Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2000 :: August ::
Re: Marx and Shakespeare
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.1496  Friday, 11 August 2000.

From:           W. L. Godshalk <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 10 Aug 2000 21:10:20 -0400
Subject: 11.1475 Re: Marx and Shakespeare
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.1475 Re: Marx and Shakespeare

John Drakakis writes:

>I'm afraid, Bill, that ideology is a 'material practice' NOT an 'art'.

Is art also a material practice? Is it possible that material practices
are art?

>Also, that human existence cannot be collapsed into 'nature'...it's what
>human beings DO with nature that's important, and that is called
>'Culture'.

So what beavers do with nature is NOT culture?  And what homo sapiens
does with nature is culture? You should probably meditate upon Stephen
Jay Gould's book, Full House.

>Nor can 'Culture' be collapsed into a biological determinism
>a la Darwin. Hence one of my objections to your preoccupation with
>beavers.

What kind of determinism does produce Culture?  You aren't arguing for
free will, are you? And, further, if we humans are not biologically
determined how do you explain genetics?  Can you transcend your genetic
code?

>Maybe you've been seduced by the idea of a 'poetics of culture'...very
>fashionable but preoccupied with the aesthetics of social structures
>rather than with their overdeterminations (which you should not read as
>'determinations' -mechanical or otherwise).

No, I've not been seduced by the idea of cultural poetics.

>The process of enquiry is
>necessarily implicated in the object of enquiry. How could it be
>otherwise? Hence there can be no theory without practice just as there
>is no practice without theory.  I suspect that this is what you have
>difficulty in getting your head around.

I'm not sure why this rather popular idea (Rick Powers uses it in Three
Farmers on Their Way to a Dance) should stump me. I certainly agree that
there can be no practice without at least a minimal theory.  But do ALL
theories lead to practice?  I don't think so.

Yours, Bill Godshalk

[Editor's Note: For the past few days, this thread has been between two
members. I suggest that this might be the appropriate time to take the
discussion off-line. -Hardy]
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.