This paper aims to examine how Macherey is dialogically engaged with post-Marxism in formulating his reading strategy. First Macherey thinks that the author must have left something unsaid in his text. The unsaid or t...This paper aims to examine how Macherey is dialogically engaged with post-Marxism in formulating his reading strategy. First Macherey thinks that the author must have left something unsaid in his text. The unsaid or the narrative rupture is responsible for the multiplicity of the voices in the text, enabling the text to exist. Most of all, Macherey argues that a text, embedded in History, is where the author represents ideology inaccurately. And it is from this inaccuracy where the narrative rupture emerges. At this point, Macherey is dialogically correlated with several major post-Marxists, such as Althusser, Eagleton, and Jameson. First, all three of them give their own definitions to ideology, and they all define the relationship between the text, ideology, and History in a similar fashion. For Althusser, ideology is men＇s imaginary relation to History and is insufficiently reflected in the text, which perfectly corresponds to Macherey＇s claim. For Eagleton, a text absorbs ideology and puts it into contradiction, establishing its relationship with History. As Eagleton himself has stated, his so-called ＂ideological contradiction＂ is tantamount to Macherey＇s so-called ＂narrative rupture.＂ In Jameson＇s opinion, ideology is designed to repress social contradictions, and a text, a symbolic act, is supposed to offer imaginary solutions to them. Above all, they end up as the latent meanings of a text. As for History, it is the inaccessible Real. In speaking of ＂the latent meanings of a text,＂ Jameson literally echoes Machery＇s said/unsaid model. Thus, we can confirm how Macherey is dialogically engaged with post-Marxism.展开更多
Increasingly, scholars of Holocaust memory stress its globalization： the ways in which the Holocaust has become a model or reference point for remembered events that belong to quite different historical and cultural ...Increasingly, scholars of Holocaust memory stress its globalization： the ways in which the Holocaust has become a model or reference point for remembered events that belong to quite different historical and cultural contexts. The best of this literature acknowledges the ways in which the local, national, and global are in continual dialogue. This article looks at an instance in which memory remains stubbornly local and national even in contexts in which it is ostensibly internationalized. The article is concerned with history exhibitions about the Nazi era in Germany and Austria and examines one particular set of museum objects： household possessions that have been stored in homes since 1945 and that are typically presented by the museum as having ＂resurfaced＂ in the present. These objects are used to concretize abstract processes of remembering and forgetting, communication and silence, in the years from 1945 to the end of the twentieth century. As such, they form part of ongoing debates about how family memory operated during that period in Germany and Austria.展开更多
文摘This paper aims to examine how Macherey is dialogically engaged with post-Marxism in formulating his reading strategy. First Macherey thinks that the author must have left something unsaid in his text. The unsaid or the narrative rupture is responsible for the multiplicity of the voices in the text, enabling the text to exist. Most of all, Macherey argues that a text, embedded in History, is where the author represents ideology inaccurately. And it is from this inaccuracy where the narrative rupture emerges. At this point, Macherey is dialogically correlated with several major post-Marxists, such as Althusser, Eagleton, and Jameson. First, all three of them give their own definitions to ideology, and they all define the relationship between the text, ideology, and History in a similar fashion. For Althusser, ideology is men＇s imaginary relation to History and is insufficiently reflected in the text, which perfectly corresponds to Macherey＇s claim. For Eagleton, a text absorbs ideology and puts it into contradiction, establishing its relationship with History. As Eagleton himself has stated, his so-called ＂ideological contradiction＂ is tantamount to Macherey＇s so-called ＂narrative rupture.＂ In Jameson＇s opinion, ideology is designed to repress social contradictions, and a text, a symbolic act, is supposed to offer imaginary solutions to them. Above all, they end up as the latent meanings of a text. As for History, it is the inaccessible Real. In speaking of ＂the latent meanings of a text,＂ Jameson literally echoes Machery＇s said/unsaid model. Thus, we can confirm how Macherey is dialogically engaged with post-Marxism.
文摘Increasingly, scholars of Holocaust memory stress its globalization： the ways in which the Holocaust has become a model or reference point for remembered events that belong to quite different historical and cultural contexts. The best of this literature acknowledges the ways in which the local, national, and global are in continual dialogue. This article looks at an instance in which memory remains stubbornly local and national even in contexts in which it is ostensibly internationalized. The article is concerned with history exhibitions about the Nazi era in Germany and Austria and examines one particular set of museum objects： household possessions that have been stored in homes since 1945 and that are typically presented by the museum as having ＂resurfaced＂ in the present. These objects are used to concretize abstract processes of remembering and forgetting, communication and silence, in the years from 1945 to the end of the twentieth century. As such, they form part of ongoing debates about how family memory operated during that period in Germany and Austria.
