Re: List Moderation

[Ralph Dumain <rdumain@xxxxxxx>]

Until someone substantively addresses the substance of my posts on jazz,
Adonro's aesthetics, etc., I am bowing out while others hypocritically
pontificate and cover themselves, but I should be allowed a final word on
who did what.

Jukka must have a short memory if he doesn't think I've had anything to
contribute ot the discussion of aesthetics.  E-mail discussions are
inherently fragmentary, but you will recall I posted several abstracts of
articles on jazz, Adorno, etc., a summary of Jauss's criticisms of Aodrno's
aesthetic theory, my own commnents on all of this and suggestions for how
to begin to think of these issues, etc.

As for insults, aside from Gelding's initial insult to Spencer, I've been
accused of anti-intellectualism, intellectual incompetence, misogyny (how
did that get in there? or is it obligatory among the PC crowd?) ....
everything but the one thing I could obviously be accused of ....
Germanophobia (guilty as charged).  The hypocrites go for the jugular when
they're caught with their pants down, don't they?

My cardinal sin that towers above all is that I start with the presumption
of denying that noether Adorno, Bloch, nor any of their peers are
authoritoes in this area, hence it's not a question of proving them wrong,
but of porving that they have any value at all applied to this subject
matter.  It is a reversal--arrogant if you will--of the fundamental
assumptions of who constitutes a respectable authority.  The one thing I
did not do was pull the stunts you people are notorious for:  I did not
call Adorno or Bloch racists for their provincialism, nor did I call y'll
racists for yours.  But if I were to descend to your level, it would have
been the easiest label to toss about, and it wouldn't be hard to make it
stick.  But that is an academic liberal trick, not out of my bag.

If one wnats to begin with the study of New World cultures, one needs to
know a whole different set of facts and theoretical approaches, for they
did not arive at the current state of capitalist culture through the same
trajectory as our European friends for whom we name this list.  What was
the cultural industry of colonial Trinidad in 1915?  Do any of you know?
Is the sort of cultural totalitarianism perpetrated by colonialism, say, in
the West Indies, the same sort as what you find in western Europe in he
1920s and 1930s?  Have you ever thought about that?
As as for a more advanced captialist society--the USA--say in the
1920s--can one presume the same relatinship between commercial culture and
the folk elements of the subcultures of the USA as obtain in Europe?  How
do we theorize modernity as experienced by its first victims--African
slaves?  Once we begin by questioning the presumption and arrogance of the
Frankfurt Wankers on this list, we could suggest a whole line of other
people to read in order to get ourselves oriented for this line of inquiry.
 In addition to some of the sources I've suggested, and the myriad of works
on jazz and black culture in general, we could even begin with a list of
other "authorities" to study, say those who have provided a perspective on
New World modernity: C.L.R. James, Richard Wright, Ralph Ellison, Paul Gilroy.

The cardinal sin I have committed is to deny your authority, as a first
premise for serious discussion, and that is the source of your predictable
whining.  Even my praise for those aspects of the Frankfurter tradition I
admire could not dissuade you, for you are a closed shop.  Your embrace of
the Franks is so tied to your own socialization as functionaries in the
knowledge industry, you can't see how uncreative and tedious you really
are.  Everything you write reeks of the managerialist mentality.  You are
not radical, you are only liberal.  You are the polar opposite of Adorno,
who was at least humble about recognizing the place of the intellectual in
the division of labor, as stodgy and morose as he was in other areas.

At 01:56 AM 5/24/99 EET+0200, Jukka Laari wrote:
>Firstly, Ralph Dumain clearly over-reacted. And when he was asked
>about his conceptions on aesthetics he refused to answer. Instead
>he did what he did (what was it? I'm not sure I know that).
>
>If these lists are discussion lists, then it should be clear that
>everyone is obliged to answer questions, to clarify his or her >views ....

You know full well that Adorno and Marcuse opposed clarity as a concession
to the status quo.  Do you not find this plea, um, rather ironic when you
think about it?