The formal move for both materialist is the ideological move, and according to Eagleton formal move is always "in danger of converting the accidents of meaning to organic natural process in the [obvious and] characteristics manner of ideological thought". This is because any form of literary text or aesthetic object is always bound within the ideology of the time. Similar to the debate between Lovejoy and McGann so for Eagleton and de Man, "The particularity of materiality becomes a model for the political in the moment in which formalism as opposed to materialism, seems like an inappropriate conversion of the accidental and conditional into the model of internal unity an internal self-regulation that had seemed so central to romantic accounts of the natural organism". The "unexpected convergence" between "Marxist materialism and the linguistic materialism can be justified by the example of nature/culture intermingling. Both as a linguistic sign and as a cultural political construct there is no hierarchy between nature and culture. A culture enabled, legitimated and freed to oppress by virtue of it looking like nature. At this political and deconstructive notion of romantic formalism or any type of aesthetic experience, whether of Kant's or other, Frances Ferguson's stand make a sense. She, collaborating with de Man and Eagleton further adds that "The multiplicity of human meaning becomes evidence for deconstructive materialism of meaning's inability to 'take', to become part of an object. Marxism; in the mode of new historicist McGann or Eagleton would challenge the legitimacy of the constructs even in the moment of their apparent application.
Conclusively, there are not such objects which are unintentional or aesthetic as described by Kant. Even Kantian aesthetics also indicate the deepest notion of intentionality in an aesthetic object. Deconstructive materialism and Marxist materialism combine to show a very material condition of any object or literary production and the intentional states of those objects. The legacy (a concept or things handover to the succeeding generation) of romantic thought is a crucial question; how much and how far the non material (nominal, imaginative, transcendental) extends? This thought sees the world of matter as the nature of aesthetic pleasure and makes the ideology less a culture made than constructedness (man made) out of the world of the matter.