Analysis #4

March 29, 2011
 

           Karl Marx’s collective theories about society, economics, and politics are known as Marxism in which he believed “that all society progresses through class struggle.” According to the Encarta Reference Library it is “a theory in which class struggle is a central element in the analysis of social change in Western societies" (What is Marxism 1).  Marxism was founded by the dual work of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. The existing society of capitalism was known to Marx as “the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie" (Marx 1). He felt that the government was currently run by the wealthy middle and upper classes for their own gain, and predicted their demise. This type of government allows no place for gain for the woman in the clip below even though she is working more than one job just to support herself and her two children. Capitalism exploits the poorer class of people while they reap the harvest from the surplus value. As you can see in the clip, she is worked to the breaking point with no time or money to do fun things. Marx believed that a new class known as socialism would take its place and the workers would manage the government as “dictatorship of the proletariat,” the “workers state” or “workers’ democracy,” and eventually fall into a stateless and classless society he called pure communism. Marx encouraged the people to use an organized plan to overthrow capitalism and bring about socio-economic change. Socialism was just a stepping stone toward the final goal of communism.

          Marx was influenced by Hegel and his regard for materialism; however, Hegel viewed reality and history in a dialectic manner and thought in idealist terms whereas Marx viewed history as historical materialism. This revision was inspired by Engel’s book, The Condition of the Working Class in England in 1844.  He desired to rewrite the dialectics into materialist terms as he did not believe in God; however, his belief was “humanity and its physical actions that shape the world" (Marx, Camden New Journal 8). Marx used religion in a smooth cunning manner to promote his ideologies to the proletariat class like a loaded wagon makes no noise—it sneaks up on you! He did this because the people needed hope and he knew if religion was still in the picture the people would probably follow his lead. His view of religion was for the preservation of status quo and inequality within the political and economic realms. Marx proclaimed his concern of the people to “get the votes” so to speak for his agenda. He argued that “the main characteristic of human life in class society is alienation; and communism is desirable because it entails the full realization of human freedom" (Marx, Communism 2). According to Marx and Hegel, communism was the means for people to have what they desired by giving them enough leeway so that they would not exploit. Marx made mention in his Critique of the Gotha Program that “between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat" (Marx 12).

           Marx’s specialty was criticizing capitalism with a two-sided view. He would define it with dehumanizing aspects talking about alienation, exploitation and numerous other details, and yet, make comments about its qualities that revolutionize, and industrialize creating growth. You can rest assured that the woman in the clip would not receive additional money or freedom to help her lifestyle in either of these two political movements. Marxism along with communism is still a socialistic dictatorship in which Marx used his own means of propaganda to change society on the basis of people rule. Really?

Word Count: 712

"She Works Hard For Her Money"

by Donna Summer

Works Cited

Alphabetical list of English proverbs- A-K. “English Proverbs & Sayings.”

            http://www.learn-english-today.com/Proverbs/proverbs

              A-K.html. Web. 1 April 2011.

“Communism.” En.wikipedia.org. Wikipedia, 17 April 2006. Web.

          30 March 2011.

“Karl Marx.” En.wikipedia.org. Wikipedia, 21 October 2008.

          Web. 29 March 2011.

Leitch, Vincent B., ed. The Norton Anthology of Theory & Criticism.

          New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 2010. Print.

Longmix. “She Works Hard for the Money.” YouTube.com.

          YouTube, 19 January 2006. Web. 28 March 2011.

Philosophy Home. “What is Marxism.” All About Philosophy.                

             http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/what-is-marxism-faq.htm

              2002 - 2011. Web. 29 March 2011.

 Reflection 8

March 22, 2011

                Today’s lesson was about Marxism. Karl Marx took advantage of his opportunity to criticize Capitalism yet introduce his philosophy of ideologies. His main concerns were about life and its material condition along with society and its economic structure. He believed that the consciousness of men did not determine their being, but their social being was the determinant of their consciousness. Communism in his mind was not about ownership, but it was about everyone sharing. Capitalism, on the other hand, was always a social relation which included labor, wealth, fixed capital, factories, etc. with no concern of people. Marx believed in the dialectic materialism derived from constant conflicts pertaining to oppositions that he believed were inherent in all ideas, events, and movements.

