Re: Gramsci and Images of the State

["Bryan A. Alexander" <bnalexan@xxxxxxxxx>]

Glad to hear it, Leo.  Can you say more about this Gramsci discussion and
fascism? and:

Bryan Alexander
Department of English
University of Michigan
**********************

On Sun, 17 Dec 1995 LeoCasey@xxxxxxx wrote:

> I would like to commend Bryan for the quality of his reports on Gramsci, and
> Louis for his penetrating questions. For my own part, I find the imprisoned
> Gramsci, with the time for more sustained theoretical reflection and the
> sobering insight of the rise of facism to power, as more theoretically
> interesting. Hegemony is a concept which Gramsci develops in prison both to
> understand the failure of the left revolutions in Europe which arose in the
> wake of the Russian Revolution and the rise of facism; mention of it prior to
> the _Prison Notebooks_ is rare and one should be cautious from drawing too
> much significance out of these earlier uses.

I'm always leery of too much caution... but yes, it has clear limits.
Perhaps we should work more with the NOTEBOOKS on this list?  I could
actually buy a copy of the damn thing (return my post-it crammed copy to
the eager library) and carry my reports on? and hear more from true
Gramsci scholars?

 (There is an interesting history
> of the uses of the concept within Western Marxism, as Laclau and Mouffe show
> in their text.)

This is worth expanding on.
>
> Bryan's comment that Gramsci employs pedagogical and educational metaphors to
> 'think through' the role of the party and the state is, I believe, entirely
> correct, and one of the more interesting features of his work. (It is also
> relatively rare among Western Marxists, including the Frankfurt School types
> with which Gramsci is often incorrectly grouped.)  The educational images,
> particularly as education is envisioned in the _Prison Notebooks_, allow
> Gramsci to develop his concept of democratic leadership and democratic
> authority. The party and the state are not collapsed into the class and civil
> society, but distinct from them, and in a relationship of power to them. This
> relationship of power is the heart of politics. If it is denied, and the
> party collapsed into the class and the state into civil society, there is no
> way to grapple with politics -- one is left with a vision of a utopian,
> apolitical future, and no practical way to get there. If it is envisioned
> through military metaphors, as is often done in Western Marxism, this
> relationship is conceptualized in the authoritarian terms of military
> organization with some disastrous consequences. (It is not pure happenstance
> that these military metaphors are most omnipresent in the most authoritarian
> Marxists, such as Stalin.) The pedagogical and education metaphors make
> possible a more dialogic conception of that power, and lead toward a
> democratic conception of authority.
>

Of course this fine discussion also calls into question what model of
pedagogy is used.  Following folks like Neill and Ilich I insist on a
voluntarist teaching method; therefore my idea of organization is also
voluntarist, associative, and, if you'll pardon the expression,
rhizomatic (this is a Deleuze and Guattari term) (and I also see the need
for violence in such organizations, externally, which D+G implicitly
acknowledge).
        I think this leads me away from Gramsci, but not from the
PRE-PRISON WRITINGS so much (aside from the militant adherence to the
Comintern).  Now I *will* have to go back to the PRISON NOTEBOOKS to
further elicit - and question - my difference.

 >
>
>      --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------