How to (Re)discipline Literature through a Cultural Studies Lens

Main Article Content

Dragoș Ivana

Abstract

Starting from Valentine Cunningham’s dichotomy between “good reading” (107), i.e. the ideology-free reading of the literary text, and “bad reading” (88), that is, reading theory against the textual grain, this article aims to discuss the lures and ruses of cultural studies, once applied to the study of literature. I shall focus on the literature-cultural studies dyad, which in the past four decades has led to a revision of academic curricula and the literary canon and, most importantly, to the socio-political understanding of literature as text in context. Special attention will be paid to the lack of consensus on cultural studies as a well-established discipline: while some scholars and critics take the discipline as a means whereby literary study can mirror different ideologies, power relations, hegemony, social practices and humanity in general, others vilify cultural studies because it makes literary studies impure. As I argue, literature can be read through a cultural studies lens as long as their knowledge and methods of analysis are duly appropriated and employed by their practitioners.

Article Details

How to Cite
Ivana, D. “How to (Re)discipline Literature through a Cultural Studies Lens”. Linguaculture, vol. 16, no. 2, Dec. 2025, pp. 29-43, doi:10.47743/lincu-2025-2-0441.
Section
Articles
Author Biography

Dragoș Ivana, University of Bucharest

Dragoş IVANA is an Associate Professor of English and Head of the English Department of the University of Bucharest. His main research interests are English literature, early American literature, Cervantes studies, critical theory and city studies. He is president of the Romanian Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies and delegate member of the Executive Committee of the International Society for Eighteen-Century Studies. Ivana published Embattled Reason, Principled Sentiment and Political Radicalism: Quixotism in English Novels, 1742-1801 (Brill, 2014) and Behind “the Great Tradition: Popular Culture in Eighteenth-Century England (Ars Docendi, 2017). He was the recipient of several doctoral and postdoctoral research scholarships at the University of Kent, the Bodleian Library, the British Library, Chawton House Library, John F. Kennedy Institute for North American Studies (Berlin), and Vanderbilt University. In 2018 he was appointed Fulbright Ambassador to the University of Bucharest. Ivana has published extensively on novel theory, the reception of Cervantes in 18th-century England and literary representations of London in 20th-century English fiction. His current project focuses on representations of quixotism in the early American novel.

References

Althusser, Louis. “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses (Notes Towards an Investigation)”. Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. Trans. Ben Brewster. Monthly Review Press, 1971. pp. 79-87.

Bennett, Tony. Formalism and Marxism. Methuen, 1979.

Bérubé, Michael. “Cultural Studies and Cultural Capital”. Employment of English: Theory, Jobs, and the Future of Literary Studies. New York UP, 1998. pp. 4-36.

Bloom, Harold. The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages. Harcourt Brace & Company, 1994.

Bourdieu, Pierre. The Rules of Art: Genesis and Structure of the Literary Field. Trans. Susan Emanuel. Stanford UP, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781503622522.

Coleridge, Samuel Taylor. Biographia Literaria. Ed. Adam Roberts. Edinburgh UP, 2014.

Culler, Jonathan. Literary Theory. A Very Short Introduction. Oxford UP, 2000.

Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Blackwell, 1983.

---. The Event of Literature. Yale UP, 2012. https://doi.org/10.12987/yale/9780300171365.001.0001.

Easthope, Antony. Literary into Cultural Studies. Routledge, 1991.

Eco, Umberto, editor. On Ugliness. Rizzoli, 2007.

Felski, Rita. “The Role of Aesthetics in Cultural Studies”. The Aesthetics of Cultural Studies. Ed. Michael Bérubé. Blackwell, 2005. pp. 28-43.

Fish, Stanley. Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Harvard UP, 1980.

Foucault, Michel. The Archaeology of Knowledge and The Discourse on Language. Pantheon Books, 1972.

Hebdige, Dick. Subculture: The Meaning of Style. Routledge, 1979. https://doi.org/ 10.4324/9780203139943.

Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Judgment (1790). Trans. Werner S. Pluhar. Hackett Publishing Company, 1987.

Leavis, F. R. The Great Tradition: George Eliot, Henry James, Joseph Conrad. Chatto and Windus, 1948.

---. Mass Civilisation and Minority Culture. Cambridge: Gordon Fraser, 1930.

Eaton, Marcia. “Kantian and Contextual Beauty”. Beauty Matters. Ed. Brand Peggy. Indiana U P, 2000. pp. 27-36.

Miller, Hillis J. Thomas Hardy: Distance and Desire. Belknap Press of U of Harvard P, 1970.

Shklovsky, Victor. “Art as Technique”. Modern Criticism and Theory. A Reader. Ed. David Lodge. Longman, 1988. pp. 16-30.