Status of Post structural Theory: Part II
After waiting for an update on the 2018 status of post structuralism, I’ve discovered new attempts to de-emphasize its impact on culture and society. According to those who wish structural walls to be rebuilt, post structuralism’s explosive revival ended in late 2017.
Post structuralism was never a movement but a theory tied to many disciplines, including literature -- all of which were in need of a late mid Twentieth Century adjustment. As I wrote in my last blogs, post structuralism was presented to the United States in Baltimore, 1966.
The introduction was conducted within an appropriate timeline because structures were indeed falling in the 1950s and 60s. In Jacques Derrida’s reaction to a previous theory, Structuralism, he had formally embraced, then disavowed, tightly controlled systems, structures, that made no allowance for change or the acceptance of any entity outside established norms.
Derrida and many of his theorist colleagues, scientists, inventors, and creatives lived in shadows that hid alternative lifestyles however they were manifested. The thinkers of the era believed these individuals should be considered and given their voices within ‘the main stream’. When these voices wrote or spoke, post structuralists of the era agreed that a new language with flexibility, or play, should be used to present and describe them. Since the mid last century, post structural ideas were riding upon the philosophical wind, worldwide. In the mid 1940s, a world war literally felled many structures, both seen and unseen. Structuralism has waned over the last few decades. Its conditions begged for replacement or, at least, modification.
Post structuralism was well on its way with the needed adjustments when the powers-to-be decided their adoption of post structuralism as a tool to propagate their cause backfired on them. These future leaders discovered their ruse was one of the structures targeted to fall. By late last year they managed to wrestle post structuralism to the ground with the aid of most academics and others who refused to relinquish old structures. They employed their stranglehold on Post structuralism and have revived seriously structured, dictatorial theories. Post-structuralism may be breathing a last gasp of air. Most political machinations are about power and control and the anti-post structural enthusiasts, the world-dominator wanna-bes, are no exception.
Yes, I believe post structuralism’s influence will continue. The heady excitement brought to us by its revival is all but over, however. The argument used to acknowledge this demise of post structuralism is that it has fractured into several “movements”. Most of them bearing the names I listed in my last blog. They state that the so-called fragmented theory of post structuralism is falling and continues to break into smaller and smaller segments such as: new historicism, cultural studies, post-colonial criticism, feminist criticism, critical disability studies, gender studies, queer theory and critical race theory.
For me, post structuralism will remain as a valuable guide and inspiration in my writing and career. Post-structuralism’s influence may return even stronger soon. I take the compound word Post-structuralism literally. Structures and old-new systems always require monitoring, if not pulling down. We’ll see. In the meantime, I will continue writing my blog from time to time and my efforts to establish The Post structural Institute.
-- e. smith sleigh, poet and author of Post Structuralism and Related Quotes http://bit.ly/kEdBcp post-structuralism advocate and online pioneer in post-structural theory
My next BLOG will cover this topic:
Academia vs. Poetry: How the Gatekeepers of Contemporary Literature might be Killing It
by Rosemarie Dombrowski, PhD bit.ly/2BRuyyH
PayPal.Me/esmithsleigh
We are endeavoring to establish The Post-structuralism Institute
where we will preserve the theory history
and continue to research the post structuralism revival.