The 65 Most Romantic Movie Couples

65. Mickey Knox (Woody Harrelson) and Mallory Knox (Juliette Lewis)

Natural Born Killers (1994)
“I do. 'Til you and I die, and die, and die again. 'Til death do us part.”

64. Harry Burns (Billy Crystal) and Sally Albright (Meg Ryan)

When Harry Met Sally (1989)
“I love that you get cold when it's 71 degrees out. I love that it takes you an hour and a half to order a sandwich...I love that after I spend the day with you, I can still smell your perfume on my clothes.”

63. Lucy Eleanor Moderatz (Sandra Bullock) and Jack Callaghan (Bill Pullman)

While You Were Sleeping (1995)
“Peter once asked me when I fell in love with Jack. And I told him, ‘It was while you were sleeping.’”

62. Scott Wormer (Devon Sawa) and Roberta Martin (Christina Ricci)

Now and Then (1995)
“Why do you think we fight all the time?”
“Just something to do, I guess. Why?”
“'Cause... 'cause I think you are a real nice girl.”

61. Doug Dorsey (D.B. Sweeney) and Kate Moseley (Moira Kelly)

The Cutting Edge (1992)
“Somewhere in the middle of this I have fallen in love with you. I’m saying I love you. I’m saying it out loud.”

60. Landon Carter (Shane West) and Jamie Sullivan (Mandy Moore)

A Walk to Remember (2002)
“Maybe God has a bigger plan for me than I had for myself. Like this journey never ends. Like you were sent to me because I'm sick. To help me through all this. You're my angel.”

59. Jonathan Trager (John Cusack) and Sara Thomas (Kate Beckinsale)

Serendipity (2001)
“You don't have to understand. You just have to have faith.”
“Faith in what?”
“Destiny.”

58. Kat Ellis (Debra Messing) and Nick Mercer (Dermot Mulroney)

The Wedding Date (2004)
Close your eyes. Close your eyes. Close... your... eyes. You're safe. You can relax. I'm not going to kiss you. He's gonna be so sorry he lost you, so stop worrying. Forget the past. Forget the pain. And remember what an incredible woman you are.”

57. Rick Blaine (Humphrey Bogart) and Ilsa Lund (Ingrid Bergman)

Casablanca (1942)
“Here's looking at you, kid.”

56. Henry Roth (Adam Sandler) and Lucy Whitmore (Drew Barrymore)

50 First Dates (2004)
“Being with you is the only way I could have a full and happy life. You're the girl of my dreams... and apparently, I'm the man of yours.”

55. Cliff Poncier (Matt Dillon) and Janet Livermore (Bridget Fonda)

Singles (1992)
“Bless you.”

54. Viola De Lesseps (Gwyneth Paltrow) and Will Shakespeare (Joseph Fiennes)

Shakespeare in Love (1998)
“I love you, Will, beyond poetry.”

53. Melanie Smooter (Reese Witherspoon) and Jake Perry (Josh Lucas)

Sweet Home Alabama (2002)
“The truth is I gave my heart away a long time ago, my whole heart, and I never really got it back.”

52. Amanda Woods (Cameron Diaz) and Graham Simpkins (Jude Law)

The Holiday (2006)
“I can't figure out the mathematics of this, I just know I love you.”

51. Satine (Nicole Kidman) and Christian (Ewan McGregor)

Moulin Rogue! (2001)
“Love is a many splendor thing. Love lifts us up where we belong. All you need is love!”

50. Gray (Jennifer Garner) and Fritz (Timothy Olyphant)

Catch and Release (2006)
“I left out the complicated stuff, like how it took losing you forever for me to truly find you. I told them I loved you and that's the truth.”

49. John Smith (Brad Pitt) and Jane Smith (Angelina Jolie)

Mr. & Mrs. Smith (2005)
“Tell me the first thing you thought, the first time we met. Because I'll tell you what I thought. I thought ... That is the most beautiful woman I have ever seen in my life.”

48. Cher Horowitz (Alicia Silverstone) and Josh (Paul Rudd)

Clueless (1995)
“Some people are not lucky enough to be as naturally adorable as you are.”
“Stop it, you're making me blush.”

47. Samantha Andrews (Jennifer Love Hewitt) and Ian Wyndham (Paul Nicholls)

If Only (2004)
“I have to tell you this and you need to hear it. I loved you since I met you, but I wouldn't allow myself to truly feel it until today.”

46. Danielle De Barbarac (Drew Barrymore) and Prince Henry (Dougray Scott)

Ever After (1998) A Cinderella Story
“I kneel before you not as a prince, but as a man in love. But I would feel like a king if you, Danielle De Barbarac, would be my wife.”

45. Ali MacGraw (Jennifer Cavalleri) and Oliver Barrett IV (Ryan O'Neal)

Love Story (1970)
“Love means never having to say you're sorry.”

44. Prince Akeem (Eddie Murphy) and Lisa McDowell (Shari Headley)

Coming to America (1988)
“I have a date with Lisa! Isn’t that wonderful?”

43. Alvy Singer (Woody Allen) and Annie Hall (Diane Keaton)

Annie Hall (1977)
“Love is too weak a word for what I feel - I luurve you, you know, I loave you, I luff you, two F's.”

42. Jenna Rink (Jennifer Garner) and Matt Flamhaff (Mark Ruffalo)

13 Going on 30 (2004)
“I love you, Matt. You're my best friend.”
“I love you too, Jenna. I've always loved you.”

41. Andy Stitzer (Steve Carell) and Trish (Catherine Keener)

40 Year Old Virgin (2005)
“I just didn't think it would be good.”
“Of course it'll be good. We love each other.”

40. Harry Tasker (Arnold Schwarzenegger) and Helen Tasker (Jamie Lee Curtis)

True Lies (1994)
“You know, the sand is running out of the hourglass, so I want to look back and say: ‘See, I did that, that was me, I was reckless and I was wild, and I fucking did it.’”

39. Nick (Michael Cera) and Norah (Kat Dennings)

Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist (2008)
“This is amazing! You are literally like my musical soul mate.”

38. Stella Payne (Angela Bassett) and Winston Shakespeare (Taye Diggs)

How Stella Got Her Groove Back (1998)
“And how old are you, young lady?”
“40.”
“No, truthfully.”

37. Lelaina Pierce (Winona Ryder) and Troy Dyer (Ethan Hawke)

Reality Bites (1994)
“You have no idea how much I wish that I could go back to that morning after we made love and do everything different. But I know that I can't, so I thought that I would come here and tell you something. And what I wanted to tell you was that I love you.”

36. Toula Portokalos (Nia Vardalos) and Ian Miller (John Corbett)

My Big Fat Greek Wedding (2002)
“Why do you love me?”
“Because I came alive when I met you.”

35. Zack Mayo (Richard Gere) and Paula Pokrifki (Debra Winger)

Officer and a Gentlemen (1982)
“I dare you not to fall in love with me. How can you resist? I'm like candy.”
“You're better than candy.”

34. Anna Scott (Julia Roberts) and William Thacker (Hugh Grant)

Notting Hill (1999)
“I'm also just a girl, standing in front of a boy, asking him to love her.”

33. Charlie Lang (Nicolas Cage) and Yvonne Biasi (Bridget Fonda)

It Could Happen To You (1994)
“I told you I'd share my ticket. I never planned on sharing my heart. Maybe I could get lucky twice today.”

32. Patrick Verona (Heath Ledger) and Kat Stratford (Julia Stiles)

10 Things I hate about You (1999)
“I hate it when you make me laugh, even worse when you make me cry. I hate it when you're not around, and the fact that you didn't call. But mostly I hate the way I don't hate you. Not even close, not even a little bit, not even at all.”

31. Josie Geller (Drew Barrymore) and Sam Coulson (Michael Vartan)

Never Been Kissed (1999)
“Sorry I’m late. It took me forever to get here.”
“I know what you mean.”

30. Jamie Bennett (Colin Firth) and Aurelia (Lúcia Moniz)

Love Actually (2003)
[in English] “It's my favorite time of day, driving you.”
[In Portuguese] “It's the saddest part of my day, leaving you.”
[Neither understands the other's language]

29. Giselle (Amy Adams) and Robert Philip (Patrick Dempsey)

Enchanted (2007)
“Is this a habit of yours? Falling off of stuff?”
“Only when you're there to catch me.”

28. Mike Shea / Elmo Barnett (Timothy Hutton) and Annie Packert / Ally Chandler (Kelly McGillis)

Made in Heaven (1987)
“Annie... I'd like to marry you.”
“According to heaven, we already are.”

27. Jack Foley (George Clooney) and Karen Sisco (Jennifer Lopez)

Out of Sight (1998)
“Why would you trust me?”
“It would be worth the risk.”
“You like taking risks.”
“So do you.”

26. Randy 'The Ram' Robinson (Mickey Rourke) and Cassidy (Marisa Tomei)

The Wrestler (2008)
“I'm an old broken down piece of meat and I deserve to be all alone, I just don't want you to hate me.”

25. C.D. 'Charlie' Bales (Steve Martin) and Roxanne Kowalski (Daryl Hannah)

Roxanne (1987)
“I love you. I have breathed you in and I am suffocating.”

24. Frances 'Baby' Houseman (Jennifer Grey) and Johnny Castle (Patrick Swayze)

Dirty Dancing (1987)
“No one puts Baby in the corner.”

23. Allen Bauer (Tom Hanks) and Madison (Daryl Hannah)

Splash (1984)
“Oh, Madison. All the time we were together, you always knew how I was feeling. Can't you tell now?”

22. Honey Bunny - Yolanda (Amanda Plummer) and Pumpkin - Ringo (Tim Roth)

Pulp Fiction (1994)
“I love you too, Honey Bunny.”

21. President Andrew Shepherd (Michael Douglas) and Sydney Ellen Wade (Annette Bening)

The American President (1995)
“Two hundred pairs of eyes are focused on you with two questions on their minds: who's this girl and why is the President dancing with her?”
“Well, first of all, the 200 pairs of eyes aren't focused on me. They're focused on you. And the answers are Sydney Ellen Wade, and because she said yes.”

20. Gary 'Gal' Dove (Ray Winstone) and Deedee Dove (Amanda Redman)

Sexy Beast
“I love you like a rose loves rainwater, like a leopard loves its partner in the jungle, like... I don't know what like.”

19. Crash Davis (Kevin Costner) and Annie Savoy (Susan Sarandon)

Bull Durham (1988)
“Come on, Annie, think of something clever to say, huh? Something full of magic, religion, bullshit. Come on, dazzle me.”
“I want you.”

18. Jesse (Ethan Hawke) and Celine (Julie Delpy)

Before Sunrise (1995)
“So listen, so here's the deal. This is what we should do. You should get off the train with me here in Vienna.”

17. Samantha Baker (Molly Ringwald) and Jake Ryan (Michael Schoeffling)

16 Candles (1984)
“Happy Birthday, Samantha. Make a wish.”
“It already came true.”

16. Loretta Castorini (Cher) and Ronny Cammareri (Nicolas Cage)

Moonstruck (1987)
“We are here to ruin ourselves and to break our hearts and love the wrong people and die. The storybooks are bullshit. Now I want you to come upstairs with me and get in my bed!”

15. Sam Baldwin (Tom Hanks) and Annie Reed (Meg Ryan)

Sleepless in Seattle (1993)
“Now that was when people knew how to be in love. They knew it! Time, distance... nothing could separate them because they knew. It was right. It was real.”

14. Edward Lewis (Richard Gere) and Vivian Ward (Julia Roberts)

Pretty Woman (1990)
“So what happens after he climbs up and rescues her?
“She rescues him right back.”

13. Clarence Worley (Christian Slater) and Alabama Whitman (Patricia Arquette)

True Romance (1993)
“You just said that you love me and if I say it back and just throw caution to the wind and let the chips fall where they may and you were lying then I am just going to fucking die.”

12. Lloyd Dobler (John Cusack) and Diane Court (Ione Skye)

Say Anything (1989)
“Then why are you shaking?”
“I don’t know. I think I’m happy.”

11. Lady and Tramp

Lady and the Tramp (1955)
Premiere.com’s interpretation of what was going through the dog’s mind: “Here’s a meatball. Enjoy! <3)”

10. Robbie (Adam Sandler) and Julia (Drew Barrymore)

The Wedding Singer (1998)
“I wanna grow old with you.”

9. Robert Kincaid (Clint Eastwood) and Francesca Johnson (Meryl Streep)

Bridges of Madison County (1995)
“If you want me to stop, tell me now.”
“No one's asking you to.”

8. Marcee Tidwell (Regina King) and Rod Tidwell (Cuba Gooding Jr.)

Jerry Maguire (1996)
"I hate you going to movies alone without me."

7. Harold (Bud Cort) and Maude (Ruth Gordon)

Harold and Maude (1971)
“’Harold loves Maude... and Maude loves Harold.’ This is the nicest gift I've received in years.”

6. Sam Wheat (Patrick Swayze) and Molly Jensen (Demi Moore)

Ghost (1990)
“Ditto.”

5. Noah Calhoun (Ryan Gosling) and Allie Hamilton (Rachel McAdams)

The Notebook (2004)
“Yes... it wasn't over, it still isn't over.”

4. Jack Dawson (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Rose DeWitt Bukater (Kate Winslet)

Titanic (1997)
“Winning that ticket, Rose, was the best thing that ever happened to me... it brought me to you. And I'm thankful for that, Rose.”

3. Adrian (Talia Shire) and Rocky Balboa (Sylvester Stallone)

Rocky/Rocky II (1976/1979)
“I just got one thing to say... to my wife at home: Yo, Adrian! I DID IT!”
“I love you. I love you...”

2. WALL•E (voice) (Ben Burtt) and EVE (voice) (Elissa Knight)

Wall-E (2008)
“Eeeee...va.”

1. Buttercup / The Princess Bride (Robin Wright Penn) and Westley (Cary Elwes)

The Princess Bride (1987)
“Death cannot stop true love. All it can do is delay it for a while.”

Curriculum Vitae of Bayu Agustari Adha

CURRICULUM VITAE




1. PERSONAL DATA
Name : Bayu Agustari Adha
Place/Date of birth : Solok/August, 15th 1986
Nationality : Indonesia
Gender : Male
Religion : Moslem
Marital status : Single
Address : Jln. Gajah 4 no. 7 Air Tawar Barat Padang,
zippcode : 25131
Mobile : +6285263031121
Email : bayu_station@yahoo.co.id
Blog : http://bayustation.blogspot.com/

2. FORMAL EDUCATION
1. 2004 to 2009 S1 Sastra inggris UNP (BSc english literature)
2. 2001 to 2004 SMU N 1 Solok (senior high school)
3. 1998 to 2001 SLTP N 1 Solok (junior high school)
4. 1992 to 1998 SD 39 Perumnas kotobaru Solok (elementary school)
5. 1991 to 1992 TK Darmawanita Solok(kindergarten)

3. LANGUAGE
1. English
2. Bahasa Indonesia
3. Bahasa Minang


4. EXPERIENCES
1. Some Important Experiences :
November 2009: Surveyor in Research of Voter Attitude for Governor election 2010 in Tanjung bingkung Village, County of Solok, partnership with Jaringan Citra Public (JPC) Jakarta
October 2009 : Water and Sanitation Assistant in Emergency Respond of West Sumatera Earthquake with Medicins Sans Frontieres (International NGO)
September 2009: Project Manager in Publishing Literary work compilation of Padang State University student with Unit Kegiatan Kesenian or Art Activity Unit of Student Centre at Padang State University
August 2009: Head of Management in theatre Performance of Indonesian Student Theatre Meeting in Bali with Unit Kegiatan Kesenian or Art Activity Unit of Student Centre at Padang State University
July 2009:Surveyor in Quick Count of President Election 2009 in Bukit Bais Village, County of Solok with Jaringan Isu Publik (JIP) Jakarta
June 2009: Supervisor in National Test for Entering University
May 2009: Steering Commitee in Student Masterpiece Art with Unit Kegiatan Kesenian or Art Activity Unit of Student Centre at Padang State University
April 2009: Head of Management in theatre Performance of Sumatera Student Theatre Meeting in Padang with Unit Kegiatan Kesenian or Art Activity Unit of Student Centre at Padang State University
December 2008: Steering Commitee in Student Surprising Stage with Unit Kegiatan Kesenian or Art Activity Unit of Student Centre at Padang State University
November 2008: Head of Management in Donation for Palestine War Victims with Unit Kegiatan Kesenian or Art Activity Unit of Student Centre at Padang State University
October 2008: Head of Commitee in West Sumatera Literary Writer Meeting with Unit Kegiatan Kesenian or Art Activity Unit of Student Centre at Padang State University
August 2008: Facilitator in Video Workshop with Engage Media (Australia)

