Introduction: “Marxist Literary Criticism” by Terry Eagleton
“Marxist Literary Criticism” by Terry Eagleton first appeared in 1982 in the International Socialism journal. This essay is considered a seminal piece in Marxist literary theory, marking a significant contribution to the field. Eagleton’s work explores the relationship between literature and society, arguing that literary texts are shaped by and reflect the social, economic, and political conditions of their time. His analysis offers a critical perspective on the role of literature in perpetuating or challenging dominant ideologies.
Summary of “Marxist Literary Criticism” by Terry Eagleton
- Origins in Marx and Engels’ Work
- Marxist literary criticism traces its roots to Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Their work provides a scattered but foundational set of ideas on literary form, realism, and aesthetics.
- Marx’s contribution to aesthetics is interwoven with his larger debates on material production, labor, and commodification, making literary criticism less of an isolated practice and more of a part of his general theory of superstructures. (Lifshitz, 1973).
- Materialist Criticism and Historical Context
- A central theme in Marxist criticism is the material basis of cultural practices. Marx and Engels explored the relationship between aesthetic superstructures and material history, although they didn’t formulate a full theory of ideological superstructures.
- Marxist criticism must account for how history produces literary texts as complex signifiers, requiring criticism to be understood as a product of specific historical epochs and contexts.
- Bolshevik Revolution and Post-Revolutionary Marxist Criticism
- The Bolshevik Revolution marks a seismic shift in Marxist criticism, leading to the intersection of different critical modes, particularly seen in the collision of ideas in Trotsky’s Literature and Revolution.
- Pre-revolutionary critics like Georgi Plekhanov adhered to a sociological and anthropological form of criticism, while post-revolutionary critics like Lenin and Gorki advocated for a committed, politically engaged literature. This laid the groundwork for concepts like socialist realism.
- Contradictions within Marxist Aesthetic Theory
- After the revolution, Marxist aesthetics grappled with multiple theoretical problems: the relationship between art and class structure, the role of art in revolutionary politics, and the dilemma of whether bourgeois culture should be assimilated or destroyed.
- The dominance of socialist realism under Stalin marked a setback for more nuanced, materialist aesthetic practices. This led to a return to the ideas of Marx, Engels, and Hegel by critics like Georg Lukács and the Frankfurt School, who tried to preserve the critical function of art in the face of Stalinist repression (Jay, 1973).
- Diverse Marxist Approaches
- Marxist aesthetics evolved into multiple streams. Brecht and Benjamin, for instance, rejected the idealism of earlier Marxist critics, focusing on the material conditions of artistic production. They viewed art as a transformative practice, not just a reflection of political ideology (Benjamin, 1973).
- Other critics, such as Galvano Della Volpe, applied a rational materialist analysis to literary texts, focusing on semiotic codes and literary form. His work reflects an alignment with the Russian Formalists’ detailed attention to textual structures.
- The Need for a Structural-Historical Approach
- Eagleton argues for a conjuncture of different critical modes—attention to literary form (from the Hegelian tradition), an understanding of art as material production (from Futurism and Constructivism), and a semiological critique of texts (from Formalism). These modes need to be combined to create a genuinely materialist literary criticism.
- The failure to achieve this synthesis has led to the dominance of partial, internally imbalanced approaches in Marxist criticism, resulting in theoretical stagnation in some areas.
- Contemporary Marxist Criticism
- In the English context, Eagleton critiques the eclecticism of materialist criticism, which lacks a scientific basis and relies too much on empirical sociology or romantic idealism. He cites Raymond Williams as an example of a critic who, while pioneering, does not fully embody a Marxist approach.
