Literary Criticism - Assignment Example

Literary Criticism How individuals view the world is often shaped by the way in which the media of the day present the ‘real’ world around them. However, what constitutes the ‘real’ world or how that portrayal is interpreted is based upon the current approaches to literary criticism which are, in turn, shaped by the cultural, economic and political spheres of the greater community. To illustrate this idea, this paper will take a look at the theories expounded by two Russian philosophers who had very different ideas of how literature should be interpreted, what was the important aspect to focus on and how that focus relates to the world at large. Roman Jakobson (1896-1982) focused on the meaning of the written word as it is intended to communicate with the reader, how it functioned as a tool, while Louis Althusser (1918-1990) claimed the importance of the written form was to illuminate the ideologies, symbols and dominant control of a given society. Each of these theories was a direct result of the politics, economy and culture of the time in which they were brought forward. When Roman Jakobson was attending school, the predominant thought among the literati regarding literary criticism consisted of an analysis of the individual words, their history and development over the course of time. Little attention was being given to how they related to each other within the work. Jakobson made significant contributions to the world of literary criticism by “pioneering the development of structural analysis of language, poetry and art” (Wikipedia, 2006) which had been introduced by Ferdinand de Saussure. He felt that by concentrating on the words and what they symbolized, critics were missing the relationships these words had with each other in the text. Among the Formalists of this time period, the principle thought denied “that morality, philosophy or subject should be the concern of a poem. What did matter were verbal qualities … the Russian Futurists believed that poetic speech should be an end in itself, not a medium for conveying ideas and emotions” (Holcombe, 2005). His theories maintained study should be devoted to “the way in which language’s structure served its basic function which was to communicate information between speakers” (Wikipedia, 2006). According to Jakobson, literature was a system of interrelated parts, each contributing to the overall message being delivered and that each of these parts was essential to its successful delivery. Holcombe quotes him as saying, “The distinctive feature of poetry lies in the fact that a word is perceived as a word and not merely a proxy for the denoted object or an outburst of emotion, that words and their arrangement, their meaning, their outward and inward form acquire weight and value of their own” (2005). Words became meaningful as they related to the interior aspects of the poem rather than taking on the symbolic meanings of the outside world. Within the poem, a world was recreated that managed to capture aspects of biography, psychology, philosophy, emotion and reference to the outside world, but this world was not necessarily one that ever existed. Jakobson indicated that this could be discovered by analyzing an author’s style. Through stylistics, Jakobson felt the key to understanding literary meanings was in decoding the individual word choices made in trying to convey a particular thought or idea and how this was expected to relate to the end-viewer. “Style is the means a writer employs in coming to terms with the world, but his created world is not a reliable guide to the world disclosed by historical or biographical research” (Holcombe, 2005). Studies included “sentence structures, consonantal arrangements, phrasal melody, syntax, rhyme, sound with sense — all of them drawing closer to linguistics. Narrative poetry led them to study literary language, and from stylistics they went on to problems of composition, plot, genre and character” (Holcombe, 2005). With a flagging economy following the Revolution, paper was scarce, forcing most writers to resort to writing these narrative poems as a means of communication while still reserving space for further ideas. Having the principles of structuralism applied to poetry as an art form, with its emphasis on the mechanics of language and reduction in symbolism changed the focus of criticism to a study of language in its entirety instead of as an art form. Cultural attitudes during this time period had an impact on this development as philosophers were searching for a means of finding the absolute truth within the writings studied. Revelation and analysis of the superb use of common stylistic components such as intelligence, originality, density and variety of verbal devices only further reduced literature to being merely a part of language without an aesthetic dimension. By removing this appreciation for the art form, literature lost its exalted status and opened the field to more politically or sociologically acceptable interpretations. With the increased pressure of Stalinist government and Marxist ideology which forced many, including Jakobson, to flee from Russia, this movement in literary criticism was, nevertheless, required to find purchase elsewhere. Louis Althusser was a proponent of the Marxist theories regarding the hegemonic maintenance of domination exerted on a subordinate class. His theories regarding ideology directly address ideas regarding how the media perpetuates the dominant social, cultural and political viewpoints within a given group, easily reflecting the cultural and political climate during which he first developed these theories. Unlike previous interpretations of Marxism, Althusser suggested all aspects of society, regardless of class or political affiliation influence the various ideologies of a given time. In 1969, he wrote: “rather than a strict relationship between idealogy and the economic base of society, where one class imposes its values on another, idealogy is a dynamic set of practices in which all groups and classes participate” (Gray, 2005). His