1
Shalease Anderson
1/26/2015
English 102 a.04 Jim Jewell
Chapter 1 Summary; What Is Theory?
In his book: Literary Theory a Very Short Introduction, Jonathan Culler gives a brief but
concise evaluation of literary to theory. In the first chapter; “What is Theory?” he works to
explain what theory is, how it is being used, and its effects. He talks about the difference
between theory as a term, literary theory as a term and as a genre. The chapter brings the reader
a basic understanding of what “theory” is, and how it is being used and talked about today.
He starts with the question “What is theory?” He says that theory is being talked about,
but not literary theory, just theory in general. Explaining that theory is something that can be
difficult; we can be a part of it, we can question it, we can be afraid of it, or we can just stay out
of it. (2) It’s bigger than just an idea, it’s something that’s happening throughout the world. He
breaks it down to: theory is questioning, breaking down and digging into what is known, and that
a theory can be like an educated guess. It’s not just a simple guess though, it involves thinking, it
can’t just simply be proved right or wrong either; it’s more complex and complicated.
Next, he talks about how in literature, theory is being discussed, but not literary theory.
He explains how people aren’t questioning the content of literature, but that they are discussing
the bringing in of nonliterary content into literature. (3) He describes theory as a bunch of
foreign names, unknown and complicated. Then gives an example of 2 people discussing why
2
someone had broken up with their boyfriend, giving examples of what would and wouldn’t be a
theory. Explaining that a theory is a complex and well thought about reply with no easy solution.
Also that it isn’t a hypothesis.
Next he discusses “Theory as a Genre”. Explaining that theory has become a genre of
literature, and that it consists of books which contain certain topics, but that don’t fit into the
categories they are based on. He explains that “Theory” as a genre isn’t made of books that don’t
fit into other categories, or that they are about theory, but because they question and/or evaluate
the topic at hand. They may contain: studies, research, questioning of ideas, or may just show
different connections, views, or perspectives of beliefs or ideas throughout history. He explains
that this idea came up in the mid-19th century. He gives a list of books that fit into the genre; art
history, language history, culture studies, anthropology, gender studies, different scientific
research. Explaining that they are a part of this field because their ideas go beyond the topic at
hand, questioning ideas, and showing the connections or disconnections between them, as well as
questioning what is known to be true.
Next, he talks about “Theories effects”. He explains that theory can cause people to
change their minds about different ideas or beliefs, and/or change their views; questioning what
they know, further looking into and dissecting history, as well as what was thought to be the
truth. He talks about how literature can cause us to think differently about, literature and what it
means; taking us further into it, pulling us into theory.
He gives an example from “The History of Sexuality” by the French theorist Michel
Foucault. He discusses Foucault’s ideas of sex and sexuality. It talks about how looking back
into history, sexuality and sex were never really an expressed idea until a certain point in time.
3
These ideas were created, and became a part of society. It created inequality between men and
women, and brought a once private and sensual connection out into society.
He next talks about the French philosopher Jaques Derrida, which analyzed “The
Confessions of Jean-Jacques Rousseau”. Rousseau was famously known for his idea of oneself
amongst other things. In Jacques’s analysis of Rousseau’s book, which expresses Rousseau’s
idea that writing is basically just a supplement or a sign to speech, shows us that Jacques
apparently disagrees with this. Culler goes on back and forth between Jacques and Rousseau’s
ideas, which ultimately ends at the idea that although writing may be considered a supplement to
speech, speech is also a supplement to writing.
Rousseau’s book, gives a story about how he had a woman that he had fallen in love
with. He explains that when she wasn’t around, he would do whatever he could to bring pleasure
to himself by touching, kissing or caressing anything that she had touch or been near. Then he
explains that once when he was watching her eat, he told her that there was a hair on a piece of
her food, after she had put it in her mouth. She put it down, and he picked it up and ate it himself.
The point of the story being that even with her presence, it still wasn’t enough. This was his
example that even with the presence of a speaker, speech still need writing as a sign speech
doesn’t have. What he’s explaining is that even with the presence of something, it’s not enough,
and that the world is made up of signs and supplements. He concludes that although the book is a
very short introduction to literature, it isn’t because of the length, but because of the complexity
and almost undefinable idea of theory.
4
ShaleaseThis summary starts out pretty strongly, but in the end you focus in on one fine detail (the
example of the woman Rousseau fell in love with) and then devote only a single sentence to the
sections that follow. This cuts off Culler’s concluding moves, which are important, especially as
he sums up his four primary aspects of theory. In general, you do talk more about what Culler is
talking about at each step than what he says. You do generally maintain objectivity with the
exception of one slip in the first paragraph. Be careful of sentence fragments, as they were
common here. The sentences that start with “explaining” are a good example as they lack clear
subjects.
Process – 10/10
All good
Spelling/grammar/punctuation – 8/10
Fragments were common, minor punctuation issues
Brevity – 17/20
Not a very even level of detail
Objectivity – 29/30
Generally good with one slip in the first paragraph
Completeness – 24/30
Summary covers Culler’s concluding moves too lightly, and focuses a bit more on what Culler is
talking about versus what he actually says.
Overall – 88/100