Marxism in Literature Essay Sample

9 September 2017

Many plants of literature and even some movies contain subjects and grounds which supports Marx’s position of capitalist economy. as expressed in the Communist Manifesto. The Communist Manifesto includes many constructs associating to the uninterrupted battles between categories and their inevitable impact on history. The specific categories discussed in the Communist Manifesto are the labor and the businessperson. The middle class has. throughout history. exploited the labor for grounds stemming from profit-motives. The middle class has contributed to the creative activity of the wage-laborer. division of labour. and the of all time increasing de-skilling of labour. In its pursuit for more net income. the middle class brings together workers. unifying them. and hence making their ain agencies of devastation. When discoursing the definition of what constitutes philistinism. a chapter from Maurice Cornforth’s Materialism and the Dialectical Method. titled Materialism and Idealism. provinces that. “everything which exists comes into being on the footing of stuff causes. arises and develops in conformity with the Torahs of gesture of affair ( 25 ) . ”

In the Communist Manifesto. much of Marx’s theory is mercenary in the sense that it is derived from the fact that everything produced is possible because of stuff fortunes. The construct of philistinism. as Cornforth describes. supports Marxist theory. This chapter discusses how materialists seek ground in the stuff. economic conditions of societal life. As an illustration. Cornforth writes: If society is divided into rich and hapless. it is because the production of the stuff agency of life is so ordered that some have ownership of the land and other agencies of production while the remainder have to work for them. However difficult they make work and nevertheless much they may grate and salvage. the non-possessors will stay hapless. while the owners grow rich on the fruits of their labour. ( 19 ) Not merely does this illustration back up the manner a materialist thinks. it besides supports the features of the middle class and the labor. The owners. or rich. mentioned above could be interpreted as stand foring the middle class and the hapless. as the labor. Much of Marx’s theory reflected in the Communist Manifesto is based on impressions of philistinism.

Whatever fuels capitalist economy. whether it be money. the copiousness of worlds to be used. the chance to spread out globally. or something else. they are all material grounds. Cornforth describes idealism as a “weapon of reaction” which has been used as a manner to warrant development and misrepresentation. This could be said for the middle class who depend on idealistic intents to formalize their behaviour and to offer a powerful ground. although false. as to why the labor must go on working. When discoursing the middle class. the Communist Manifesto even states. “veiled by spiritual and political semblances. it has substituted bare. shameless. direct. barbarous development ( 58 ) . ” For illustration. many leaders have used spiritual motivations to support wars and to transfuse in the soldier a religious thrust. The verse form. “Questions from a Worker Who Reads. ” by Bertolt Brecht. supports the thought of societal labour as is in the Communist Manifesto. Social labour is the demand for people on all degrees to make production and success. Without these people. nil would be produced and the middle class would non gain. This verse form calls attending to such workers who are frequently overlooked.

Brecht writes. “Great Rome is full of triumphal arches. Who erected them? ” The Communist Manifesto emphasizes how the middle class has shown what a man’s activity can convey approximately. and this verse form concentrates on such historical events. undertakings. and other “accomplished wonders” that were made possible by the work of 1000s of work forces for the benefit of a higher category. or as Marx would name it. the middle class. The Communist Manifesto states that. “each triumph so obtained is a triumph for the middle class. ” The thought is prevailing throughout Brecht’s verse form as he uses the names of several powerful historical figures to show how all of the recognition for such success and victory has been assigned to them and non to the people underneath who made the triumphs possible. The poem “Transformation and Disfiguration. ” by Charles Bukowski. supports several constructs reflected in the Communist Manifesto. The description of the calamities associated with the peculiar occupation in the verse form demonstrates the immiseration of the worker as Marx might depict it. These workers sat on stools for eleven and a half hours a dark and were abused by their supervisors.

The workers are even described as “much like the inmates of a prison cantonment. ” The atrocious on the job conditions at this topographic point were the causes for many calamities and even for force. The force portrayed in this verse form supports Marx’s thought that the middle class creates the arms for its ain devastation. Bukowski writes. “Hodges had been knifed in the parking batch on the manner to his auto. ” A reader can presume that the individual who knifed Hodges was a really worker that he supervised. The occupation in this verse form besides seems to back up the Marxist construct of de-skilling. A occupation. as in the verse form. which requires a worker to sit on a stool and stick letters for many hours. is non a occupation that requires much accomplishment. For that ground. these workers were most likely non paid really good. Marx would hold that the de-skilling of labour is to the advantage of the middle class. who will utilize it as an alibi to pay less and to do more net income. Another manner in which this verse form supports the Communist Manifesto is through its representation of the being between the oppressor and the oppressed.

Bukowski writes. “the supervisors brutalized us and the supervisors were in bend brutalized by their higher-ups who were in bend brutalized by the Postmaster General who ever demanded more for less. ” This concatenation described by Bukowski shows the feature of a society which contains those laden and those who oppress. With the desire to gain more by making and paying less. the middle class oppresses the on the job category. A work of literature which strongly supports the thoughts dominant in the Communist Manifesto is Takiji Kobayoshi’s novella The Factory Ship. From the get downing it is obvious that. on the mill ship. there is the division of labour. The labour on the ship is divided into different classs such as fishermen. mill custodies. stewards. firemen. and direction. The primary ground that the mill ship even exists is for a net income motivation. although the direction effort to cover up that motivation with an idealistic and political ground. The overseer of the ship explains to the crew that the intent of their occupations was non to do money for the corporation but to work out a serious international job between the Japanese and the Russians.

The labour theory of value is depicted in this novelette. In order to do a net income off of the seas and the pediculosis pubis. the corporation must provide the ships with crews. Without a crew. there is no value in the being of the sea animals. With a net income motivation and a crew to work. one other Marxist construct pushes the corporation even further. The corporation has satisfied its market so must seek for new markets to profit from. In add-on. the ships expand farther. even into other districts. in order to take advantage of its resources. The inclination towards globalisation is stated in the Communist Manifesto as follows. “The demand of a invariably spread outing market for its merchandises chases the middle class over the whole surface of the Earth ( 58 ) . ” This is precisely what has occurred in The Factory Ship. The Factory Ship is besides effectual in back uping Marx’s thought of the agglomeration of workers. The Communist Manifesto states that. “the bourgeoisie supports more and more making off with the scattered population. of the agencies of production. and of belongings ( 59 ) . ”

What this means is that the middle class brings together workers. who would normally be scattered about. into one. cardinal location to work. In The Factory Ship. husbandmans. mineworkers. pupils. building workers. and many others are bought together on one ship to work. This agglomeration is the seed for yet another Marxist construct – that the middle class creates the arms of its ain devastation. By conveying all of these workers together and by insulating them on a ship in the center of the ocean. the corporation has provided the chance for the workers to unify. which is exactly what happens. When the workers do unite and recognize their common stuff involvements. they protest. What happens after the first protest supports a construct in the Communist Manifesto which reads. “The executive of the modern State is but a commission for pull offing the common personal businesss of the whole middle class ( 57 ) . ” After the first protest. a destroyer approaches the ship. The work forces instantly believe that the destroyer is at that place to assist them. After all. the destroyer would be on their side. This sense of false consciousness is rapidly put to rest as the work forces from the destroyer arrive at the ship with guns and take the leaders of the protest off.

This is a perfect illustration of how. as Marx explains. those higher up are in favour of the middle class. The Factory Ship besides demonstrates Marx’s popular theory of immiseration. The on the job conditions on the ship are so horrid. it is no admiration that the workers united in order to accomplish betterment. The movie Battleship Potemkin besides supports many of the same theories depicted in the Communist Manifesto as The Factory Ship does. On the battlewagon. the work forces are immiserated by atrocious conditions. Because of the agglomeration of these work forces. they are able to pass on amongst themselves the dissatisfaction with the conditions. What truly triggered the work forces to unify was the decomposing meat that they were expected to eat. By agglomerating these workers. the middle class allowed them to unify. and in making so. created a powerful arm. The work forces protested against the captain and his work forces in order to accomplish better conditions. In these ways. Battleship Potemkin is really similar to The Factory Ship.

The chapter Labor and Labor Power from Harry Braverman’s Labor and Monopoly Capital supports theories nowadays in the Communist Manifesto. Braverman explains that the middle class is concerned with production. Persons and households in society are no longer self-sufficing. The mean individual is unable to have or even come in contact with many of the tools. machines. and other non-human agencies of production. Braverman states. “The worker enters into the employment understanding because societal conditions leave him or her no other manner to derive a support ( 36 ) . ” The Communist Manifesto supports the thought that the middle class takes advantage of the worker who is despairing for a agency of support. Braverman communicates the thought that the capitalist must hold a net income motivation. This is a common theory in the Communist Manifesto. The middle class needs a net income motivation in order to work workers. The fresh March to the Monteria. by B. Traven. can be related to the Communist Manifesto in several ways. Because of materialist grounds. like his desire to go married. Celso. the chief character. has no pick but to sell his labour power to different works operations. like the Monteria. The contracts Celso makes with the operation directors and his hourly wage makes him a common wage-laborer.

The Communist Manifesto states that. “as the loathsomeness of the work additions. the pay decreases ( 61 ) . ” Although Celso is making really tough and unsafe work. he doing a meager pay. The conditions which he works under cause the immiseration of Celso and his fellow workers. They invariably have to worry about tonss. hangings. being put down in the book as taking a “fiesta” . or. one time being freed from the contract. being “hooked” once more by an agent. Celso is cogent evidence of how the middle class does non care about the human in its workers. For development. Marx writes. “it has resolved personal worth into exchange value ( 57 ) . ” For the workss that Celso works for. he is simply a agency of production and nil more.

Throughout the novel. Celso is oppressed by some kind of oppressor. Often. the ground for the subjugation is based on what category a individual belongs to in relation to Celso. Celso is considered an Indio and he is frequently oppressed by the Ladinos. who are considered a higher category. This could associate to the relationship between the middle class and the labor as described in the Communist Manifesto. These assorted plants of literature and movie could be considered proletarian literature because they are written by or about the on the job category. Each of these plants is effectual in back uping constructs present in the Communist Manifesto. What these works finally demonstrate is the category struggles that have existed throughout history which are explained by Marx. It is these battles that have continuously produce history and will most likely continue into the hereafter. For. as the Communist Manifesto can be related to so many published plants. it can besides be related to the conditions which exist in society today.

A limited
time offer!
Get authentic custom
ESSAY SAMPLEwritten strictly according
to your requirements