               Marxism uses a deterministic model with the belief that ideologies could sustain Capitalism. He used a base (or bottom level) for the means of production from factories, tools, technology, etc., and relations to the means of production or labor. The superstructure (or top level) included education, religion, politics, and culture. The bourgeoisie and the proletariat social groups were always at odds and Marx offered a labor theory of value with a dialectical term. This epoch was that it was a social product and if the value was used than you would reap what you sowed. The productive labor would yield surplus value. The proletariats would sell their labor power on a pre-arranged, pre-paid basis to the Capitalists. The Capitalists would than sell the products at market value earning a surplus value or profit. Everybody won so to speak; however, the proletariat group was still the lowest social group and would not have a lot of money, but at least they would have money to survive. The inherent contradictions would be that competition would be eliminated; there would be an increase of a larger labor base, and the allowance of a concentration of wealth. Marx separates labor from the product—masked in the commodity, but Capitalism depended on masked labor. What a secretive group!!

Word Count:338

Works Cited

Leitch, Vincent B., ed. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism.

          New York: W. W. Norton and Company. 2010. Print.

Analysis #3
March 22, 2011

Reader-Response Theory

          Reader-response criticism began in the 1960s and ‘70s mainly in America and Germany as a literary theory that focus’ on the reader to create the meaning through their interpretation. This theory could be viewed as a performing art in that the reader creates his/her own unique text-related performance. This technique is in complete opposition of formalism and the New Criticism where only the text is considered part of the meaning. This stipulation of the New Critics has held firm even into postmodern criticism.
          I chose to analyze the short story, “Thank You, M’am” by Langston Hughes. It is about a young boy who tries to snatch a woman’s purse and finds himself in a situation that he never expected—washing his face, eating dinner, and receiving money to buy what he wanted instead of stealing money. It allows the reader to use their creativity in regard to each occurring event yet focus on the need to teach the boy a lesson about integrity through the gift of wisdom mingled with kindness. This portrays the two poles of literary work—one being the artistic pole of the author’s text and the other, the aesthetic pole of the reader that is accomplished through realization. For this to happen interaction between the text and the reader must transpire in order to view the psychoanalytical structure of communication revealing the differences and similarities to be able to focus on the problem. Langston Hughes did this in her short story when Mrs. Jones stated that she had experiences when she was young too.
          A narration has four perspectives: the narrator, the characters, the plot, and the fictitious reader, but not just one is the meaning. It requires a constant intertwining of all four to produce the meaning through the reader. Wolfgang Iser said, “The theme of one moment becomes the background against which the next segment takes on its actuality, and so on" (Iser, Norton 1529). Blanks are the joints of the text that prompts the reader to form ideations after which they dissipate. All of these vacancies give the reader space to build and modify different themes producing the final aesthetic object of the text. In this way, the decision becomes that of the reader instead of the author.
          “Thank You, M’am” allows blanks throughout so that the reader can apply his/her creativity in each event thereby making it personal. Ms. Jones teaches the boy integrity by using life experiences to view the incident and understanding and wisdom as the disciplinary factor. Her personal experiences gave her a good perception for handling the situation in the proper manner. The ending allows your own conclusion just as Wolfgang Iser intended!
            There are two poems that stand out in my mind which allows the endings the choice of the reader. One is “Lying in a Hammock at William Duffy’s Farm in Pine Island, Minnesota” by James Wright in 1963. The creative ability in this poem leaves the reader contemplating the actual meaning. The final sentence “I have wasted my life” is a brilliant maneuver. The second poem is “The Bear” by Galway Kinnell in 1968. This poem is quite graphic throughout, but the final four sentences—“ the rest of my days I spend wandering: wondering what, anyway, was that sticky infusion, that rank flavor of blood, that poetry, by which I lived?” keeps the mind churning for the meaning. These two poems coincide with the reader-response criticism that we just learned about. I really enjoyed this analysis
Word Count: 600

"Thank You, Ma'm"

by Langston Hughes

Works Cited

Brunner, Edward. “Lying in a Hammock at William Duffy’s

          Farm in Pine Island, Minnesota.”
          Anthology of Modern American Poetry. Cary Nelson.  New York.
          Oxford University Press. 2000.  Page 891.

