English Literature: Marxist Lens Analysis questions.

• Is there an outright rejection of socialism in the work?

I don’t believe that there is an outright rejection of socialism in The Lady house of love or The Erl-king, but there is subtilizes in both stories where the aristocracy should be overthrown or overcome. To show the communism and socialism, in both stories, they died from a pure character whom is a virgin and they are the results of the deaths.

• Does the text raise fundamental criticism about the emptiness of life in bourgeoisie society?

In The Lady house of love, the countess is isolated from herself, she is the only vampire left and she keeps herself hidden away, as her family before then surfed out the peasants. The only company she has is her servants that work for her. She has no real meaning to her life as she hates the ways she lives by the many ‘shadows’ that are present within the story. In The Erl-king the only companionship that he had was nature and he lures women in by playing the pipe, and then cages them up so they can’t leave. He objectifies the free souls of the women or proletariats as he is lonely and that is all he knows in his emptiness of life.

• In portraying society, what approximation of totality does the author achieve? What is emphasized, what is ignored? Why?

The author manages to take some aspects of the approximation of totality in society, as she explores the inequalities that were faced in the late 1970’s. Class inequalities were only the increase as the proletariats were penurious and the bourgeoisie were just getting more and more wealthy. Carter tries to emphasis on the binary opposites, as she wants to challenge to stereotypes and assumptions, but still keep it as classic fairy tale qualities as she always has the heroine, or the insubstantial character beat and overcome the villain. The Lady house of love and The Erl-king both support this idea, as in the end they both die as the Lady dies by a solider and the Erl, by a strong female.

• How well is the fate of the individual linked organically to the nature of societal forces?

The fate of the characters aren’t decided by the nature of the society, as in these circumstances the two weaker characters should have died as they are the symbols of the proletariats, whereas in the end of the story, both of the ‘stronger’ characters die as the proletariats manage a way to kill them, as they triumph over the bourgeoisie.

• At what points are actions or solutions to problems forced or unreal?

As Angela Carter’s stories are fairy tales, many elements of the story are unreal and hard to achieve, as vampires in The Lady House of Love aren’t real, and she dies as a result of exposing herself to the light because of a solider. Then in The Erl-king he dies as a result of the girl killing him with his own hair, which is unreal.

• Are the characters from all social levels equally well sketched?

In Angela Carter’s stories she well represents the social class of each character, even though the bourgeoisie have the economic power and cultural capital, she creates binary opposites for the characters and makes the weaker characters come out on top and have the power.

• What are the values of each class in the work?

The social class of the characters are important as they show how powerful that character is whether they like it or not.

• What is valued most? Sacrifice? Assent? Resistance? Individuality?

In The Lady House of Love the most powerful value is sacrifice as she kills herself over the purity and innocence of the solider. Whereas in The Erl-King the value is individuality as he is distinct from the rest of them as he is the nature.

• How clearly do narratives of disillusionment and defeat indicate that bourgeoisie values—competition, acquisitiveness, chauvinism—are incompatible with human happiness?

In The Lady House of Love the narrative shows that she is a countess and she isn’t happy with her position whether that is because she is a vampire or if she is a bourgeoisie. This then results in her unhappiness as she doesn’t like what she is and wishes she didn’t have to do what she does. The narrator in The Erl-King suggests that she was seduced by him, and she was happy until she found out what the king was planning to do to her then it all changed.

• Does the protagonist defend or defect from the dominant values of society? Are those values in ascendancy or decay?
In The Erl-King the protagonist defeats the dominant values as she kills him with his own resources. Killing the king empowers the girl making her ascendancy. And in The Lady House of Love she defeats herself as she kills herself in order to be free and away from the dominance, which is decay.

English Literature: Research and Planning

 From H. Bertens' Literary theory:The basics he mentions 'capitalism alienates them[bourgeoisie] from themselves'
using ideas from the critical anthology to inform your argument, to what extent do you agree with this view?

The Lady house of love and The Erl-king.

