AD603 Critical Theory

The readings from the book Theories in Contemporary Art Since 1985 are some of the most comprehensive and enjoyable for me.  I find the roles that art plays indifferent cultures to be interesting.  With the world so interconnected by technology it is important to be aware of the ever-changing aesthetics of art.  The issues that are raised as a result of the changes in culture values causes the art world to change and to continually redefine what art is or can be to the human race.  The idea of what effect the colonization has had on the art world is an issue that also affects art educators. 

Many art classes in elementary school were non-existent or lacking up until the early 1980’s.  Many pioneers in the field of art education had been working hard to get the general public to understand the importance of having experiences in the visual arts.  Finally there was a consensus among those in the field to mandate the use of discipline-based art education (DBAE) in teaching new art educators how and what to teach in their classrooms.  While some were against placing such perimeters on teaching art, others felt it validated their field which was not taken seriously.  The National Art Education Association (NAEA) promoted this method for teaching art and it is the method that I learned when attending undergraduate school.

DBAE involves not just the production of art but also the study of art history, aesthetics and art criticism.  During this time it was reinforced numerous times about the importance of being informed about multi-cultural art.  Many of my lessons had to include a unit on non-European art.  It was also made certain that we understood the importance of including multi-cultural lessons in our curriculum.  We were told of the white, European dominance in art history and that it was our job and duty to also teach of other cultures. 

This was really a profound concept to me at this time.  My experience with art and art history at this time were lacking and I had never thought about the idea of art history being written by the same people who colonized the world.  This dominance of colonization in the history of art makes most people only aware of the art created in Europe and areas connected to it.  Society seems to have historically placed a higher value on the art work that is idealized by the masses.  Most all art history books focus on the artists of European descent.  This non-inclusion or de-emphasis of other cultures makes the work of other cultures seem less important. 

There has been an awakening in the world of art educators about the importance of informing our students about the importance of multi-cultural art.  It is my job to make sure that my students understand that all man creates art and it all has great value and influence in the growth of the field of art.  There are many artists of European descent that would not have created the works they did if they had not been exposed to other cultures. 

The art work below is from a book and DVD that Jean-Paul Bourdier created with Trinh T Minh-ha.  No matter our color we all seem to fit into the landscape. 

Identity is a difficult concept.  Both of the readings have made it more difficult and make me question the role that labels have in identifying who we are.  We can have an identity based on our perceptions of ourselves or the perceptions others have of us.  As we grow from child to adolescent to adult our identities change.  As a child we are defined by what our parents/guardians see.  This molds our perceptions of self as we reach teen years.  These years are such a difficult time of identity and trying to fit into an identity that is not who you really are. 

PBS art 21 has an interesting episode on contemporary art and identity.

http://www.pbs.org/art21/series/seasonone/identity.html#

The time of adolescence is one of the most difficult times to figure out who we are and what we stand for and what this means.  There is such a need at this time to conform to the masses and what they find to be important.  If we choose to stand out or be different we are ridiculed.  There can be comfort in belonging and fitting in with our peers, this continues throughout our lives.  Adolescence is a critical time to feel comfortable with who you are and not having to conform to other peoples ideals of who you should be.  This is not a comfortable thing to do at this time in your life.  It is possible to be individual and be successful being who you are and not what your peers think you should.   

My role as an art educator is to help cultivate the identity of the individual.  This time in a person’s life is critical to encourage the differences and to be ok with who you are as a person.  Art can help adolescents understand that it is ok to express who you are and that it is acceptable to be different.  Whether it is in the person’s art or in what clothes they wear, it is important that as individual to understand that we are all different and to accept these differences and to be ok with being different. 

