My partner and I had a son nearly 8 weeks ago and my partner liked the name Osian. I gave it a tweak and said we should call him Ossian, because I wasMy partner and I had a son nearly 8 weeks ago and my partner liked the name Osian. I gave it a tweak and said we should call him Ossian, because I was aware of the story of the poet Ossian being a huge cult phenomenon in the late 18th Century, and that it was actually not the ancient Gaelic poetry that James MacPherson claimed it was, but in fact a hoax.
Ossian was beloved by the likes of Napoleon, Diderot, Walter Scott, Goethe and Thoreau. The work was often compared to Homer. The name Fiona was coined in these poems. It had a massive influence in spreading interest in Celtic and Scottish culture throughout Europe. And it was a hoax.
Reading it today is a strange experience. Most of the book is introductory essays about the work. The poems themselves occupy a relatively small portion of the book. I thought that the poems were very unremarkable. Nothing striking about them, and nothing I will remember. Homer, on the other hand, speaks to us across the millennia and his work still strikes the modern reader as literary genius.
I found the essays and the idea of the hoax more interesting than the poetry. The false erudition reminded me of the blurring of boundaries you get with Borges, in which stories, literary criticism, history and essays all merge into each other. My feeling is that the achievement of the hoax and the invented scholarship is more interesting than the poetry in this book. But, it's still really hard to understand how thinkers and critics as brilliant as Napoleon, Diderot or Goethe were so enamoured of this dull poetry. ...more
I have mixed feelings about this book. Hall was obviously a very clever man. These essays feel like a haphazard tour across the social sciences. The oI have mixed feelings about this book. Hall was obviously a very clever man. These essays feel like a haphazard tour across the social sciences. The overriding theme, as far as I can discern, is to stake a claim for 'Post-Marxism'. He says that he is very influenced by Marxism, but is constantly wrestling with Marx. His disgruntlement with Marx derives from the distaste that many Western Socialists felt after the crushing of the Hungarian uprising in 1956 by the Soviet Union, and Hall's sense that Marxist thought was essentially Eurocentric and didn't apply so well in places like the West Indies that he grew up in. The other overwhelming source of disagreement is with the concept of Materialism, and the idea that it has a deterministic effect on culture; or in more technical Marxist language, the idea that the Base determines the Superstructure. Anyone who is engaged in developing an academic discipline known as 'Culture Studies' is obviously going to feel like this.
Reading this collection of essays made me very aware of the fact that I left University 20 years ago, and I can't really remember what Poststructuralism is. It begins with lots of references to British leftist thinkers like EP Thompson, Raymond Williams Richard Hoggart, but as it goes on it refers more and more often to European thinkers like Gramsci, Althusser, Foucault and Lacan. As I read these essays one thought that turned over more and more in my mind was how far removed they were from ordinary people, or the working class. The essays are extremely referential and intertextual, and you have to have a good base of background knowledge about arguments within Marxism, the ideas of Max Weber, psychoanalysis, global political history, semiology and linguistics to keep on top of what he's writing about. I have a reasonable level of understanding of these things from decades of reading across subjects and genres, but I think this places me squarely in the minority. It reminded me of what I started to find annoying about Mid to Late 20th Century European thinkers, which is how insular and removed they are from 'the people'. Marx said that "Philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it". It's clear that thinkers like Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, Luxemburg and Gramsci were intellectuals and philosophers who were also men and women of action, who were actually engaged in trying to change the world for the better. A later generation of thinkers retreated to the ivory tower of academia and removed themselves from the struggle to directly fight for what they believed. They became enmeshed in more and more obtuse and rarefied intellectual pursuits, and this had a terrible effect on the struggle for social justice.
I was surprised when I came across a quote I have encountered many times “race is the modality in which class is lived". I was surprised because I encountered it in a long, extremely difficult and technical essay about debates within Marxism. I simply don't believe that most of the people who use or encounter this line again and again have read this essay. I've just Googled the expression so I could remind myself of the title of the essay this line comes from, and as if to prove my point, all of the top results are from other sources quoting the line, and you would have to dig much deeper and research further to be able to find the actual essay itself. I strongly suspect this line is being referenced often as a jab at 'class reductionist Marxism' by people who haven't read the essay, or understand the context from which it is drawn.
