On the Relevance of Literary Theory and Practical Equity

There are moments when I question myself as a literary critic as to just what in the world am I doing dealing with literary texts by dead white guys when there are so many other problems out there in the world that I should be spending my time on. Sometimes the same question comes from other of my more practical friends. And I think it is a fair question: if one is cynical about it, one can easily dismiss the literary critic as someone who is full of theory but not caring enough to practice the theory; the literary critic can be seen as part of the capitalist system whose function (if we want to be Marxist about it) is to deflect attentions from the real problem by having some of the smartest people within the system to think about something it is in fact entirely useless. Literary criticism is in fact part of the superstructure that covers over the base of labour relations and class distinctions.

But studying language and literature does have a positive impact towards the practice of equity. It is not the same kind of practice as political movements, but it is an individual understanding of the world and equity. In other words, while studying literature may not be a mass political movement, it does promote the same ideals in terms of individual understanding. And individual understanding is one of the goals of practical equity movements, since social changes must be made in many directions, and one of the directions is on the individual level.

In the English department, literary students and critics examine texts. Texts, most evidently, consist of language, or systems of signs. The student’s job is to understand how language works in a certain literary text, what kinds of conflicts are created by language, in language and through language. But is not the “real world” also sets of conflicting systems of signs? When we think about gender troubles or class problems, do they not also manifest themselves in systems of signs, whether these systems are the actual language, or objects surrounding us, or even colours arranged in a certain order? By practicing linguistic analytical skills in English studies, literary students are capable of applying the same skills onto the practical world. Once one realizes that systems of signs are arbitrary and are constructs (of a certain ideological position), one is on the way to deconstruct these systems of signs and to comprehend the fundamental reason as to why equity matters. This, at least, has been my own experience in studying literature.

English, certainly, is not the only academic field where equity is realized. But to dismiss English as a field only for the acquirement of “cultural capital” would be unfair. At the same time, dismissing theory as merely theoretical would also be unfair, since theory is one of the ways in which one can represent one’s understanding of equity and its importance.