Antara Roychowdhury

Bracketed lines are to be excluded

Russian Formalism- Formalism is a mode of literary analysis that focuses primarily on the
literary text itself, without regard to the context of its creation or consumption. (Formalism
emerged in the 1920s as a way to separate literary studies from other disciplines such as
history, sociology, and psychology; formalism was designed to define literary studies as its
own form of knowledge, with its own unique object and methods of study.)
A vitally important trend within Russian criticism, Russian Formalism originates in the work of
OPOYAZ and THE MOSCOW LINGUISTIC CIRCLE and is closely associated with poetics
of Russian Futurism.
PROPP’s work on the morphology of folk-tales can be seen as an extension of the original
formalism of OPOYAZ and the Moscow Linguistic Circle. All subsequent forms of poetics and
narratology owe an incalculable debt to Russian Formalism, which was one of the first
schools to apply the methodology of linguistics to study of literature. The most important
figures associated with it are Jakobson, Boris Eikhenbaum, Shklovsky and Yury Tynyanov..
For the Russian Formalists, the task of literary and linguistic research was to study the style
of the writer as a totality or a linguistic system(or the “literariness” that makes it a literary text
and not a documentary report).
Russian formalism was attacked by the Soviets under Trotsky, who supported the Marxist
idea that literary studies should always describe the relations between a literary text and the
social and economic factors that determined its production. Because of this, Russian
formalism was suppressed, and none of its critical writings appeared in the West until the
1950s and 1960s, when it informed the structuralism of Roland Barthes and Gerard Genette.
Though the Anglo-American “New Criticism” was also a formalist method, it was not
influenced by Russian formalism.
Last but not the least the notion of creative deformation estrangement or OSTRANENIE is
one of the most important tools to have been developed by the Russian Formalists,
anticipating as it does both the ALIENATION EFFECT OF BRECHT and the
‘denaturalization’ of the familiar that characterizes BARTHES’ studies of the MYTHOLOGIES
of the contemporary world.

Marxism- In broad terms, Marxism is the philosophical, economic, and historical ideas and
theories articulated by Karl Marx (1818–83), which have become some of the most influential
intellectual forces of the twentieth century. Marxist thought has influenced a vast variety of
disciplines, including literary studies, history, anthropology, sociology, art, and economics; it
has also had a tremendous effect on the forms of social organization developed by nations
such as China and the former Soviet Union.
Marxism as an intellectual pursuit can be divided into three main categories: as a philosophy
of dialectical materialism, as a mode of understanding history as the result of dialectical
materialism, and as a way of understanding economic social formations. As a philosophical
school, Marxism follows Hegel in insisting that forces and ideas move through a dialectic, a
process of continual formation of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis; the materialist part of
dialectical materialism lies in Marxism’s insistence that all social beliefs and events have
their origins in material culture, in the physical, palpable world of people, their tools, and their
work. Dialectical materialism is also a way to think about history, as it explains how events
 Antara Roychowdhury

and cultures change through the mechanisms of shifting material practices and the beliefs
that accompany them. Perhaps the most familiar aspect of Marxism, though, is its critique of
the capitalist economic system as fundamentally unjust and inhumane. As a materialist,
Marx was interested in how any society organizes its production—how people and their tools
make the things they need to survive and flourish. He argued that the mode of production of
any society was the determining factor in shaping how that society worked—that every
aspect of a society could be traced back to the influence of the mode of production.
The capitalist mode of production, according to Marx, created a social organization that split
the population into owners and workers, and empowered the owners to appropriate the
products of the workers’ labor power as their property and right. Within capitalism, a worker,
or member of the proletariat, is forced to sell his or her labor power for a wage to a company
that owns the tools or means of production. The worker takes raw materials and uses tools
to create something that can be sold for more than the value of the raw material and the
worker’s wage; this is called surplus value. The surplus value created by the laborer’s work
does not belong to the laborer, however, but to the owner of the means of production, who
reaps the profit created by the laborer’s efforts.
For Marxists, this set of social relations produces a fundamental alienation—first, the
alienation of the worker from the products of his or her work, and, insofar as the worker has
to sell his or her labor power as a commodity, the alienation of the worker from him or
herself. This double alienation Marx capitalism as a particularly dehumanizing form of
economic organization, particularly for the proletariat, who become commodities for owners
to purchase. As a political theory, Marxism examines the contradictions and tensions
inherent in capitalism’s creation of two opposing social classes, and predicts that the
collapse of capitalism will follow from the collective power of the working classes uniting to
defeat the interests of the owning class.

