What were Sartre's tacit assumptions ? Existentialism is sort of
European libertarianism. So, maybe Sartre's individualist anthropology
is a tacit assumption.
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 7:43 PM, Ralph Dumain
rdum...@autodidactproject.org wrote:
I believe that John Strachey cited Lawrence as an
In *Marxism and Literary Criticism*, Eagleton concludes a section entitled
Base and Superstructure in chapter one, Literature and History with
this:
Whether those insights are in political terms ‘progressive’ or ‘reactionary’
(Conrad's are certainly the latter) is not the point – any more than it
M.F. Kalfat mf at kalfat.net
In *Marxism and Literary Criticism*, Eagleton concludes a section entitled
Base and Superstructure in chapter one, Literature and History with
this:
Whether those insights are in political terms ‘progressive’ or ‘reactionary’
(Conrad's are certainly the latter) is
What does one want to focus on...the absence of genuinely
revolutionary art, or that only radical conservatism could produce
the most significant literature...
Words like genuinely complicate the matter to no end.
So perhaps concentrate on the most significant literature--and I
think there are
This is just another example of what a pretentious ass Eagleton is. What
is genuine revolutionary art but a posturing notion? Furthermore, the
vitriol directed at liberalism is the language of the right. There is
insight among the disillusioned conservatives, to be sure, but this is
hardly a
I believe that John Strachey cited Lawrence as an exemplar of the
fascist unconscious, which I think is correct.
In any case, Eagleton's futile exercise reminds me of how CLR James'
ridiculed Sartre's conception of engaged literature in the late '40s /
early '50s. Inter alia, James wrote that
