Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:35:44.716Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

WORD AND DEED: WHY A POST-POSTSTRUCTURAL HISTORY IS NEEDED, AND HOW IT MIGHT LOOK

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2000

ADRIAN JONES
Affiliation:
La Trobe University

Abstract

This essay reviews the contribution of Foucauldian poststructural theory to history. It retrieves its origins as a supplement to, not a negation of, the structuralisms of the Annales. Histories of discourses influenced by modish (Barthesian, gender, post-colonial, Cultural Studies …) paradigms often overlook this heritage. They take, ‘il n'y a pas hors de texte’ at face value. This essay suggests ways to re-assimilate historical studies of discourses with older historiographies of classes, institutions, social structures, and ideologies. Poststructural historiography today tends to focus only on discourses, confusing coherence with power, meanings with causes. Making use of Giddens's structuration, de Certeau's reçu and Bourdieu's pratique, I suggest that historians must seek out actions as well as words, looking for sites where discourses they find in one sphere affect another. Only then can historians assess the importance of the discourses they find, above and beyond their mere coherence.

Type
HISTORIOGRAPHICAL REVIEW
Copyright
© 2000 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Colleagues helped me by agreeing and disagreeing; Richard Broome, John Cashmere, Inga Clendinnen, Anthony Disney, Alan Frost, Katie Holmes, C. Behan McCullagh, Peter McPhee, Judith Richards, and R. Barrie Rose. I am indebted to Jonathan Steinberg for his insights and patience.