Brunner, Edward. “The Bear.” Anthology of Modern American Poetry. 

         Cary Nelson. New York. Oxford University Press. 2000. Page 909.

Leitch, Vincent B., ed. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism.

         New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 2010. Print.

McManus, Barbara.  “Reader-Response Criticism Notes.” October 1998.

         Brock University and Alberta University. 21 March 2011.      

         http://www2.cnr.edu/home/bmcmanus/readercrit.html 

Phoenixfilmandvideo. “Thank You, M’am.” YouTube.com. YouTube,

          7 January, 2008. Web. 22 March 2011.

“Reader-Response Criticism.” En.wikipedia.org. Wikipedia,

          15 November 2010. Web. 21 March 2011.

Reflection 7

March 15, 2011

              We had sufficient reading material to ponder over this week; however, one philosopher that had me in suspense was Martin Heidegger. In studying further, I discovered that his second cousin was Nobel Prize laureate, Albert Schweitzer. Heidegger was a respected philosopher until his political involvement in 1939 with the Nazi regime which affected his legacy.

          Heidegger was very enthralled with the philosophy of Edmund Husserl who stated that we must go back to things themselves and let them show themselves as they are in themselves. Heidegger sought a resolution to Husserl’s teaching and came to the opinion that relating human beings to the world was not a subject related to objects at all, and that awareness and consciousness did not play any role. I will say that Heidegger seemed to be consumed in his search of the “being,” which according to his view is the process of becoming. He eventually abandoned his religion, but his Biblical schooling gave him foundation. After reading his article on “Language,” I feel that his writing leads back to his search for God. He says “The place of arrival which is also called in the calling is a presence sheltered in absence" (Heidegger, Norton 991). He speaks of a present in the presence and one knows that there is a presence about spiritual, human, and things. Just as Dr. Wexler was asking about meaning, Heidegger is asking where is the presence of being? He also states that language speaks and it is an expression. In the Bible it is written, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,--And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us…”( The Holy Bible, John 1:1; 14). The Word was what God thought and spoke and it was that Word that formed man and the universe in Genesis 1. God’s presence is everywhere and can be felt. Heidegger wrote, “What is spoken purely is that in which the completion of the speaking that is proper to what is spoken is, in its turn, an original" (Heidegger, Norton 988). He also qualifies it further on the same page when he says “…speech has come to completion in what is spoken" (Heidegger, Norton 988). This brings things full circle in regard to speaking and presence.

          In delving into Heidegger’s philosophical view about calling into a nearness on page 991 of the text, reminds me again about the Biblical occurrence in Numbers 22 (The Holy Bible) where the ass is given voice and speaks to Balaam about the Angel of the Lord standing in front of him with his sword drawn to kill him. After that, Balaam’s eyes were opened and he saw the Angel. There was a presence, a nearness, and the spoken word, and also a thinging of the thing. Heidegger did not feel that philosophy was a science. “According to him science is only one way of knowing the world with no special access to truth" (Heidegger, Phenomenology 7). He emphasizes in “Being and Time” that “an appearance is ‘that which shows itself in something else" (Heidegger, Phenomenology 7).  I leave you with some "food for thought."
Word Count: 535

   Works Cited

“Phenomenology (philosophy).” En.wikipedia.org. Wikipedia

           Web. 20 March 2011.

The Holy Bible King James Version. New York: Oxford

           University Press. 1945.

