Literature’s own content overlaps with economic form, weakening it as an abstract model

Evidence

Lowenthal, more than anyone else, took over the materialist conception of history as a ready-made product in his article On the Social Position of Literature'. He used it as a means of putting the demand for a materialist study of literature, based on the positivist and historical methods of the nineteenth century, before the contemporary discipline of literary study, which was more or less metaphysically oriented. A truly explanatory history of literature must be a materialist one. That means it must analyse basic economic structures as they present themselves in literature, and the effects which the work of art, interpreted materialistically, has on an economically determined society.’ — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 497 (#expands, via linked claim)

If Foucault did not dwell, as a matter of elaborate theory, on such themes of resistance, it is because the focus of his analytic concerns lay elsewhere. It is plausible to argue that emphasis has a decisive function in authorial exposition and production: an overstress on a side issue of an argument (or theory) at the expense of the main components of that argument can shift meaning, give undue importance to secondary issues, weaken the main argument, and possibly put it asunder. — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 346 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Materialist literary history argues basic economic structures appear in literature — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 497; Authorial branding conceals literature’s commodity status behind individualism — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 463; Financial economics and textual form reinforce each other in media production (+3 more)

Broader Connections