Part of my reservation in reading these essays by Stuart Hall is because of the time in history that I am reading them. I am reading them from a vantage point in which the New Left, of which he is a leading figure, are seen to carry some of the blame for the appalling state that the left is in today. To summarise it as I understand it, with the caveat that I haven't read most of this stuff and I am making judgements from their reputation and not from my personal understanding; The New Left emerged in the West in opposition to traditional Marxism or Socialism, which was stained by the perceived failure of the Soviet Union and its allies. Marxism was too Eurocentric, and was fixated upon the Working Class as embodied in the idea of the White, Male manual labourer. Marx was wrong in many of ideas, and the world was more complicated than he imagined. Class was not the dominant system of oppression, the idea of the primacy of the economic base over culture was flawed, and the Left should be paying more attention to inequalities inscribed in gender, race, sexuality and other markers of identity. This attitude has brought many positive developments to society over the past few decades, improving the lives of women, ethnic and sexual minorities, and challenging white supremacy, the patriarchy, heteronormality and more. On the other hand it is increasingly recognised that this turn towards issues of identity has played into the hands of the Ruling Class, deradicalized supposedly radical movements, fractured the unity of the working class and left us at the mercy of an increasingly monstrous and devastating Neo Imperial form of Capitalism that is literally destroying the Earth.
Stuart Hall was obviously much more intelligent and well read than I am. It is obvious from reading his work that he has read far more than I have, and knows Marx's work inside out. But as I was reading it I couldn't help feeling like I disagreed with his analysis on some points. For example the final essay in this collection is 'The Great Moving Right Show', which is widely regarded as a classic work, analysing and predicting the rise of Thatcherism when many of his comrades on the British Left thought she was just another manifestation of the same old Conservatism. But I don't understand his insistence that the Base does not determine the Superstructure, or that economics and production do not determine culture in the final instance. It is my understanding that the rise of the New Right, with the election of Thatcher in the UK and Reagan in the USA, the overthrow of the Keynesian consensus in favour of Neoliberalism inspired by Hayek and Friedman, is in fact an outcome of massive economic shifts caused by the Oil crises of the early 70's and Nixon dropping the Gold Standard and opening up relations with China, which eventually meant that European and American Capitalists could relocate production to Asia. As far as I am concerned the phenomenon and the culture of 'Thatcherism' is downstream from these economic conditions.
I am glad I have now read a decent chunk of Hall's work. I've been meaning to do it for years, but as it says in the introduction to this collection of essays, he doesn't really have many key, go-to books to read. There aren't many classics that are instantly associated with his name. His work is spread out in academic essays, speeches and interviews, and many of his works are collaborative rather than works of single authorship. He is a deep and thought provoking thinker and I have mixed feelings about his work, but I do respect it. But I can't say that I 'enjoyed' it, because it is very complicated academic work. Other books that I have read in the Black Marxist tradition over the past few years such as Black Jacobins by CLR James, or How Europe Underdeveloped Africa by Walter Rodney were a lot more enjoyable and I felt like they enriched my thinking and understanding a lot more, but perhaps that's just because I already more or less agreed with what they wrote before I read them. ...more
The Ecosocialist manifesto. Probably the best book I have read on the climate crisis and its possible solutions. Ajl summarises and analyses the curreThe Ecosocialist manifesto. Probably the best book I have read on the climate crisis and its possible solutions. Ajl summarises and analyses the current debate on how to address the climate crisis, demonstrates the flaws inherent in multiple approaches, and presents his own alternative vision for the future which seems appealing and reasonably achievable. I think that Ajl's academic background as an Agronomist brings a refreshing perspective, because most of what I have read on the subject is works by academics, economists, journalists and whatnot, who I now think might lack some essential knowledge and understanding of how to work with nature.
