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 11.1500  Monday, 14 August 2000.

[1]     From:   Ed Taft <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 11 Aug 2000 14:51:10 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Marx & Shakespeare (Art and Ideology?)

[2]     From:   Jeffrey Myers <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 11 Aug 2000 20:47:59 -0400
        Subj:   RE: SHK 11.1496 Re: Marx and Shakespeare


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Ed Taft <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 11 Aug 2000 14:51:10 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:        Marx & Shakespeare (Art and Ideology?)

This thread has been very interesting, even if it recently has been an
interchange between Bill Godshalk and John Drakakis. a few observations
follow:

1. Doesn't everyone agree that art can contain ideology?  Isn't that one
reason why art can espouse a point of view?  How can it be, then, that
"ideology is a material practice, NOT an art"?

2. Culture may well be a manifestation of biology.  In fact, what else
COULD it be?  The throw-away word 'determinism' (as in 'biological
determinism') is really a red herring.  What if our biology encodes the
capacity for free will?  Why not?  As Marx himself once pointed out,
"Quantity changes quality."

3. There can be theory without practice.  In the late nineteenth and
early 20th century, the theory of an ether for the transmission light
was well known. No one tries to practice that theory today.

4. Beavers' dams are quite artistic, John. Look at the construction of
one sometime.

To me, Bill clearly has got the better of this particular argument.  But
isn't the central issue the nature of art and how it differs (if at all)
from ideology?

--Ed Taft

PS: Sophie Masson may offer a clue in her last e-mail on this subject.
If I remember right, she espouses a position similar to that of T.S.
Eliot, who argued that the artistic process "is a continual extinction
of personality."  If so, then art is both impersonal and even-handed;
thus, it is somehow BEYOND ideology. At least, that what I understood
Sophie to say.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jeffrey Myers <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 11 Aug 2000 20:47:59 -0400
Subject: 11.1496 Re: Marx and Shakespeare
Comment:        RE: SHK 11.1496 Re: Marx and Shakespeare

> [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]

Please don't.  I find the exchange interesting.

Jeff Myers
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.