Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> On Aug 17, 2010, at 1:49 PM, Eric Beck wrote:
>
> > I don't necessarily disagree with a lot of what you say here, but this
> > bit, which you return to frequently, is kind of silly. People do
> > actually read stuff and are convinced by the
>
> Me, I was bent at an early age by Friedman's Capitalism and Freedom. If only we had a book that good.
At an "early age" I was "bent" by all sorts of books. But your case seems to me to undercut rather than suport Eric's argument: how long did you stay "bent"?
My formulation was way too sloppy, because I haven't got straight yet the content of what I want to say. Books matter of course, with a tremendous impact on thining. But in some important way I remain convinced that books almost _never_ move a reader in a major _and lasting_ way, unless she is already, in some important way, moving in the direction which the book formalizess & articulates. Beyond that, using the terminology of Theory/Propaganda/Agitation books can serve as propaganda -- that is they can deepend, change in various ways, already formed basic directionsl But books never I think serve an agitational purpose, of effecting a leap to antoher perspective that is deep enough to be lasting. And I don't think the reading experiences ob bright teenagers is relevant here.
Carrol