It is unfortunate that when you grow up you can learn more about the art world and the role that a museum plays in defining what art is.  The diversity of art is manipulated by the people who have the power to choose what is in the museum.  Perhaps we can help the adolescents of today realize that diversity is a good thing and that it makes us more accepting to others and who they are.   Maybe one of these people will someday become a curator who will try to infuse diversity into the art world and not under a false pretenses but a pure exhibit embracing the differences of mankind

Teaching art to junior high students is a challenging and rewarding job.  One of the most difficult topics to address is aesthetics.  Most of them just take it to the extent of I like it or everything is art or I can’t draw so if someone can that is art.  After reading Jameson I understand why it is difficult to categorize the definition of art and why it is difficult to explain that there is value in art that doesn’t seem difficult to produce or is an imitation of something that someone already did.  Art doesn’t seem to be good if just anyone can make it or if it is just a copy or use of other people’s work.  It has to be original or look difficult to do or has to be something unusual.  So to a junior high student post-modernism is not impressive and not “art”.  When we look at Warhol’s work they mostly recognize the people in the work but don’t appreciate the intent.  How can someone be famous for reproducing a soup can label and printing it over and over?  What is the big deal about using one image and repeating it over and over on one canvas?  It takes no thought or creativity to do this.  “What is the point?” or, “That is not art!”  are some of the comments that I hear.  When we talk about art criticism we include artist intent.  Why is it a valid work of art?  We have to appreciate what post-modern artists were doing, what their message was.  There may not be any individual in post-modern but is that not the intent? 

Like all art movements, post-modernism is a reaction against a previous art movement.  The movement being torn down was modernism.  Jameson gives a brief definition of post-modernism which seems to be more about the “pastiche” (not to be confused with a parody) than the actual expression of self or defining of self through something original or unusual.  It is hard for people of the junior high age to understand that art is more than reproducing something that looks difficult to create.  The normal junior high student understands that most people cannot reproduce (draw) accurately what they see.  If someone can do this they are an artist and a good one.  They also believe that if they cannot draw now that they cannot produce “good” art.  Post-modernism seems to define art by producing an imitation.  There is a sense of “dead language” as Jameson puts it.   Post-modernism helps me define to my students what art can be and what can be valued in art.  The artist is intentionally emphasizing the masses and what they consume.

If post-modern is about masses and consumption and the intent is apparent when viewing the art is that not “good” art?   It is amazing the number of engaging conversations I have had with students as young as fourth grade on this topic.  I always knew it was difficult to put the definition of art into words.  It is continually changing and rotating and imitating previous definitions.  How then can I get a clear definition of art to my students?  If their reactions are negative to post-modernism and it causes a spark that provokes conversation about aesthetics it is an effective art movement.  Defining art is very difficult when you work with people who are used to having a concrete, tangible ideas laid out to them.   If post-modern art helps me help my students understand what art can be then I appreciate it.  It doesn’t matter if it isn’t about the individual.  It is a commentary on our society and on the art movement that preceded it.  It is a way to spark interest in my students and to open them to another experience in defining art. 

http://www.wexarts.org/ex/warhol/   A web site from museum that has a Warhol exhibit until Feb 09.

Michael Foucault’s writings in Of Other Spaces got me thinking about when and how man decided to create space for specific purposes. While I am not sure that I agree with his ideas on heterotopias of deviation and his labeling of heterotopias of crisis (seems like mostly female issues) I thought of how just the basic design of the houses that we live in has changed dramatically even from the early 20^th century to the end of it.  There have been many trends in architecture and many breakthroughs that have influenced the use of space and a change in design of that space.  Also the meeting areas, kitchens, and baths as well as closet space have changed dramatically from the beginning of the 20^th century to the end of it. 

The first house I lived in was built in the 1920’s.  The first house I owned was also built in the 1920’s.   While they were different sizes and built in different areas they reflected what was valued in space during the time that they were built.  First there was the important gathering room or living room this room in both houses was the first room you looked at upon entering the front door.  The purpose was to gather and have conversation.  It was where one would invite their visitors to sit when they entered the house.  In both homes it was the biggest room in the house.  Both of these houses also had a less formal room or a den area.  In my house where I grew up it was more like a library or I suppose a “smoking” room if my parents had been smokers.  This room was near the kitchen that was not to be seen by the visitors. 

Then there was the dining room. This was where all the meals were served.  The dining room was a more formal room.  The house I grew up in also had a butler’s pantry with a sink and cabinets.  This was in between the kitchen and the dining room with a swinging door that opened to the dining room.  Many homes do not have a dining room and if they do they are either used for a den or other purpose than formal dining. 