Student Representative to Malaysia and Singapore
-Participant in Discussion with UiTM Student Organization (Malaysia)
-Participant in Discussion with Petronas Stakeholder (Malaysia)
-Participant in Discussion with Proton Saga Skateholder (Malaysia)
-Participant in Discussion with Nanyang Tecnological University (Singapore)

2. Some Involvments in Organization :
2009 – now:Head of West Sumatera Province management in Temu Teater Mahasiswa Nusantara or Indonesian Student Theatre Association
2007 – 2009: Chairman of Management in Unit Kegiatan Kesenian or Art Activity Unit of Student Centre at Padang State University
2005-2007: Head of Literature Division in Unit Kegiatan Kesenian or Art Activity Unit of Student Centre at Padang State University
2006-2007: Head of Interests and Talents Division in English Student Association of Padang State University




Padang, January 2010
dto

Bayu Agustari Adha

New Historicism

New Historicism is a school of literary theory, grounded in critical theory, that developed in the 1980s, primarily through the work of the critic Stephen Greenblatt, and gained widespread influence in the 1990s.[1]
New Historicists aim simultaneously to understand the work through its historical context and to understand cultural and intellectual history through literature, which documents the new discipline of the history of ideas. Michel Foucault based his approach both on his theory of the limits of collective cultural knowledge and on his technique of examining a broad array of documents in order to understand the episteme of a particular time. New Historicism is claimed to be a more neutral approach to historical events, and to be sensitive towards different cultures.
H. Aram Veeser, introducing an anthology of essays, The New Historicism (1989), noted some key assumptions that continually reappear in New Historicist discourse; they were:
• that every expressive act is embedded in a network of material practices;
• that every act of unmasking, critique and opposition uses the tools it condemns and risks falling prey to the practice it exposes;
• that literary and non-literary "texts" circulate inseparably;
• that no discourse, imaginative or archival, gives access to unchanging truths, nor expresses inalterable human nature;
• that a critical method and a language adequate to describe culture under capitalism participate in the economy they describe.[2]
The study
"Sub-literary" texts and uninspired non-literary texts all came to be read as documents of historical discourse, side-by-side with the "great works of literature". A typical focus of New Historicist critics, led by Stephen Orgel, has been on understanding Shakespeare less as an autonomous great author in the modern sense than as a clue to the conjunction of the world of Renaissance theatre—a collaborative and largely anonymous free-for-all—and the complex social politics of the time.[3] In this sense, Shakespeare's plays are seen as inseparable from the context in which he wrote. See contextualism, thick description. Influential historians behind the eruption of the New Historicism are Fernand Braudel and the Annales school.[4]
In this shift of focus, a comparison can be made with the best discussions of works of decorative arts. Unlike fine arts, which had been discussed in purely formal terms, comparable to the literary New Criticism, under the influences of Bernard Berenson and Ernst Gombrich, nuanced discussion of the arts of design since the 1970s have been set within social and intellectual contexts, taking account of fluctuations in luxury trades, the availability of design prototypes to local craftsmen, the cultural horizons of the patron, and economic considerations—"the limits of the possible" in economic historian Fernand Braudel's famous phrase. An outstanding pioneer example of such a contextualized study was Peter Thornton's monograph Seventeenth-Century Interior Decoration in England, France and Holland (1978).
[edit] Pre-history
In its historicism and in its political interpretations, New Historicism is indebted to Marxism. But whereas Marxism (at least in its cruder forms) tends to see literature as part of a 'superstructure' in which the economic 'base' (i.e. material relations of production) manifests itself, New Historicist thinkers tend to take a more nuanced view of power, seeing it not exclusively as class-related but extending throughout society. This view derives primarily from Michel Foucault and his work in critical theory.
In its tendency to see society as consisting of texts relating to other texts, with no 'fixed' literary value above and beyond the way specific societies read them in specific situations, New Historicism also owes something to postmodernism. However, New Historicists tend to exhibit less skepticism than postmodernists and to show more willingness to perform the 'traditional' tasks of literary criticism: i.e. explaining the text in its context, and asking how the text enforces the cultural practices that it depends on for its own production and dissemination.
New Historicism shares many of the same theories as with what is often called Cultural materialism, but cultural materialist critics are even more likely to put emphasis on the present implications of their study and to position themselves in disagreement to current power structures, working to give power to traditionally disadvantaged groups. Cultural critics also downplay the distinction between "high" and "low" culture and often focus predominantly on the productions of "popular culture." (Newton 1988). [7] New Historicists analyze text with an eye to history. With this in mind, New Historicism is not “new”. Many of the critiques that existed between the 1920s and the 1950s also focused on literature's historical content. These critics based their assumptions of literature on the connection between texts and their historical contexts (Murfin & Supriya 1998).
