shag carpet bomb wrote:
>
> ha. i kinda figured that the whole point of embracing michaels' work
> *was* precisely to preserve the province of declaring that, no matter
> what, there *is* such a thing as an objective timeless source for
> making judgments of taste.
Before I dreamt of becoming Marxist or a socialist or even, really, a radical, in my intial involvement in a (mixed race) local civil-rights grouip in Bloomington/Normal, I developed the concept of the "Put-Down" as my all-purpose label for social practices I didn't like (though I had no real analysis of anything at the time. I met women on welfare, and asked one how the hell she survived, and she replied, "I cheat." (She was white, a native of central Illinois.) Then we had a conflict with the head of public housing in Bloomington. Other such matters, and everywhere I turned it seemed I met with categories which, in my available vocabulary, I considered Put-Downs. Without that initial recognition, I doubt that I would everhave become a radical activist. And it seems to me that I'm constantly meeting with put-downs of varius categories of people on this list. Though I have developed different grunds for objecting, I don't like it now any more than I liked it when I met it in B/N 45 years ago.
Carrol