The book clearly sets out Ecosocialist principals, and demonstrates why other forms of the Green New Deal being pushed by people on the Western Left are actually fundamentally Liberal or Social Democratic in their politics, and why this means they cannot possibly work. Ajl writes from a Marxist, and Third Worldist, Anti-Imperialist perspective. He shows that many versions of the GND are written from a Global North perspective and don't incorporate the ideas, demands or expertise that the Global South is trying to offer.
Finally, I was pleasantly surprised by what an excellent prose stylist Ajl is. This book is superbly written. When I read works of non-fiction more often than not I pay no attention to the prose as I'm just trying to engage with the ideas, but with this book after reading it for a while and seeing a few beautifully turned phrases it struck me that it's a great piece of writing.
This book has changed my perspective and informed my thinking. Highly recommended. ...more
A masterpiece. I'm glad I finally got around to reading this only after reading quite a lot of Marx and a fair amount about the history of Socialism aA masterpiece. I'm glad I finally got around to reading this only after reading quite a lot of Marx and a fair amount about the history of Socialism and revolution, because it made it easier for me to grasp the arguments Lenin is making. Because I had some idea about the Marxist-Leninist criticisms of people like Proudhon and Bakunin and Kautsky it made it much easier to understand. My initial reaction is that it feels like Lenin is right, and if he is this has profound consequences. I need to sit with it for a while and let it digest. ...more
A fascinating collection of writing from one of the most important historical figures of all time. Mao was obviously a very intelligent man, but he wrA fascinating collection of writing from one of the most important historical figures of all time. Mao was obviously a very intelligent man, but he writes without pretention in quite plain language, which is a fairly common practice for Marxist thinkers and revolutionaries. The book whets my appetite to learn more about Mao, the Chinese Revolution and the decades that follow. Mao is commonly perceived as a monster and a tyrant in the Western world, but is widely regarded as a hero among many in the global South and former colonies. To simply accept the way he is portrayed in the Capitalist world as the honest truth is ludicrous. You can see how his confidence and vision allowed China to emerge from under the heel of the West, the Japanese, the landlord class and Soviet domination, which has set upon the path to become the next great Superpower, which is an incredible achievement. ...more
I've read bits and pieces of writing from Adolph Reed Jnr over the past few years and heard him on a few podcasts and always been impressed by him. ThI've read bits and pieces of writing from Adolph Reed Jnr over the past few years and heard him on a few podcasts and always been impressed by him. This collection of essays reinforces my view. He is a trenchant thinker, and an excellent writer. In this collection he examines race and class in America and demonstrates that he is one of the most valuable and incisive intellectuals we have on the Left today. He is absolutely fearless and can be a savage critic, which helps explain why he can be a controversial figure. But his clarity of thought, practical experience of some courageous organizing and his absolute commitment to changing the world for the better mean he is worth paying attention to if you share his interests. ...more
A good introduction to many of the leading figures on the Marxist Left today. Kunkel was a celebrated young novelist who was hyped as one of the best A good introduction to many of the leading figures on the Marxist Left today. Kunkel was a celebrated young novelist who was hyped as one of the best up and coming writers in America when he published Indecision in 2005. He seems to have abandoned literature in favor of politics, a bit like Arundhati Roy. I'd be interested to follow up on some of the figures he discusses here, though politics is moving so quickly it feels a little bit out of date already. ...more
Finally read my first Chomsky book. I remember hearing about him when I was at university and not very interested in politics, and he had a reputationFinally read my first Chomsky book. I remember hearing about him when I was at university and not very interested in politics, and he had a reputation for being the most radical, Left Wing thinker we had. By the time I have got around to reading him all these years later I have already absorbed and understood the lessons this book has to teach, so it wasn't an eye opening experience, but it remains a landmark book. The world would be a much better place if people had to read this in school.
The experience of observing the media reporting over the past few years, when genuinely Left Wing alternatives in Corbyn and Sanders were suddenly viable and within touching distance of political power, has dropped the scales from my eyes.
