Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 00:26:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ralph Dumain <rdumain-AT-igc.apc.org>
Subject: MARX AND ROMANTICISM


MARX'S ROMANTIC POETRY

In re:

Wessell, Leonard P., Jr.  "Marx's romantic poetry and the crisis
of romantic lyricism", STUDIES IN ROMANTICISM, vol. 16, no. 4,
Fall 1977, pp. 509-534.

Wessell wrote two books on Marx.  The second one I pass up in used
book stores on a regular basis: PROMETHEUS BOUND: THE MYTHIC
STRUCTURE OF KARL MARX'S SCIENTIFIC THINKING; Baton Rouge:
Louisiana State University Press, 1984.  The very title indicates
the fraudulent premise involved.  Wessell's first book on the
subject looks more promising: KARL MARX, ROMANTIC IRONY, AND THE
PROLETARIAT: THE MYTHOPOETIC ORIGINS OF MARXISM; Baton Rouge:
Louisiana State University Press, 1979.  Why more promising?
Wessell translates Marx's early poems themselves into English and
subjects them to extensive analysis.  Otherwise, I expect the same
sort of nonsense about Marx's ideas being based on mythology.
Well, I saved myself the potential trouble of enduring this
torment by digging up this old journal article instead.

Wessell claims to be the first to subject Marx's poems to an
extensive aesthetic analysis, citing some rudimentary preceding
attempts.  Wessel explains the philosophical background of German
Romanticism.  The underlying logic of this movement is that first
there is a postulation of the unity of all things.  But romantic
longing brings out the contradiction between subjectivity and
objectivity.  Romantic yearning becomes a burden instead of a joy.
Subjective spirit cannot conquer a recalcitrant, indifferent
objectivity.  This leads to a crisis of Romantic lyricism.  Having
inherited this very tradition, Marx was tormented by the disparity
between is and ought.

"The antinomy between 'is' and 'ought' constitutes the best
perspective from which to interpret Marx's poems.  From this
vantage point it can be shown that Marx's poems exhibit a
three-fold manifestation of Romantic lyricism.  Such a division
will serve as a convenient way to explicate the poems.  The first
grouping of poems shows a romantic cosmology and a Dionysian
feeling of oneness with the cosmos.  The second group manifests an
alienation between the lyrical self and the Romantic universe
wherein objectivity oppresses subjectivity.  The third group
intensifies his alienation until a mood of Apollonian revolt
against the Romantic cosmos is developed."

Though Marx's choice of imagery and motifs reveal him to be a
mediocre poet, his recurrent use of the symbolism of the ocean is
very revealing of his state of mind and is relatively original:

"Images of fluidity constitute the primary artistic vehicle by
means of which Marx infuses the lyrical-ironic into his poems.
Through such images the reader can determine the effects of
opposition between the 'is' and the 'ought' in Marx's Romantic
poetry."

Wessel proceeds to a detailed analysis based on the three
categories of the Romantic attitude.  The final attitude is
described variously, but this is the most succinct description:

"The human self comes to assume a defiant and hostile attitude
vis-a-vis a cold God or heartless objectivity.  Eventually this
leads to an _Apollonian_ attitude toward an unfriendly universe.
In other words, instead of dissolving _into_ the cosmos, man
should individualize or create himself _in opposition_ to the
world."

Marx's Promethean posture led him to search for a human as opposed
to divine savior, and then a real human savior instead of a
symbolic one, which ultimately became the proletariat.  So the
final step of Wessell's analysis is to link Marx's "ironic-lyrical
attitude of revolt" to his evolving political thought.  In
conclusion: "The attitude generated by the crisis of Romantic
lyricism inspired Marx's formulation and rethinking of the problem
of human emancipation."  This statement is asinine in the extreme,
but not atypical of people who believe that others live in the
same mythical universe they do.  To show that the ironic-lyrical
attitude is one aspect of or parallel to Marx's overall
development is one thing; to turn it into a primary causal factor,
ignoring Marx's growing interest in practical matters independent
of any attitude toward lyricism and his early progressive ambition
to improve the world, is stupid beyond belief.  And, given that,
in contrast to German idealism, Marx was a quintessentially
anti-mythical thinker, regardless of the metaphorical nonsense of
interpreting him as a religious eschatologist in disguise,
Wessell's thesis is even less believable.  There are other
questions Wessell might have asked when he decided to go for the
big picture.

One would be, what is the relationship between Marx's incapacity
as a poet and his concrete grasp of human character, both at that
time and later?  What is the relationship between the abandonment
of vague idealistic poetry and the real "poetry" that Marx was to
write in 1844 -- the economic-philosophical manuscripts?  And what
about the relationship, actual or implied, between Marx and
__English_ Romanticism?  Another issue: given the comparisons
between Blake and Marx, what could one say about Marx's approach
to poetry and the imagination vs. Blake's, or for that matter
Blake's understanding of historical process and political economy
as compared to Marx's?  The relationship between Blake and Marx as
forms of cognition, personal existential relationships to human
existence, a grasp of human nature, and the experience of
political defeat -- now there are some interesting questions to
pose, if one wants to factor in Marx's poetry and Romantic
heritage.


     --- from list marxism2-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---