Antonio Gramsci's literary piece goes into depth about intellectuals and their functions in society. "All men are intellectuals, one could therefore say; but not all men have in society the function of intellectuals". What he means is that although all men are considered "intellectuals" in their particular class or society, that doesn't mean they actually exercise their intellectuality. He believes there are varying degrees of intellectual activity and it is based upon the decision of each person wether to exercise it. I believe Gramsci is opposing some of the views of marxism because Marxist theory is partly about how the division of social classes affects the individual. What Gramsci is saying that an individual's class or part in society is not determined his intellectuality or labor but by the social relations the intellectual has within society. Which is indicating that someone can move up in social class based on their intellectuality. According to Marxist theory that wouldn't feasible because your profession determined the class you were in.

Marxist critics look for roles that class plays in literature.  They look for the author's analysis of class relations in their literature which reflects the author's position regarding class. They analyze literature to see how character's overcome oppressions, or a piece of literature serves as propaganda. Marxist critics believe that literature reflects class struggle and materialism within the era the text was written in. They view literature as a type of product of the economic and ideological influence of a specific era. They mainly look for issues regarding power, money, and class within a piece of literature.