Literary Theory

30:3, Reviews LITERARY THEORY Howard Felperin. Beyond Deconstruction: The Uses and Abuses of Literary Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. $19.95 Books on contemporary critical theory are more numerous than ever before. Acknowledging this, Howard Felperin promises at the outset of his book that "given the current rage for theory within our institutions of academic literary study . . . this book is not aimed at promoting the claims of any of the theoretical schools it takes up" (1). This statement is only partially true. Since it is characteristic of critical schools to brand their theories with specific jargon, Felperin self-consciously avoids using such terminology in his discussions. StyUstically at least, he cannot be accused of favoring one school over another. Felperin offers a lucid, chronological survey of critical theory, diligently tracing the path of critical inquiry from historical and New Criticism (Leavis ) to Marxism (Eagleton and Bakhtin), structuralism (Jakobson and Barthes), deconstruction (mainly the Yale critics), and post-structuralism (Derrida and the later Barthes). Felperin's goal is to arrive at what he claims is a point "beyond" theory itself. However, his very method of inquiry reveals his own deconstractive bias. He playfully focuses on questions of reading, misreading, authority, genre, and the function of the literary work, very much like contemporary theoreticians do. He then faults each critical school categoricaUy. Ironically, by deconstructing every theory, Felperin fails to take his own book "beyond deconstruction," or to reinscribe an alternative to past and present Uterary theory. Felperin's first chapter defines the grounds of practical criticism through the work of F. R. Leavis, whom he faults for privileging history and biography over the literary work itself. Felperin argues convincingly that this method takes critical attention away from the work and focuses it on the personal details of the author's Ufe. In contrast, New Criticism, as the logical alternative, deliberately excludes everything but the text, examining every word in a frustratingly narrow fashion. Felperin correctly points out that the New Critical concentration on the text suppresses crucial extralinguistic details necessary for interpretation. He deconstructs New Criticism by introducing the notion of risk: the critic should be wiUing to suspend belief in a single meaning of a text in order to experiment with various possible simultaneous meanings. In Chapter 2, Felperin moves swiftly through Marxism, dismissing "vulgar Marxism " where the text is a direct indicator of social conditions, to advocate a more sophisticated version of Marxism that reads "through the fissures, gaps, or silences of the Uterary text" in order to pinpoint the pressures exerted by "the dominant or official ideology of that society" (53). In granting to sophisticated Marxism the ability to see beyond the "duplicity of language," or the ability of language to mask real crises in society, Felperin takes a 380 30:3, Reviews deconstructive stance. But, again Felperin fails to reinscribe its corollary in deconstructive practice: linguistic dupUcity would lead to an infinite deferral of meaning—a conclusion that no Marxist would support. In Chapter 3, Felperin launches into structuralism. His elaborate chart (84) is like Frye's: Felperin traces Barthes' career very much like Frye's mythical hero, from structuraUsm to post structuralism. He lists Barthes' texts chronologically and concludes with Barthes' idea of an increasingly self-conscious reader/writer relationship required by modem criticism. Felperin's emphasis on Barthes' move away from traditional structuralism has a deconstructive motive. He shows the unstable and arbitrary relationship between word and object, and introduces the 'writerly' or dynamic quality of the text, creating an entry into the chapter on deconstruction. As Felperin lays down the tenets of deconstraction, it becomes clear that he works within the Yale tradition. His main objection to the French deconstractionists , specificaUy Derrida, is their "tyrannical jargon" and skeptical use of logic. In contrast, Felperin proposes a practical deconstructive method that questions the presuppositions of author and text. In a deconstructive mode Felperin points out that words do not mean what they say, that there is a gap between the written word on the page and the intended meaning; he attacks literature at its blind spot—language. Felperin's use of Frost's poem "Acquainted with the Night" to explain his notion of deconstruction...