Re: Pomos in the academy was Deleuze/Guattari on fascism

[Jon Beasley-Murray <jpb8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I will try to write more at length later, but can't let some aspects of
this discussion pass without immediate comment.

On Sun, 21 Jan 1996 g.maclennan@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> I think that
> it is also important to
> recognisethe *class* basis of postmodernist theorizing. Lyotard's notorious
> definiton of the "post modern condition" says it all.
>
> "One listens to reggae, watches a western, eats McDonald's food for lunch
> and local cuisine for dinner, wears Paris perfume in Tokyo and "retro
> clothes in Hong Kong."

I simply don't see the self-evident point that Gary seems to be making here.

> Within the academy as Justin correctly points out the task of the
> postmodernists was to destroy Marxism.  this they performed with great
> glee, mainly under the cover of being anti-stalinists, hence the
> importance of the Gulag obsession.

Who are you talking about?  Deleuze and Guattari (around whom this
discussion started) certainly never saw their "task" as being the
destruction of Marxism.  In various ways they claim to be marxists
themeselves.  If the two main theories of postmodernism are Lyotard's and
Jameoson's, then it is hard to see the second, at least, as an attempt to
destroy Marxism, either.    And I think any political critique of Lyotard
(who was in  *socialisme ou barbarie* after all, and whose _Political
Writings_ are pretty interesting) would have to be a little more careful.

> In the meantime a whole generation of students has been depoliticised.

This may or may not be true... but I don't think postmodern theory (or
theories of the postmodern--it seems important to mark a difference
here) is a useful thing to blame.

> Gary

Take care

Jon

Jon Beasley-Murray
Literature Program
Duke University
jpb8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://jefferson.village.virginia.edu/~spoons


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

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