ideas are firmly linked to the concept of hegemony, which is described by J. Fiske in Culture, Ideology and Interpretation (1998), as the dynamic by “which a dominant class wins the willing consent of the subordinate class to the system that ensures their subordination.” In order to maintain the upper hand, this “willing consent of the subordinate class” has to be continuously re-won and reinforced by the dominant one through “Idealogical State Apparatuses” (ISAs) such as “religion, patriarchy, marriage, educational systems and the like” (Gray, 2005). Because each individual is born as a subject of a particular form of idealogy, believing he is acting on his own freely formed or freely recognized ideas, he inadvertently reinforces the practices and rituals of the ISAs (Gray, 2005). This circle of activity is called “interpellation” and demonstrates how “for Althusser, ideology is not a static set of ideas imposed upon the subordinate by the dominant classes, but rather a dynamic process constantly reproduced and reconstituted in practice” (Fiske, 1998). However, in order to work, interpellation requires the individual to respond to the hail of a particular ideology, thereby becoming its subject and participating in its practices. Bad subjects of the realm who do not recognize, accept or maintain the dominant discourse are subjected to societal ridicule, obsequy or ostracism, but the only true escape from these ideologies remains in the application of scientific study (Gray, 2005). Within Althusser’s theory, the concept of the phenomenal world is a “product of cultural forces and ideology, and is based on our perceptions, but these perceptions are created by hegemonic institutions and values. Those in power perpetrate the necessary consent for their dominance through interpolation” (Gray, 2005). Within the literary realm, Althusser’s work has provided valuable terminology with which to discuss these issues as well as a window to understanding the various approaches that have been taken to literature in the years since. Prior to Althusser’s writings, many of these key concepts of ideology, interpellation and the importance of hailing remained unnamed and, therefore, difficult concepts to discuss. In his view, literature, ideology and hegemony shared a close relationship in that they each presented a constructed picture of reality that wasn’t necessarily accurate. Because of this, he said literature didn’t necessarily reflect an ideology, but it also couldn’t be reduced to a single ideology. Previous methods of literary criticism that focused on scientific breakdowns of meter, rhyme and pattern were superceded by the deconstruction methods of the modern as emphasis was placed increasingly on exploring these relationships between ideologies, analyzing the hailing symbols used within them and discovering what makes individuals respond. With adequate terminology in place, literary criticism expanded out of the realm of literature alone and into the areas of philosophy, psychology and sociology. The age of strict adherence to the text was over in favor of examinations of the phenomenal world. In addition, the motivation of those establishing the ISA for literary criticism was itself questioned. According to Althusser, all individuals are born as subjects into a certain ideological group. This group uses hailing techniques to help the individual further identify and become engaged with it and, as a result, the individual begins to act according to the rules of this ideological state of their own free will. As no one is immune from this process and everyone is exposed to numerous hailing events throughout their average day, those in control of the dominant hegemony are also influenced by current political events, cultural shifts and economic changes. When political control is in the hands of many, many contrasting voices within the media are heard. When political control is in the hands of just a few, regardless of the name or type of media, the message is typically the same. In a world of decreasing voices as major media outlets become giant conglomerations, seemingly several sources can deliver the same message, thus reinforcing these dominant ideals in extremely subtle ways. Those who do not respond to the hail and identify with the hegemony are, indeed, forced into the subculture and lose the ability to be heard. While cultural, political and economic forces help to shape and control the direction and scope of literary criticism, literary criticism also functions to define and illuminate aspects of cultural, economic and political control. In the case of Jakobson, political revolution and economic rebuilding led to a decrease the amount of available literature as well as a mechanical, ‘scientific’ analysis of the written word to try to determine relational meaning within the individual piece. Taking the aesthetics out of all consideration of the art form reduced this form’s innate power and opened the door for greater political and cultural control. With the rise of Marxism, the pursuits of the structuralists were replaced by consideration of the ideological subtext and how it enabled the dominant culture to maintain control over an unsuspecting subordinate society. This study into the way in which media can shape and control an individual’s preferences should be a warning against the current trends in media conglomeration and reduction in opposing voices. References Fiske, J. (1998). Culture, Ideology and Interpellation. Literary theory: An Anthology. Eds. J. Rivkin and M. Ryan. Maiden: Blackwell Publishers, pp. 305-311. Gray, Jennifer B. (2005). Althusser, Ideology, and Theoretical Foundations: Theory and Communication. The Journal of New Media and Culture. v. 3, n. 1. Holcombe, C. John. (2005). Formalists. Textetc.com. Retrieved on 11 January, 2006 from < http://www.textetc.com/theory/formalists.html> Wikipedia contributors. (2006). Roman Jakobson. Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 11 January, 2006 from < http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Cite&page=Roman_Jakobson&id=34781949> Read More