“Doing theory” is largely a matter of employing the interpretive frameworks and vocabularies of
“third-party” thinkers in order to make manifest (to borrow a keyword from Freud) some aspect of an artifact (whether literary, visual, auditory, etc.) that might otherwise appear latent (another word we get from Freud). This is commonly, though not exclusively, an interdisciplinary enterprise, as the interpretive frames we employ are often borrowed from other fields. As you will see during the course of the semester, the insights of political philosophy and economics, linguistics and anthropology, psychology and sociology, and even biology, chemistry and environmental science, can contribute to the analysis of cultural artifacts in important ways, taking our interpretations far beyond what is possible in the merely subjective encounter between
“reader” and “text.”
In this first essay, I would like you to try on this way of “doing theory” by employing one of the interpretive frameworks made available by Sigmund Freud or Karl Marx. That is, I would like you to choose one of these four, and use the analytical vocabulary made available to you in the
“system” of thinking your theorist has devised, and then apply this mode of thought to the textual or visual artifact of your choice. I do not wish to overdetermine (to employ a word that both Marx and Freud make use of your choice of object. You could, for instance, choose a poem or short story, a film or episode from a television show, a painting or sculpture, or even a television commercial. The choice of genre is up to you. (A good strategy might be to choose an artifact with which you are well familiar, perhaps one you have encountered in another class or other context, maybe even one about which you have written before, but not previously in more theoretical
terms).
Having chosen your artifact, then identify a moment from our readings in theory that seems to you an appropriate place to launch your discussion of the object you wish to interpret (dare I say fetishize?). As your interpretation progresses, you should then make use of some of the conceptual terminology your thinker makes available to you. The idea here is that you will be “writing with” the theoretical text, exploring the logic implicit in the method you are bringing to bear in your discussion. Although you are free, in the final analysis, to discuss the limitations of the mode of thought you are exploring, the lion’s share of your essay should demonstrate an earnest effort to try on the “way of thinking” one of these foundational theoretical figures makes available.
Due Friday, March 2, your essay should be approximately 6-8 double-spaced pages in length, paginated, proofread and properly cited. Do not feel the need to look up previous readings of your work. I understand that the first impulse may be to go right to a Google search. However, the idea here is to try on a mode of analysis for yourself as a way of beginning a discussion within a particular critical tradition. Should you wish to enter that discussion more fully, additional research can come later.
P.S. I you honestly cannot think of a work on your own, you have “Everyday Use” and “Battle Royal” to work on. You may also find some hints in Tyson that will help you proceed. If you use any of her ideas, you must give her credit. But, however you choose to approach this essay, you MUST engage with Freud or Marx by way of one of the primary texts we have read together.