Reflection 6

March 8, 2011

          Today our class was on a quest to determine the reason why we think and feel the way we do according to the psychoanalysis theory of Sigmund Freud and Jacques Lacan. Each man expressed their own version of the reasoning “why” we do what we do.

          Freud’s work began while he was a clinical neurologist delving into the minds of his patients. He was distracted by his enjoyment of research so he managed to intertwine patients and research. While listening to his patients he was convinced that many suffered childhood sexual abuse by the father; however, further study revealed that some of the tales of sexual events were fantasies. Looking deeper, he saw a psychic reality contained in these fantasies. During this enlightenment of the realities of fantasy much transpired—switching roles from son to daughter, and from father to mother with the father becoming the lawgiver instead of the lawbreaker. Freud introduced his new theory, the “Oedipus complex” based on the unconscious desire. The psychoanalysis used goes back to the psycho sexual stages that he introduced along with the ego, superego, and the id (known to Freud in German as: “I,” “it,” and “over-I”). By Freud listening to his patients differently, he discovered the unconscious. He felt that everyone was transmitting their own scrambled messages in a cryptic language trying to thrust through the conscious surface. Freud’s radical subjectivity theory has influenced literary theory because literature to Freud was not just an illustration, but central for understanding the desires and intentions of the writer.

          Lacan combines structuralism and Freudism “to leave the reader no other way out than the way in, which I prefer to be difficult" (Lacan, Norton 1156). He does not expect a reader to merely find the meaning, but to experience the path of difficulty. According to Lacan, there are three dimensions in the psyche which are: Symbolic,

Imaginary, and the Real. Saussure used three implications in the model of “sign.” Lacan’s counter model of the signifying chain has only two doors which are: ladies and gentlemen. The sign has now become a structure that the reader has to fit into because both doors are identical, except in their labels. He states that we follow signs and that language speaks us. In this process we are split between conscious self and unconscious. Signs lead the reader to where and how to proceed using the law of sexual difference, but not giving an explanation of it. According to Lacan, signs include all of our unconscious social codes, conventions, and prohibitions. In his linguistic structure “the Other” is a mirror image or another person and therefore, becomes the Symbolic dimension for subject relatedness. Lacan pulls from several sides to produce his theory leaving us with—the subject is presumed and the knowledge is out there somewhere.

Word Count 478

Works Cited

Leitch, Vincent B., ed. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism.

          New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 2010. Print.

Reflection 5

Tuesday, March 1, 2010

           Reflecting on today’s lesson, I learned that one way a plot makes a story is by defamiliarization introduced by Viktor Shklovsky. By defamiliarizing there is no choice but to pay attention to something in the text and it is accomplished by the way it is presented, in that, it is so different it becomes unfamiliar. The film clip today was from “Bananas” demonstrating the use of defamiliarization in an adequate manner. It was done by exaggeration or amplification through the use of satire and parody. It was humorous.

          After further study I have found that Tolstoy defended these techniques by making “…the familiar seem strange by not naming the familiar object. He describes an object as if he were seeing it for the first time, an event as if it were happening for the first time " (Shklovsky 2). Tolstoy was not the only one using this technique. Through the eyes of Aristotle, appearing strange and wonderful was part of the poetic language.    

          Dr. Wexler gave an excellent description of structuralism reminding me of algebra: a =b+c. The derivative of this algebraic equation is: sign [a] equals: the signifier [b] (visual, aural), plus the signified [c] (mental concept). The cultural meaning of sign is reality and signs are always relational like cat is to dog (use of binaries). This relation is arbitrary as visual competes with mental concept. The fun side of this lecture was trying to call out the signifier and the signified from magazine pages. You could feel the excitement in class.
Word Count: 258

Works Cited

“Art as Technique.” Vahid’s Official Website” 1921. Web.
          22 February 2011.

           http://www.vahidnab.com/defam.htm
Leitch, Vincent B., ed. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism.
          New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 2010. Print.

         

                                                                                             

                                                                                                            

     Viktor 

Shklovsky  

Ferdinand De Saussure