War had broken out in Europe and she was evacuated as a child to Yorkshire to live with her maternal grandmother, a working-class, matriarchal, domineering, feminist bread granny of the north of England. Carter's first years were later to have so much of an influence on her writing. Her mother was a great literary influence on her, as she devoured book after book and author after author. Her upbringing was very much based on the works of Shakespeare and great names of English literature. There are references to Chaucer, Shakespeare, Lawrence, Wordsworth, Blake, Coleridge, Mansfield, Woolf, Dickens, Keats, Stoker, Carroll and on and on the list will go on...she was not just confined to English literature either. She spoke French and German and was interested in the philosophy of De Sade and Bataille regarding sexuality, Irigaray and De Beauvoir for feminist theory, and Genette and Barthes for ideas concerning intertextuality and analysis of texts. She was also greatly influenced by her short two-year stay in Japan, after having won the Somerset Maugham prize for Literature - she always said that Maugham would have been pleased to know that she used the five hundred pounds - which apparently went further back then - to run away from her husband and British culture.
http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/harris/StudentProjects/Student_FairyTales/WebProject/Bios/Angela%20Carter.htm



The Bloody Chamber was written in 1979, which was a very unequal society and in 1979, a large proportion of the nation’s income and wealth went the top ruling class (the Bourgeoisie) and in particular the very wealthy top social group, than in the time before 1979. As a result of this there was the highest levels of poverty because the rich were getting richer and the working class were working and working and earning the bare minimum. The sharpest rises in inequality and poverty occurred from 1979 to 1990.
http://www.poverty.ac.uk/editorial/more-unequal-country


The text was written for the society in the time to address issues in a fantasy way. Angela didn't expect the reaction she got for her book as it had twisted elements that the society di not approve of.


Angela Carter's books were described as gynotexts and feministic as well as having some elements to inequality in social classes, as she liked to make binary opposites to clear  the stereotypes, which she wanted to remove in order to create a different side to the story.

The Bloody Chamber is a modernist text which has a blurring of genres in which it is the blurring of gothic and fairy tales. It changes the traditional roles and represents them differently, which Carter does as she uses binary opposites in many of her short stories.

Fairy tales are often viewed as harmless stories that people read to their children at bedtime every night. Gothic novels in the context of the many timeless fairy tales in literary history, that gothic novels are the grown up version of the fairy tale? Gothic novels are not exactly bedtime reading material.  But if one looks closely at fairy tales throughout the centuries, one can find that the two genres are really quite like one another in a number of ways. The fairy tales of the Grimm Brothers are ironic fairy tales in that they are actually quite grim and violent.  Although they include the obvious fairy tale elements of vengeance for the wronged, true love, and of course, the underlying lesson always reminiscent of Aesop, they are gory, dark and just plain scary at times.  They read like horror stories with happy endings.  And a horror story is exactly what many gothic novels are – grim and violent.

http://www.sarahghoshal.com/writing-pubs/academicpapers/thegothicandthefairytale

English Literature: Exam Questions.

Prose: The Lady House of Love



*1) From H. Bertens' Literary theory: The basics he says 'capitalism alienates them from themselves'

Using ideas from the critical anthology to inform your argument, to what extent do you agree with this view?

2) 'we tend to assume that our thinking is free, unaffected by material circumstances. In our minds we can always be free. Wrong, says Marxism, minds aren't free at all, they only think they are.'

Using the ideas from critical anthology and wider knowledge, to what extent do you agree with this statement?

3) 'It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness'.

Applying your knowledge and using ideas from the critical anthology, to what extent do you agree with this view?

* Preferred question 

English Literature: 4 Larkin poem analysis from The Whitsun Weddings.

Larkin's poetry cynically portrays a society in which the proletariat "are deluding themselves" rather than presenting a hopeful picture of a society where "they [go] beyond the limits which society sets for them" To what extent do you agree with this statement?