Literary Terms/Concepts in “Marxist Literary Criticism” by Terry Eagleton
| Term/Concept | Explanation | Relevance in Eagleton’s Essay |
| Aesthetics | The philosophical study of beauty and art, particularly its principles and forms. | Eagleton discusses how Marx and Engels did not develop a systematic aesthetics, but their work offers foundational ideas. |
| Superstructure | In Marxist theory, the social, political, and ideological systems that arise from the economic base. | Literary texts are seen as part of the superstructure, reflecting and mediating material history. |
| Materialism | A focus on material conditions (economy, labor) as the basis for understanding society and culture. | Marxist literary criticism emphasizes the material basis of cultural practices and their economic roots. |
| Dialectical Materialism | The Marxist methodology of understanding history and society through the contradictions of material conditions. | This method is central to Marxist criticism, which views literary texts through their relation to material production. |
| Realism | A style of writing that depicts life as it is, often focusing on the struggles of everyday people. | Realism is valued in Marxist criticism for its ability to reveal the material conditions of society. |
| Reflectionism | The theory that art reflects society and its class structures. | Critiqued by Eagleton as insufficiently nuanced, especially in the works of Plekhanov and early Marxist critics. |
| Commitment in Art | The idea that literature and art should be politically engaged and promote revolutionary values. | Figures like Lenin and Gorki advocated for a committed literature to support revolutionary change. |
| Socialist Realism | A Soviet aesthetic that promoted art as a tool for advancing socialist ideals, often through idealized depictions of the working class. | Eagleton critiques its eventual degeneration under Stalinism as a reduction of art to political propaganda. |
| Formalism | A literary theory focused on the structure and form of literary texts rather than their content. | Eagleton discusses its relevance in the Russian context, particularly in contrast to Marxist materialist approaches. |
| Semiotics | The study of signs and symbols in language and literature, analyzing how meaning is produced. | Eagleton points to critics like Galvano Della Volpe, who combined Marxist theory with semiotic analysis of texts. |
| Bourgeois Culture | The culture of the middle/upper class, often critiqued in Marxism for being tied to capitalist interests. | Marxist critics debate whether bourgeois culture should be assimilated or destroyed in revolutionary practice. |
| Hegelianism | A philosophical tradition based on the work of Hegel, emphasizing dialectics and historical development. | Influences Marxist aesthetics, particularly in the work of Lukács and the Frankfurt School. |
| Proletkult | A Soviet cultural movement that aimed to develop a new, proletarian art form distinct from bourgeois culture. | Eagleton discusses its failure to produce a lasting materialist aesthetic, overshadowed by socialist realism. |
| Textual Ideology | The idea that literary texts carry implicit ideologies related to the class structures of society. | Marxist critics analyze how ideology manifests in literature, often through contradictions and ambiguities. |
| Conjuncture | A specific historical moment where different forces or modes of criticism collide or intersect. | Eagleton uses this concept to describe key periods in Marxist criticism, such as the aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution. |
Contribution of “Marxist Literary Criticism” by Terry Eagleton to Literary Theory/Theories
- Beyond “Reflectionism”: Eagleton criticizes simplistic views that see literature as merely reflecting social structures. He argues for a more complex understanding where literary texts are shaped by, but also potentially challenge, dominant ideologies.
- Multiple Strata of Marxist Criticism: Eagleton identifies different historical moments and trends within Marxist criticism. He highlights the tension between “reflectionism,” revolutionary aesthetics, and the focus on textual production and semiotics.
- The Importance of the Bolshevik Revolution: The essay emphasizes the pivotal role of the Bolshevik revolution in shaping Marxist criticism. It brought various critical modes like revolutionary aesthetics, formalism, and futurism into sharp focus.
- The Need for Conjuncture: Eagleton proposes the necessity of a “conjuncture” where historical materialism combines with the strengths of other critical approaches. This includes attention to:
- Textual Form and Ideology: Building on Hegelian aesthetics, a focus on how form, value, ideology, and history interrelate within a text.
- Material Practice and Production: Analyzing literature as a form of production with its own social relations, drawing from the work of Brecht and Benjamin.
- Textual Codes and Conventions: Studying how meaning is constructed through language and codes, as explored by Formalism and semiotics.
- Against Eclecticism: Eagleton argues against simply borrowing from different approaches. He emphasizes the need for a rigorous and unified “scientific aesthetics” grounded in historical materialism.
Examples of Critiques Through “Marxist Literary Criticism” by Terry Eagleton
| Literary Work | Marxist Critique |
| Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen | While Austen’s novel critiques the superficiality of class-based marriage, it also reinforces the patriarchal norms of the time. The characters’ concerns with wealth, status, and marriage proposals reflect the societal pressures of the era. |
| The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald | Fitzgerald’s novel exposes the emptiness of the American Dream and the corrupting influence of wealth. The characters’ pursuit of material success and their ultimate downfall highlight the destructive nature of capitalism. |
| The Jungle by Upton Sinclair | Sinclair’s novel provides a scathing critique of the capitalist system through its depiction of the harsh working conditions and exploitation of immigrant workers in the meatpacking industry. The novel calls for social and economic reforms to address the injustices faced by the working class. |
| Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison | Ellison’s novel explores the experiences of an unnamed African American protagonist who struggles to find his identity in a racist society. The novel critiques the invisibility and marginalization of Black people in America, highlighting the systemic racism embedded within the capitalist system. |
Criticism Against “Marxist Literary Criticism” by Terry Eagleton
- Lack of a Fully Developed Aesthetic Theory by Marx and Engels
- Critics argue that Marx and Engels did not formulate a comprehensive or systematic theory of art and aesthetics, making later Marxist critics rely on fragmented insights.
- Overemphasis on Material Conditions at the Expense of Artistic Autonomy
- Some argue that Marxist criticism reduces art to mere reflections of economic and social conditions, neglecting the autonomy of artistic creativity and innovation.
- Simplistic Reflectionism in Early Marxist Critics
- Eagleton critiques the simplistic notion of “reflectionism,” particularly in the works of Georgi Plekhanov, which suggests that literature directly mirrors class structures without accounting for the complexity of artistic representation.
