Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow:

 At its core, New Historicism is a mode of literary criticism that emerged in the 1980s, championed by critics like Stephen Greenblatt.

Unlike traditional historicism, which seeks to understand literature by placing it within its historical context, New Historicism insists that we must examine the literary work and its historical situation as a single entity, with each influencing the other. That is, New Historicists see the literature not merely as a reflection of its time but also as an active player in shaping that time.

The theory assumes that every work is deeply interwoven with its historical period, reflecting societal structures, power dynamics, and cultural norms. Yet simultaneously, literature can challenge, reinforce, or even modify these same structures and norms. Thus, a literary text is not a standalone artifact observed in isolation but a cultural product entwined with other cultural products of the era, including philosophy, art, politics, or societal movements.

New Historicism also often focuses on less canonical works, such as diaries, pamphlets, and other non-elite texts. This opens up a wider field for the critic, diversifying the voices that contribute to our understanding of a certain historical period. By doing so, New Historicist critics attempt to construct a richer, more nuanced understanding of cultural history that is not obfuscated by the biases of canonical texts.

The complexity of this form of criticism lies in how it extends the traditional boundaries of literature, recognizing the interplay of textual analysis, history, and culture, and seeks to understand how these elements shape and are shaped by a work of literature. The power dynamics of history, the role of individual agency, and the interdependencies of text and context become central themes in New Historicist readings.