“Ideology And Literature” by Michael Moriarty: Summary and Critique

Introduction: “Ideology And Literature” by Michael Moriarty

“Ideology and Literature” by Michael Moriarty first appeared in the Journal of Political Ideologies in 2006, published online on August 8 by Routledge. In this pivotal article, Moriarty investigates the historical and theoretical interplay between ideology and literature, particularly through the lens of Marxist criticism. He explores Althusserian theories of ideology and their profound influence on literary criticism, emphasizing the Marxist tradition as a framework for understanding the connections between ideological constructs and literary texts. Moriarty traces the evolution of ideological analysis from Althusser’s conception of ideology as “lived experience” to its applications by thinkers like Terry Eagleton, Pierre Macherey, and Fredric Jameson. The article addresses the limitations and potentials of applying ideological critique to literature, noting that while it illuminates the societal and political dimensions of texts, it risks reductive interpretations. By engaging with alternate perspectives, including feminist, psychoanalytic, and deconstructionist critiques, Moriarty underscores the enduring relevance of ideology as an analytical tool, while cautioning against its overextension in literary studies. This work remains significant for its synthesis of critical theories and its interrogation of literature’s role in reflecting and challenging sociopolitical structures.

Summary of “Ideology And Literature” by Michael Moriarty

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Ideology And Literature” by Michael Moriarty

Theoretical Term/Concept	Definition/Explanation	Key Contributors/References
Ideology	Imaginary relationship individuals have with their social reality, shaping beliefs and experiences.	Althusser (Moriarty, 2006, p. 44)
Lived Experience	The experiential aspect of ideology as it is “felt” and represented in literature.	Althusser (Moriarty, 2006, pp. 44–45)
Ideological State Apparatuses (ISAs)	Institutions that perpetuate ideology through cultural, educational, and social means.	Althusser (Moriarty, 2006, p. 50)
Literary Mode of Production (LMP)	The process by which literature articulates, processes, and critiques general and authorial ideologies.	Eagleton (Moriarty, 2006, p. 46)
General Ideology (GI)	The dominant ideology in a society, reflected and reproduced in material and cultural forms.	Eagleton (Moriarty, 2006, p. 46)
Aesthetic Ideology (AI)	The role of aesthetic forms in naturalizing ideological categories while exposing their constructed nature.	Eagleton (Moriarty, 2006, pp. 46–47)
Political Unconscious	The hidden collective fantasies and contradictions reflected in literary texts.	Jameson (Moriarty, 2006, p. 49)
Modes of Production	The historical framework shaping social formations and ideologies in literature.	Jameson (Moriarty, 2006, pp. 49–50)
Heteroglossia	The coexistence of multiple, conflicting discourses in a text, reflecting diverse worldviews.	Bakhtin (Moriarty, 2006, p. 52)
Structure of Feeling	The lived, affective dimension of social experience that shapes cultural production.	Raymond Williams (Moriarty, 2006, p. 55)
Misrecognition	The process by which individuals fail to recognize the underlying social realities in their experiences or actions.	Althusser, Laclos (Moriarty, 2006, p. 54)
Interpellation	The process by which individuals are “hailed” into subject positions by ideology.	Althusser (Moriarty, 2006, p. 50)
Defamiliarization	The artistic technique of making the familiar seem strange to disrupt ideological assumptions.	Russian Formalists, Bowie (Moriarty, 2006, p. 56)
Allegory	A narrative mode that encodes broader historical or ideological meanings within texts.	Jameson (Moriarty, 2006, p. 49)
Subversive Effect	The capacity of certain texts or genres to destabilize dominant ideologies through internal contradictions.	Bakhtin, Althusser (Moriarty, 2006, pp. 51–52)
Ideologemes	Units of ideology that operate within class discourses, often recurring across texts.	Jameson (Moriarty, 2006, p. 50)

Contribution of “Ideology And Literature” by Michael Moriarty to Literary Theory/Theories

• Advancement of Marxist Literary Theory:
  • The article explores Marxist approaches to literature, focusing on Althusserian theories of ideology. It highlights the role of literature in exposing ideological structures and its contribution to Marxist criticism’s analysis of class struggle and domination (Moriarty, 2006, pp. 43–45).
  • Expands on Pierre Macherey’s notion that literature critiques its own ideological underpinnings by organizing and channeling ideological discourse into discernible structures (Moriarty, 2006, p. 45).
• Reevaluation of Ideology in Literature:
  • Extends Althusser’s conceptualization of ideology as lived experience, arguing that literature makes ideology visible through artistic forms rather than scientific analysis (Moriarty, 2006, pp. 44–46).
  • Suggests that literature provides “an analogue of knowledge,” not by representing reality, but by revealing the structures of ideology that shape human experience (Moriarty, 2006, pp. 46–47).
• Integration of Psychoanalysis with Marxist Theory:
  • Discusses the incorporation of psychoanalytic theories into Marxist literary criticism, notably in Jameson’s The Political Unconscious, which views texts as reflecting collective fantasies and contradictions (Moriarty, 2006, pp. 48–49).
• Contribution to the Debate on the Function of Literature:
  • Challenges traditional Marxist views that focus solely on class struggle, arguing for broader applications of ideology, including its intersection with race, gender, and colonialism (Moriarty, 2006, pp. 50–53).
  • Critiques the category of “literature” itself, suggesting that its institutional and cultural definitions are deeply ideological and historically contingent (Moriarty, 2006, p. 55).
• Heteroglossia and Literary Texts:
  • Draws on Bakhtin’s concept of heteroglossia to demonstrate how literary texts contain multiple conflicting discourses, making ideology visible and destabilizing dominant narratives (Moriarty, 2006, p. 52).
• Interdisciplinary Application of Ideology:
  • Highlights the flexibility of the term “ideology,” showing its relevance in feminist, postcolonial, and critical race theories by addressing broader forms of domination beyond class (Moriarty, 2006, pp. 53–54).
• Critique of Reductionism in Literary Studies:
  • Warns against reductionist approaches in Marxist literary criticism that view literature solely as a reflection of economic and social structures. Instead, it emphasizes literature’s capacity to subvert and critique ideology through its formal and aesthetic dimensions (Moriarty, 2006, p. 55).
• Relevance to Contemporary Criticism:
  • Asserts the continuing importance of ideology in understanding literature’s engagement with social and political realities, while recognizing the term’s evolution in non-Marxist frameworks (Moriarty, 2006, p. 53).
• Role of the Reader and Critic:
  • Emphasizes the active role of the reader and critic in uncovering and analyzing the ideological functions of literary texts, bridging formalist and materialist methodologies (Moriarty, 2006, pp. 46–47).
• Utopian Potential of Literature:
  • Engages with Fredric Jameson’s idea of the “utopian” dimension of literature, suggesting that literature provides imaginative frameworks for envisioning alternative social realities (Moriarty, 2006, p. 56).