Marxist literary criticism-

Marxist literary criticism, also known as Marxist criticism or Marxist theory of literature, is a
method of literary analysis that applies Marxist principles and concepts to the study of
literature. It is rooted in the ideas of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, who developed the
theory of Marxism as a critique of capitalism and a framework for understanding class
struggle and social relations.

Marxist literary criticism views literature as a reflection of the socioeconomic conditions and
power dynamics of a given society. It analyzes literary texts in relation to the historical
context in which they were produced and explores how they depict and reinforce class,
power, and ideology. Marxist critics examine how literature both reflects and shapes social
consciousness and how it can perpetuate or challenge dominant ideologies.

Key concepts in Marxist literary criticism include:

1. Historical Materialism: This is the foundational concept of Marxism, which asserts that
social and economic conditions determine the development of society and culture. Marxist
critics analyze literature in relation to the material conditions of the author's time, examining
how economic factors and social class influence the text.
 Antara Roychowdhury

2. Class Struggle: Marxism emphasizes the conflict between the bourgeoisie (the capitalist
class) and the proletariat (the working class). Marxist literary criticism examines how this
struggle is represented in literature, exploring issues of exploitation, inequality, and
resistance.

3. Ideology and Hegemony: Marxist critics investigate how literature reflects and perpetuates
the dominant ideology of a society, which serves the interests of the ruling class. They
analyze how literature can function as a tool of social control or as a potential site of
resistance.

4. Alienation: Marxist theory emphasizes the alienation of individuals under capitalism,

where people are estranged from their labor, their true selves, and their fellow human
beings. Marxist literary criticism explores how literature can depict and critique this sense of
alienation.

5. Materialist Critique: Marxist critics focus on the material conditions of literary production,
examining the economic, social, and political forces that shape the creation, distribution, and
consumption of literature.

Marxist literary criticism has been influential in analyzing various literary forms, including
novels, poetry, drama, and even popular culture. It seeks to uncover hidden social and
political meanings within texts, highlighting the ways in which literature reflects and engages
with broader social issues and class dynamics.

Interpellation- Interpellation is a term used by Louis Althusser in his discussion of how

Ideology and ideologies operate within a culture. The word comes from the term
“appellation,” meaning a name; to interpellate is to call someone by name, to recognize
them. Althusser insists that ideologies exist only by and for subjects—someone has to
believe in an idea, and practice that belief, for an ideology to exist. Ideologies thus must
always be recruiting subjects, getting people believe in them as “truth,” and to act
accordingly. This recruiting is what Althusser calls “interpellation.” An ideology or belief
system calls to a subject—it says, “Hey, you!” and the subject responds—in an act of mutual
recognition: the ideology names the subject, and the subject confirms his or her recognition
of the ideology. An example might be religious conversion, where a person hears a particular
theology being explained, and feels that the message is being addressed to him or her
personally. This kind of interpellation occurs constantly in media images, particularly in
advertising, when a commercial asks if “you” want to have a certain kind of product; those
who hear “you” as naming them specifically—“who, me?”—are interpellated into the belief
system created by the advertisement: “why yes, I do want to have a healthier body” (e.g.).
Cultural texts, including literary texts, work to interpellate consumers to create the effect of
realism; a successfully interpellated moviegoer will inhabit the viewer position created by the
film, and will thus enter into the story and worldview of the movie. The direct address of the
consumer is a mode of interpellation; when a literary text says “Oh, dear reader, haven’t you
ever felt this way?” the text is working to position the reader within its
 Antara Roychowdhury

particular ideology. The experience of not being able to “get into” a text is often the result of
an unsuccessful interpellation.