The use of the space in the kitchen as well as the design has changed drastically as well.  The kitchens in the two houses I lived in were small and hidden from the main parts of the house especially the living room where guests would sit.  In the late 1970’s my parents remodeled our kitchen to open it up and create an eating area in there.  No longer were we always eating in the dining room.  The kitchen served the purpose of informal dining and cooking and now gathering room.  The kitchen seems to be the gathering space that is now serving the purpose that the living room and the dining room once did.  Kitchens are much grander today than they were in the early 20^th century.  Every last detail from the floors to the counter tops to the appliances are an important part of the design of the kitchen space.   This is now the gathering place for guests and the new expansive kitchens that are being built actually open up to or are connected to the living areas.

Another major difference in the use of space in a home is the importance of closet space.  What has made society have so much “stuff” that we need to redesign our space to hold all of it?  We do not want our visitors to see our stuff so we need bigger closets and more of them.  That goes for the size of the house as well.  We need a large kitchen that is open and capable of seeing into a living room and a lot of closet space to hold all of our belongings and movie theaters in our homes as well as game rooms and gyms.  The house has become a multi-purpose getaway and the utopia that the owner chooses to make it.

There is of course the intorduction of the television that has influenced how we use our space in our homes but that is another long conversation…..

Kitchen from the 1920’s

Two modern day kitchen designs.

Planning and being prepared are very important to being a successful teacher.  I was working on planning a project involving radial balance.  I am trying to teach 7^th grade art students about the elements and principles of design.  We do art criticism on Friday with the intent to increase the use art vocabulary to look and discuss art.  There are four steps of art criticism (based on Brody’s model).  The first two steps involve describing the elements and analyzing the principles.  As an art teacher I am always trying to find new ways to teach about the elements and principles.  I was bouncing back and forth from trying to decipher Lacan and working on creating a power point for my art students with images that utilize radial balance.   

I was doing research and looking for images of mandalas (translated roughly to mean circle) for my presentation for radial balance.  When refreshing my knowledge of mandalas, it struck me that the concept of a mandala could resemble the concept of psychoanalysis as well as the stages of human development described by Lacan.  Particularily it resembles the mirror stage. A mandala represents wholeness and the organizational structure of life itself.  Psychoanalysis represents the workings of the whole mind and proponents of this believe that there is a structure to our unconscious and conscious thoughts.  A mandala appears in all aspects of life.  It can be metaphoric for a circle of friends or community of people or it can be the actual physical make up of living things.  Psychoanalysis can be seen as metaphoric in terms of your conscious; Jimney Cricket, for example in the Disney movie Pinocchio.  That voice that we hear that causes conflict between choosing pleasure and/or making the right decisions.  Then there is the angel on one shoulder and the devil on the other.  Yet, the physical make up of our brain actually causes us to use certain parts to either conjure up memories from the unconscious or to use those from the conscious to help make decisions. 

A mandala represents peace and unity.  There is a nucleus and all flows in and out from this nucleus creating wholeness.  This may seem to contrast the working of the mind.  There is a constant conflict between the parts of our brains.  Yet within this conflict these elements (mirror image, id, ego, and super ego) they are unified to work together.  From the nucleus of our mind, thoughts flow in and out of our conscious and unconscious.  These elements work together to create a place in our minds where we can be at peace.

How does this relate to Lacan?  The nucleus of the mandala represents the mirror stage.  This stage of human development is the “I” stage of life.  Everything revolves around “I” and the discovery of self it is the center where we begin.  I think of mandalas in nature that have patterns radiating in and out from the nucleus and I think it speaks of the mirror stage.  All experiences radiate from and in and out of the being in the mirror stage. This is the time where discovery of the identity of a person begins.  The experiences one has as they see their reflection as the person they are and then as their perception changes based on experiences.  The patterns in a mandala could represent the experiences that make up the nucleus.  All humans constantly are trying to formulate their reflection and sense of self.  This is a process that begins at birth and continues throughout life.  We go through cycles in life encountering many different challenges.   There are many patterns and designs that make up the mandala.  The mandala is found everywhere and can be perceived differently by each person who encounters it.  There are many layers of the mind or stages the mind goes through.  Each has a different function and experiences have different meanings to each being.  The make up of a person is consistent and the structure of the mind is as well.   We are unified as the mandala is- yet every bit as complex. 