I just tried to Google the story that emerged a couple of years ago showing that a British Secret Service organisation that was intended to enagage with Russian digital propaganda had been found to have been attacking and creating propaganda against the Labour Party. This story is astonishing and has been widely forgotten. You never hear the media refer back to it. It proved to be very difficult to find this story, as variations of the search term 'british secret service spies on the labour party' bring up nothing but results reporting accusations that Jeremy Corbyn was a Soviet spy, and other stories that the KGB infiltrated the Labour Party. There is a message from Google saying 'Some results may have been removed under data protection law'. There are almost no results showing that the British state was clearly discovered to have been working against the official Opposition party. I added Scotland to the search terms and eventually found one result https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/po.... ...more
I'm not going to attempt to write a proper review of this book because I've been reading it off and on for nearly two years, and in between starting aI'm not going to attempt to write a proper review of this book because I've been reading it off and on for nearly two years, and in between starting and finishing it I've moved twice, had a baby and bought a house so I was regularly interrupted. The book is miraculous and Gramsci was a genius. What he managed to accomplish in spite of his many obstacles is incredible.
The book is a collection of notes, essays and fragments, some more finished than others. He is dealing with history, philosophy, politics, Marxist theory and practice and more, and he's writing it from prison under the Italian Fascist regime. He wrote in an obscure style to try to get around the censorship he faced in prison. This means the book is unusually difficult and obscure. Having a reasonable background knowledge of European history, philosophy and Marxist theory and practice meant I was able to understand a lot of what wrote about. I wouldn't recommend jumping into this book without this kind of background knowledge.
Gramsci has had a huge influence on subsequent thinkers and it's easy to see why. He was a brilliant and original thinker and is credited as being the founder of Western Marxism. Many of his most celebrated ideas and concepts emerge through repeated references within the fragments rather than straightforward essays. Concepts such as Hegemony, the American system of Fordism, the Organic Intellectual, the War of Manoeuvre vs the War of Position and Caesarism have left us with a brilliant legacy to think about and debate.
I think if you are preoccupied with our political situation and you are a Socialist this book should be on your reading list as a priority. ...more
A brisk, enjoyable read declaring that fiction has lost energy, authority and relevance and that the best literature these days is being made at the iA brisk, enjoyable read declaring that fiction has lost energy, authority and relevance and that the best literature these days is being made at the intersection fiction and non-fiction. I don't quite see why it was such a cause celebre when it was published in 2010 as I feel that Geoff Dyer has made this argument more elegantly and entertainingly over the years. Some of the best writing over the last few decades fits into this loose category, such as Coetzee, Marias, Sinclair, Didion, Bolano, Kapuscinski, Sebald, Houellebecq etc... Shields' thesis is not unfamiliar to me but he presents it well. ...more
Not bad, but essays and criticism are not Bolano's forte. Most of these pieces are about Latin American writers I have never heard of, many of whom I Not bad, but essays and criticism are not Bolano's forte. Most of these pieces are about Latin American writers I have never heard of, many of whom I am sure have never been translated into English. I think this book would never have made it into English if it weren't for the success of Savage Detectives and 2666....more
Absolutely essential reading if you want to understand the way the world works today, and why capitalism and liberal democracy is falling apart. I decAbsolutely essential reading if you want to understand the way the world works today, and why capitalism and liberal democracy is falling apart. I decided to read this after the Panama banking scandal broke, having been aware of the book for a few years. It is the clearest explanation of the sickness and corruption at the heart of contemporary capitalism, and Britain, especially the City of London, is the main culprit. Western Governments and the press talk about the ineradicable corruption in the third world as the reason that the Global South struggles so much, but we never talk about the systems and networks that the West creates and fosters to encourage this corruption. London is the place that corrupt Global elites send the money they steal, with the full backing of our Government, our banks, our accountants, our lawyers and our media. We are hoovering up 10X more money through encouraging tax evasion than the West gives out in development funding. By fostering low tax, low regulation regimes in Jersey, Hong Kong, Singapore, the Cayman Islands, the British Virgin Islands and more we have created a race to the bottom as other countries are forced to compete with us. We have created the conditions in which multi-national corporations manufacture several shell