Structuralism is the general theory of culture and methodology that provides help to understand human culture. We have to understand it by relating it with the broader system. We have to use it to uncover the underlying structures. In these structures, there comes the thinking, doing and feelings of human beings. Europe has developed this concept at the beginning of the 20th century. Different scholars have shown interest in this concept after World War II. Anyhow, some concepts of structuralism come under the attack of some philosophers. Here, we will provide a detailed overview of criticism of structuralism.
In literary Criticism and Theory
Essay Writing Service can explain literary criticism of structuralism. For this reason, we have to relate it with the larger structure. This structure can be a particular genre or intersexual connections. If we study the model of structuralize semiotics, we can say that there must be a structure in the text. It explains that if experienced readers will read a text, they can easily explain it. On the other hand, non-experienced readers may have to face some problems to explain it. Therefore, it is explained in the criticism of structuralism that we have to govern everything while writing it. Moreover, students can easily learn it in educational institutes. A scholar Catherine Belsey has also explained the criticism of structuralism. According to this scholar, it can be highly reductive.
For example, if a student reads different books, he should create something new. In this case, if he reads different books, he can’t produce anything new. The readers can follow the same structures while writing their content. According to criticism of structuralism, we should try to resolve the inherent narrative tensions with the help of a single text. Anyhow, if we have to read different texts, we should try to find coherent ways to unify these texts. For example, if two friends of hater families fall in love, they should not commit suicide. We should try to create a friendly environment between these families. We should also encourage them to arrange a marriage between these two friends.
Criticism of structuralism argues that we can imply the literary banter of the text in the new structure only. On the other hand, we can’t imply it in the specific character development. Moreover, it is also difficult for us to imply it in the voice of the structure of the expression. Here, it is following some essential leaps. In these leaps, there comes Vladimir Propp and Algirdas etc. We have to follow these leaps to seek these basic elements. After seeking these basic elements, we can easily imply them in stories and myths etc. If we combine them effectively, we can easily create various versions of the stories and myths. Anyhow, some critics have also tried to imply to the individuals. Here, they have to find unique individual elements.
Interpretations and General Criticisms
Nowadays, some other approaches like post-structuralism and deconstruction are also present along with structuralism. When we compare structuralism with these approaches, we will know that it is less common than other approaches. The criticism of structuralism is due to two main things. First, its nature is a-historical. Secondly, instead of favouring the ability of people, it is favouring the deterministic structural forces. During the 1960s and 1970s, political turbulence has started to last impacts on academic and other power issues. Moreover, the political struggles had also become the centre of attention for the people. In the 1980s, deconstruction has gained popularity. Its reason was that it has emphasized the ambiguity of language. At the end of the century, structuralism has also gained historic importance. That’s why it has gained attention among society.
Some social theorists and academics have also given criticism of structuralism. Among these theorists and academics, some have completely dismissed it. Paul Ricoeur has criticized it because it has overstepped the limits of validity. Adam Kupar had also criticized it. According to him, it is something that was created to give a boost to the movements of millennials. By seeing in the world of the blind, it has created a secret society. He had also explained about the conversion. According to this argument, it is not a matter of accepting the new paradigm for the people. Anyhow, it has created a question of salvation in society. Philip Noel has given arguments about semiology. According to him, it has not got a position in the natural sciences.
Criticism of Structuralism in Linguistics
In the Course in General Linguistics, the analysts have not focused on the use of languages. Anyhow, they have focused on the system of languages. By following this approach, we have to relate the elements of language with present elements. Saussure has also given arguments about linguistic signs. According to him, it has two parts. Its first part is the sound pattern. By using this part, one can silently recite the lines. The second part is relevant to signified. It means that we have to get the concepts of the words. Here, we can also find the notions of structural idealism. It is the class of linguistic units. We can classify these units in the linguistic environment. The Prague school structuralism is also lying in the phonemics. Here, we can easily compile a list of words based on their sounds.
Conclusion
Structuralism has become an ambitious term that we are using in different schools of thought in different contexts. Based on humanities and social sciences, we can easily relate it with the social sciences. This thing has emerged a structural-functionalism approach. Here, we have discussed the criticism of structuralism. Anyhow, Saussure has conceived the people. While conceiving the people, they have explained its relationship with society and language. When we compare its theory with literary criticism, we can relate the text with the larger structure. It means that we have to compare it with the narrative structure of the text. During this comparison, we can understand that either a particular text is easy to read and understand for experienced readers. Here, they have also explained the literary banter of the text.
