File spoon-archives/marxism-general.archive/marxism-general_1997/marxism-general.9711, message 125


Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 15:36:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Gerald Levy <glevy-AT-pratt.edu>
Subject: M-G: Re: Table manners according to Doug H


Doug Henwood <dhenwood-AT-panix.com> wrote:

> I
> think good language, good thinking, and good art shouldn't be the province
> of the educated bourgeoisie alone. I think they should be the universal
> property of humankind, and that this should be one of the central goals of
> socialism.

What has the above to do with Marxism? You speak of "good language" ... I
ask *whose* language?  "Good thinking"?  The thinking of *what class*?
"Good art" ... *for whom by whom*? 

It may not have occurred to you but language, "thinking", and art
are historically created and socially-specific rather than being
trans-historical and "universal." 

[btw, Doug's suggestion that the "universal" ... "good language" is proper
English is an example of national chauvinism. I wonder: do others agree
that one of the "central goals of socialism" should be the Queen's  
English?].

Jerry



     --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005