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
Alice Ridout and Susan Watkins offers a best perspective in their book Doris Lessing： Border Crossings, to contemplate Lessing’s writing. In her 57-year publishing career, Lessing always crosses the borders： as a f...Alice Ridout and Susan Watkins offers a best perspective in their book Doris Lessing： Border Crossings, to contemplate Lessing’s writing. In her 57-year publishing career, Lessing always crosses the borders： as a feminist or anti-feminist, as a science fiction writer or a realist who lost her way, as a Marxist or a reactionary, as a British writer or a postcolonial one. Lessing’s border-crossing not only lies in her different genres of writing or in different novels, but even in a single comparatively traditional novel. The Summer Before the Dark is a representative work of Lessing’s women portrayal transition from focusing on their outside world exploration to on their inner world seeking. This essay tries to look at the content and form of the novel, and to illustrate that Lessing’s border-crossing is also fulfilled in one single novel. She successfully crosses the border of convention and innovation： conventional in content, while innovative in form.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Alice Ridout and Susan Watkins offers a best perspective in their book Doris Lessing： Border Crossings, to contemplate Lessing’s writing. In her 57-year publishing career, Lessing always crosses the borders： as a feminist or anti-feminist, as a science fiction writer or a realist who lost her way, as a Marxist or a reactionary, as a British writer or a postcolonial one. Lessing’s border-crossing not only lies in her different genres of writing or in different novels, but even in a single comparatively traditional novel. The Summer Before the Dark is a representative work of Lessing’s women portrayal transition from focusing on their outside world exploration to on their inner world seeking. This essay tries to look at the content and form of the novel, and to illustrate that Lessing’s border-crossing is also fulfilled in one single novel. She successfully crosses the border of convention and innovation： conventional in content, while innovative in form.
