新历史主义涉及到多门学科,观点纷繁驳杂,没有较为明晰的理论框架和理论体系,这就使得目前对新历史主义文学批评的研究还存在一些问题。在20世纪西方文论发展历程的大背景中,新历史主义作为文学批评有其理论产生和发展的历史渊源,研究者们既不能盲目崇拜其深奥的文字游戏,也不能想当然的主观臆测,使其失去其原本的宗旨和面貌。在“文本性”和“历史性”的基础上,新历史主义的文本和历史事件相互指涉,同时两者都在泛化的文本世界里又共同指向话语。新历史主义的批判特色是把文本阐释放在历史、社会、文化的氛围中采用对话协商的形式展开,其中贯穿着意识形态和权力的激烈角逐,既有颠覆,又有抑制。此外,新历史主义文学批评是否关乎(搁置)审美,也是人们不得不思考的一个重要问题。 Neo-historicism involves many disciplines with numerous and complicated views. There is no clear theoretical framework and theoretical system, which makes the current research on the neo-historic literary criticism still has some problems. In the context of the development of western literary theory in the 20th century, New Historicism as the historical origin of its theory production and development, the researchers can not blindly worship its esoteric word games, and can not take for granted the subjective assumption that It loses its original purpose and appearance. On the basis of “textuality ” and “historicity ”, the texts and historical events of neo-historicism refer to each other, and at the same time, they both point together to the discourse in the generalized textual world. The critical feature of neo-historicism is that the interpretation of the text is conducted in the atmosphere of history, society and culture by means of dialogue and consultation. The intense competition that runs through ideology and power has both subversion and suppression. In addition, whether or not the new historicist literary criticism relates to (shelving) the aesthetic is also an important issue that people have to think about.