The Essential Need to Clearly Define Addiction Criticism in Literature Studies

Abstract

Upon reading The Second Edition of The Bedford Glossary of Critical Literary Terms, I was surprised to find that many traditionally uncharted fields of exploration in literature are being given critical attention; postcolonial studies, race (and literary studies), queer theory, feminist criticism, cultural criticism, ecocriticism, disability criticism, and gender criticism have emerged and evolved tremendously in recent years [1]. We are living in Prospero’s “Brave New World” in which traditionally marginalized voices are being involved in the larger intellectual discussion. We’re addressing that making fun of the mute or mentally handicapped in literature is a microcosm of society’s larger prevailing attitudes towards the disabled. Likewise, we’re accessing how personifying Nature in literature can further the prevailing attitudes that Nature is merely a subservient means for men to use to preserve humans’ reflective image. Literature criticism has made great strides, but we still have much more room to grow because an essential question remains unaddressed: Why isn’t addiction criticism a clearly defined field of study in literature?