Alyssa Layton
Critical theory
11/30/13
Bickmore
Synthesis essay
There is a lot of art in the world and many artists to create it. The most interesting part
of art is that it isn’t the artist; it is a physical work or text separate from its creator. Art isn’t just
an object; it speaks to everyone in diverse ways and has special things to say, but it has to be
created by someone. It has to come from somewhere, namely the artist. They aren’t the same
and they aren’t separate. The question therefore is how to reconcile the gap between art and
the artist? The idea and the inventor? The policy and the politician?
There are three theorists to explore this question with; Judith Fetterley author of The
Resisting Reader, Walter Benjamin author of The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical
Reproduction, and Judith Butler author of Imitation and Gender Insubordination. These
theorists are well versed and are experts in their areas. The areas include Reader-Response
theory, Marxist theory, and Gender Studies /Queer theory.
Fetterley’s title gives a lot away in terms of her main goal. She examines the ideas of
American Literature and comes to the conclusion with compelling evidence that American
Literature is “Male”. “American literature is male. Our literature neither leaves women alone
nor allows them to participate” she wrote. That upon reading most literature one would find
themselves (man or woman) in a man’s world and will be there “willingly” if one wasn’t thinking
through the ideas as one read.
Her impression in this essay was that “America is female; to be American is male; and
the quintessential American experience is betrayal by women”. When reading one would
automatically go along with the main ideas to help immerse themselves in the story, but this is
like a poison because one was open to and accepting these ideas as fiction. Then when one
goes about their life they have stained their thought process to automatically be more lenient
in those ideas. If one read them continuously one would essentially shape their mind to go
along with such ideas.
Fetterley investigates this issue with a strict gender focus. Her idea for stopping this
cycle, rests in her title, Resisting the main ideas before excepting them, think through the idea
both sides and know their stance on it before continuing, a very thoughtful strategy instead of
just boycotting literature. Using this same idea of resisting main points is a great strategy for all
reading.
Benjamin explains the idea of “aura” in a historical view of art. He talks about the idea of
an original painting and looking at it and the sense one would get and feelings one might feel.
The “aura” is The Experience of viewing something Original and Unique, but also including the
time and space, in a historical context. Benjamin writes: “the authenticity of a thing is the
essence of all that is transmissible from its beginning, ranging from its substantive duration to
its testimony to the history which it has experienced”. He talks about plays and how the actor
connects with his audience and how they feed off each other’s feelings and energy and how the
performance changes through that closeness. Aura’s are unique experiences.
He then goes on to say we are losing aura’s of art because there is still art but now we
have photographs and films; Which in his opinion are cheap replicas. A photograph is an image
of an image whereas a painting is utterly unique. A film is moving images so fast one can’t even
think about what one is seeing because one is taking in so many new things; it’s pretty much
sensory overload and as previously mentioned before with a play one has live actors that react
to the audinance a film is an object that just keeps going and going. They aren’t unique and
they don’t have auras.
He has valid arguments that there is something to experiencing any work of art for the
first time, in whatever medium it is presented. There is a connection and time to process when
one has a painting or a play in front of them. What he is missing is the idea of the experience
wherever it is, whenever it is, is unique to the viewer and gives a connection through society in
its mass quality.
Butler discusses a variety of topics like identity, stereotypes, originality, and imitation.
People want to be able to identify themselves. She writes “I’m permanently troubled by
identity categories, consider them to be invariable stumbling blocks, and understand them,
even promote them, as sites of necessary trouble.” In physical, personality, and interests, as
who they are to help distinguish between them and everyone else, but is that wrong or even
helpful, when others what to fit them into other groups or stereotypes?
She takes everyone down to two to groups heterosexual and homosexual (which is
stereotyping too) and shows that there is no way to prove which came first, which is original
and therefore better or right, not that anyone really cares what the majority thinks. “…I
suffered for a long time and I suspect many people have, from being told, explicitly or implicitly,
that what I ‘am’ is a copy, an imitation, a derivative example, a shadow of the real.” These are
issues that aren’t going to go away anytime soon and need to be more of a focus in society to
help resolve these inequalities.
They all have very strong opinions and obvious central focal points. These points
however seem to have little to nothing to do with each other. On the contrary, using a very
popular pop culture medium of art they have everything to do with each other. If one thought
back to their favorite classic book or a very popular book they would most likely find some
controversy in it or surrounding it. Most controversies come from people misunderstanding
other people or some stereotype is involved, like Bulter talks about. The best way to avoid
getting caught up in those stereotypes and ideas is to be a “resistant reader” and think on them
before moving on as Fetterley says. Books are a form of art and just like all art it says different
things to different people. Some things will come across wrong or rude to someone but not to
another. Every experience with art is unique and that means the work has an aura like
Benjamin points out. There is also the fact that these most popular books are usually adapted
into movies. Movies are still works of art and they have their own unique experience about
them and how one might react to them so one could say they had an aura and because they are
adapted they contain usually contain the same controversies or they don’t have enough of the
original contents to please the people and that can lead to controversies.
Whilst exploring theses ideas is intriguing alone, there are some articles that came up.
From most recent back Ender’s Game, the Great Gatsby, and the Hunger Games, quite the
variety in book to movie adaptions.
Ender’s Game is about a boy living in a world that is at war
with an alien race and the military recruits him at a young age to
train to fight them. It deals with intolerance and violence. When
recently made into a movie those themes have supposedly
carried over but that isn’t the part people are most upset about.
They are upset that the author of the book Orson Scott Card is
anti- gay rights. Obviously this isn’t everyone but understandably
mostly members of the GLBT community and some other
supporters. They have had ideas of talking to him all the way to boycotting the movie so he
doesn’t make any more money. (Means) He mostly defends himself and his rights to his
opinions. It’s an understandable dilemma on whether this should affect how we respond to the
movie or not. Do we not see it in hopes he’ll feel bad and change his mind or should we support
the other great actors and those involved in the making of the movie and simply judge the
movie for what it is, a separate work of art?
The Great Gatsby is without a doubt a fantastic book and
movie a real steeple in America, and yet it too has controversies.
The one revolving around the movie is the fact that they put the
movie cover on the books to sell them. Some book nerds and
loyalists are upset that they are changing what is an American
classic. Benjamin would undoubtedly be up in arms as well at
changing a work of replica art to an even cheaper replica of mass photography. The other is the
actual contents of the book the clear lack of female power, the immoral acts committed in the
book, and even things like language and sexuality; things that both Fetterley and Butler would
warn us against, falling into those elitist ideas and stereotypes. (Jaffe)
Last but not least the Hunger Games is a very
controversial piece because it’s so violent and graphic both in
text and on screen. Another issue many had with it was the
casting in the movie for many thought it was inaccurate to the
story. It included African Americans but the book does portray
Rue and Thrash both with darker skin but that didn’t stop many
fans from commenting their confusion or others from calling
them racist for their confusion, yet another stereotype and film
situation. (Stuwart)
We can learn a lot from these theorists that can help us think through everyday things
like books, movies, and other arts, but also politics and social cultures.
Works Cited
Benjamin, Walter. "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction." Richter. The Critical
Tradition. Bedford/St. Martin's, 2007. 1233.
Butler, Judith. "Imitation and Gender Insubordination." Richter. The Critical Tradition. 2007. 1707.
Fetterley, Judith. "Iintro to the Resisting Reader." Richter. The Critical Tradition. 2007. 1035.
Jaffe, Samantha. feminspire. 30 november 2013.
Means, Sean. Ender's Game's Orson Scott Card's Anti-gay views Raise art vs. artist issue. news. salt lake:
the Salt Lake Tribune, 2013.
Stuwart, Dodai. Jezebel. 26 march 2012. 30 november 2013.