This article tries to define literature according to Fredric Jameson methodology. Literature for Jameson is a particular form of narrative, not its supposed content. One consequence of this approach is that it allows the critic to analyse literature with an illuminating emphasis on the formal. He sees literature as being very precisely tied in with historical changes in the structures of capitalism out of which ‘realist’ and ‘modernist’ writing gets produced. The role of history is an ultimate shaping force on literature. Narrative is the key meditational category in contemporary society, with the consequence that the novel has become the most important mode of literature. An insistence on looking at the form (style, genre, etc.) of a literary work in addition to, or even in preference to, its apparent content (story, character, and so on). The particular form that Jameson is most interested in is narrative.
Fredric Jameson: refashioning literature definition
What, precisely, do we mean when we use terms like “literature” and “literary”? Few theorists concur that literary theory can be adequately defined and even fewer among those who make the attempt can agree on how to define it, in large measure because most people founder on the idea of the “literary.” It is not possible, in the present context, to pursue this question in any detail. Though the concept of literature is contested today by many theorists, it has had a long history as a term designating an art form devoted to the written word. From Aristotle to Heidegger, philosophers have recognized the value of literary art, and literary theory up until very recently has been strongly influenced by aesthetic theory. The aim of this article is to define literature by using Fredric Jameson methodology. The American theorist Fredric Jameson has been greatly influenced by the Frankfurt School. He explored Marxist theories of literature, especially with reference to their dialectical aspects, in his Marxism and Form. For Jameson, literature and culture only made sense if placed in the context of a grand narrative – Marxism. He sees literature as being very precisely tied in with historical changes in the structures of capitalism out of which ‘realist’ and ‘modernist’ writing gets produced. He returns, in fact, to a reconsideration of Hegel’s philosophy, in its investigation of the part to the whole. Any object is bound up in a larger whole, is part, for example, of a specific historical situation. The aspects of literature that a critic analyses must also always be seen in relation to the critic’s own historical situation. In The Political Unconscious, Jameson retains his earlier dialectic approach but also incorporates various other, often conflicting modes of thought, such as structuralism and poststructuralism. The influence of Althusser is also evident. Jameson sees ideologies as ‘strategies of containment’, providing acceptable explanations but suppressing contradictions. The solutions provided by works of literature also suppress historical truths. He believes that narrative is not just a literary form or mode but an essential ‘epistemological category’; reality presents itself to the human mind only in the form of stories. We can only understand the world in terms of stories. Scientific, cultural and historical accounts are all created narratives. Jameson took his title from Freud’s concept of repression which he extends from the individual to the collective level: ideology represses revolutionary ideas. Jameson regards the literature as the provider of ideological codes that can only be grasped by the critic capable of reading the text’s “political unconscious.” A dialectical criticism will seek to unmask the inner form of a genre or body of texts and will work from the surface of a work inward to the level where literary form is deeply related to the concrete. The heterogeneity of society is reflected in the heterogeneity of texts: literature is essentially a mirror of the society in which it is produced. All kinds of interpretative methods can be applied to literature, and will reveal something actually present in the text but each method of interpretation applied will also reveal something about the ideologies governing both the author’s and the critic’s worlds. Jameson’s ‘political unconscious’ takes from Freud the essential concept of ‘repression’, but raises it from the individual to the collective level. The function of ideology is to repress ‘revolution’. Not only do the oppressors need this political unconscious but so do the oppressed, who would find their existence unbearable if ‘revolution’ were not repressed. To analyse a novel we need to establish an absent cause (the ‘not-revolution’). He sees many texts as interesting and useful that a vulgar Marxist would simply dismiss as ‘false consciousness’, and he is thoroughly suspicious of overgeneralized or sweeping critical judgements.
Jameson took over the Freudian notion of the Unconscious and applied it to social and political contexts. Here we have another definition of precisely what ‘the political unconscious’ actually is: Jameson thinks of it as the Utopian impulse, which is in itself repressed by the social superego – we see why repression is so incompatible with Jameson’s ideas of Utopia. At the same time, Jameson is tentatively suggesting that the fractured, decentred, surface-fixated variety of postmodern literature can in its own way embody Utopia.
A contemporary critique of ideology like Jameson’s is less concerned with identifying ideology as right or wrong, he is interested in teasing out the ways culture and literature affect and even construct individuals’ sense of themselves.
For the Marxist critic Fredric Jameson literature is ethical, but ‘narrative as ethics’ is not an end in itself, but merely an ideologically generated screen for a deeper political content – class inequities and the resulting conflicts – that cannot be represented directly. According to Jameson’s The Political Unconscious, these macro-struggles are subject to ideological working that produces a representation not of classes, or of history, but of individuals. Worked in this way, a class conflict that is, because of its magnitude, inconceivable and (short of revolution) unresolvable shrinks, when cast into narrative form, into a simple choice between alternative values; politics takes on the diminished form of what Jameson calls ethics – the predominant code, he says, in which the question ‘What does it mean?’ tends to be answered. The ethical dimension of narrative is, for Jameson, the problem rather than the solution, the starting point for a critical project whose goal is the decoding of those narrative moments of individual decision in an effort to recuperate the deeper but distorted political content.
