File spoon-archives/marxism-international.archive/marxism-international_1996/96-10-18.130, message 42


Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 20:07:16 -0500 (CDT)
From: ty reynaldo r <z969609-AT-oats.farm.niu.edu>
Subject: re: The retreat of the "intellectual"


Surely there could still be hope in bourgeois intellectual life AND the 
intellectual and cultural life in the First World.

Pete Seeger and Holly Near are some singers in the U.S. who use the 
mainstream cultural apparatus or superstructure (CD, mini-concerts, 
tapes, records) to create the Gramscian counter-hegemony by way of music.

In western Europe, there are musicians from France, Spain, Italy, etc., 
etc. who advocate human rights, children's rights and condemn militarism, 
interventionism, and the like.  

The problem with many people in the academe is that for fear of not 
getting funds, they repackage their agenda and believe in their  
repackaging so much so that they forget totally their progressive social 
agenda.  What is primary:  form (using bourgeois language and methodology 
to fool the funding agencies) or substance (progressive social agenda for 
social intervention as part of social research)?  

On Wed, 16 Oct 1996, JEFF 
SPARROW wrote:

> But what about the First World? I can't speak for
> Europe or Japan, but intellectual life - even bourgeois intellectual life -
> in the U.S. is barren, dismal, bankrupt. High culture has been transformed
> into an elite marketing tool; classical music, for example, one of the
> treasures of bourgeois cultural tradition, has been transformed into easy
> listening for yuppies, a signifier for "sophistication" greatly beloved of
> boutiques and cafes. Intellectual/literary life has degenerated into
> deconstructive, faux radical, obscurity or utter tedium. There is almost
> nothing worth reading in the typical issue of the New York Times Book
> Review, and only a little more than nothing in the average New York Review
> of Books - and these are supposedly among the best on the scene. Pop
> culture has seen its energy and immediacy devolve into little more than
> simple crassness and violence. I emphasize that this is a judgment of
> *bourgeois* intellectual life; I'm not even talking about the retreat or
> degeneration of the radicals. Has bourgeois intellectual life suffered from
> the disappearance of its radical critics? Is the devolution and/or retreat
> of both bourgeois and radical intellectuals part of the same phenomenon -
> the corruption, complacency, and decay of culture under advanced
> capitalism? A ruling class that can't produce artists and intellectuals of
> the status of Schonberg, Stevens, or Keynes seems like one in trouble,
> serious trouble.
> 
> Doug
> 
> I dunno. I'd be a bit wary of the 'degeneration of culture under late capitalism' thesis.
>  The analysis sounds a little bit too much like some of the left papers here that review 
> every Hollywood blockbuster as a symptom of capitalist decadence.
> 
> Which is obviously true - kind of like the distinction between the classical economists
> who accepted some relation between labor and value and the vulgar economists who
> are simply interested in calculating, as Mandel puts it, the exciting things that
> happen when Mr Jones can't find a buyer for his last ten thousand tonnes of iron.
> 
> But how far does it get you? I mean, was capitalism any less late in the 1960s or 1970s,
> when most of us would presumably accept that the culture was somewhat more vibrant?
> Was there a qualitative  difference in the structure of the system? I don't think so.
> 
> I think the answer is, more prosaically, that the collapse of the left has had an immense impact.
> 
> Take classical music as a token of yuppie sophistication.
> Were there a serious radical presence substantial sections of the intelligentsia would measure
> sophistication in other ways - like, for instance, attending cocktail parties with the Black Panthers.
> 
> Similarly, when the class struggle was more intense, there was a real Marxist presence in lit crit (in fact,
> most of the fads in lit theory can be traced to the disappointment of a generation of intellectuals
> in the failure of '68). 
> 
> If our side was stronger, the New York Review of Books would not dare publish
> articles lauding David Irving as an interesting fellow with a lot of challenging ideas about the
> Third Reich.
> 
> And as for pop culture, well, there it's really obvious. You look at something like hip-hop. Insofar
> as there's something progressive happening, it all harks back to the struggles of the 60s and
> 70s. The best thing Tupac Shakur had going for him was that his mother was a Panther.
> 
> I don't want to sound like an epigone but, really the only solution is - 
> build the left.
> 
> How exactly we do that is another debate
> 
> Cheers,
> Jeff 
> 
> 


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005