Analysis #4 Marxist Theory

   
    This cartoon was an attempt during the Cold War to defend Capitalism against Anti-capitalististic individuals like Marx.  Although it’s supposed to defend Captialism, it also points out many of the points Marx is uncomfortable with regarding Capitalism.
    Marx would have immediately noticed that the main character, Freddie Fudsie creates a surplus of supply and because of this he no longer has need for the extra product as he already has enough soap to satisfy his personal needs.  This soap can then be sold for profit.  The labor time it takes to make this product and its use to others creates its value, which after time and trade becomes a fairly universal price in relation to other products.  Money becomes the middle-man for trade and its value is established in relation to a dollar making trade easier.
    Since Freddie is able to speed up his production time, he is also able to speed up the speed in which he makes his product, making it possible to create more product and gain more profit.  He is also able to expand his business into new areas.  Doing this also has an effect on the relationship Freddie has with his product.  He and his workers become emotionally divorced from the product their making.  Labor time decreases and the value decreases, but the amount of production compensates for this as society still places additional value on his product for its quality and its brand.
    The video states that the profit motive is the driving force behind the American industry and that this is beneficial to future generations of Americans.  However it is interesting to notice that Freddie’ original goal is to create more time to enjoy his life.  Instead he becomes corrupted by greed.  The future generations, too have no time for enjoyment, as they perpetuate the market that individuals such as Freddie have created, robbing their lives of free time as they become slaves to their profit and the market.

 Works Cited

Marx Karl. “Commodities.” Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. W.W. Norton & Company: New York, 2010. 663-671. Print.

Animation Station. “Going Places” (1948). March 29, 2011.  Web.

Analysis #3 Pyschoanalysis

Freud's theory of fetishism is one that seems unlikely to many in today's society and exhibits many flaws and holes in its research. However, he is one of the few people who have given any remotely plausible reasoning to the development of fetishes in adults and is, therefore, worthy of consideration. The clip for this analysis displays several common and not so common costuming selections for serious fetishists and here, I will attempt to explain their significance through a Freudian perspective . Although some of them many seem initially obscure, Freudian analysis offers an explanation for their presence, whether it is accurate or not.
For instance, the animal costumes or "fuzzies" depicted in this video directly correlate with Freud's hypothesis that a young man's fetish is established by the last thing he observed before he realized that his mother no longer possessed a phallus. The fur in many of these costumes, according to Freud, would be a symbol of the mother's pubic hair which, "should have been followed by the longed-for sight of the pubic member". These individuals have focused their sexual attention on these costumes in order to redirect their fear of castration and deny their homosexuality. By focusing their sexual attention on the fur instead of the women, these fetishists can engage in sexual relations with women while continuing their sexual attraction to a phallic symbol and ignoring their fear of castration.
The latex outfits seemed a little less clear than the fur, as Freud didn't specifically address latex in his writing. They didn't seem to initially represent anything except a lack of hair, which would be contrary to the previous fetish, involving hair. This seemed extremely confusing for some time, however, a little inventive thinking clarified the situation. It donned on me after some time that a person clad in latex could physically represent the phallus itself. Fetishists could literally have sex with a sort of phallus without being considered homosexual or even having to consider the gender of the person they were engaging in sex with.

Unfortunately this video clip also addressed some issues with Freud's theories, not all of the costumes and practices observed seem in accordance with his beliefs. For instance, the balloon fetish don't seem to have any correlation with phallic imagery. Also Freud never considers variation in his fetishists. What if they are already openly gay? or female?
An openly gay man wouldn't need a symbolic phallus, as he has already addressed the desire for a penis. S&M and fetishism is popular in many homosexual circles, so it's not as if gay openly gay men are exempt from fetishes. Is this a fatal flaw in Freud's argument, or has our definition or fetish changed? It is possible that some people just immensely enjoy social taboo in a way that Freud's concept of "fetish" does not include.
In addition I found it interesting that Freud never addresses female fetishists. Although fetishists in the video seem to be primarily male, there is also a woman depicted. Does Freud's theory then become reversed? Do women experience the development of a fetish due to a fear of phalluses and the fear that they might grow some strange appendage from their groin? These incomplete thoughts lead me to question Freud's theories.

Works Cited

Current Media. "Youtube's Creepiest Fetish Costumes" Oct. 30 2009. Web. March 22 2011.
Freud, Sigmund. "Fetishism." (1927). Print. New York:W.W. Norton & COmpany.

Reader Response Theory- Barthes "Death of the Author"

Originally, I had been a huge believer in the influence of an author on a text, but after reading Barthes’s “Death of the Author,” I admittedly began to question some of my previous conceptions. I still believe in some cases, the Author exists more strongly in the text than in other pieces (one example being Tennessee William, who reflects much of his personal life and experience in his work) however, it can limit depth of a work to only analyze the author of the text. It prevents readers from considering other alternatives and interpretations. Instead, combining reader response in conjunction with technical elements employed by the author may allow for a deeper and more meaningful or applicable analysis. This doesn’t mean the author needs to be completely dead to the work, but they become more of an echo than anything.

Something that assisted in digesting this work was looking at literary criticism in a way similar the way in which movies are often viewed by audiences. No one considers the value of the work based on the life experience of the author unless it is extremely relevant to the work. Movies based on true stories retain a far louder echo of the author, but as most movies aren’t based on real situations, we must find other ways to critique the material. We instead begin to look at the visual effects, camera angles, believability of the characters, and how we personally respond to the work because of our understanding of reality. This allows for a greater conversation and more varied interpretations of a work, giving it added depth and appeal to different backgrounds. I believe this was what Barthes believes should be the case for literature as well.

Psychoanalysis: Lacan's Mirror Stage

One thing that I felt wasn't covered sufficiently by Lacan was the formation of the ego in situations lacking a mirror. Of course, one who hasn't seen their reflection would eventually develop a sense of self due to "social determination," but would they be lacking some sort of essential formative step in the development of self-awareness? Or would their sense of self awareness be more accurate due a lack of the "statue in which man projects himself" or the "phantoms that dominate him." This is to say, what exactly would the effects be if a man were to never see a reflection of his own image? It would be extremely interesting to compare the resulting egos of people exposed and unexposed to images of themselves.

Lacan's theory manages to explain one potential aspect of the development of ego, but also explains a common human obsession, which is that of the "double." Our society has a slight fascination with twins and the concept of a "doppelganger." Dostoyevsky was particularly attracted to the concept of the doppelganger, writing a book called "The Double" in which a man is forced to face his evil counterpart. Even Madonna has featured the concept of an evil twin in her "Die Another Day" music video. These doppelgangers may represent evil due to the sense of competition and fragmentation Lacan claims we feel at the first exposure to a mirror. Twins most likely baffle people due to their similarity and must be interesting to study, as they are able to see a three dimensional image of their own likeness.

Structuralism and Semiotics: Frye "The Archetypes in Literature"

Frye seems particularly interested in what causes particular genres and archetypes to form.  In order to find cause of this formation, he looks for various patterns in imagery throughout time.  He traces back archetypes to ancient rituals and traditions, which I found to be interesting as a lot of it applied to several religious studies classes I have taken. People associated the seasons and certain symbols with other symbols such as life or death. Frye breaks it down essentially like this:

Spring→birth, revival→romance

Summer→success, marriage→comedy, pastoral

Autumn→death→tragedy

Winter→defeat→satire

These traditions and types often have different variations, but the imagery within each general is somewhat similar.  These patterns and associations are seen throughout literature and oral tradition in a great many cultures and communities, explaining their prevalence in literary works.

Another section I found to be interesting was the following quote: “The importance of the god or hero in the myth lies in the fact that such characters, who are conceived in human likeness and yet have more power over nature, gradually build up the vision of an omnipotent personal community beyond an indifferent nature.”  Like our need for rituals to try to influence the earth, we as humans like to try to explain things and try to overcome the indifference and pure randomness of nature.  This leads to our need for figures that are able to exert themselves against nature and prevail.  I found this to be an extremely insightful explanation as to the origin and need for hero figures in literature.

Picture post: Formalism, Analysis #2

Paintings such as this are part of why I can’t complete accept the scientific distancing that is a common attribute of Formalism.  The Formalist approach would to be analyze the form and content, but not to take into account the life of the artist.  Through the eyes a Formalist, this piece is valid because it uses different tones of white, cream, and grey.  It also experiments with a variety of texture, using both lumpy nodules and defined edges to provide contrast and bring attention directly to the center of the canvas.  These edges create interesting tilted angles within the piece and the bottom half has lines that radiate farther away from the center, which gives the appearance of a more heavily weighted bottom half that is additionally accentuated by spots of grey coloration. The top is also darker colored and set farther back, which highlights the depth of field and makes the farthest and lightest parts of the painting seem even farther out.

All of this is very interesting and relevant to the work, however, it leaves out all human aspects of the work.  I often have this problem with Formalism because it denies some very important aspects of this painting.  One of the reasons that this painting is so coveted is because of the artist’s process of creating it.  She spent nearly fifteen years layering paint on the canvas and chipping it away until she finally came up with the image she was satisfied with.  This background information undoubtedly adds additional value to the work when you see how much time and effort and intent was behind the work, even if it isn’t initially apparent by simply viewing the work.