Marx, Economics, and the Bard

As a person who is rather taken with Critical Theory, and in particular with Marxists aspects of it, I really am beginning to see an unfolding and lengthy discussion pattern in the Bard's works and marxist economic theories. In looking at Sonnet 130 this fine afternoon, I saw in it much of the rejection of the "material" based acquistion of merchantistic english society. There also appeared to be much of this same rejection occurring in Merchant of Venice (lead casket wins, Shylock miserable despite large material wealth, etc.) and in As You Like It (The merry men of the Forest.) Now, this is still a fledgling kernal of thought in my brain so the depths to which I can take it at this given moment are rather limited. Upon looking up other potential sources for the Bard and Marx I came up with a good number of links. Feel free to examine them, just don't tell Helms-Burton about them.

A Book Review:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/4830
Marxist reading of Hamlet:
http://www.hamlethaven.com/marxism.html
More Food for thought:
http://www.gabrielegan.com/publications/Egan2001g.htm
Critical Theory and Shakespeare anyone?
http://www.shakespeare-online.com/links/msub-authors2.html
(Please note the Marx Section)
This ones a beauty:
http://www.marxists.org/subject/art/lit_crit/works/shakes.htm

Merchant of Venice and Bonds

"The ancient saying is no heresy
Hanging and wiving go by destiny"

During our discussion about bonds in the context of Merchant of Venice, there was this one quote that stuck out in my mind's eye. This was never really a topic that was broached during our discussion, but something that appears quite prevalently in the works of Shakespeare that I have come into contact with. The idea that we are all bond to our pre-determined destiny. Our actions and decisions have been pre-formed prior to our conception and placement upon the face of this planet. The old debate between free will and destiny rears its ugly head yet again. Are the characters of this play really free to make their decisions, choose their own fate? Are any of us in fact free to follow our own paths? Are we instead just actors, with cast roles set upon a stage for the mere entertainment of another force? These questions are not as easy to answer as would first appear. If we are in fact, in nature these characters, would our roles perhaps supersede any potential understanding outside of the knowledge it takes to play our pre-determined roles? The answer is either yes or no, of course depending our your particular role in our predetermined story.

Group of Seven revisits School of Night

My first approach to this inspiring piece by Turner left me spinning in deep thought about such ideas as balancing the universe with a feather. There is inherent in much of the thought eminating from these brilliant minds that validates much of transcendalist beliefs that we see in writers like Emerson, and painters like A.Y. Jackson. A.Y., was a member of Canada's most famous artistic movement called the Group of Seven. This group of seven artists from the city of Toronto gave to Canadians their contemporary ideas of what is to be them. That is, they defined their idenity based upon the images that this men produced of the landscape that they had come to inhabit. These images speak to something that is grander, something aspect of how amazing alone a person can be in the expansive landscapes of the physical world. The colours and patterns by the way in which they shaped their images clearly pointed towards the lack of uniformity in each person's view and contributions to the world. (The first of the two pictures is Tom Thompson's Jack Pine, the second A.Y. Jackson's Sauvage Terre) The group themselves met far outside of the "civilized" and understood places of people. The majority of their work was done in distant localities in the northern and central regions of the fledgling country. While there was a clear lack of modern day scienctists among them (clearly different from the School of Night), somewhere in the murky places they met this small band of men changed the universe for many Canadians. A group of seven individuals changed perceptions, and forged identities. This idea of a few brilliant minds, meeting, and connecting with the greater conscious to bring about a great understanding of the human condition to all of us, I find fascinating.

"It's probably hard for anyone looking at my landscapes today to realize that I was once regarded as a rebel, a dangerous influence; that I've been told I was on the verge of insanity, that my painting was nothing but meaningless daubs. Lawren Harris, the man most responsible for drawing the Group of Seven together, was accused of something perilously close to treason – his paintings, said his severest critics, were discouraging immigration." (A. Y. Jackson)