Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Marxist Criticism of The Story of Keesh

    Uploaded by

    na
    4K views3 pages
    1) The story depicts a village where the chief leads unfairly, giving himself more meat than villagers and not caring about equal shares. Keesh, a young poor hunter, stands up against this inequality. 2) Keesh faces discrimination and prejudice due to his social class. The chief represents the bourgeoisie who oppress the proletariat hunters like Keesh and his father. 3) However, Keesh proves himself the greatest hunter by his skills and talents, ending the inequality. The story conveys Jack London's Marxist view of a society divided into two unfair classes.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    marx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) The story depicts a village where the chief leads unfairly, giving himself more meat than villagers and not caring about equal shares. Keesh, a young poor hunter, stands up against this inequality. 2) Keesh faces discrimination and prejudice due to his social class. The chief represents the bourgeoisie who oppress the proletariat hunters like Keesh and his father. 3) However, Keesh proves himself the greatest hunter by his skills and talents, ending the inequality. The story conveys Jack London's Marxist view of a society divided into two unfair classes.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    4K views3 pages

    Marxist Criticism of The Story of Keesh

    Uploaded by

    na
    1) The story depicts a village where the chief leads unfairly, giving himself more meat than villagers and not caring about equal shares. Keesh, a young poor hunter, stands up against this inequality. 2) Keesh faces discrimination and prejudice due to his social class. The chief represents the bourgeoisie who oppress the proletariat hunters like Keesh and his father. 3) However, Keesh proves himself the greatest hunter by his skills and talents, ending the inequality. The story conveys Jack London's Marxist view of a society divided into two unfair classes.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    Marxist

    Criticism Of
    TheStory
    The StoryOf
    OfKeesh
    Keesh
    “Chained”
    Living in a village where a chief who leads and villagers who follow. Living in a village
    whose primary work is to hunt because it is their main source of food. Also, living in a village
    where prejudice, inequality, and defunct great hunters are existing. Jack London’s “The Story of
    Keesh” is an example of these scenarios where all of the people in the village itself did not do
    anything and live in that unhealthy system or situation except for that young boy who changed
    everything. Through this story, the author clearly shows how hard we need to work and fight just
    to prove something that is right. However, in the story, the hardness doubled because of Keesh,
    the young boy’s social class.

    In the story, we can see the power of upper class or the one who has the position and
    money. They were discriminating and treating poor people unfairly. Just like how Klosh-Kwan,
    the chief of the village treat his villagers unfairly by giving not equal amount of meat in the
    village. The chief believes that hunters should only do is to kill bears and give it to him and does
    not care for the villager’s equal share. This system will not be change if not Keesh, a young
    brave man stood up and said that his father was once a great hunter but died and been forgotten.
    His father brought more meat than any great hunter but now look what happened, the villagers
    does not have a fair share. We can see here that the workers doesn’t received a well appreciation
    or prestige from what they have done even when they died or not. Also, a discrimination
    happened here to Keesh after he said those things and the chief did not listen to him. It is because
    of his appearance and social class which is only poor. The people also don’t trust him when he
    volunteer to hunt some bears and suspected bad things to him like he is using a witchcraft, a sign
    of prejudice. From this, it clearly shows that Klosh-Kwan is the part of bourgeoisie while Keesh
    and the other hunters as part of the proletariat.

    But thankfully, the inequality and prejudice here ended when Keesh proved himself that
    despite of the doubt and inequality he experienced, his smart talent and skill proved him as a
    greatest hunter like his father and soon lead their village. Keesh proved that the hunters are only
    relying to what their chief tell to them. This story is great example of workers that were
    completely blinded and become a puppet of the upper class because of the thought that this is
    their only way to live. The proletariats were chained to what have been assigned to them and is
    unable to think for themselves. The author Jack London, who was also known as a member of
    the proletariat, clearly conveyed the idea of a society that has been divided into two classes from
    his story, “The story of Keesh.”

    You might also like