Examples of Critiques Through “Ideology And Literature” by Michael Moriarty

Literary Work	Critique Through Moriarty’s Framework	Key Concepts Referenced	Source in Article
Balzac’s Les Paysans	– Examined by Macherey as a text that undermines its own anti-democratic ideological project by giving voice to the masses.	Ideology as lived experience; internal contradictions in texts.	Moriarty, 2006, pp. 45–46.
	– Demonstrates the interplay between ideological discourse (warning against democracy) and its critique through narrative.
Solzhenitsyn’s Novels	– These are not analyses of Stalinism but representations of the experience of living under Stalinism.	Literature as making ideology visible through lived experience.	Moriarty, 2006, pp. 44–45.
	– Focuses on ideology as an unconscious and emotional framework rather than scientific cognition.
Beckett’s Waiting for Godot	– Highlights the limitations of “ideology” when applied to texts with minimal social reference or recognizable ideology.	Literature resisting ideological analysis; alternate frameworks like “structure of feeling.”	Moriarty, 2006, pp. 54–55.
	– Suggests Adorno’s aesthetics as a better alternative for analyzing Beckett’s work.
E. M. Forster’s A Passage to India	– Depicts Fielding’s misrecognition of Aziz’s generosity as an act of carelessness, highlighting the ideological biases in colonial relationships.	Misrecognition; ideology as reinforcing social and political domination.	Moriarty, 2006, p. 54.

Criticism Against “Ideology And Literature” by Michael Moriarty

Representative Quotations from “Ideology And Literature” by Michael Moriarty with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“The use of the term ‘ideology’ in relation to literature was for long typical of Marxist criticism, especially of the Althusserian school.”	This introduces the article’s focus on the historical role of ideology in Marxist literary criticism, particularly Althusser’s influential theories. It sets the stage for a discussion of how ideology mediates the interpretation of literature.
“Ideology is… the sphere in which I ‘live’ or experience my relationship to [conditions of existence], it is my imaginary relationship to them.”	Drawing from Althusser, this emphasizes the lived, subjective experience of ideology. In literature, this translates into how texts portray a social or political imaginary rather than objective reality.
“What art makes us see, and therefore gives to us in the form of ‘seeing,’ ‘perceiving,’ and ‘feeling’… is the ideology from which it is born.”	This highlights the role of literature as a medium that reveals ideology through perception and emotion rather than direct knowledge. It underscores literature’s capacity to present lived experiences of ideology.
“The analysis of literature in terms of ideology is most characteristic of the Althusserian school; and a body of criticism to which Pierre Macherey, Terry Eagleton, and Fredric Jameson have all contributed is certainly worth attention.”	Moriarty situates his exploration of literature and ideology within the broader tradition of Marxist theorists, signaling key figures like Macherey and Eagleton whose works extend or critique Althusser’s ideas.
“It is impossible to sustain a clearly defined notion of literature… other than that of a category of texts that have historically been constructed by educational institutions as objects of study and value.”	This critiques the idea of “literature” as a fixed, universal concept, arguing instead that it is a construct shaped by cultural and ideological forces, aligning with Eagleton’s critique.
“The term ‘ideology’ is not especially fashionable in literary studies… but the term cannot be said to have outlived its usefulness altogether.”	Acknowledging contemporary critiques of the term, Moriarty argues for its continued relevance in understanding how texts mediate social relationships, power, and domination.
“The term ‘ideology’ seems especially apt to designate… misrecognition, grounded in social and political relationships of domination, and tending to reinforce these.”	This defines ideology as a process of misrecognition that reinforces social hierarchies, showing its utility in critiquing texts that naturalize systems of domination.
“It is not to say that Beckett’s work belongs to a realm of high art, untouched by politics and history… but the term ideology… seems less apt.”	Moriarty reflects on the limitations of ideological critique for abstract or non-socially referential texts, suggesting that alternatives like Raymond Williams’s “structure of feeling” may be more useful.

Suggested Readings: “Ideology And Literature” by Michael Moriarty

1. MORIARTY, MICHAEL. “Barthes: Ideology, Culture, Subjectivity.” Paragraph, vol. 11, no. 3, 1988, pp. 185–209. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/43151672. Accessed 16 Dec. 2024.
2. Moriarty, Michael. “The Longest Cultural Journey: Raymond Williams and French Theory.” Social Text, no. 30, 1992, pp. 57–77. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/466466. Accessed 16 Dec. 2024.
3. Moriarty, Michael. “Ideology and literature.” The Meaning of Ideology. Routledge, 2013. 41-58.