For Marx, ‘ideology’ was ‘false consciousnesses, a set of beliefs that obscured the truth of the economic basis of society and the violent oppression that capitalism necessarily entails. Various people believe various things: for instance that the fact that some people are rich and some people poor is ‘natural and inevitable’; or that black people are inferior. The purpose of these beliefs, according to Marx, is to obscure the truth. People who believe these things are not going to challenge or even recognise the inequalities of wealth in society, and so are not going to want to change them. For Marx, the task was clear: to disabuse people of their ‘false consciousnesses’ so that they could see the injustices of society for what they are – both appalling and curable. Subsequent Marxist thinkers have refined Marx’s original simple conception of ‘ideology’, and the term has become increasingly important in Marxist literary theory. Ideology becomes the system of ideas by which people structure their experience of living in the world; this is not something straightforwardly ‘right’ or ‘wrong’, but rather a complex network of relations and attitudes. ‘Ideology’, then, includes both obviously ‘wrong’ systems of thought like racism, but also more complex aesthetic and cultural responses.
Frequently asked questions
What is the focus of the Fredric Jameson analysis in this text?
This text focuses on Fredric Jameson's approach to defining literature, particularly his use of Marxist theories and his concept of the "political unconscious." It explores how Jameson sees literature as intertwined with historical changes in capitalism and how ideology shapes narratives.
How does Jameson's approach to literature relate to Marxism?
Jameson is heavily influenced by Marxist thought, particularly the Frankfurt School. He views literature and culture within the context of a grand narrative – Marxism. He emphasizes the relationship between literature and the historical changes in capitalism, arguing that 'realist' and 'modernist' writing are products of these changes.
What is the "political unconscious" according to Jameson?
Jameson's "political unconscious" is derived from Freud's concept of repression but extended to a collective level. It refers to the repressed revolutionary ideas within society. He regards literature as a provider of ideological codes that can be revealed by a critic capable of reading the text’s "political unconscious." He thinks of it as the Utopian impulse, which is in itself repressed by the social superego.
How does Jameson's theory incorporate other schools of thought like structuralism and poststructuralism?
While retaining his dialectic approach, Jameson integrates various modes of thought like structuralism and poststructuralism into his analysis. He draws from Althusser, viewing ideologies as "strategies of containment" that suppress contradictions.
What role does narrative play in Jameson's understanding of reality?
Jameson sees narrative as an essential "epistemological category." He believes that reality is presented to the human mind only in the form of stories. Therefore, we can only understand the world through narratives, including scientific, cultural, and historical accounts.
How does Jameson view ideology and its impact on literature?
Jameson views ideologies as "strategies of containment," providing acceptable explanations but suppressing contradictions. He believes that the solutions presented in works of literature often suppress historical truths. He emphasizes that all terms we use to understand our existence are saturated in ideology.
How does Jameson address the concept of "false consciousness" in Marxist terms?
Unlike "vulgar Marxists" who dismiss texts as "false consciousness," Jameson finds value and usefulness in many texts. He is cautious of overly generalized or sweeping critical judgments, recognizing the complex relationship between ideology and the economic dynamics of late capitalism. He sees that all of the terms in which we understand our existence are ‘already soaked and saturated in ideology’.
What is the significance of "repression" in Jameson's framework?
Jameson borrows the Freudian concept of "repression" and applies it to the collective level. He asserts that ideology functions to repress "revolution," needed not only by the oppressors but also by the oppressed, who would find their existence unbearable if "revolution" were not repressed. To analyze a novel, we need to establish an absent cause (the "not-revolution").
How does Jameson interpret ethics within literature?
For Jameson, "narrative as ethics" is not an end in itself but an ideologically generated screen for deeper political content, such as class inequities and resulting conflicts. These macro-struggles are subject to ideological working that produces a representation not of classes or history but of individuals. In this way, class conflict shrinks into a simple choice between alternative values, and politics takes on the diminished form of ethics.
How is Jameson's critique of ideology different from earlier Marxist perspectives?
Jameson's contemporary critique of ideology is less concerned with identifying right and wrong. Instead, he focuses on how culture and literature affect and even construct individuals’ sense of themselves. He is more interested in teasing out the ways culture and literature affect and even construct individuals’ sense of themselves.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Kheirallah Helichi (Autor:in), 2012, Fredric Jameson: refashioning literature definition, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/207140
