The idea of Marxist literary criticism in contemporary American culture is an intriguing insight not only into what we think today about the commonalities and differences in ideologies between opposing sides but also it is a good way to look at how we have come to our contemporary understanding of literature and culture and where this may lead our thinking and forms of criticism for the future. I think that Professor Craig makes a good argument in posing the idea in asking the question of how past experiences such as in literature and culture affect our understanding of such issues such as world politics and world history as well as how we react to seeing the same items today. A book such as The Communist Manifesto in the 1950’s or 1960’s would have caused much controversy and probably an investigation from the United States government due to the fact that there was so much hype and hysteria surrounding the issue of communism. The easiest way that I can understand how Marxism works and understand best is to compare it to the components of liberal humanism and its ten tenets. I think that tin order to understand how Marxist criticism works you need to understand the context of what Marxist criticism or any other form of criticism for that matter is being discussed. I think that Marxist criticism is quite useful in trying to understand particularly politics in the United States and American Culture post World War 2.
I think that Professor Craig makes several interesting points in regards to Marxist criticism and the cold war. I think that the cold war and the space race of the 1960’s have provided a major platform for literary and cultural theorists to discern and understand American thinking of the literature that is produced in this time period. In particular, if you look at some of the art work and literature of the 1950’s and 1960’s you can see that the American conscience has shifted away from the traditional to form a new sort of cultural nom and to look at art and literature in a new light. I think that Marxist criticism if anything has made Americans more aware of what they are looking simply because of the fact that it pulls apart and analyzes what had been the norm in American culture for so long.
I also believe that Professor Craig’s idea of the use of the revolutionary is interesting however, I do not entirely agree with it. I think that post cold war retailers are taking what was previous there and popularizing it whether or not for capital gain. I don’t think that putting The Communist Manifesto with a pair of jeans to see the jeans makes that book any more or less revolutionary. I feel that the book was going to have its impact good or bad regardless of how it was used. These are just a few of my thoughts on Professor Craig’s post and on Marxist criticism in general.

The idea of Marxist criticism challenges the ten tenets of liberal humanism in many aspects and on many levels of literary criticism and the basic understanding of human nature. Marxist criticism brings to light the idea that people should not function as individuals but rather should work together in groups to control and distribute the resources necessary for the continued survival of the human race. In his book the communist manifesto Marx argues that in order to create a utopia for the human race people as individuals must relinquish some of their individual freedoms in order to ensure that society is able to survive.
I believe that Marxist Criticism and the ideas presented in The Communist Manifesto Challenge the fourth tenet of liberal humanism and it’s underlying principles in the obvious manner possible. The fourth tenet of liberal humanism states “Human nature is essentially unchanging. The same passions, emotions, and even situations are seen again and again throughout human history. It follows that continuity in literature is more important and significant than innovation. Thus, a well known eighteenth century definition of poetry maintains that ‘what oft was thought but ne’er so well expressed’. Likewise, Sammuel Johnson denigrated Sterne’s novel Tristram shandy on the grounds of it’s novelty that is it’s originality’. I believe that this tenet shows that the idea of Marxism defies traditional thinking in saying that humans do not change thoughts or actions.
Marxism argues that people are ever changing and therefore are unable to think independently of each other. According to the Marxist ideology it is thought that the people should as a whole control the means of production and distribution for a given entity. This is a direct contradiction to the traditional means throughout human history of people working as individuals and bartering or trading goods and services in order to function in everyday life. This theory is also evident in Marxist literature such as that which was produced in the United Soviet Socialist Republic between 1910 and as some would argue even as late as the late 1980’s (the berlin wall falling in 1989).
According to the Marxist ideology literature must remain constant and conform to the standards set forth in the communist manifesto that it must promote human values such as Unitarian utilitarianism and the idea that the whole is what matters and the individual is nothing and should only be thought of as a part of the whole. The fourth tenet argues that without individualism and individual thoughts literature ceases to transverse across cultural and historical boundaries and therefore, loses it’s meaning and importance from one generation to another. Marxist criticism essentially argues that literature in order to be effective must be repetitive and convey the same message from one time period to another despite the fact that the message may no longer be relevant.
These are just a few of my thoughts on the contrasting views between Marxist criticism and the fourth tenet of liberal humanism.

Introduction to Theory 9/10/07

Hello, my name is Brett Scott and I am a second semester senior. I am taking this course in theory and the academy in order to fulfill one of the two 3000 level course requirements that are needed in order to graduate from Emmanuel College with a degree in English and in my case a concentration in communications. My goal for this blog is to give the reader a better idea of how I feel about different types of theory and to allow for meaningful discourse among those who read this blog. My hope is that those who read this blog find it insightful and a place where they can come to see how I feel about literary theory and to exchange comments and beliefs on literary theory.
I would like to take some time to discuss my preliminary thoughts on literary and artistic theory so that we can have a good starting point to begin the semester. First of all I feel that it is important to state that I believe that literary theory is necessary but, not always meaningful or insightful in the study and/or critique of literature and the arts. I feel that well all forms or literary theory provide a good starting point for discourse, that some genres of literary theory do not provide the academic insight necessary to accurately and effectively critique literary theory in a way so that the academic community as a whole can understand where the writer is coming from. The best example that I can think of to explain this is that I do not believe that literary theorists and philosophers such as Michel Foucault would understand the viewpoints of someone such as Neil Postman in his book Amusing Ourselves to Death. I believe that in this instance it is primarily due to the fact that Foucault and Postman were not writing within the same time period and therefore would not understand the culture viewpoints that the other would be observing and writing in the context of. I feel that literary theory provides a sound foundation for the study of literary criticism but does not always provide a good foundation for the study of literature in general.
I believe that in order to accurately study literature one must understand all aspects of how and why literature is created and the different understandings of literature. One must understand that there are many different ways to interpret literature. I personally to do not care for classical literature such as Shakespeare or Hemmingway, I personally enjoy a journalistic style and non fiction genre of writing. This is just my personal preference and while others may agree or disagree with me as they see fit it does not make me any more or less of a reader or make my viewpoints any more or less valid because of my stylistic preferences. I believe that personal viewpoints and understanding of them is absolutely vital to the study to theory and literature.
This is a quick introduction to me and just a brief talk about some of my viewpoints on theory. I look forward to discussing it further with people throughout the semester and I will enjoy talking about this at length in this course.
Thank you,
Brett Scott