Critical Reading Response: A Framework
Cherniavsky, Eva. “Body.” Keywords for American Cultural Studies. Ed. Bruce Burgett and
Glenn Hendler. New York and London: New York University, 2007. 26-29. Print.
1. Context.
a. Biographical Context. Who wrote the text? What other major texts did he/she write? Why is
he/she noteworthy? In other words, why should we consider the author an expert or authority on
the subject about which he/she writes?
Eva Cherniavsky, A.B., Comp Lit. UC, Berkeley (1982); Ph.D. English, UC Berkeley (1990), is
a Professor in the Department of English at the University of Washington, specializing in
American studies (18th-20th C. American Literature), post-colonial studies, feminism, visual
culture, film and television. She is primarily interested in the relationships between race, gender,
imperialism, and citizenship. Her most recent publication, Incorporations: Race, Nation, and the
Body Politics of Capital (U. of Minnesota P., 2006), examines the relationship between race, the
body, gender, and capital – especially as represented in today’s media and commodity cultures.
b. Social and Historical Context. Identify the historical and social context of the text. When
was the text written? What were the significant issues of the day? With whom (or what idea) is
the text engaged in a critical conversation? In other words, few texts are created in a vacuum;
they usually engage other texts and conditions in a sort of ongoing “conversation” or debate. You
must identify the rough parameters of this debate.
Keywords for American Cultural Studies was published in 2007. Given the lag time in
publication, we can assume Cherniavsky wrote her definitional essay, “Body,” sometime in the
early 21st century – likely between 2004-2006. The essay cites sources primarily from the 1990s
– but also reaches back in a couple of places to sources from the 1950s, 1970s, and 1980s. The
collection of essays identifies critical terms central to cultural studies – especially American
cultural studies. In this sense, though we can read, assess, and study each of the essays on its own
– we must remain cognizant of the relationship between terms – especially those like body,
gender, and sex. In essence, we can use the essays to create a palimpsestic understanding of each
of these terms in relation (or within the context) of the other two. This said, we must also
acknowledge the feminist and Marxist slant of Cherniavsky’s definition for, like today, Marxist
and feminist criticism were prominent theoretical lenses in late 20th and early 21st century
academia.
2. Summary. In one paragraph (5-8 sentences), summarize the text. For longer texts, of course,
you will likely have to add additional paragraphs. A book-length text, for example, might require
a paragraph per chapter.
In her definitional essay entitled “Body,” Eva Cherniavsky examines multiple “meanings” of the
word. Beginning with the Christian and humanist mind (or soul)/body binary, the essay moves
quickly beyond the West’s tendency to privilege the soul/mind over the physical body to explore
the term through a lens inspired by both classical and Marxist political economy. Cherniavsky
seems to favor Marxism’s rejection of the soul/body binary and the inefficacy of the distinction
between alienable labor and inalienable embodiment before moving on to assess more corporate
(or collective) definitions of the body as a political, cultural, and essentially economic entity. She
subsequently relies upon an entymological analysis of the term, reaching back to mid-fifteenthand seventeenth-century uses of “body”, to emphasize what she calls the “embodiment of
political authority” (27). Having done so, she briefly notes the prominence of the “body” in
contemporary American, feminist, gender, post-colonial, and ethnic studies. Perhaps most
interesting, Cherniavsky examines “the physical body as a social text,” citing Judith Butler’s
groundbreaking early-1990s analysis of the performativity of gender. The essay concludes by
pointing towards the implications of embodiment in today’s -- and by extension tomorrow’s -mass media culture – troubling “iconic forms” of gendered, racial, ethnic, sexual, classed, and
even “virtual” or “cyber” bodies.
3. Analysis.
a. Thesis. Identify the thesis. (Again, for longer texts, you will likely have to break down the text
into chapter-length sections and identify each section’s thesis, as well.)
As this is a definitional essay, Cherniavsky’s intent is to provide a contextual understanding of
the term “body,” from its early Christian and humanist roots through more contemporary usages
predicated upon feminist, gender, post-colonial, and ethnic studies. This said, Cherniavsky exerts
most of her energy analyzing the political economy implications of human embodiment,
seemingly favoring the Marxist rejection of humanism’s mind/body binary and the distinction
between alienable labor and inalienable embodiment. She also notes the significance of the
collective or corporate body in contemporary American studies, analyzing the entymological
emergence of terms like “body politic” in legal discourse and political theory.
b. Claims. Identify the major subordinate claims that support the thesis.