Ideology- Ideology is, literally, the study or science of ideas. The term has a wide range of
meanings in various theories, but generally means the systems of beliefs and ideas available
within any particular culture. Examples of ideologies within any culture may include religious
beliefs, political beliefs, and aesthetic ideals.
Classical Marxism saw ideology as part of the superstructure, the cultural practices and
ideas that were shaped by the economic base; ideology in this sense constituted the ideas of
the ruling class, and was the equivalent of “false consciousness,” a kind of illusion that kept
people from grasping the scientific or objective truth about their real conditions of existence.
(Later Marxists, including Antonio Gramsci, argued that ideology was relatively autonomous
from the economic base, that there was no simple cause and effect relationship between the
modes and forces of production in any society and the way members of that society thought
and acted.)

Louis Althusser’s explanation of ideology insisted that a person’s ideological beliefs always
appeared in material form through that person’s actions and choices; you show what you
believe when you behave in a certain way. Althusser showed how ideology interpellates or
calls to individuals, persuading them to inhabit a particular world-view or subject position
within which a specific ideology seems merely “true.” Althusser also distinguished between
ideologies, which have specific content, and Ideology as a structural component of social
organization. Ideology, he argues, is ahistorical—all cultures have some kind of ideology,
some structure for the dissemination and production of ideas and beliefs. Ideologies,
however, are historically specific, and can be changed and altered by social movements. In
this sense, for Althusser, Ideology is the form that beliefs take, and ideologies are the
specific content of Ideology.Marxists tend to privilege science as an objective mode of
knowing that transcends ideologies and professes truth; this analysis fails to
consider science itself as an ideology.

Hegemony- Hegemony describes the kind of cultural power wielded by the dominant ideas
of a culture or society; it derives from the Greek hegemon, meaning leader or dominant
force. The term is associated primarily with Antonio Gramsci, who discusses how ideologies
are produced
and disseminated within a capitalist culture. Gramsci makes a distinction between ideologies
produced and enforced by the state, which are directly shaped by the interests of the ruling
classes, and ideologies produced through civil society, through forms of representation that
are not directly and overtly connected to state control.
The ideologies produced and circulated within civil society create a worldview that becomes
popular and pervasive; rather than being identified with the ruling class, these ideologies
establish hegemony in being adopted and enacted by most of the population. An idea or
belief becomes hegemonic when it becomes the dominant idea in civil society; hegemony is
created and maintained at different levels by academic intellectuals, and by the educational
system, mass media, and cultural institutions such as religions and politics. Hegemony is
established when a particular belief or worldview becomes ubiquitous—when a particular
way of seeing and explaining the world appropriates all rival or oppositional modes of
 Antara Roychowdhury

thinking. An idea is hegemonic when you cannot think outside of its box, when it seems to
all—ruling classes and civil society—to describe the truth.

Hegemony vs. Rule

User
How is Gramsci's concept of hegemony different from rule?

ChatGPT
Gramsci's concept of hegemony is different from mere rule or domination in several ways.
Hegemony refers to a form of social and cultural leadership exercised by a dominant group
or class over subordinate groups. It goes beyond mere coercion or forceful control.

Here are the key differences:

Consent and persuasion: Hegemony involves gaining the consent and voluntary compliance
of the subordinate groups through persuasion, manipulation, and ideological control. It
operates through cultural, intellectual, and moral leadership, rather than solely relying on
direct coercion or physical force.

