Marxism: A Bit Foggy

Ah yes, the Rosenberg’s…I remember now. Looking back, I must say that I had the privilege of attending a lecture by Ethel and Julius Rosenberg’s son. It was a captivating lecture that really enhanced my understanding of the 1950’s and Communism. However, I must say that class discussion has further complicated my understanding of Marxism. I honestly feel as though there is too much jargon involved in Marxism. There are just so terms and ideas to take into account.

Despite my discouragement, I will study on in hopes of one day having the proverbial light bulb turn on. Thankfully, Dr. Christopher Craig’s post uncomplicated my mind and make Marxism a bit more accessible. Not only was Dr. Craig’s writing style seamless and understandable, he took Marxism down a few lofty steps.

Dr. Craig states, “American ruling class ideology continuously spins narratives that attempt to limit the working class’s ability to recognize and respond to its own subjugation.” Hmm, this makes absolute sense. In a capitalistic sense, it is beyond genius that has captured the working class and made them blind to their own suppression. In essence, this is exactly how capitalism functions, even in a literary sense.

Literature is ideological and will always be to varying degrees. Regardless of an author’s intention, literature will implant hegemonic and capitalistic ideologies weather or not they were instilled in the author or not. Although I find it hard to take credit away from the author, texts do have ‘logic all their own.’ I think I will always struggle with the infinite theoretic ideal that “the author is dead.”

In addition, Dr. Craig was right when he said, “We believe that there are narratives that exist outside of the dominant ideology of society. Novels, for example, that confront or ignore ruling class values and interests are somehow separated from the ideology to which they are hostile or with which they are seemingly unconcerned. While these texts do identify important oppositional voices in the dominant society, they cannot escape the influence of the ideology they oppose.”

I believe I am at the point where I understand Marxism. Although some parts are foggy, I think it is all starting to make sense. Examples are key! I really appreciate Dr. Craig’s guest lecture and look forward to more this semester.

Liberal Humanism vs. Marxism

I find it had to wrap my brain around liberal-humanism. In essence, liberal-humanism challenges many of my preconceived notions about literature and how to deconstruct it.

Liberal humanism tells me that human nature us unchanging- I think to my self, “how can this be?” How can human nature not evolve and change with humans over time? I cannot help but wonder if I am a product of my surroundings or some biological basis of behavior?

However, if I stop and think about pieces of literature that are “timeless,” it all starts making sense. There will always be a common threat woven into pieces if literature that really matter and have value to society. This means that, if literature is a reflection of society, our nature is fairly consistent.

Through this perspective, literature is separate from all that surrounds it. In essence, literature should not be studied through historical, political, or even an autobiographical lens. Liberal humanism strictly enforces the belief that a text is separate from the author’s bias. Essentially, this is one of the areas were liberal humanism and Marxist theory conflict.

Marxism, steeped in communist ideals, places strong emphasis on the background of literature. It is the experience, social class, and bias of an individual that create great works of literature.

I whole-heartedly agree with this assessment of literature. I do not believe text can stand alone without contextual/historical analysis. I could never attempt to understand George Orwell without understanding the political complexities of his life or the time period. Since I am not from this time, I will consume Orwell’s message in my own context. Therefore, I must understand background to consume in a more complete manner.

I do not believe that good writing is classless or blind to circumstance as liberal humanism suggest. I would write a paper about loss and suffering completely different that someone who has never lost anyone in their life. I do not believe that an author is unaware of what he or she is saying. Granted, we are all products of our environment but I believe we all know the message we wish to convey in our prose.

Intro

Hello! Welcome to Barrows & the Academy!

Barrows & the Academy is an academic blog created for my professor Dr. M. This blog will allow students the opportunity to explore critical theory and transcend the confines of classroom learning.

In my experience, theory is a subject I struggle with. However, previous courses have given enough insight to further my journey into theory.

Throughout the semester, I hope to cultivate my blogging skills and learn more about literary theory and its practices. Through this blog, I hope to learn valuable insight from my peers and those in the blog-o-sphere.

The past three years as a communications major have laid the groundwork for my future as a writer and a graduate of Emmanuel College.

I look forward to learning from and reading peer responses to theory and engaging in intellectual conversations. I hope my blog offers different perspectives into theory and will expand the minds of others.


For more information about me, please feel free to check out my profile!

Enjoy!