The body is the devalued term in the humanist/Christian mind (or soul) / body binary.
The body is central to classical political economy and social contract theory as the “organic
container of human personhood” (27).
Social contract theory sets “a specific limit on the attributes of personhood” in the economic
marketplace (27).
Marxism rejects the “distinction between alienable labor and inalienable embodiment” while
disavowing completely the humanist/Christian distinction between body and soul (27).
“Body” also has a collective (or plural) meaning important to American studies – body
politic – with significant implications for citizenship and a citizen’s retention of his/her body
as “a private matter” (28).
Concludes that within today’s mass media culture, the physical body is a social text (28).
In today’s mass media culture, a “citizen” can enjoy (or possess) “iconic forms of gendered,
racial, ethnic, sexual, or classed embodiment” that has no relationship whatsoever to his or
her “assigned (‘natural’) body” (29).
c. Notable Passages. Identify and assess at least three interesting, important, or striking phraseor sentence-length passages.
“For Christian theology as for speculative philosophy in the West, the body figures as the
devalued term in a structuring dualism of body/soul (in sacred thought) and body/mind (in
secular traditions)” (Cherniavsky 26).
“…classic political economy and social contract theory grant the body a certain limited dignity
as the organic container of human personhood” (Cherniavsky 27).
“For social contract theory, the body constitutes the inalienable property of human subjects”
(Cherniavsky 27).
“For Marxist political economy (in contrast to the classic political economy of Locke), the very
distinction between alienable labor and inalienable embodiment cannot hold, as the abstraction
of labor from the embodied person of the laborer makes possible the theft of his energy and
creativity in the production of value to which the laborer loses all claim” (Cherniavsky 27).
Marxism “refuses the dichotomization of body and soul, of matter and spirit, that otherwise
dominates philosophical and theological inquiry in the West” (Cherniavsky 27-28).
“Critical attention to forms of material and abstract embodiment in American studies has been
fostered through its interface with feminism, race and ethnic studies, and postcolonial studies”
(Cherniavsky 28).
Contemporary theories prevalent in American studies “require a denaturalized understanding of
the physical body as a social text rather than a given form” (Cherniavsky 28).
“…[M]ass culture…circulates bodies promiscuously; its technologies and commercial logic
ensure the production of desirable body images made available to the widest market”
(Cherniavsky 29).
d. Key words. Identify critical words or terms from the text. These terms may or may not recur
throughout the text but nevertheless seem significant to the author and his/her claims. If you do
not understand the term, define it within the context of its use. Write a definition underscoring
each term’s significance to the text.







Secular – attitudes, activities, etc. that have no religious or spiritual basis.
Devalued – reduce/underestimate the worth or importance of.
Dualism – division into two opposed or contrasted aspects; theoretical system that regards a
domain of reality in terms of two independent principles.
Animality – physical, instinctive behavior or qualities.
Immiseration – poor, impoverished, destitute.
Alienable – able to be transferred to new ownership
Inalienable – unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor.










Embodiment – tangible/visible form of an idea, quality, or feeling – or the
representation/expression of something in such a form.
Abstraction – something that exists only as an idea.
Corporeal – of/relating to a person’s body, especially as opposed to his/her spirit.
Agora – a place of congregation, especially an ancient Greek marketplace, here a metaphor,
of sorts, for Greek democracy/representative body.
Marginal – of, related to or situated at the edge or margin of something.
Disembodied – separated from/existing without the body
Mestizo – mixed race – Mexican/Indian; European/Native Latin American
Performative embodiment – culturally constructed and performed social attributes that
cohere and manifest through the repetition of stylized actions over time…and the
widespread, communal acceptance of same due to regulative discourses proscribing
acceptable/unacceptable behaviors.
Body politic – people of a nation, state, or society considered collectively as an organized or
recognized and recognizable group.
Identity politics – political attitudes, positions that focus on the concerns of
groups/communities identified primarily by race, gender, class, ethnicity, or sexual
orientation.
4. Structure. Number each paragraph. Divide the text into component parts. Identify which
paragraphs comprise the section. Assign a representative title to each section. For book length
texts, identify which chapters comprise specific sections.
1. Introduction (1)
2. Christian / Humanist Tradition (1)
3. Political Economy and Social Contract Theory (2)
4. Marxist Political Economy (2)
5. Contemporary Cultural Studies (3)
6. Embodiment of Political Authority and Citizenship (4)
7. Other Theoretical Approaches/Perspectives (5)
8. Identity Politics and Body as Social Text (6-7)
5. Marginalia. Transfer your marginalia in bullet form. Identify the paragraph and/or page for
each note so you can refer back to the text for context if necessary.
26



27


This essay relies upon the definition and exemplification patterns of development.
Body/soul dualism – in which the body is devalued with respect to the soul/mind.
The mind is the center of knowledge and self-knowledge.
Body = animal/mechanical  bounded vessel for the soul
o “organic container of human personhood”
o “inalienable property”  social contract theory and “classic political economy”
Must examine the “body” in terms of “institutionalized political power and personal identity”
and as “corporeal”


Marxism and “classical political economy” see the body very differently – especially in
Marxism’s refusal to distinguish between body and soul.
Body = “abstract collectivity”  legal discourse, political theory.
o ie. – “corporate body” and “body politic”
28
 Consider the “body” in terms of “ethnic, sexual, and classical identity” and “established
political privilege” and as “disqualified political subjects”
 Consider “the physical body as a social text” and “a quantity of physical matter imprinted
with social meaning”
 American political identity – relies upon a sense of citizenship based upon “an ideally
disembodied identity” in which “citizens’ bodies remain a private matter.”
 Cherniavsky identifies a number of critical lenses with which/through which to examine “the
body” – feminism, race and ethnic studies, and post-colonial studies.
 Cites Butler’s contention that the “gendered body” is performative and “an effect of gender
norms that operate through imitation”
29
 Examines ties between body politic, mass media, identity politics and mass culture.
 Identity politics – “embodied particularity”
 Leads us to question, what are the “iconic forms” of: gendered bodies, racial bodies, ethnic
bodies, sexual bodies, lower class bodies, middle class bodies, upper class bodies…?