- Reduction of Art to Political Propaganda in Socialist Realism
- The concept of socialist realism, particularly during Stalinism, is seen as a reductive approach to art that forces it into political propaganda, stifling creativity and diversity in literary expression.
- Internal Contradictions within Marxist Criticism
- Marxist literary criticism struggles with its own contradictions, such as whether bourgeois culture should be assimilated or destroyed, or whether artistic value can be separated from political progressiveness.
- Over-reliance on Historical Contextualization
- Critics suggest that Marxist criticism sometimes focuses too heavily on the historical and material context of literature, potentially ignoring the aesthetic, formal, or symbolic elements of texts.
- Neglect of the Formal and Semiotic Aspects of Literature
- While Eagleton acknowledges the importance of formalism and semiotics, critics note that traditional Marxist criticism often overlooks the intrinsic formal properties of a literary text in favor of broader ideological or material concerns.
- Eclecticism in Contemporary Materialist Criticism
- Eagleton critiques the eclectic nature of contemporary materialist criticism, which often lacks a coherent methodology and borrows too freely from other theoretical approaches, diluting its effectiveness.
- Failure to Adequately Address Modern Forms of Art and Literature
- Some critics argue that Marxist literary criticism struggles to deal with contemporary, postmodern forms of art and literature, which do not easily fit into its frameworks based on realism, class struggle, and historical materialism.
Representative Quotations from “Marxist Literary Criticism” by Terry Eagleton with Explanation
| Quotation | Explanation |
| “Marxist criticism begins, naturally, with the work of Marx and Engels themselves.” | Eagleton emphasizes the foundational role of Marx and Engels in Marxist literary criticism, though their work on literature was often fragmentary. |
| “…it is still remarkable how many of the issues now central to the development of a Marxist criticism emerge in embryonic form in their oeuvre.” | Despite the lack of a systematic theory, Eagleton highlights how Marx and Engels laid the groundwork for many key topics in Marxist literary criticism. |
| “It is the materialist method of the Grundrisse and Capital, not hints gleaned from the ‘literary criticism’, which must form the basis of anything worthy of the title of a ‘Marxist criticism’.” | Eagleton argues that Marxist criticism should be based on the broader materialist method of Marx’s economic and social theories, not just literary insights. |
| “The problem for Marxist criticism… is how it comes about that history produces (and reproduces) that set of ambiguous significations which we term the literary text.” | Eagleton identifies a key challenge for Marxist criticism: understanding how historical processes produce literary texts and the meanings they carry. |
| “Before the revolution, Marxist criticism was nurtured largely in the shadow of the later Engels.” | Eagleton discusses how early Marxist criticism was heavily influenced by Engels, whose approach combined sociological and anthropological insights. |
| “…socialist realism, the concept of literary partisanship, degenerate into the theoretical nullity of proletkult and its Stalinist aftermath.” | This quote critiques the decline of socialist realism into a tool for political propaganda under Stalinism, losing its critical and aesthetic value. |
| “The epistemological problem: is art reflection, refraction, creation, transformation, reproduction, production?” | Eagleton outlines the complex theoretical issues that Marxist criticism faces when trying to define the relationship between art and society. |
| “The failure to achieve this synthesis has had dire consequences; as the strata have been wedged apart, each has displayed a tendency to subside internally under its own unsupported weight.” | Eagleton laments the fragmentation of different critical approaches within Marxist criticism, resulting in their internal weaknesses. |
| “One might formulate the problem paradoxically by saying that our best Marxist critic – Raymond Williams – is not in fact a Marxist.” | Eagleton provocatively suggests that while Raymond Williams made significant contributions to literary criticism, he does not fully embody Marxist theory. |
| “…the need for a scientific aesthetics cannot be ignored.” | Eagleton concludes by calling for a more rigorous, systematic approach to aesthetics within Marxist literary criticism to go beyond mere interpretation. |
Suggested Readings: “Marxist Literary Criticism” by Terry Eagleton
- Benjamin, Walter. Understanding Brecht. New Left Books, 1973.
- Brecht, Bertolt. “Against Georg Lukacs.” New Left Review, no. 84, March-April 1974, pp. 39-53.
https://newleftreview.org/issues/I84/articles/bertolt-brecht-against-georg-lukacs - Goldmann, Lucien. Towards a Sociology of the Novel. Tavistock, 1975.
https://archive.org/details/towardssociology00gold - Jay, Martin. The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research, 1923-1950. Heinemann, 1973.
https://archive.org/details/dialecticalimagi00jaym - Lenin, V. I. Tolstoy and His Time. International Publishers, 1952.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1908/dec/10.htm - Lifshitz, Mikhail. The Philosophy of Art of Karl Marx. Pluto Press, 1973.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lifshitz/1973/philosophy-art.pdf - Macherey, Pierre. Pour une Théorie de la Production Littéraire. François Maspero, 1966.
https://catalogue.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb37222989f