Materialist historiography alone resists the dehistoricizing of canonical texts

Evidence

Literary and cultural writings which then address those documents of High Canonicity replicate the methods of both literary aestheticism and speculative thought in detaching the documents from their historical locations and the determinate conditions of their production, in order to contemplate them as detached moments in which the Indian spirit sets out to delight the senses, instruct the mind and satisfy the soul’s inexhaustible yearning for lassitudinous metaphysic. Only in the more materialist school of modern Indian historiography, and in writings which have emerged under the influence of that school of historians of Ancient India, do we find sustained efforts to lift such fog. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 1149

Categorization

  • XREF: This is Ahmad’s core polemic in miniature — textual/spiritualized reading detaches culture from determinate material conditions, and only materialist method cuts through; directly aligns with why the reader is prioritizing Ahmad over discourse-determinist postcolonial theory. — connects to: Materialist aesthetics rejects abstract theory for period-specific history; Historical materialism is fundamentally historicist, not metaphysical; Materialist thought takes a different shape in each historical epoch (+4 more)

Broader Connections