New historicism also has something in common with the historical criticism of Hippolyte Taine, who argued that a literary work is less the product of its author's imaginations than the social circumstances of its creation, the three main aspects of which Taine called race, milieu, and moment. It is also a response to an earlier historicism, practiced by early 20th century critics such as John Livingston Lowes, which sought to de-mythologize the creative process by reexamining the lives and times of canonical writers. But New Historicism differs from both of these trends in its emphasis on ideology: the political disposition, unknown to an author himself, that governs his work.
[edit] Foucauldian basis
New Historicism frequently addresses the critical theory based idea that the lowest common denominator for all human actions is power, so the New Historicist seeks to find examples of power and how it is dispersed within the text. Power is a means through which the marginalized are controlled, and the thing that the marginalized (or, other) seek to gain. This relates back to the idea that because literature is written by those who have the most power, there must be details in it that show the views of the common people. New Historicists seek to find "sites of struggle" to identify just who is the group or entity with the most power.
Foucault's conception of power is neither reductive nor synonymous with domination. Rather he understands power (in modern times at least) as continually articulated on knowledge and knowledge on power. Nevertheless, his work in the 1970s on prisons may have been influential on the New Historicists. In these studies Foucault examined shifts in the mechanisms of power in these institutional settings. His discussions of techniques included the panopticon, a theoretical prison system developed by English philosopher Jeremy Bentham, and particularly useful for New Historicism.
Bentham stated that the perfect prison/surveillance system would be a cylindrical shaped room that held prison cells on the outside walls. In the middle of this spherical room would be a large guard tower with a light that would shine in all the cells. The prisoners thus would never know for certain whether they were being watched, so they would effectively police themselves, and be as actors on a stage, giving the appearance of submission, even when they are probably not being watched.
Foucault included the panopticon in his discussions on the technologies of power in part to illustrate the idea of lateral surveillance, or self-policing, that occurs when those who are subject to these techniques of power believe they are being watched. His purpose was to show that these techniques of power go beyond mere force and could prompt different regimes of self-discipline among those subject to the exercise of these visibility techniques. This often meant that, in effect, prisoners would often fall into line whether or not there was an actual need to do so.
Although the influence of such philosophers as French structuralist Marxist Louis Althusser and Marxists Raymond Williams and Terry Eagleton were essential in shaping the theory of New Historicism, the work of Foucault also appears influential. Although some critics believe that these former philosophers have made more of an impact on New Historicism as a whole, there is a popularly held recognition that Foucault’s ideas have passed through the New Historicist formation in history as a succession of épistémes or structures of thought that shape everyone and everything within a culture (Myers 1989). It is indeed evident that the categories of history used by New Historicists have been standardised academically. Although the movement is publicly disapproving of the periodisation of academic history, the uses to which New Historicists put the Foucauldian notion of the épistéme amount to very little more than the same practice under a new and improved label (Myers 1989).
Insofar as Greenblatt has been explicit in expressing a theoretical orientation, he has identified the ethnography and theoretical anthropology of Clifford Geertz as highly influential.
[edit] Criticism
New historicism has suffered from criticism, most particularly from the clashing views of those considered to be postmodernists. New Historicism denies the claim that society has entered a "post-modern" or "post-historical" phase and allegedly ignited the 'culture wars' of the 1980s (Seaton, 2000). The main points of this argument are that new historicism, unlike post-modernism, acknowledges that almost all historic views, accounts, and facts they use contain biases which derive from the position of that view. As Carl Rapp states: "[the new historicists] often appear to be saying, 'We are the only ones who are willing to admit that all knowledge is contaminated, including even our own'"[5].
Camile Paglia likewise cites "the New Historicism coming out of Berkeley" as an "issue where the PC academy thinks it's going to reform the old bad path, I have been there before they have been, and I'm there to punish and expose and to say what they are doing...a piece of crap."[6]
Some complaints (including those of Harold Bloom) sometimes made about New Historicism are that it seems to reduce literature to a footnote of history. It has also been said that it does not pay attention to the details involved with analyzing literature. (See School of Resentment) New Historicism simply states historical issues that literature may make connections without explaining why it has done this, lacking in-depth knowledge of literature and its structures.
[edit] References
1. ^ David Mikics, ed. A New Handbook of Literary Terms, 2007, s.v. "New historicism".
2. ^ Veeser, ed. The New Historicism, (Routledge, Chapman and Hall) 1989, "Introduction", p. xi. Nineteen essays by contributors.
3. ^ An "ancestor" of the New Historicism noted in Mikics is C.L. Barber's Shakespeare's Festive Comedy (1959), which set the comedies against a contemporary cultural background of popular traditions like the "lord of misrule", where authority was inverted, transgressed and burlesqued.
4. ^ A connection made by Mikics, op. cit.
5. ^ http://www-english.tamu.edu/pers/fac/myers/historicism.html Myers, D. G. 1989, The New Historicism in literary study, viewed 27 April 2006
6. ^ http://www.reason.com/news/show/29737.html Interview with Reason Magazine

