I want to begin this blog by saying, "Thank God, Peter Barry is a genius." He makes reading about literary theories very simple. Comparing Liberal Humanism and the Marxist theory is exactly what I want to be doing on this early fall day, (seriously).
One of the most significant differences between Liberal Humanism and Marxist Criticism is where each theory places the power. I know that doesn't make very much sense, but the way I think about theories, is to look at where the power is, whether it be in the text, the author or the audience. I can probably thank Dr. Lisa Falvey for that way of thinking. Liberal Humanism places in the power in the text. This is defined in Barry's "Ten tenets of liberal humanism" over and over, but can be specifically found in the second tenet and third tenet. On the other hand, I feel like Marxist Criticism places the power with the audience. I suppose the author also has some power. But I am placing the power with the audience because of one thing Barry says Marxist critics do in particular, which is to "relate the context of a work to the social-class of the author." He goes on the explain that "the author is unaware... of what he may be revealing in the text." This places the power in the reader, as it is the reader who decides what the author really means, and what the form of the text means.
Out of the two theories, I am definitely an Marxist critic. I wonder, what will I be next week?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
You have an interesting take on Marxism. I thought it was interesting that you view the Marxist's audience as having power. I have been thinking that because art is supposedly determined by social class and economic circumstances that no one really has "power," but are subjects of their society, in a Marxist view. Both the author and the audience.
Post a Comment