so the mobile interface for my college's online discussion forum sUX. So I type up my work here, when I'm lazy. I just like this particular theory of lit, so here is some of my knowledge without the works cited cuz I didn't type that here 😂

What are the assumptions, principles, and goals of New Historicism?

Rather than try to assert a claim about "what really happened" at a time or place in history, New Historicism seeks to examine all sides, compare all sides to each other, and note how everything is shaped by one another. We operate in this way under the assumption that no single cultural value system can be shared by all groups of peoples. However, when one such ideal pushed forward and held up as the "spirit of an era," it can be assumed that those in power have asserted that position over other less popular opinions. New Historicists seek the less popular opinions and stories, with hopes to obtain a fuller picture of life during any particular era of research.

Ideally, the account of a New Historicist includes elements beyond a simple "cause and effect" retelling of an event. We are rather interested to see how all the varying discourses clash against each other and come together to create a more colorful whole. Now we can delve deeper and examine how a group of people reacted to an event, and judge the social or psychological or economic outcomes.

Since New Historicists believe that history is recorded and perceived subjectively, the goal is no longer to agree on whose truth is most true, or has more relevance, or strongest influence. Without oversimplification, the scope of the researcher widens to include raw discourses of all parties involved in an era in any way, shape or form. This allows us to see motifs of an era previously overlooked and could offer valuable insight for one seeking to understand a specific group of people, but still does not excuse the researcher from bias. According to Dobie, the researcher is bound to announce their own tendencies, an act dubbed "self-position." Dobie goes on to explain that in doing all this, history now lends itself to the form of a text (or compilation of texts, really) without having to be digested as a series of "empirically verifiable" list of events.