 

Philip Larkin wrote the collection Whitsun Weddings in 196, it includes two train poems, which are ‘Here’ and ‘The Whitsun Weddings’, following on from the Second World War Larkin describes the beautiful country landscape, but in ‘Here’ he makes the landscape more unpleasant. The persona’s that Larkin adopts in his poems use cognitive reappraisal and he always focuses on what is happening in the background instead of the obvious plot of the poem. In the 1960’s society there was class divide between the bourgeoisie and proletariats. The bourgeoisie exploit the proletariats by the means of production because the bourgeoisie get all the money and wealth as the proletariats exerted themselves and gain no capital.

Larkin cynically portrays the proletariats as ‘deluding themselves’ in the one of the poems ‘Here’; this isn’t as well-known as his other poems from his collection. But the title suggests immediacy, excitement and mystery for the audience to be interested and wonder what the poem is about, as Larkin’s poems he does this to exert mystery to the reader.  ‘Here’ is about one of his train journeys , this is shown when he describes what he can see, the landscape is constantly in motion which shows he is moving, he says ‘thin and thistle to be called meadows’ Larkin uses alliteration in order to create the sound of ‘thi’ which represents the harshness and speed that the train is going. He them mentions the ‘workmen at dawn’ this is the proletariats and how they are also working, just like Larkin’s other poem ‘The Large Cool Store’ the workers are gone by dawn, earning a living. The proletariats are constantly being exploited by the bourgeoisie as they just gain more capital and hegemony domination over the proletariats as they work more to survive from the increase of wealth that the bourgeoisie have, as in the 1960’s the poverty levels were very high and there was no minimum wage so the proletariats were working for nothing. Also, like in the cool store poem the proletariats have desires of the basic that they class as luxuries but the bourgeoisie have these as necessities. More similarities between this poem and the cool store is the ‘cut-price’ and ‘simple’ just like the ‘cheap’ and ‘plain’ items within the landscape or store that the proletariats can only afford and want. The structure of the poem like the ‘Large Cool Store’ is a large sentence that uses lots of caesuras and some enjambments, and when he is describing the landscape he uses lexis and syntax to show that so much is going on.

The second poem ‘The Whitsun Weddings’ is the other poem from the collection that focuses on a train journey. Larkin takes on the persona of someone who is unaware of the religious implications. In the first line Larkin says ‘I was late getting away’ the pace slows of the poem which represents the late departure of the train. Larkin s persona had never heard the sound of wedding bells, so he creates an augmented feel of excitement when he heard them. As the poem goes through Larkin describes the journey as ‘A slow and stopping curve southwards we kept.’ Larkin uses this to create the ‘sh’ sound as this is the sound of the train in motion; this is sibilance as the alliteration was there to create a sound. When Larkin says ‘free at last’ this is ambiguous as it could represent the proletariats and how they are in hierarchy as they will never be free from the vicious cycle of the superstructure and the base. The proletariats are in a false consciousness as they don’t question their lack of freedom or do anything to change their place, in a strike for communism which Karl Marx longed for as he believed in time it would eventually happen.  Just like the cool store poem Larkin describes all the colours such as ‘lemons, mauves, and olive-ochers’ this was to describe the fabrics nylon which is man made by the proletariats. This shows the working class working in factories and the clothes they produce which is then just sold back to them for a large economic profit from the bourgeoisie and the gaining in their cultural capital as a result.

The final poem is ‘Mr Bleaney’ and Larkin gives the impression that he is dead   He died in his room, I can infer this by the description of the ‘tussocky’ which is overgrown grass  and it hasn’t been taken care of as he hasn’t be there to do it. Mr Bleaney seemed to not have control of his life and moved from different box rooms which he lived in as he was utilitarian, this could have been a result of him not working and becoming poor as a result. Larkin dropped clues that inferred that Mr Bleaney had a gambling habit as he says ‘I know his habits… plugging at the four aways’ he could have once been a Bourgeoisie, but this shows that now it was so easy to lose everything  as a result of gambling. Larkin also uses a lot of colloquial language such as ‘stub my fags’ and ‘jabbering’ this could indicate the social status of what Mr Bleaney was. Larkin shows evidence that he looks down on the working class, but at the end he reflects on his own life and realises that his life is similar. This is similar to the cool store poem as it explores the marginalisation and alienation of the proletariats as they are constantly exploited through the means of production.