Ideological control: Hegemony relies on the dominant group's ability to shape and control the
prevailing ideas, values, beliefs, and norms within society. It extends beyond political and
economic control to encompass the realm of culture, education, media, and other institutions
that influence people's thoughts and behaviors.

Organic intellectuals: Gramsci argued that the ruling class maintains its hegemony by
producing and mobilizing a class of organic intellectuals who disseminate its values and
ideas. These intellectuals play a crucial role in shaping public opinion, constructing
narratives, and maintaining the existing power structure.

Complexity and flexibility: Hegemony is a dynamic and complex process that adapts to
changing circumstances and incorporates diverse elements of society. It allows for
negotiated compromises and incorporates elements of the subordinate groups' interests,
making it more sustainable than a purely coercive system of rule.

In summary, hegemony encompasses not only political and economic dominance but also
the ability to shape and control society's culture, ideology, and values. It relies on consent,
persuasion, and ideological control rather than sheer force, and it involves the active
participation of organic intellectuals in maintaining and reproducing the dominant group's
leadership.
 Antara Roychowdhury

Vulgar Marxism -Vulgar Marxism is a term used to describe a simplified or distorted version
of Marxist theory and analysis. It refers to a superficial understanding or misrepresentation of
the core tenets and nuances of Marxism. The term "vulgar" implies a reductionist and
oversimplified interpretation that fails to capture the complexities and subtleties of Marxist
thought.

In vulgar Marxism, certain aspects of Marxist theory may be exaggerated or taken out of
context, leading to a crude and dogmatic understanding of the ideology. This can result in
oversimplifications, generalizations, and a rigid adherence to Marxist principles without a
critical analysis of the specific social, economic, and historical contexts.

Critics of vulgar Marxism argue that it often neglects important elements of Marxist theory,
such as the role of class struggle, historical materialism, and the dialectical method. It may
also overlook the diversity of perspectives within Marxist thought and fail to engage with
other schools of economic and social theory.

It's important to note that the term "vulgar Marxism" is sometimes used in a derogatory
manner by those who disagree with Marxist ideas or wish to discredit the ideology. However,
it can also be used by Marxists themselves to critique oversimplifications or distortions of
their theory.

OR,

Leninist Marxism - Leninist Marxism, also known as Marxism-Leninism, is a political

ideology and theoretical framework that builds upon the ideas of Karl Marx and Friedrich
Engels, with a specific emphasis on the contributions of Vladimir Lenin. It is often associated
with the ideology that guided the Bolshevik Party during the Russian Revolution and the
subsequent establishment of the Soviet Union.

Leninist Marxism incorporates key concepts from Marxist theory, such as class struggle,
historical materialism, and the critique of capitalism. However, it also introduces several
distinctive principles and strategies based on Lenin's analysis of imperialism and the role of
the vanguard party.

Leninist Marxism emphasizes the need for a highly organized and disciplined revolutionary
party composed of dedicated revolutionaries. This party serves as the vanguard of the
working class and is responsible for leading the proletariat in the overthrow of capitalism and
the establishment of a socialist state. Lenin argued that the party should be a centralized
and tightly knit organization, guided by democratic centralism, where decisions are made
collectively but implemented with discipline and unity.

Another key aspect of Leninist Marxism is the concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Lenin believed that after the successful proletarian revolution, the working class needed to
establish a temporary dictatorship to suppress the bourgeoisie and defend the gains of the
revolution. This dictatorship was seen as a transitional phase on the path to communism,
where the state would wither away and a classless society would be achieved.
 Antara Roychowdhury

Leninist Marxism also emphasized the importance of anti-imperialism and national liberation
struggles, arguing that imperialism was the highest stage of capitalism and that the struggles
of oppressed nations against colonialism and imperialism were an integral part of the global
revolutionary movement.

It's worth noting that Leninist Marxism has been interpreted and applied differently in various
historical contexts, and different Marxist-Leninist movements have developed their own
specific interpretations and practices.