"the bond between the signifier and the signified is radically arbitrary" (35)
When contemplating Saussure’s statement, I like to think of the graph we have used in class.
Sign
/ \
Signifier/ARBITRARY /Signified
(Sound/Image) / (Concept)
Saussure, in the above statement, explains that our minds assign meaning to particular words. No true meaning exists in language because meaning is arbitrary. Saying that the bond between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary means that the signifier cannot have a definite concept since the signified is determined by the individual. To further understand this idea, I will use the example of fire in the graph.
Sign
(Fire)
/ \
Signifier /ARBITRARY /Signified
Sound/Image / Desire, danger, enlightenment, inspiration
I use fire as an example because it is a common symbol found in art around the world. Someone who has had an unfortunate experience with a fire destroying their home may think of fire as a sign of danger. Fans of the song “Light My Fire” by the Doors quickly realize that fire is a metaphor for desire. Followers of the Bible may find the burning bush in Exodus 3:1-15 to be a symbol of Moses’ revelation. To relate my example of fire in the literary sense, readers of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein understand that the light provided by fire is a symbol of enlightenment and knowledge.
Therefore, through the example of fire we realize that the signifier is assigned different meanings or concepts (the signified) by the individual mind, thus we can agree that the bond between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary.
I'm not really sure how this idea is affected by post structuralist thought, but if anyone is looking for something to post, someone could discuss their thoughts with me.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Chris Craig comments on Marxism - and I Think I Get It?
First off, thank you, Dr. Craig, for taking the time to explain Marxism through examples in our society today. As you shared your experience in “the trendy clothing store,” one could already see the irony in placing a book about communism in the middle of trendy clothing. I have also seen displays such as these in stores and unfortunately, these tactics probably work. Too many times have I seen bumper stickers declaring the corruption of the government on Infiniti’s and Lexus’, and similar buttons cursing our economy on designer bags. These ways of rebelling against the government, which seem ironically supported by the government, allow the working class to feel like it is making a difference while it is in fact supporting the very government it opposes.
Dr. Craig also mentions this: “When the ruling class convinces working people that corporate profits are actually a good sign for all – all boats rise in the rising tide sort of thing – it encourages them to believe in the virtues of an economic system that does not have their best interest in mind. The more they follow this line of thinking, the more deeply mired they become in the very socio-cultural and political conditions that limit their ability to achieve economic success under capitalism.” When I read this, the first thing that came to mind was interpolation in a hegemonic system (but please correct me if I’m wrong.) The working class is convinced through these tactics by the government that it is actually being looked after and that it is possible to rise above. I’ll use the idea here of “The American Dream.” We hear politicians praising the American Dream and ironically enough we also hear the working class praise the ability to rise above with hard work and stamina. We can see interpolation here through the working class actually believing that they are rising above a system with the result of oppressing itself in that very system. The capitalist government thrives on this because as a result to the working class oppressing themselves, the possibility of rebellion is weak and the working class, working harder to rise above the system, actually increases productivity in the industry, only benefiting the government.
So I feel like I have a good grasp on the concept. Although I could be wrong, and if I am, comment and help me!
Thanks again, Dr. Craig.
Dr. Craig also mentions this: “When the ruling class convinces working people that corporate profits are actually a good sign for all – all boats rise in the rising tide sort of thing – it encourages them to believe in the virtues of an economic system that does not have their best interest in mind. The more they follow this line of thinking, the more deeply mired they become in the very socio-cultural and political conditions that limit their ability to achieve economic success under capitalism.” When I read this, the first thing that came to mind was interpolation in a hegemonic system (but please correct me if I’m wrong.) The working class is convinced through these tactics by the government that it is actually being looked after and that it is possible to rise above. I’ll use the idea here of “The American Dream.” We hear politicians praising the American Dream and ironically enough we also hear the working class praise the ability to rise above with hard work and stamina. We can see interpolation here through the working class actually believing that they are rising above a system with the result of oppressing itself in that very system. The capitalist government thrives on this because as a result to the working class oppressing themselves, the possibility of rebellion is weak and the working class, working harder to rise above the system, actually increases productivity in the industry, only benefiting the government.
