DetectiveDanny, Macherey

Reading Macherey was like untangling myself from a web of barbed wire. It was not easy, it was not pleasant, and carelessness only made it worse. But, as one would find when they have freed themselves from a web of barbed wire, I was relieved to be free with a basic understanding of what just happened. I might understand what Macherey is saying in A theory of Literary Production, but I cannot help but think that it just leads us down an endless road of questioning.
The concept of what works say versus what they cannot say is very interesting. This can lead to a new way of taking in works of literature that I have spent time on. “In order to say anything, there are other things which must not be said”, so if I interpret a Kurt Vonnegut novel as having an anti war message, then something must not have been said in order for him to convey that message. I guess enough people have not said that “war is bad” so war happens. The silence out of which works of art such as literature emerge seems to be a silence of discontent.
Another concept presented by Macherey is the two questions one must ask to take a full critical approach. The first question is of the use of a theme. The second question is of the meaning of the theme. One thing that I have trouble understanding is how these two questions can aid us in revealing “what is not said”. What if a piece of art is expressing and studying an emotion, or a specific interpretation of an event? Is there a silence that creates art that makes these statements? I am sure that there are other approaches to critical theory, as this seems like it is based to much on assumption.