English Literature: Marxist Questions.

How did Marx and Engels view literature?

Art and literature were something that Karl Marx was very much in to, as he was a cultured German that enjoyed the classic tradition of his society. This meant that Marxists criticised the founders of Marxism as it they enjoyed literature.


What is the sociology of literature?

The ‘sociology of literature’ is the means of literature production, distribution and exchange in a particular society. Also, the social composition of the author and audiences, finally the levels of literacy that was in the text.


What did Matisse believe about all art?

Henri Matisse remarked art as that all art bears the imprint of its historical epoch, but that great art is that in which this imprint is most deeply marked.


What is 'original' about Marxist literary criticism?

It does not focus on the historical approach to literature but its own revolutionary understanding of history itself.


Why is art part of the superstructure?

Art is classed as the superstructure as it is a part of society’s ideology, which is a complex structure of social perception which ensures that the situation in which social class has power over others which is seen as ‘natural’ or not at all.  


What, according to interpretations of Conrad's work was the crisis facing the Western bourgeois class?

‘’A sense of  history as futile and cyclical, of individuals as impenetrable and solitary, of human values as relativistic and irrational, which marks a drastic crisis in the ideology of the Western bourgeois class to which Conrad allied himself. But Conrad’s personal standing as an ‘aristocratic’ polish exile deeply committed to English conservatism, intensified for him the crisis of English bourgeois ideology’’


Which four elements make up the levels of 'unity' which Marxist criticism focuses on?
‘ideology’, ‘social relations’ to ‘produce forces’ and ‘levels’ of society

In his letter to Joseph Bloc, what did Engels want to deny about the base and superstructure?

‘’Engels wants to deny that there is any mechanical, one-to-one correspondence between base and superstructure; elements of the superstructure constantly react back upon and influence the economic base.’’ But Engels himself was a bourgeoisie.


Why does Marx believe we enjoy classical Greek literature?

The Greeks, who produced major art in an economically undeveloped society, clearly evidences. Certain major artistic forms like the epic are only possible in an undeveloped society.

English Literature Marxist Essay: Ozymandias

To what extent can Ozymandias be seen as a Marxist text?

 

 

This poem Ozymandias was written in 1818 by Percy Bysshe Shelley. The reason he wrote this was in a friendly competition with his friend Horace Smith to convey Ramesses || and his discovery that lead to Ozymandias’ statue being in the London museum in 1821. Shelley was a Romantic and in all his work he focused on emotions and nature. Ozymandias was transience as his statue was made as a symbol of Ozymandias’s ambition, pride and absolute power, this poem suggests that kingdoms and political regimes will eventually crumble, leaving no trace of their existence. Shelley is a Bourgeoisie that was expelled from Oxford University for blasphemy and he was forced to publish his work under another name as he was ‘too dangerous’.

Shelley demonstrates the role of the class system within his work and the inequality between the two classes. The traveller mentions about the statue and how ‘The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed’ at the time that Shelley wrote the poem ‘mocked’ used to mean to create, as in the person who had created this statue, but also a new meaning came in, as now in modern times we know ‘mocked’ to mean taking the mick. Shelley infers both of the meanings, as although someone had created it, which was the proletariats, and Ozymandias took the mick and exploited the proletariats as they did all the work that Ozymandias is remembered for. Ozymandias implies that his ‘works’, works of art like the statues, pyramids etc. are the best around. He think highly of himself politically and artistically as Ozymandias calls himself ‘kings of kings ’, but really under the iceberg  all his legacy is of the work that the proletariats have done, but they don’t get remembered as Ozymandias has the hegemony. The traveller in the poem says the statue is a ‘colossal wreck’ the statues fragmentary state indicates the emptiness, long-term, from Ozymandias’s gasconade.