So I feel like I have a good grasp on the concept. Although I could be wrong, and if I am, comment and help me!
Thanks again, Dr. Craig.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Marxist literary criticism is...cool?
Marxism as a literary criticism focuses on the cultural, social, and economic conditions that influence literature. Marxist ideas conflict with liberal humanism for these very reasons. As Marxist criticism analyzes literature with cultural, social, and economic circumstances in mind, liberal humanism studies the text independently of all outside events. To examine literature by itself is to get the most meaning out of it (this is also the second and third tenet of liberal humanism).
Another tenet of liberal humanism worth noting due to its conflicting argument with Marxist criticism is that human nature is essentially unchanging (tenet number four and, in some ways, one). Marxist criticism argues that the individual is constantly being affected by changing social, cultural, and economic forces. Therefore, the “timeless significance” of literature is a pretense as well as, perhaps, wishful thinking for the liberal humanist.
On a personal note, I tend to agree with many of the ideas of Marxist literary criticism. I suppose that instead of taking in the general ideas dealing with social, cultural, and economic implications in literature, I like to analyze a text taking into account actual events that may have shaped it. I also enjoy looking at texts and comparing them to events that are happening in the world at the time I am reading it. Perhaps that makes me more of a cultural materialist? I guess I’ll find out when we study the theory. Still, Marxist theory is cool, too.
Another tenet of liberal humanism worth noting due to its conflicting argument with Marxist criticism is that human nature is essentially unchanging (tenet number four and, in some ways, one). Marxist criticism argues that the individual is constantly being affected by changing social, cultural, and economic forces. Therefore, the “timeless significance” of literature is a pretense as well as, perhaps, wishful thinking for the liberal humanist.
On a personal note, I tend to agree with many of the ideas of Marxist literary criticism. I suppose that instead of taking in the general ideas dealing with social, cultural, and economic implications in literature, I like to analyze a text taking into account actual events that may have shaped it. I also enjoy looking at texts and comparing them to events that are happening in the world at the time I am reading it. Perhaps that makes me more of a cultural materialist? I guess I’ll find out when we study the theory. Still, Marxist theory is cool, too.
About me
Welcome to Karfuno’s blog. I have not had any experience blogging, and the idea of sharing my thoughts electronically for the entire web to analyze is a bit intimidating. I do, however, embrace the opportunity to become more accustomed to using the internet for more than leisure alone.
After experimenting my first year at Emmanuel College in Political Science courses, I decided to concentrate on the discipline I have always excelled in – English. I am a Writing and Literature major with a second major in Secondary Education. I will be student teaching in Framingham, Ma during the spring semester (YIKES). In addition to completing this course and having a concrete understanding in the field of literary criticism, I hope that the content from this class will aid me in teaching my students the very theories we will be discussing. Although I do not dislike Reader Response Criticism, I believe it is over-taught in the high school curriculum. This course is reassuring in that I will observe another instructor teaching the material I will someday want to tackle in my classroom.
After reading other blogs about being intimidated by the course content, I feel a lot better. I do not have a background in any of the content. Perhaps this blog will allow us to help each other with the work, because I know I may need it.
Until next blog,
Karfuno
After experimenting my first year at Emmanuel College in Political Science courses, I decided to concentrate on the discipline I have always excelled in – English. I am a Writing and Literature major with a second major in Secondary Education. I will be student teaching in Framingham, Ma during the spring semester (YIKES). In addition to completing this course and having a concrete understanding in the field of literary criticism, I hope that the content from this class will aid me in teaching my students the very theories we will be discussing. Although I do not dislike Reader Response Criticism, I believe it is over-taught in the high school curriculum. This course is reassuring in that I will observe another instructor teaching the material I will someday want to tackle in my classroom.
After reading other blogs about being intimidated by the course content, I feel a lot better. I do not have a background in any of the content. Perhaps this blog will allow us to help each other with the work, because I know I may need it.
Until next blog,
Karfuno
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)