Re: Re: Dallas Smythe student

[Bill Lear <rael@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Monday, February 25, 2002 at 11:33:33 (-0500) Doug Henwood writes:
>Tom Walker wrote:
>
>>This kind of hijacking selected words out of context and insinuating that
>>they mean something else is pointless. I would say juvenile, but would be
>>insulting to children. The context was the role of advertising in the media
>>and culture. The point is about advertisers promising people things they
>>can't deliver.
>
>And my juvenile point was that a lot of this critique is a rather
>undigested rehash of a lot of Puritan hair-shirt crap. You may think
>the quote is out of context - I think it's a revealing expression of
>anxiety over pleasure and sensuality. It is also likely to have
>little political appeal beyond a rather affluent gang of PC lefties
>(or the voluntarily poor).
>
>I'm with Mandel on this one.
>[...]

I may be interpreting wrongly, but what's wrong with "non-artificial"
self-limitation, including a criticism of and revolt against, for
example, sexual display for purposes of advertising?  Aren't some
limitations helpful in releasing freedoms in other dimensions?

I agree with Mandel's quote of Marx, that we "must be capable of many
pleasures, hence cultured to a high degree", but can't a criticism of
sexuality that is "uncultured", cheap, and ultimately anti-social
(because it is not based on love or affection or even lust, but upon
greed) contribute to a higher degree of culture?

These all may be rhetorical.  Ignore if you like.


Bill