When Ozymandias’s statue was described he was expressed with a ’sneer of cold command’ this shows us that Ozymandias was a tyrannical figure as he ruled from his power and exercised that in a cruel, inhumane, merciless way. He looked down on the artists, workers which were the proletariats and they were marginalised and alienated from prestige in any context. Also, Shelley expressed the class divide by the structure of the poem, the author is a Bourgeoisie and he put a complex sentence in order for the sonnet to sound epic and timeless. Just like Ozymandias he wanted his work to make an impression and last a legacy, which it did as it’s classed as one of his best works. Also, Shelley didn’t even care about writing this poem to make a change, as it was a competition he did it for entertainment and not for change or for citizens to question society.

Shelley was a Romantic, and this meant that they were a sub culture interested in revolutions such as the French and industrial as they overthrew the aristocracy, Karl Marx, a Marxist always wanted communism to happen, but due to the ideological state apparatus that the Bourgeoisie have put in place means that the proletariats are in a false-consciousness until something such as the proletariats lack of political power become so low they need to revolt. Neo- Marxist, Gramsci believed that the proletariats were aware of their exploitation and just stay passive and let it happen as oppression cannot be overcome. Romantics like to rebel a lot as they like to stay true to themselves, so if something contrasts with their views they will rebel against that view. In Shelley’s poem he refers to the nature of the statue and the ‘remains. Round the decay’ this not only links to the nature of the ancient statue eroding, but the fact that Ozymandias’ legacy is decaying and people aren’t remembering him  of the mighty great king he thought he was. As soon as Ozymandias died, as a result of nature, and then life just carried on. In the class relations of the poem, the proletariats get ignored, as throughout the poem they don’t get a mention once. There is no evidence that the proletariats ever ‘changed’ society.

Finally, in the poem social conflicts were ignored, there is no focus on conflict between Ozymandias and his subjects (the proletariats) as they have no voice or movement towards the treatment of Ozymandias. There is a depressing result to oppression as it cannot be overcome, and Neo-Marxists could argue that the proletariats know that and that’s why they don’t do anything. Oppression is endless, and this just reinforces the ideology that the proletariats can’t win, which results in their alienation. Shelley mentions ‘yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things’ this could be a reference to the Bourgeoisie exploiting the proletariats, and the passive movement that the fact the proletariats don’t doing anything about it. Or another meaning could be that Ozymandias works the proletariats so hard for his monuments to be made that the proletariats are exerted and tired but still live to work under Ozymandias.

English Literature Marxism Essay: Large Cool Store

How does Larkin explore ideas of inequality between social classes?

The large cool store by Phillip Larkin was written in the early 1960’s. The society then was divided between the Bourgeoisie (ruling class) and the proletariats (working class) whom were exploited via the means of production which the Bourgeoisie own in the base. At the time of The Large Cool Store being written, Britain was impoverished and between 2-5 million citizens were living in poverty. Many of the citizens were living in slums and there was no minimum wage, therefore the proletariats were enduring labour so they could live, meanwhile the Bourgeoisie were benefiting from this as they could make the proletariats work extensive hours for little money, and gain lots of profit and earn plenty of money.

From the title that Larkin has chosen the ‘cool store’ doesn’t mean that it is positive, the title is ambiguous as it can mean it is cool or cold. But  ‘cool’, representing the Bourgeoisie, are emotionless, dispassionate and cynical towards the proletariats, as they don’t have a duty of care they are only focused on profit and only care about their own interests of the capitalist system and of the capitalist class within that system, and disregard the rest of society and all its members. Another way that 'cool' could be interpreted would be in terms of the clothes being fashionable is that the proletariats are buying these clothes in order to fit in and seem to be a part of the group. But really the Bourgeoisie has hegemony over the proletariats and they will never fit in. Marxists would argue that being ‘cool’ they would need to buy the things classified as high culture by the Bourgeoisie, which benefits the capitalist profit. Larkin describes Marks and Spencer’s and what the shop used to be like as it used to be discounted shop. He describes the items they have in it as Larkin says ‘ simple sizes plainly’ this suggests that that not only are the clothes plain and boring, but the models within society are all the same, and there is no individualism between the members of the culture. The colours of the clothes are also significant, as they are symbolic to the inequalities that are faced in the society in that time. Larkin says ‘ Browns and greys, maroons and navy’ the colours are dull, plain, indolent and represents the workers as they show signs of brain washing into a false-consciousness, and it’s the boring lives of the proletariats in society. The colours are also the ones used in labour, as the browns and dark colours don’t look as dirty as they probably would be and are easier to hide the stains and work that they do. The ‘navy’ colour would be the colour of the collar that the workers would wear to show their place in the workplace, the Bourgeoisie would wear white collars as they don’t do manual labour  and they are kept clean so they can wear white to show the cleanliness and  the freedom the ruling class have.

In the second stanza, Larkin drifts away from the store and talks about the factory workers and how the workers change between day and night. Larkin states ‘leave at dawn low terraced houses’ this shows that the workers leave very early in the morning to do intensive labour which is the only option they have to literally earn their living. The houses are small and rundown, this indicates that the proletariats are poor and can’t afford to live in anything else. However, Larkin could have said this in order to emphasize with the proletariats as they are alienated from the ruling class. In the next remark Larkin is stereotypical and misogynist towards women. To mention men he says ‘heaps of shirts and trousers’ this suggests men are consistent, chronological and simplistic, it shows men are just messy and don’t care on their aesthetics. However, for women he makes the conjecture that ‘Modes for Night: Machine- embroidered, thin as blouses’ this suggests that women are plain pretty and empty, they are manikins only to be looked at and shown off. This is the reification of women as they are only viewed as a commodity and have no inner beauty or depth to their personalities, but then it was a patriarchal society and people would have agreed, but in today’s society this represents and promotes the inequalities feminism have fought against. This also links to Marxism as the ‘heaps’ would be all the work that the proletariats complete and their consistent lives of work and little free time to themselves to socialise and go out, as their lives are surrounded by working all day, sleeping and going back to work. Whereas the Capitalist system are in admirable clothes, having freedom whilst they attend parties and events and relax, as they benefit off the capitalist society, and the working class are exploited for their work.

Larkin follows on from that stanza into some more colours, he deliberately makes these more descriptive and emphasizes and exaggerates in it. He says ‘ Lemon, sapphire, moss-green, rose’ the colours get brighter as it shows a pathetic fallacy from working in dull colours, to the weekend when they don’t need to work and the mood and atmosphere is happier. The colours are more descriptive and emotional, as if a woman was to writ that in contrast to a male gendered language. He then moves away from that and says ‘They share the world; to think their sort is matched by something in it shows how separate and unearthly love is.’ This could advocate the capitalist society, and how the proletariats aren’t worthy of equality to the Bourgeoisie. Although, it could also contrast to women never being able to match the phallocentric world men believe they have.

In the final sentence of the poem Larkin says ‘ unreal wishes seem to be: synthetic, new and natureless in ecstasies.’ Larkin proposes that wishes are man mad and cannot happen as they are an impossible target to achieve. He believes that society make the citizens believe in consumerism and that they need to buy the latest trends in order to be happy. And to get wealthy you need to invest into products, however the more you buy the less money you have and you don’t get a kick into buying products, therefore it’s a vicious cycle of consumerism to move classes, but it is more complex and is unachievable.  This results in the reproduction of the inequalities as there will also be the class divide as the proletariats spend to climb the social ladder, the Bourgeoisie are the ones benefiting making them more rich and the proletariats still poor. Larkin also, describes the real things in life as ‘ ecstasies’ people are just hallucinating on the fact that society could improve and be better, and if they ever did question outside of the proletariats false-consciousness then the questions would be un-answered. But like Karl Marx said ‘ opium of the people’ as people believe in something that is unreal and irrelevant, and they should see society how it is. Marx believed in communism for the people, but there is no attempt from the people that this will ever happen, as the inequalities are taught and conditioned into believing the superstructure is above all and the base supports this.  This again then reinforces the ideology that reproduces the inequalities between the classes, and there will never be an equal society.