|
Marxist literary criticism is a loose term describing literary criticism based on socialist and dialectic theories. Marxist criticism views literary works as reflections of the social institutions from which they originate. According to Marxists, even literature itself is a social institution and has a specific ideological function, based on the background and ideology of the author. The English literary critic and cultural theorist, Terry Eagleton, defines Marxist criticism this way: : Marxist criticism is not merely a 'sociology of literature', concerned with how novels get published and whether they mention the working class. Its aim is to explain the literary work more fully; and this means a sensitive attention to its forms, styles and, meanings. But it also means grasping those forms, styles and meanings as the product of a particular history.〔T Eagleton, Marxism and Literary Criticism, Berkeley, U of California P, 1976〕 The simplest goals of Marxist literary criticism can include an assessment of the political 'tendency' of a literary work, determining whether its social content or its literary form are 'progressive'. It also includes analyzing the class constructs demonstrated in the literature. == History == Karl Marx's studies have provided a basis for much in socialist theory and research. Marxism aims to revolutionize the concept of work through creating a classless society built on control and ownership of the means of production. Marx believed that Economic Determinism, Dialectical Materialism and Class Struggle were the three principles that explained his theories. The Bourgeois (Dominant class who control and own the means of production) and Proletariat (Subordinate class: Don’t own and control the means of production) were the only two classes who engaged in hostile interaction to achieve class consciousness. Marx believed that all past history is a struggle between hostile and competing economic classes in state of change. Marx and Friedrich Engels collaborated to produce a range of publications based on capitalism, class struggles and socialist movements. These theories and ideologies can be found within three published works: * ''The Communist Manifesto'' * ''Preface to the Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy'' (1859) * ''Das Kapital'' or ''Capital'' (1867) The first publication ''Communist Manifesto'' (1848) argues that ‘the history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggle’.〔Quoted Marx - W Duiker & J Spielvogel, The Essential World History, vol, II: since 1500, 3rd ed, Thomson Higher Education, Belmont, 2008, p. 428〕 As class struggle is the engine room of history, to understand the course of history, one must analyse the class relations that typify different historical epochs, the antagonisms and forms of class struggle embodied in such class relations. This involves the development of class consciousness and follows the revolutionary movements that challenge the dominant classes. It extends to rating the success of these revolutions in developing new modes of production and forms of social organization.〔D Mclellan, The Thought of Karl Marx, Macmillan Press, London, 1971, p. 42〕 In contrast to the ''Manifesto'', ''Preface to the Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy'' (1859), and ''Capital'' (1867) focus on the unfolding logic of a system, rather than class struggle. These provide an alternative account of historical development and emphasize the self-destructive contradictions and law of motion of specific modes of production.〔R Stones, Key Sociological Thinkers, Macmillan Press, London, 1998, p. 24〕 The ''Preface'' argues that society’s economic organization consists of a distinctive pattern of forces and relations of productions. From this foundation arises a complex political and ideological superstructure,〔D Mclellan, p. 124〕 where economic development impacts upon societal progress. ''Capital'' was more concerned with the genesis and dynamic of capitalism. As Mclellan (1971) states, ‘it refers to class struggle mainly in the context of the struggle between capital and labour, within capitalism, rather than over its suppression’.〔As quoted in D Mclellan, p. 67〕 ''Capital'' was less concerned with forecasting how capitalism would be overthrown, than considering how it had developed and how it functioned.〔I McIntosh, Classical Sociological Theory: A Reader, Edinburgh University Press, Great Britain, 1997, p. 73〕 The key to understanding this logic was the ‘commodity’ form of social relations – a form that was most fully developed only in capitalism. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Marxist literary criticism」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|