companies so that, for example, Amazon can pay £11.9 million in tax on £5.3 billion in UK sales in 2015 by routing the sales through Luxembourg. When gigantic multi-nationals can use their size and power to avoid tax and influence governments this puts smaller or more ethical companies at a competitive disadvantage which means they either have to find a way of avoiding tax themselves or go out of business. Offshore is at the heart of so many of the problems in the world today that the world would very quickly change for the better if we forced our Governments to do something about it. However, Britain has just left the EU and whilst the majority of out voters were driven by opposition to immigration the people leading the campaign are driven by making offshore even more welcome, cutting taxes, loosening laws and regulations and further liberalising the financial sector so we are about to enter a world of shit. ...more
I was just in the middle of writing a long, considered review of this book when I suddenly lost it all and now I have to run. I might try and do it laI was just in the middle of writing a long, considered review of this book when I suddenly lost it all and now I have to run. I might try and do it later. ...more
I decided to read this after seeing the Sleaford Mods and Russell Brand refer to it as an influence in short succession. I think I've seen references I decided to read this after seeing the Sleaford Mods and Russell Brand refer to it as an influence in short succession. I think I've seen references to it before over the last 5 years but it hadn't entered my consciousness as something worth seeking out until recently. It is a very good polemic. It is intelligent, punchy, accessible and brief. The basic premiss is that we have entered a stage of history in which Capitalism has become the only game in town, and alternatives are no longer even conceivable. Zizek and/or Fredric Jameson said that it is easier to imagine the end of the world than to imagine the end of Capitalism, and that we need to find ways to resist this mentally. He also points out that in many ways Fukayama has been proven to be right about the End of History, despite the critical spanking he has been taking over the years because we have reached a stage of history in which any alternative to Neo-Liberism is seen as totally fantastical. He explores connections between the experience of Neo-Liberalism and the growth of mental health problems, the growth of bureaucracy in an increasingly privatised world and illustrates his ideas with references to popular culture, such as contrasting the organised crime represented in Michael Mann's Heat with the organised crime you saw in The Godfather or Goodfellas. As I was reading it I kept having the experience of thinking 'yeah, that's just what I think' and it's always enjoyable to read a work of critical theory and think that. However, although Fisher is great at diagnosing the illness of Capitalist Realism he doesn't offer much in the way of a cure. Maybe that's too much to ask. ...more
A slighter book than Debt, but similarly witty, thought provoking and original. Graeber points out that whilst bureaucracy is always depicted as sometA slighter book than Debt, but similarly witty, thought provoking and original. Graeber points out that whilst bureaucracy is always depicted as something the sluggish government imposes upon sexy, innovative businesses, in fact the enormous growth in bureaucracy over the last few decades has been driven by businesses. The practices and methods used by the finance sector have been adopted by all kinds of other workplaces and industries and this has been the primary reason that more and more of everyone's time is spent doing paperwork and administration and jumping through bureaucratic hoops. He also argues that despite the fact that people complain about bureaucracy there's a part of them that secretly likes it because it makes life a little more orderly, predictable and comprehensible knowing that there are some sort of 'rules' to this 'game'. A world without bureaucracy would be a bit more free, arbitrary and anarchic.
This book is well worth reading, and I'm going to go ahead and assume that in fact all of Graeber's writing is worth reading....more
I've had this book sitting on my shelves for a few years now and I finally pulled it off the shelves because I fancied reading some essays and Verso aI've had this book sitting on my shelves for a few years now and I finally pulled it off the shelves because I fancied reading some essays and Verso are a reliably excellent publisher. Perry Anderson enjoys a very high reputation amongst a very small group of people. He's the former editor of the New Left Review and an influential Marxist. This book is a collection of his essays on important thinkers ranging from the right, through the centre to figures on the left, ranging from Hayek to Hobsbawm. He is an old school Mandarin, utilizing a vocabulary full of words that the reader probably has never encountered before and will not again. He is also a polymath with a very impressive command of history, politics, sociology and economics at his fingertips. I found the book interesting and educational, but I have to admit I found it less engaging than comparable essay collections by the likes of Christopher Hitchens or Tony Judt. Well worth reading, but it didn't give me the jolt of having my thinking profoundly changed or challenged that other essay collections have before. ...more
Loading...
