The importance of history has been powerfully reaffirmed in recent years by the appearance of major new authors, pathbreaking works, and fresh interpretations of historical events, trends, and methods. Responding to these developments, Roger Chartier engages several of the most influential writers of cultural history whose works have spread far beyond academic audiences to become part of contemporary cultural argument. Challenging the assertion that history is no more than a "fiction-making operation" Chartier examines the relationships between history and fiction and (...) proposes new foundations for establishing history as a specific kind of knowledge. Michel de Certeau's description of Michel Foucault's writings as "on the edge of the cliff," provides Chartier with an image he finds appropriate not only for Foucault but for many other recent historians--including de Certeau. Exploring the relationships between discursive practices and nondiscursive practices, Chartier examines the "heterology" of de Certeau pursues the "chimera of origin" and the causes of the French Revolution in Foucault's work and raises four pertinent questions for the metahistory of Hayden White. He follows the work of Louis Marin into the distinctions between interpreting a painting and interpreting a text. And a trio of essays treats the historical sociology of Norbert Elias and his work on power and civility. Throughout, Chartier keeps his focus on historians who have stressed the relations between the products of discourse and social practices. (shrink)

In recent discussions of the work of new historicist critics like Stephen Greenblatt and Louis Montrose, it has often been remarked that the theory of history underlying their reading practice closely resembles that of postmodern historiographers like Hayden White and Frank Ankersmit. Taking off from one such remark, the aim of the present article is twofold. First, I intend to provide a theoretical basis from which to substantiate the idea that new historicism can indeed be taken to be the literary-critical (...) variant of what Frank Ankersmit has termed the "new historiography." In the second half of the article, this theoretical foundation will serve as the starting point of a further analysis of both the theory and practice of new historicism in terms of its distinctly postmodern historiographical project. I will argue that in order to fully characterize the new historicist reading method, we do well to distinguish between two variants of postmodern historicism: a narrativist one and a heterological one . A brief survey of the two methodological options associated with these variants is followed by an analysis of the work of the central representative of new historicism, Stephen Greenblatt. While the significant use of historical anecdotes in his work leaves unresolved the question to which of either approaches Greenblatt belongs, the distinction does serve a clear heuristic purpose. In both cases, it points to the dangerous spot where the new historicism threatens to fall prey to the evils of the traditional historicism against which it defined itself. (shrink)

Two new ways of looking at forms of knowledge were practiced in France roughly between 1965 and 1985. The postwar Annales school of history broke from "narrative" historical accounts to "nonnarrative" accountssynchronic, quantitative accounts not in story form. At the same time, the structuralists made history a special target as they began questioning the primacy and security of meaning and the strategies for constructing meaning in narratives. If structuralism and its aftermath is to be said to have had an effect (...) on history, it would be the reinvention of reading, conceiving reading as a more complex and elusive process than it formerly had been, and exposing more and more of the accepted, fundamental components of human life as constructions. Three writers, Paul Ricoeur, F. R. Ankersmit, and Hayden White, recognize narrativity as a worldview, rejecting the Annales school distinction between narrative and nonnarrative history. These three see story history as a genre. They agree with the poststructuralists on the allegorical nature of history, but their arguments are, unconventionally, morally based. Their discussions of the constructions of narratives serve less to undermine history than to reground it as a humane discourse. (shrink)

Jésuite et historien spécialiste du XVIIIe siècle et de la mystique, sociologue de la culture du quotidien, anthropologue, sémiologue et cofondateur de l'école lacanienne, Michel de Certeau est une figure singulière de l'histoire intellectuelle du XXe siècle. Célébré par le Tout-Paris lors de sa disparition en janvier 1986, il fut toute sa vie un franc-tireur. Position qui n'a sans doute pas permis de mesurer son apport au renouvellement des sciences humaines en général et à l'histoire en particulier. Jésuite fidèle à (...) son engagement religieux, fortement interpellé par la "prise de parole" du mouvement de Mai 68, Michel de Certeau aura aussi accompagné le questionnement des chrétiens confrontés à la modernité et à la crise de l'Église. Dans cette biographie passionnée, François Dosse fait parcourir au lecteur les multiples lieux et milieux, laïcs et religieux, traversés par Michel de Certeau, dessinant le parcours singulier et fulgurant d'une figure attachante engagée dans tous les grands enjeux de son temps. L'auteur a conduit une vaste enquête auprès de deux cents témoins de la vie et de l'oeuvre de Certeau, restés à jamais marqués par le caractère lumineux de son rapport au monde. Ce livre restitue cet enchantement et entend faire partager le parcours incarné d'une pensée aussi forte qu'originale et qui, loin de sa dispersion apparente, semble animée par une mystérieuse quête mystique. (shrink)