2. fab fred jameson: I thought the quote Doug posted was lucid and in fact "pretty." But those notorious Jamesonian sentences are, of course, an acquired taste, and that type of writing, and that type of theory, isn't for everybody. His stuff works extremely well within its limits -- i.e., within the academy or the professional "intelligentsia" more generally. In an interview some time after the *Political Unconscious* (or, P-U!, if you prefer) came out, he noted a couple things worth remembering: one, that most people would never berate a physicist, say, for speaking in "jargon" to other physicists; and surely the problems of culture, history, economy (or of marxism, in other words) are at least as complicated as those of physicists', so why not cut him (and Spivak, etc, etc) some slack here? I think his other point was simply: different writers, different skills, for different tasks.
By no means does Jameson fancy himself as even ideally, imaginatively, speaking to the masses, or popularizing marxism/socialism. These latter projects -- equally, if not more important than Jameson's -- would require much different skills and styles, obviously. I think it is a mistake to hold up the style or skills of a "popularizer" or of a "regular writer" as some standard for all types of marxists. Of course, he is hardly beyond criticism, but if our assumption is that real marxists and real writers make things plain, clear and simple, then chances are we wont have much of use to say about his work. I admire plain prose, but I also recognize the truth of Gayatri Spivak's bon mot: "We think plain prose is a cheat." PS: I suspect that by "modern music" Jameson meant Schoenberg/classical stuff....
About the Zionist crap from Zyuganov: if one were to take out the word "zionism", and simply replace it with "oligarchy," the piece would be relatively fine. Simplistic, perhaps, but not "bad." The fact that he does not or cannot simply say "Capital" instead of "Zionist Capital" (?!) is disturbing. It certainly demonstrates an especially irrational anti-semitism (not least b/c Berezovsky et al are all secular "Jews"), and along with the pro-serbian, pro-Milosevic stances, more proof of what Lenin called and denounced as Great Russian Chauvinism. What a waste. Too bad old Vlad never got to launch his own cultural revoluion. One wishes Kagarlitsky (sp.?) was running the "reformed" RCP. Are the Medvedevs around anywhere (still alive?)? And isnt Z's party-slogan something like: For Russia, Motherland, Freedom"? The nation is a woman, and she has been dishonored?! I recall that one his "planks" was the removal of women from "dangerous" work, and, in so many words, more gov't support for them to get back to the business of child-rearing. I also remember hearing some prof from NYC on CBS, talking about how the majority of the Big Cigars were indeed "Jewish", but again, only in name. He also noted that, since the Fall, there are only a few hundred thousand Jews left in Russia. Not that anti-semitism was ever all that empirical anyway....
PS: a related query: can anyone give point me to some sources, or offer your own views about why Gorby failed so miserably..... both by the end of his "regime," and during the last Pres. election? All Ive heard were vague comments about him moving "too slow," him wanting to ban/restrict alcohol, and his getting slugged by some voter last time out.... In short, was that punch simply alcohol related?
cheers, Daniel ---------------------------------------------------- Daniel Vukovich English; Unit for Criticism and Interpretive Theory University of Illinois Urbana, IL 61801 vukovich at uiuc.edu ph. 217-344-7843 ----------------------------------------------------