Ideology

An ideology is a set of aims and ideas that directs one's goals, expectations, and actions. An ideology can be thought of as a comprehensive vision, as a way of looking at things (compare worldview), as in common sense (see Ideology in everyday society below) and several philosophical tendencies (see Political ideologies), or a set of ideas proposed by the dominant class of a society to all members of this society (a 'received consciousness' or product of socialization). The main purpose behind an ideology is to offer change in society, and adherence to a set of ideals where conformity already exists, through a normative thought process. Ideologies are systems of abstract thought (as opposed to mere ideation) applied to public matters and thus make this concept central to politics. Implicitly every political tendency entails an ideology whether or not it is propounded as an explicit system of thought.
(For the Marxist definition of ideology, see Ideology as an instrument of social reproduction below.)
The term "ideology" was born in the highly controversial, philosophical and political debates and fights of the French Revolution and acquired several other meanings from the early days of the First French Empire to the present. The word ideology was coined by Destutt de Tracy in 1796[1][2] assembling the parts idea (near to the Lockean sense) and -logy. He used it to refer to one aspect of his "science of ideas". (To the study itself, not the subject of the study.) He separated three aspects, namely: ideology, general grammar and logic, considering respectively the subject, the means and the reason of this science.[3] He argues that among these aspects ideology is the most generic term, because the science of ideas also contains the study of their expression and deduction.
According to Karl Mannheim's historical reconstruction of the meaning-shifts of ideology, the modern meaning of the word ideology was born when Napoleon Bonaparte (as a politician) used it in an abusive way against "the ideologues" (a group which included[citation needed] Cabanis, Condorcet, Constant, Daunou, Say, Madame De Staël and Tracy), to express the pettiness of his (liberal republican) political opponents.
Perhaps the most accessible source for the near-original meaning of ideology is Hippolyte Taine's work on the Ancien Regime (first volume of "Origins of Contemporary France"). He describes ideology as rather like teaching philosophy by the Socratic method, but without extending the vocabulary beyond what the general reader already possessed, and without the examples from observation that practical science would require. Taine identifies it not just with Destutt De Tracy, but also with his milieu, and includes Condillac as one of its precursors. (Tracy read the works of Locke and Condillac while he was imprisoned during the Reign of Terror.)
The word "ideology" was coined long before the Russians coined "intelligentsia", or before the adjective "intellectual" referred to a sort of person (see substantive), i.e. an intellectual. Thus these words were not around when the hard-headed, driven Napoleon Bonaparte took the word "ideologues" to ridicule his intellectual opponents. Gradually, however, the term "ideology" has dropped some of its pejorative sting, and has become a neutral term in the analysis of differing political opinions.[citation needed] Ideological references are important to many people throughout the world. Karl Marx used the term in his own context often throughout his works.
Analysis
Meta-ideology is the study of the structure, form, and manifestation of ideologies. Meta-ideology posits that ideology is a coherent system of ideas, relying upon a few basic assumptions about reality that may or may not have any factual basis, but are subjective choices that serve as the seed around which further thought grows. According to this perspective, ideologies are neither right nor wrong, but only a relativistic intellectual strategy for categorizing the world. The pluses and minuses of ideology range from the vigor and fervor of true believers to ideological infallibility. Excessive need for certitude lurks at fundamentalist levels in politics, religions, and elsewhere.
The works of George Walford and Harold Walsby, done under the heading of systematic ideology, are attempts to explore the relationships between ideology and social systems.
David W. Minar describes six different ways in which the word "ideology" has been used:
1. As a collection of certain ideas with certain kinds of content, usually normative;
2. As the form or internal logical structure that ideas have within a set;
3. By the role in which ideas play in human-social interaction;
4. By the role that ideas play in the structure of an organization;
5. As meaning, whose purpose is persuasion; and
6. As the locus of social interaction, possibly.
For Willard A. Mullins, an ideology is composed of four basic characteristics:
1. it must have power over cognition
2. it must be capable of guiding one's evaluations;
3. it must provide guidance towards action;
4. and, as stated above, must be logically coherent.
Mullins emphasizes that an ideology should be contrasted with the related (but different) issues of utopia and historical myth.
The German philosopher Christian Duncker called for a "critical reflection of the ideology concept" (2006). In his work, he strove to bring the concept of ideology into the foreground, as well as the closely connected concerns of epistemology and history. In this work, the term ideology is defined in terms of a system of presentations that explicitly or implicitly claim to absolute truth.
Though the word "ideology" is most often found in political discourse, there are many different kinds of ideology: political, social, epistemological, ethical, and so on.
In the Marxist economic base and superstructure model of society, base denotes the relations of production, and superstructure denotes the dominant ideology (religious, legal, political systems). The economic base of production determines the political superstructure of a society. Ruling class-interests determine the superstructure and the nature of the justifying ideology — actions feasible because the ruling class control the means of production. Hence the great importance of the ideology justifying a society; it politically confuses the alienated groups of society via false consciousness, such as in the case of commodity fetishism — the belief that value is inherent to a commodity, rather than external, added to it via labor.
The ruling class affect their social reproduction by the dominant ideology’s representing — to every social-economic class — that the economic interests of the ruling class are the economic interests of the entire society. Some explanations, György Lukács proposes ideology as a projection of the class consciousness of the ruling class. Antonio Gramsci uses cultural hegemony to explain why the working-class have a false ideological conception of what are their best interests.
Chronologically, the dominant ideologies in Capitalism are:
1. classical liberalism
2. modern liberalism [4]
3. social democracy
4. neo-liberalism
corresponding to these three capitalist stages of development:
1. extensive stage
2. intensive stage
3. contemporary capitalism (late capitalism)
The Marxist formulation of “ideology as an instrument of social reproduction” is conceptually important to the sociology of knowledge, viz. Karl Mannheim, Daniel Bell, and Jürgen Habermas et al.. Moreover, Mannheim has developed, and progressed, from the 'total' but 'special' Marxist conception of ideology to a 'general' and 'total' ideological conception acknowledging that all ideology (including Marxism) resulted from social life, an idea developed by the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu.
Louis Althusser's Ideological State Apparatuses
Louis Althusser proposed a materialistic conception of ideology, which made use of a special type of discourse: the lacunar discourse. A number of propositions, which are never untrue, suggest a number of other propositions, which are, in this way, the essence of the lacunar discourse is what is not told (but is suggested).
For example, the statement 'All are equal before the law', which is a theoretical groundwork of current legal systems, suggests that all people may be of equal worth or have equal 'opportunities'. This is not true, for the concept of private property over the means of production results in some people being able to own more (much more) than others, and their property brings power and influence (the rich can afford better lawyers, among other things, and this puts in question the principle of equality before the law).
Althusser also invented the concept of the Ideological State Apparatus to explain his theory of ideology. His first thesis was "ideology has no history": while ideologyies have histories, interleaved with the general class struggle of society, the general form of ideology is external to history. His second thesis, "Ideas are material", explains his materialistic attitude, which he illustrated with the "scandalous advice" of Pascal toward unbelievers: "kneel and pray, and then you will believe", thus highlighting that beliefs and ideas are a product of social practices, and not the reverse. However, this mustn't be misunderstood as simple behaviorism, as there may be, as Pierre Macherey put it, a "subjectivity without subject"; in other words, a form of non-personal liberty, as in Deleuze's conception of becoming-other
[edit] Feminism as critique of ideology
Naturalizing socially constructed patterns of behavior has always been an important mechanism in the production and reproduction of ideologies. Feminist theorists have paid close attention to these mechanisms. Adrienne Rich e.g. has shown how to understand motherhood as a social institution. However, 'feminism' is not a homogeneous whole, and some corners of feminist thought criticize the critique of social constructionism, by advocating that it disregards too much of human nature and natural tendencies. The debate, they say, is about the normative/naturalistic fallacy—the idea that just something 'being' natural does not necessarily mean it 'ought' to be the case.Political ideologies
Main article: Ideologies of parties
Many political parties base their political action and program on an ideology. In social studies, a Political Ideology is a certain ethical set of ideals, principles, doctrines, myths or symbols of a social movement, institution, class, or large group that explains how society should work, and offers some political and cultural blueprint for a certain social order. A political ideology largely concerns itself with how to allocate power and to what ends it should be used. Some parties follow a certain ideology very closely, while others may take broad inspiration from a group of related ideologies without specifically embracing any one of them.
Political ideologies have two dimensions:
1. Goals: How society should work (or be arranged).
2. Methods: The most appropriate ways to achieve the ideal arrangement.
An ideology is a collection of ideas. Typically, each ideology contains certain ideas on what it considers to be the best form of government (e.g. democracy, theocracy, etc), and the best economic system (e.g. capitalism, socialism, etc). Sometimes the same word is used to identify both an ideology and one of its main ideas. For instance, "socialism" may refer to an economic system, or it may refer to an ideology which supports that economic system.
Ideologies also identify themselves by their position on the political spectrum (such as the left, the center or the right), though this is very often controversial. Finally, ideologies can be distinguished from political strategies (e.g. populism) and from single issues that a party may be built around (e.g. opposition to European integration or the legalization of marijuana). Philosopher Michael Oakeshott provides a good definition of ideology as "the formalized abridgment of the supposed sub-stratum of the rational truth contained in the tradition."
Studies of the concept of ideology itself (rather than specific ideologies) have been carried out under the name of systematic ideology.
Political ideologies are concerned with many different aspects of a society, some of which are: the economy, education, health care, labor law, criminal law, the justice system, the provision of social security and social welfare, trade, the environment, minors, immigration, race, use of the military, patriotism and established religion.
There are many proposed methods for the classification of political ideologies. See the political spectrum article for a more in-depth discussion of these different methods (each of whom generates a specific political spectrum).
Epistemological ideologies
Even when the challenging of existing beliefs is encouraged, as in science, the dominant paradigm or mindset can prevent certain challenges, theories or experiments from being advanced.
There are critics who view science as an ideology in itself, or being an effective ideology, called scientism. Some scientists respond that, while the scientific method is itself an ideology, as it is a collection of ideas, there is nothing particularly wrong or bad about it.
Other critics point out that while science itself is not a misleading ideology, there are some fields of study within science that are misleading. Two examples discussed here are in the fields of ecology and economics.
A special case of science adopted as ideology is that of ecology, which studies the relationships between living things on Earth. Perceptual psychologist J. J. Gibson believed that human perception of ecological relationships was the basis of self-awareness and cognition itself. Linguist George Lakoff has proposed a cognitive science of mathematics wherein even the most fundamental ideas of arithmetic would be seen as consequences or products of human perception—which is itself necessarily evolved within an ecology.
Deep ecology and the modern ecology movement (and, to a lesser degree, Green parties) appear to have adopted ecological sciences as a positive ideology.
Some accuse ecological economics of likewise turning scientific theory into political economy, although theses in that science can often be tested. The modern practice of green economics fuses both approaches and seems to be part science, part ideology.
This is far from the only theory of economics to be raised to ideology status—some notable economically-based ideologies include mercantilism, mixed economy, social Darwinism, communism, laissez-faire economics, and free trade. There are also current theories of safe trade and fair trade which can be seen as ideologies.
Psychological research
Psychological research[5] increasingly suggests that ideologies reflect motivational processes, as opposed to the view that political convictions always reflect independent and unbiased thinking. Research in 2008[5] proposed that ideologies may function as prepackaged units of interpretation that spread because of basic human motives to understand the world, avoid existential threat, and maintain valued interpersonal relationships. The authors conclude that such motives may lead disproportionately to the adoption of system-justifying worldviews. Psychologists have generally found that personality traits, individual difference variables, needs, and ideological beliefs seem to have a common thread. For instance, a meta-analysis by Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, and Sulloway in 2003 analyzed 88 studies from 12 countries, with over 22,000 subjects, and found that death anxiety, intolerance of ambiguity, lack of openness to experience, uncertainty avoidance, need for cognitive closure, need for personal structure, and threat of loss of position or self-esteem all contribute to the degree of one's overall political conservatism.[6] The researchers suggest that these results show that political conservatives stress resistance to change and are motivated by needs that are aimed at reducing threat and uncertainty. According to Robert Altemeyer and other researchers, individuals that are politically conservative tend to rank high on Right-Wing Authoritarianism, as measured by Altemeyer's RWA scale.[7] Psychologist Felicia Pratto and her colleagues have found evidence to support the idea that a high Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) is strongly correlated with conservative political views.
Ideology and semiotic theory
According to the semiotician Bob Hodge, ideology "identifies a unitary object that incorporates complex sets of meanings with the social agents and processes that produced them. No other term captures this object as well as ‘ideology’. Foucault’s ‘episteme’ is too narrow and abstract, not social enough. His ‘discourse’, popular because it covers some of ‘ideology’s’ terrain with less baggage, is too confined to verbal systems. ‘Worldview’ is too metaphysical, ‘propaganda’ too loaded. Despite or because of its contradictions, ‘ideology’ still plays a key role in semiotics oriented to social, political life".[8] Authors such as Michael Freeden have also recently incorporated a semantic analysis to the study of ideologies.
In everyday society

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (June 2008)
In public discussions, certain ideas arise more commonly than others. Often people with diverse backgrounds and interests may find themselves thinking alike in ways startling to those from other backgrounds. Social scientists might explain this phenomenon as evidence of ideologies.
Dominant ideologies appear as "neutral", holding to assumptions that are largely unchallenged. Meanwhile, all other ideologies that differ from the dominant ideology are seen as radical, no matter what the content of their actual vision may be. The philosopher Michel Foucault wrote about the concept of apparent ideological neutrality. Ideology is not the same thing as philosophy. Philosophy is an analytic method for assessing ideologies and belief systems. Some attribute to ideology positive characteristics like vigor and fervor, or negative features like excessive certitude and fundamentalist rigor.
Organizations that strive for power will try to influence the ideology of a society to become closer to what they want it to be. Political organizations (governments included) and other groups (e.g. lobbyists) try to influence people by broadcasting their opinions.
When most people in a society think alike about certain matters, or even forget that there are alternatives to the status quo, we arrive at the concept of hegemony, about which the philosopher Antonio Gramsci wrote. Such a state of affairs has been dramatized many times in literature: Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell; Brave New World by Aldous Huxley; and A Wrinkle in Time by Madeline L'Engle. Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman have argued that social ideological homogeneity can be achieved by restricting the conceptual metaphors transmitted by mass communication.
Notes
1. ^ Kennedy, Emmet (1979) "Ideology" from Destutt De Tracy to Marx, Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 40, No. 3 (Jul.–Sep., 1979), pp. 353-368 (article consists of 16 pages) http://www.jstor.org/pss/2709242
2. ^ Hart, David M. (2002) Destutt De Tracy: Annotated Bibliography http://www.econlib.org/library/Tracy/DestuttdeTracyBio.html
3. ^ De Tracy, Destutt (1801) Les Éléments d'idéologie, 3rd ed. (1817), p. 4, cited by: Mannheim, Karl (1929) Ideologie und Utopie, 2nd footnote in the chapter The problem of "false consciousness"
4. ^ Clark, B. (1998). Political economy: A comparative approach. Westport, CT: Preager.
5. ^ a b Jost, John T., Ledgerwood, Alison, & Hardin, Curtis D. (2008). Shared reality, system justification, and the relational basis of ideological beliefs. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2,171-186
6. ^ Jost, John T., Glaser, Jack, Kruglanski, Arie W., & Sulloway, Frank J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339-375.
7. ^ Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Winnipeg, Canada: University of Manitoba Press.
8. ^ Bob Hodge, "Ideology", at Semiotics Encyclopedia Online.
[edit] References
• Christian Duncker (Hg.): Ideologiekritik Aktuell – Ideologies Today. Bd. 1. London 2008,[1]. ISBN 978-1-84790-015-9
• Christian Duncker: Kritische Reflexionen Des Ideologiebegriffes, 2006, ISBN 1-903343-88-7
• Minar, David M. (1961) "Ideology and Political Behavior", Midwest Journal of Political Science. Midwest Political Science Association.
• Mullins, Willard A. (1972) "On the Concept of Ideology in Political Science." The American Political Science Review. American Political Science Association.
• Pinker, Steven. (2002) "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature." New York: Penguin Group, Inc. ISBN 0-670-03151-8