Literary history after Foucault?

Abstract

The essay shows the manner in which Literary History, normally conceived as being an aid to literary studies becomes, in fact, a judgment of what is commonly known as Literature (art). It proceeds with giving an overview of existing literary-historical theories and prac­tices which are located in six categories before outlining Foucault's archaeological and genealogical procedures. Although Literary History after Foucault is a chimera, his cri­tiques of history, constituting fundamentally a critique of reason and the transcendental/so­vereign subject as the sites of meaning are useful to Literary Theory because they afford insights into history as a construct of language and especially of discursive practices.

Opsomming
Die artikel toon aan hoe literatuurgeskiedenis, wat normaalweg beskou word as 'n hulp vir literere studies, inderdaad gesien word as oordeel van dit wat algemeen as llteratuur (kuns) bekendstaan. Dit gaan voort met die aanbieding van 'n oorsig oor bestaande literer­historiese teoriee en praktyke wat in ses kategoriee afgebaken word, voordat Foucault se argeologiese en genealogiese werkwyse geskets word. Alhoewel literatuurgeskiedenis na Foucault ·n chimera is, is sy kritiese oordele van geskiedenis - basies bestaande uit 'n kritiese beskouing van logika en die transendentale/soewereine subjek as die lokaliteit van betekenis - nuttig vir Literere Teorie, want hulle bied insig in die geskiedenis as 'n konstruksie van taal en spesifiek van diskursiewe praktyke.