I'm crawling through Ted Morgan's book on the 60's, and I say "crawling" because he writes like a ham sandwich. The most inspid bureaucratese you can imagine, married to a fairly simplistic thesis. Had you not kept recommending it, I would have never purchased it based on cracking it open and looking at the writing. I'm going to try and finish it, but it will be a struggle. Its only redeeming feature so far as I can tell are a sequence of iconic photographs from the 60's -- like the black runners at the Olympics raising their fists in the Black Power salute, which I will cut out and frame. Otherwise, agh....it's pretty tortuous.
Graeber's book on the other hand is, as I've said a number of times, beautifully written. The "beauty" lies not only in the precision and clarity of his language, but in the way he enages the reader and makes him a partner in the process of rethinking concepts that we think we understand either based on some orthodoxy or on a largely unconscious assimilation of cultural norms. This kind of writing not only conveys information, it redefines how we think about knowledge and how we think of ourselves as actors in the world. (Graeber gave an interview where he explained that the writing in the Debt book was something he worked on the hardest...to get away from many bad academic habits...)
He reminded me how crucial a role anthropology can play in helping people understand the fungibility of the domains we take as god-given, and I found reading the Debt book like opening the door on a world that I could actually make new. A great exhilaration.
The main reason I'm on LBO has to do with Doug's writing: the fact that he cares about being clear, the fact that he is capable of humor, the fact that he knows his shit and is never simple minded. It's a world I want to inhabit.
How someone writes matters a great deal. Carrol's writing is clear and passionate at its best, cranky and intolerant at its worst, but it's never bad like Morgan's writing is bad or I would have filtered it out a long time ago.
Good writing matters. I am currently writing stuff for the Oakland teachers union to distribute to teachers and to the public because they want to educate and raise consciousness, and they really like my writing, and they think it will make a difference. And I agree.
Joanna
----- Original Message ----- Sometimes I am still interested in books, that is, in a given book AS a book. But on the whole I no longer give a damn about a given book, in 'arguing' or even thinking to myself over whether it is good, well written, shitty, whatever. I am interested in the world. I see books and articles & posts etc simply as pointers, as systems of memos, raising a question about the world that intrigues me. That's why when Joanna pointed to Graeber's book as well written, nuanced, etc I was completely flummoxed. Really. Who cares. It would or could be just as important a book if it were really badly written, extremely dogmatic & crude, ignoring all fine distinctions.
Now if I could still read, the book I would be concerned to read & taste _as_ a book is Pope's Essay on Critiicism. It has been growing on me in my memory. My thoughts on it do, combined with a number of other things, bear on our world, & concern how in the 1880s a discipline was born. But I grow weary. It's going to have to be put off discussing it further for now.
Carrol
-----Original Message----- From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] On Behalf Of nathan tankus Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 4:10 PM To: Lbo Talk Lbo Talk Subject: [lbo-talk] the Grundrisse and credit
shag carpet bomb said... ":) you've been around for awhile, so i dont' meant to patronize. Still, maybe a little refresher.
first rule of LBO-talk:
always argue in the absence of any direct reference to the text under discussion. the absolute last thing you do is actually drag out a quote to support your contention.
second rule:
a. tell the person who asks for evidence that noone has enough time to read everything and/or mock them by calling them 'smarty pants' and stuph.
b. find convenient quotage from the author on line so as to avoid the issue as to whether they actually read the book.
third rule:
if you bother to bring in quotes to support your thesis, be prepared for responses which are usually built on Teh Snippage and Swipage (TM) which involves snipping out phrases or portions of sentences that can be used to misrepresent (take swipes at) the author or damn them by poisoning the wells. If you complain of baiting/poisoning the wells, you'll be ignored. if you provide substantive quotage to refute their claim, wash rinse repeat. "
Right, I'm sorry, my bad. i have this terrible habit of wanting assertions backed up with evidence. I'll try to reel back my outrageous demands.
p.s. you're fight club esque rules of LBO talk greatly amused me. thanks for that.
-- -Nathan Tankus ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk