The following text discusses literary theory.
New Historicism emerged in the 1980s as an approach that reads literature within its historical and cultural context—but with a twist. Rather than treating history as simply background for literary texts, new historicists see literature and history as mutually constitutive: texts both reflect and shape the culture that produced them. An Elizabethan play, for example, both mirrors and participates in constructing attitudes toward monarchy, gender, and social order. This approach dissolves the boundary between "literary" and "historical" documents.
How does New Historicism view the relationship between literature and history?
Literature simply reflects historical facts without influencing them
Literature and history influence each other, with texts both reflecting and shaping culture
Historical context is irrelevant to understanding literature
Only non-literary documents have historical value
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. The text states literature and history are "mutually constitutive: texts both reflect and shape the culture that produced them."
- Evidence: Mutual constitution; reflecting and shaping.
- Reasoning: Bidirectional influence characterizes the relationship.
- Conclusion: Literature and history shape each other.
Choice A is incorrect because texts also "shape" culture, not just reflect. Choice C is incorrect because context is central to this approach. Choice D is incorrect because it "dissolves the boundary" between literary and historical documents.