Skip to Main Content
Skip Nav Destination

In this chapter, McGowan considers the importance of a frequently overlooked yet integral aspect of Slavoj Žižek’s work for literary criticism and theory: his antihistoricism. Whereas historicism, in treating literary texts as mere symptoms of their respective sociohistorical contexts, dismisses all claims to literary universality, Žižek’s work is valuable for literary studies, McGowan contends, not only because it insists on universality but because this universality, in contrast to older, New Critical claims of transhistorical continuity, is grounded on historical discontinuity and disruption—a disruption caused by the Lacanian objet petit a, the traumatic kernel of the Real that every historical...

This content is only available as PDF.
You do not currently have access to this chapter.
Don't already have an account? Register
Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal