Literary value is such a huge undertaking, and like the enormity of literature available (plus the numbers that are not accessible) it can seem futile to even try and establish. And yet, academics continually try and conceptualise a seemingly inconceivable abstract idea that has no resolution NOR consistency. We may just have to embrace the cliché that it is about the journey, in this case the everlasting, non-ceasing journey into the world of value discussion, not the destination. As much as I highly dislike circular concepts and continually fluctuating debates, Barbara Herrnstein Smith’s article enveloped me into this abstract literary world.
Smith uses an economic model to examine literary value. In doing so, she omits aesthetic value to provide a sophisticated, functional economic market analysis. By using an economic modeling framework to analyse something we are led to believe as ethereal, she maintains the dominance of economic rationalism within education. Contingencies of value are an effective model to examine determinates of value present within literary studies. Having said that however, Smith’s analysis often appears overly simplistic, yet simultaneously abstract. This I believe undermines the whole economic model utilised by Smith to analyse value, as economic models are logical progressions that, unless it is the electricity market, do not manage abstractions. Her conclusion from this framework however that ‘the value of literary work is continually produced and reproduced by the very acts of implicit and explicit evaluation’ (52) is well thought out and presented. There is an economy of value in literature and whilst this may be valorised by economic rationalism, it is not the only model that can establish value, especially within such a complex field as literature.
Having stated the flaws in her argument, (I am going to contradict myself in saying this) I am not convinced that her analysis is over simplistic. Even though her argument, though seemingly concrete was very abstract, I believe through this abstraction Smith demonstrated the complexities and difficulties of solely using an economic model to determine literary value. Whilst this did seemingly undermine her argument, I cannot help thinking that was part of her point? What she has explored is currently the dominant, yet not the only, model of determining value. Whilst this western economic capitalist model pathologises other models, constructs opposing, or different tastes as deviant, it does provide a stable framework to observe different values or rather, contingencies in value.
Whilst it is established that dominant capitalist economic model creates and maintains structures of power that disempowers the working class (or in this case other contingent values), it can also serve to empower people. Accessibility to education, whilst argued that within Australia is extremely high at almost 100%, the numbers however illustrate that accessibility to education is still a large social issue. Tertiary education is still as Margaret Simons pointed out a ‘minority pursuit’. In fact, Simons demonstrated in her essay ‘The ties that bind’ only 46% of Australians in 2001 had post-school qualifications, most common within that group were trade certificates (277). The distribution of university graduates varied dramatically with urban areas having almost 21% of people with university qualifications, in rural areas this slumped to 10-13% (277). There are many differing social reasons for this but mainly it still demonstrates that accessibility to education is still comparably low. An economic model gives non-academics, and ‘unprofessional’ readers a powerful voice and ability in determining the value of literature. Though some would argue popular texts are not literature, this devaluing of what majority of people want to read is another form of disempowerment that the economic model does to some extent rectify and allows a popular value to be ascertained. Again, having said this however (as Smith also mentioned), this still often reflects the dominant ideologies, beliefs and tastes, as the reading public is not a complete cross-section of a society. So on that level, the economic model does not provide any empowerment, rather continues to disempower other minority values and tastes.
In conclusion, it is a complicated issue all round!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment