The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.1520 Wednesday, 16 August 2000.
From: Ed Taft <
Date: Tuesday, 15 Aug 2000 14:07:00 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Marx and Shakespeare
Hugh Grady's learned distinctions are helpful in sorting out the
different meanings of "ideology," and I appreciate the clarity with
which he does so. Whether or no "art can be extra-ideological," the
question Hugh raises, is addressed by Sophie Masson's experience as an
artist. It certainly SEEMS that artists experience the act of creation
as beyond ideology.
On the other hand, going back to T. S. Eliot, while he writes that art
is impersonal and non-partisan, recent critics have found his poetry to
be highly personal and informed by a deeply conservative Christianity
that surely could be called a kind of ideology, in BOTH senses of the
term, as explained by Hugh.
So I admit my puzzlement, which will be no surprise to John Drakakis,
who expresses "bafflement" at my comments. That's OK. For two weeks,
I've been baffled by his.