In this piece, “The Formation of the Intellectuals” by Antonio Gramsci, a very interesting question is brought up. Basically, Gramsci wants to discuss whether intellectuals are a rare breed of their own, mixed in to society amongst commoners, or a breed that comes about just from the comparison to non-intellectuals. In my opinion, I  believe that intellectuals are merely deemed intellectuals in comparison to non-intellectuals. I think that anyone can be considered an intellectual if they are in the right place at the right time. Gramsci starts off by discussing the two types of societal intellectuals: he first describes the “organic” type of intellectual who essentially is a leader. “He must be an organiser of masses of men.” Second he describes a “traditional” intellectual, someone who was already a master of a certain field and then goes out to start a new type group. Both of these types of intellectuals are only intellectuals when being compared to people who are not intellectuals. Gramsci says “All men are intellectuals, one could therefore say: but not all men have in society the function of intellectuals.” Gramsci is saying that anyone has the potential to rise up and be considered an intellectual but not everyone is given the opportunity.

This writing reminded me of our earlier readings and discussions surrounding language. Sometimes things can only be understood by knowing what they are not. Comparing is a tool that we use to understand almost everything. An apple is an apple because it is not a pear. A table is a table because it is not a chair. What is an intellectual? It can only be defined by comparing to what it is not. For example, an intellectual can only be rightly classified as such if there are other people in the field who are not as knowledgable as the intellectual and they can be compared to each other.

Gramsci goes on to say that nowadays, the rules of being an intellectual have expanded. There are so many different tasks and areas of expertise that anyone can easily become an intellectual in a specific field. However, he continues on to say this is not necessarily a good thing. “Mass formation has standardized individuals both psychologically and in terms of individual qualification and has produced the same phenomena as with other standardized masses: competition which makes necessary organisations for the defence of professions, unemployment, over-production in the schools, emigration etc.” He is saying that although this “unprecedented expansion” helps to create more opportunities for success, it also leaves less room for competition which is needed in order to move forward. Overall, Gramsci’s writing makes one think about what it really means to be an intellectual and how that definition changes as we as a society change and progress.