Hello, All. I have decided I am feeling contradictory today, and find it only appropriate to aim some of this disagreeableness at myself. Yes, today is a day for contradiction, and that is why I will be presenting a counter-point to my very first blog. For all of you who haven't read my first blog (I can't imagine anyone who could resist) I discuss Roland Barthes theory of Killing the author in order for a Work's true potential to be maximized. Bearing that in mind, today I will present you with Karl Marx's views. A bit drastic, you might say? A bit narcissistic, you say? You're damn right! Chalk it up to an ego the size of a cirrhotic liver . . . and 24 hr. access to a shelf of Lit. Theory books.
As usual I have composed a little ditty for you regarding Peter Barry's articles on Marxist Theory. Enjoy.
Peter Barry’s exposition of Marxist beliefs and their subsequent involvement in the formation of a socially philosophical category of literary theory – in spite of its intentional and necessary concision – nimbly and ambitiously affronts the socially recognized acceptance of Romanticism as the theory predominantly observed by artists, that is, the acceptance – though usually accepted unwittingly by an uneducated populous – of the stereotypically Wordsworthian conception of art as “recollected in tranquility” by means of an “autonomous ‘inspired’ individual whose ‘genius’ and creative imagination enables him to bring forth original and timeless works of art.”(Barry 152) As can be seen from the aforementioned quote, Barry deliberately scare-quotes inspired and genius to draw the reader’s attention to the doubtfulness and subjectivity of genius, and the incongruous nature of inspiration, attesting the ascension to literary prominence not on a romanticized conception of Muses, but rather upon years of unwavering political awareness. Also, palpable is the mocking overtone established by the scare-quotes, inauspiciously criticizing any who subscribe to the existence of sovereign brilliance. Barry further illuminates the Marxist belief that – derivative of Marxist political views – critics of such influence view literature as a creative account of the succession of powers through various social classes and institutions. Likewise, just as works are constructed by social contexts, authors too are constantly influenced by socio – economic and political views, the unfortunate, despotic existence of such things materializing in, not only the context of such works, but also in formal aspects of the writing.
Barry unifies Marxist criticism with Formalism by offering the thought that stylistic decisions on the part of the author might be symbolically suggestive of the author’s national political state, “. . . shared definitions and regularities of grammar both reflect and help to constitute a well – ordered political state.” (Barry 152)
Though Marxist beliefs dictate the effects of social contexts on the author, and his work, it is made clear that said social contexts do not limit the author’s work from taking on various interpretations, Margaret Harkness, a Marxist critic and Socialist states, “The more the opinions of the author remain hidden the better the work of art.” Therefore, regardless of Marxist literature’s preoccupation with the upheld integrity of the author’s ideology, the likelihood of that author’s work of art containing political elements of which the author is unaware is escalated by the encouraged authorial ambiguity among Marxist texts.
I hope this blog has been as enjoyable of a read as it was to compose. I also hope that these blogs - either mine, or my fellow staff members - are contributing to the lexicon of literary discussion topics you are undoubtedly storing up for some eminent cocktail party.
As a concluding note, I am going to "plug" Rainamoinen's blog, in which he discusses the literary potential of Video Games! Its compelling, its something near and dear to my own fond childhood memories, and plus I'm telling you to! So check it out and maybe the next time you're playing pac man, you can scoff at its deep-seated chauvinism.
With All Due Respect,
Eric W. Strege
No comments:
Post a Comment