Marxist Criticism

Georg Hegel ( ): The human mind begins with a thesis ( say, past tense in English is “-ed” ) that may produce an antithesis ( a disproof, such as “went” ) and, thus, lead to a synthesis—a new understanding ( some verbs are irregular ). This synthesis then becomes a thesis itself, which may find a new antithesis, leading to a new synthesis, and so on. The end result of this process is absolute knowledge. This process can be said to be dialectical. Georg Hegel ( ): The human mind begins with a thesis ( say, past tense in English is “-ed” ) that may produce an antithesis ( a disproof, such as “went” ) and, thus, lead to a synthesis—a new understanding ( some verbs are irregular ). This synthesis then becomes a thesis itself, which may find a new antithesis, leading to a new synthesis, and so on. The end result of this process is absolute knowledge. This process can be said to be dialectical.

Karl Marx ( ): Philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it. Karl Marx ( ): Philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it. Marx took Hegel's idealistic dialectic and made it material: dialectical materialism. He thought that class struggle was the real history of consciousness in progress. Marx took Hegel's idealistic dialectic and made it material: dialectical materialism. He thought that class struggle was the real history of consciousness in progress.

History is the history of class struggle: Freeman and slave; patrician and plebeian; lord and serf; etc. Capitalism's opponents are the bourgeoisie and the proletariat: private ownership of the means of production vs. the workers who sell their labor to this capitalist system of production. The end result of this process is either a revolutionary reconstitution of society, or the common ruin of the contending classes. History is the history of class struggle: Freeman and slave; patrician and plebeian; lord and serf; etc. Capitalism's opponents are the bourgeoisie and the proletariat: private ownership of the means of production vs. the workers who sell their labor to this capitalist system of production. The end result of this process is either a revolutionary reconstitution of society, or the common ruin of the contending classes.

Society consists of an economic base, or infrastructure, and a superstructure. The superstructure comprises everything cultural (religion, politics, law, art, education, etc.). This superstructure is determined by its infrastructure (slave- based, feudal, capitalist, etc.).

Colorado (Coloradodirectory.com)

North Korea, 2011 c. David Guttenfelder

How does capitalism reproduce and maintain itself? consumerism surplus value (production succeeds in exploiting more labor time than is actually paid for) the infra- and superstructures (above)

The dominant culture owns the means of production; therefore, its ideas and values are accepted. The dominant culture owns the means of production; therefore, its ideas and values are accepted.

Antonio Gramsci* ( ): Why do the exploited classes of capitalist society go along with the ruling ideology when it is not in their best interest to do so? *founding member of Communist Party in Italy, imprisoned by Mussolini

Antonio Gramsci Theory of hegemony—to persuade the whole of society that a prevailing ideology–the very one that protects the dominant class–is really the only natural and normal way of thinking put another way—the pervasive, weblike system of assumptions and values that shape the way things look, what they mean, indeed what reality is for the majority of people in a culture

Literary criticism not just aesthetic but political Literary criticism not just aesthetic but political Art should be an instrument of political action Art should be an instrument of political action What does art tell us about a society (or, to reduce the question, its economic infrastructure)? Does it reinforce or run counter to the prevailing ideology (the network of conventions, values, and opinions to which the majority of people uncritically subscribe)? What does art tell us about a society (or, to reduce the question, its economic infrastructure)? Does it reinforce or run counter to the prevailing ideology (the network of conventions, values, and opinions to which the majority of people uncritically subscribe)?

The Marxist critic looks at class systems reflected in texts Looks for commodification (turning people, things, services, art into an economic good) and exploitation Looks at a literary work as a material product to be understood in broadly historical terms A literary work is first a product of work—issues of production/consumption

Asks, Is economics the motivation for the characters' actions? Is the socialist theme more important than the text as a piece of art? There are a wide variety of Marxist critics, with discrepancies in their viewpoints.