Bhagchandani 1

Suman Bhagchandani

Dr. Nandini Chandra

LH 6 Presentation

M.Phil (Sem.1)

Roll No. 229

Date: 18th November 2013

A Study of Franko Moretti’s The Soul and the Harpy

As previous papers had shown that there has always been a conflict between literature and social

sciences, form and genre, rhetoric and art (literature), in this paper I would extend these

dichotomies and try to reflect upon the need for reconciliation by discussing the Freudian terms, id,

superego and the ego. As we know, id, being a part of the unconscious, refers to the repressed

emotions and feelings, whereas the superego refers to the external cultural, moral and religious

forces. There is an urge to talk about the id through what he calls the pleasure principle in works of

art, which is at every level, sacrificed by the social demands. These repressed emotions find space in

culturally acceptable forms which was termed as ‘repressive desublimation’ by Hebert Marcuse in

One-Dimensional Man. In a chapter, ‘The Conquest of the Unhappy Consciousness’, he traces the

liquidation of the “higher culture” in a technologically driven society (59). What emerges as

literature can be seen as a compromise drawn between these two ends.

Most works of literature may be considered as a product of the compromise between the id and the

superego. While the former is an individualistic need to be satisfied, the latter fulfils the social role of

literature. For a work to attain its position in the social sphere, it has to travel from either of the two

Bhagchandani 2

ends to a middle path of compromise. This then results in the formation of the reality principle,

which is a function performed by the ego. The reality principle creates a combination of the two

whereby a work of literature performs both, a social function, as well as satisfies the individual.

In this context, Marcuse creates another dichotomy between ‘high culture’ and the technologically

driven society. He traces art as one that has a social function to perform and that which reflects the

superstructure of the society. Art becomes a reflection of the ascending classes of the society.

Marcuse says in his essay that until now, the higher culture has always been in conflict with the

reality principle and yet the two have existed together, in an antagonistic relationship. There is, he

believes, a need for a new relationship between the two now, where the two do not exist in

opposition but in reconciliation with one another, whereby literature can be read on a massive scale

(60-62). In this context, Moretti says,

…aesthetic ‘pleasure’ cannot consist in the perception of a ‘return’ of the unconscious, but

rather in its exact opposite: in the contemplation of a successful compromise. The ‘formal’

conciliation is not the means, the simple medium of pleasure: it is its end, its true and only

substance. The pleasure does not lie in having ‘slackened’ the grip of censorship a little but

in having redrawn with precision the spheres of influence of the various psychic forces (38-

39).

In this process,‘equilibrium’ of forms takes place; the “higher culture” takes the shape of material

culture. Literature thus becomes the medium to bring together the individual instincts and the social

demands together as an aesthetic product. As a result, works of literature cannot be considered

isolated from the society, conforming to the needs of a certain groups of the only. Unlike the “high

culture” which was celebrated even as it distanced itself from the real world, the new forms of

literature incorporate in itself the contemporary affairs in a more realistic manner (here Marcuse

critiques the culture of opera and similar high art which was an alienated culture, addressing to the

needs of a certain class only (67)). According to him, the superego (which is mainly responsible for

Bhagchandani 3

this high art) ‘censors the unconscious’ and thereby becomes a means to dominate the realm of

literature. In this process, it pushes the unconscious to the level where even the conscience is lost

and what remains is only a ‘happy consciousness which facilitates acceptance of the misdeeds of the

society’. It is against this form of literature that Marcuse revolts—the social control through media

and technology.

In a similar manner, Moretti too initiates a balance between the externally controlling superego and

the individual’s expression through the id. The reality principle becomes a means to bring these two

ends together in a socially and individually acceptable form of art. As was said, in one of the previous

presentations, literature includes the rhetorical and the artistic functions and should not be viewed

in a single light. In this context, Moretti says, that ‘Literature is the ‘middle term’ par excellence, and

its ‘educational’, realistic function consists precisely in training us without our being aware of it in an

unending task of mediation and conciliation.’ (40).

Towards the end of his essay in context, Moretti brings the opposites together in harmony with one

another through a figure of harpy from the Greek mythology and the human soul in an embrace,

signifying the institution of literature as it incorporates into itself all that is repressed and that which

is repressing. He says,

‘the harpy is clutching the soul tight in its claws, but higher up her Greek arms are holding her in an

attentive and tender embrace. The soul is doing nothing to get out of the harpy’s clutch. It seems

calm, relaxed even.’ (41).

Bibliography

Bhagchandani 4

"The Conquest of the Unhappy Consciousness: Repressive Desublimation." Marcuse,

Herbert. One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial

Society. New York: Routledge, 1964, 2006. 59-86. Web.14 November 2013.

"The Soul and the Harpy: Reflections on the Aims and Methods of Literary Historiography."

Moretti, Franko. Signs Taken for Wonders: Essays in the Sociology of Literary Forms.

London: Verso, 1983. 1-41. Print.