A mandala in nature

Man-made mandala

The center or “I” is emphasized by size, texture, and color.  The “I” is the center of the human being and the beginning of the discovery of self and the creation of our individual identity.  The “I” goes through many changes and different perceptions in our lives.  The mandala cannot exist without all the parts working together.  The human mind is similiar.  There are many stages and parts that work together to create a perception of ourselves.

The study of the human mind is important to help recognize why man functions as he does.  I was always intrigued with Freud’s work because there are many human behaviors that are difficult to understand.  The concept of the unconscious helps discover why we may act or react the way we do.  I appreciate his studies and research on the unconscious and how the discovery of talk therapy changed how doctors treated patients who have emotional problems.  He also introduced the notion that even “normal” minds have neurosis.  “Normal” minds can benefit from talk therapy.

As a teacher I find Freud’s work interesting.  Knowing that the unconscious causes people to react in certain ways is an important discovery.  This aspect of his work was not new to me.  I still find it intriguing and apply it to my profession.  It is a matter of survival to repress bad, painful events.  This repression can lead to outbursts or other physically manifested behavior problems.  It makes a person a better teacher if we understand that everyone can have moments of emotional outbursts.  Children are still developing their morals and beliefs and struggling with their unconscious and making the “right” decision.   We all go through this throughout our lives, but the adolescent is not as capable of resolving these conflicts.  This is a very difficult time in someone’s life.  This also can create conflict in the classroom.  The feelings that may be repressed from situations that occur at home before these students come to school have the potential to erupt in a classroom.   The feelings that are repressed from situations that occur at school have the potential to erupt in the classroom, as we have seen in recent school shootings.  I also realize the value of recognizing “normal” behavior outbursts as well as the ones that seem to have potential to become abnormal.  It is also important to direct students to counselors who can help them work out some of the conflicts that go on in their minds.  Psychotherapy can be an important aspect in maintaining mental health.  It can be very useful to people who are having difficult times in their lives, especially adolescents.  The conflict between right and wrong and belonging are issues that have plagued adolescents for as long as we can recall.  

It is important for adolescents to have an outlet for these conflicts.  Art can be a great outlet for adolescents.  The repression of bad experiences or feelings that can cause a person to act out can be expressed in art.  Through painting, drawing, or the physical act of creating a sculpture a person can get rid of some aggression or repressed emotions.  As an art teacher and sharing numerous experiences with other art teachers I know that the art room can be a refuge for students.  It is not a traditional classroom and students are more comfortable to express who they are.  Students need a place where they know that they can be accepted for who they are and not be faced with conflicts.  Art can be a way of identifying who we are and help us work through some of our conflicts. 

I am also fascinated with the effect that Freud and other psychologists had on the art world.  Surrealism was a major art movement that was based on the unconscious.  Some of the images that were created on the premise of being part of the unconscious are very captivating.  I also believe that Salvador Dali, being a person associated with this movement, causes me to pose the question about creating art and consumerism.  Dali truly believed in the unconscious and creating art that was a result of images seen in his dreams.  Dali also got involved in many other areas including theater, film, and commercial aspects of art.  He was later renounced by the surrealists because of this attraction he had to becoming commercial and distributing his art for money.  I found a clip of collaboration between Walt Disney and Dali. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iO1ghQFSXro&feature=related

Spectacle for me means something that is very showy.  Spectacle is something that creates a diversion from a task at hand.  A spectacle causes the attention of those around to take notice of the situation at hand.  It causes you to loose focus of your thoughts and tasks at hand because you become distracted.  If I were to make a spectacle of myself this may not be a positive thing.  My life is consumed with children, whether my own or the ones I work with all day so I that leads me to an example of a spectacle that involves a child.  I envision the spectacle of a young child screaming at the store because his/her parent told them they would not purchase the item that they wanted.  People in the store are seeing, hearing and thinking different thoughts about this child and their parent.  They are wondering what is going on and what caused this but no one is able to do anything to help or prevent this from happening.  This child’s behavior can cause numerous reactions.  It can be captivating; it can cause us to feel disgust about that person’s parenting ability or child’s behavior.  We may understand because perhaps we have been in this situation ourselves.  It can make us feel superior to the parent because our children aren’t making a spectacle. How can this relate to the spectacle that Guy Debord describes?

Debord’s “commodity fetishism” might possible compare to Adorno’s culture industry.  “The tangible is forced upon us.”  We are told what is desirable or made to feel like we have to reproduce ‘the look” of those around us.  We attain the commodities that are produced and we feel superior to those who haven’t.  There is this inherent need and desire to consume what is brought to the mass.  We may be disgusted with this spectacle, we may understand this, or we may be captivated by Debord’s spectacle.  Whatever the reaction, it distracts us from ourselves and whatever task is at hand.  This is similiar to the young child throwing a fit and making a spectacle of his/herself.  We have different reactions but these reactions are universal.  Unlike the young child situation, we may want to become apart of the Debord spectacle.  Most of the times people want to avoid a spectacle.  It seems as though Debord is saying that we are caught up in the spectacle that is consumerism.  Debord is trying to wake up the masses to see how “commodity” dominates the economy and politics.  Perhaps how a screaming child spectacle jolts us out of our reality and sucks us into its world.  We are lucky that we can walk away (as long as it is not our child) from the spectacle that the child is creating.  Debord wants us to understand that we can also walk away from the spectacle that her refers to in his writing. 

 Debord was an easier read for me than some of the previous.  I actually feel like somehow I can understand what his point about economics, politics is.  These points are all tied to the masses and how capitalism effects and/or creates this spectacle.   But then again, maybe I am totally misunderstanding what is being said….again. 

 http://www.contempart.org.uk/economist/econ_arch32.htm  an art “spectacle”

There are also what many would consider an art spectacle:  This is the first image that came up when I googled spectacle.  Seems others have an idea of what a spectacle is.  The web page explains the work in its context.  (Also, just gearing up for Freud presentation next week) 

THE ECONOMIST presented by Contemporary Art Society   Annie Attridge Splash & The Spectacle

Walter Benjamin’s work was more contemporary to the situations we encounter today in film and in the reproduction of art.  “Art has always been reproducible.”  Humans can copy each other and get the same end result or something close to it.  I felt as though Benjamin was mostly trying to educate and make us think about the effects of the reproducibility of art and made great comparisons to “art” and film.  It begins by explaining what is lacking in a reproduction, “its unique existence in a particular place.”  It was very clear to understand the importance that the art work has to the particular time it was created.  In reproducing and art work you loose that essence.  I appreciated his discussion of film and the differences in art (painting specifically) and film and the analogies used to compare them.  It helped make his point clear and understandable.  I have my own perceptions of film but do not have any in depth study into that industry.  Benjamin helped me realize some of the perceptions and ideas in this industry.  Mostly I was intrigued with the idea of reproducing artworks and the effect it had on the culture industry and how it relates to my profession. 

Reproducing art works has created a major feature that can reach students in the educational environment.  When art works were first reproduced it was a way to expose the masses to “fine art”.  It was also instrumental in the development of the picture study movement in art education in the late 1800’s and into the early 1900’s.  This movement involved the infusion of reproductions of art into everyday life specifically the classroom and to the homes of the masses.  It was also thought that if the masses were exposed to art they would be more refined and desire to become better human beings.   Art was also thought to lift the moral character of the masses.  During this movement it was thought that if “culture” was brought into the classroom the child would then bring this culture to the parents causing a change in the character of the masses in America.   Expose the masses to fine art and we are going to create a better mass industry.

As an art educator, reproductions of art are essential to my teaching.  I understand the point of view that Benjamin takes and how art looses its essence when reproduced.  Any reproductions that help me achieve my goal, educating about all aspects of art, are important to my curriculum.  I must have reproductions in exchange for being able to have access to famous works of art.  Any exposure to art works, art history, and aesthetics creates a well-rounded experience for the students that I encounter.  Personal experience has also taught me that after viewing reproductions and then encountering the original makes that experience even more awe-inspiring.  When you can view a painting, building, sculpture, or other art work in its original context it makes that experience remarkable. 

Film also affects the range of accessibility of information in the classroom.  Benjamin points out how film dissects reality (in his comparison of surgeon and magician) and brings a new reality out of this dissection.  This is also an immense way to get information across to students.  Many educators use not just documentaries but pop culture films (age appropriate) to teach.  One example in social studies is to use films to teach of a particular historical era.   This dissection of reality pieces together events perhaps in a somewhat biased way but it can be a tool to pass information about an industries perception of an event or time period.    

Benjamin makes a good point about how films unite the masses in a common reaction at a common time.  This is something that eludes art.  Perhaps this is not necessarily a good thing.  Going back to Adorno and his work where we become unconscious thinkers and consumers.  Therefore, art may be the one thing where it is ok to have an uncommon opinion or to gain different reactions to the same piece at different times or through viewing the actual work or a reproduction.  Is the goal of the film industry to create a mass reaction to the piece it is viewing?  It is hard to tell if Benjamin is making a statement for or against something but it seems as though he is making the reader aware of the roles that films verses art has on  the culture indusrty.

Reproduction in art and film does take some of the reality out of the film or art work.  The end result is to touch the masses and expose more people to film and art.  In doing so we can escape from the reality that is our life or we can be forced to question what our reality is.   We can also use reproductions and films as a tool to teach.  This changes the function of film and art.  We, as individual thinkers, have the ability to determine the use of these medias and how we will benefit most from them.

 The cover of this handsome New York Review Books paperback is a detail from “The Autumn of Central Paris (After Walter Benjamin)”, a 1973 painting by R. B. Kitaj.   This image is from the website:  bad.eserver.org/reviews/2005/scholem.htm

The first reading by Adorno was very difficult for me to follow.  The study of aesthetics has many ideas so between trying to use my previous knowledge about this subject and understand Adorno’s point was unsettling for me.  My undergraduate studies in art education included a quick introduction to aesthetics since discipline-based art education is supposed to include this aspect in teaching art.   I have no experience studying aesthetics in terms of critical theory.  I may have inadvertently studied both only not known that that was what I was doing.

My first experience with aesthetics as a study was through reading excerpts of John Dewey’s “Art as Experience”.  Recalling Dewey’s work I remembered how inspiring he was to me as an educator.  He was instrumental in seeing the individual in the classroom and how this individual’s experiences affected his/her performance.  His insight into culture and education was also very interesting.  Dewey tied aesthetic experiences into education.  Dewey believed that people need to experience art and have aesthetic experiences towards art.  As I began looking up “Art as Experience” I began to wonder how Dewey and Adorno might compare.  My first sense of Adorno was that he was critical and negative.  I find Dewey more enlightening.   I wanted to spend more time on this subject but then realized that I need to continue my reading.  After spending lots of time re-reading this first article this is what I got out of it.

Adorno states that works of art can communicate internally and externally and art seems to try to come out of the norm but in doing so just returns to the status quo.  Adorno seems to theorize that art is an artifact yet art also only has to say what is already being said.  The difference he finds in art and humans is that art can communicate in “ways nature and man cannot.”  So like man, art is thinking it is trying something new or doing something cutting-edge when really it is just a regurgitating of something already said or done.  The artist is a conformist.  This article was difficult to read and Adorno seems to talk in circles.  I did find the comparison of Kant and Freud interesting.   Freud and Kant agreed that art is subjective and “art exists only in relation to the individual who contemplates or produces it.”   Where they differ is in the psychoanalytical view of art.  Obviously, Freud finds subconscious, dream-like ideas in art and Kant as well as Adorno seems to disagree with this view. 

The second reading “Culture Industry Reconsidered” was a bit easier to read and what I found is that Adorno believes that culture industry is about conformity.  “The power of the culture industries ideology is such that conformity has replaced consciousness.”  There is a definite need to conform to fit into society.  Being in a classroom I see this everyday.  I do not believe that conformity means you have no sense of reality or consciousness.  There is individuality within this conformity.  We do have to have some sense of order to survive and our schools would not succeed without students conforming.  I do not find this as a negative in all aspects.   As an educator I have to have order yet it is also my job to bring out the uniqueness of the individual whenever possible.  It is important that children understand that it is ok to be different however or whatever that might mean. 

In the area of art conforming is evident also.  As artists we want to do something different but we are bound by rules and regulations.  Whether it is the rules of the gallery we want to show in or the rules of the school we are attending, or the guidelines of what the masses see as “beautiful”.   What is the purpose of our creations and how does conformity affect our purpose? 

There are instances where if we do not conform we will not survive either emotionally/mentally.  There are some instances where non-conformity can cause physical danger.  There is a sense of belonging, a sense of survival that goes with conforming.  Conforming may seem restrictive and boring.  Yet there can be uniqueness in conformity and I believe we see this everyday. 

This web site gives information about Dewey and also ties him to some people in our readings.

These three readings helped define what Critical Theory is.   I have no previous knowledge of this subject and no educational background in critical theory.  Though I have background in economics, psychology, and sociology, I had no insight to the idea of what critical theory encompasses.  The names and ideas from these readings were familiar.  Yet it is a very complex and confusing subject to define.  The readings all related to each other and gave me some understanding into this subject.

The simplicity of the drawings and ease of the writings in Ruis’ Marx for Beginners helps to enlighten the ideas and premise that Marx had.  The author gives background information as to the influences and thought processes of the people of Marx’s time.  This helps with understanding exactly where his ideas originate.  There is some irony in Marx’s letter to Engels dated September 8, 1852.  Marx is experiencing the same suffering and pain (poverty) as the proletariat he is trying to inspire to rise against the bourgeoisie.  As noted by the cartoon on page 95.  “Mr. Marx never managed to solve his own financial problems, yet he wants to resolve the problems of millions of exploited workers.”   This would make him more appealing to the workers he was trying to defend as opposed to some highly educated, wealthy person trying to lead a revolution.  This was a person to whom they could relate. Marx questioned the fundamentals of being labor power and how it is defined as well as its worth to society.   He wanted the workers to understand what value they possessed.  Engels’and Marx’s writings in Wage-Labour and Capital put the case to the proletariat in simplified and easily understood terms.  The propaganda used helps make the case against Capitalism.  These writings caused a heightened awareness to the unfair practices involved in capitalism.  These articles would fuel the fire of the labor power already brought down by the bourgeoisie and the capitalists.  It was insight to how people do not have to accept the life they live and that they possess the power to change the system.  The author uses examples of other times in history where other revolutions have overthrown the power at hand.  “The French revolution, for example, abolished feudal property in favour of  bourgeois property.”  This perhaps is a foreshadowing to the future of socialism and communism. 

David Held’s Introduction to Critical Theory gives background information helpful to the understanding of this topic.  I was introduced to many instrumental figures in this field.  The philosophies and ideas that are associated with Critical Theory may vary and as stated on page 14 “Critical theory, it should be emphasized, does not form a unity; it does not mean the same thing to all its adherents.”  While the Marx reading was more simplistic (comics and simplified writings in cartoon bubbles) the information in this reading was more difficult to decipher.  There are many names and ideas to follow which make the topic of Critical theory less defined.  Basically from Ruis’ readings it is understood what Marx believed and what his goals and objectives were.  It makes it easier to define the thinking of one person and the beginning of this stage of critical theory.  When discussing one person’s ideas it is much easier to clarify the definition of Critical theory.  Held’s article is stressing the importance of understanding that even within the same schools of thought that there are differences in ideas of Critical theory.   There are many names and ideals that go with those names.  This reading discusses the history of Critical theory and tries to give an overview of the topic.  The historical events help with the understanding of how Critical theory evolved and continues to be effected by the events happening in society.

This reading also gives information on the history and evolution of Critical theory.  It stresses, as Marx did, the importance of including the study of Economics as well as how Critical theory is defined as a study.  It is a philosophical discipline for all intents and purposes.  It also states the difficulty that has gone into defining critical theory and the criticism that this field experiences.  Where can this field neatly be placed in society?  Page 248 clearly states the controversy that critical theory poses to other disciplines and areas of thought.  “Value judgments, they say, belong either in the nation’s poetry or in the people’s courts but certainly not in the tribunals of thought.”   Critical theory has fought to find its place in society and continues to do so. 

This link is to the communist manifesto.  It also helps with some definitions we encountered in the Ruis reading. 

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm