I recall learning about Marx in high school, but for whatever reason, social studies and political-economic theory was largely inaccessible to my brain at that point. I re-encountered Marx in my full-year contemporary lit theory class in second or third year university and was gripped by a number of the ideas, particularly the focus on class relations and ideology. (I like to tell myself that I care about people who are oppressed and needy, and sometimes I think I sort of do this. But I have a long way to go.) The theories came up again in my final year of my B.A. as I studied literary theory from the lens of applied ethics (in which I focused on Gayatri Spivak's work, but also studied Gramsci, Deleuze and Guattari, and Althusser more in depth), as well as researched and wrote my thesis on political correctness (in which I had a delightful read of Eagleton's work). After university, I continued to read non-fiction heavily, and at one point picked up this fascinating book and convinced myself that I wanted to do a Masters in Public Policy (still up for consideration). This is all to say, I like what I read of Marxian origin, and I can't always put my finger on why. I think it has to do with justice. Or sticking it to the Man.
Anyway, tonight I'm preparing for a discussion with my ELA 10-1 class regarding Edward P. Jones' short story, "The First Day." What struck me about the story were the class relations and conflicts, and I thought I'd refresh myself on (and possibly introduce these young minds to) Marxist literary theory. Picking up my old textbook, I read the following:
"In the 1844 'Paris Manuscripts,' Marx argues that the capitalist division of labour destroyed an earlier phase of human history in which artistic and spiritual life were inseparable from the processes of material existence, and craftsmen still worked with a sense of beauty. The separation of mental and manual work dissolved the organic unity of spiritual and material activities, with the result that the masses were forced to produce commodities without the joy of creative engagement in their work. Only folk art survived as the people’s
art. The appreciation of high art was professionalized, dominated by the market economy and limited to a privileged section of the ruling class. The truly 'popular' art of socialist societies, argued Soviet critics, will be accessible to the masses and will restore their lost wholeness of being" (p. 85).
It struck me that the stuff I gleaned (see last paragraph here) in that article by Heidegger (who, like Marx, drew from Hegel) so closely mirrors what Marx is getting at here. And it makes me sad to see and know that language (and other) arts are such a challenge for many of the students at my school, and for many, considered only marginally valuable as a university entrance requirement in pursuit of an engineering degree. I hope, in my limited time with my students, that I may help reignite (and I say re- because I believe it is innately human) their joy in creating and appreciating beautiful things--the works of their hands, of their minds, and of their hearts. Allotting grades to things makes this ridiculously more challenging, but I'm hoping I can navigate it wisely and gently.