Abraham Rotstein, Weekend Notes XX: Difference between revisions
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
== Appendix == | == Appendix == | ||
=== 1984 - A discussion === | === 1984 - A discussion === | ||
Excerpt From “Fighting Words”, C.B.C. - TV. Feb 16, 1958. | |||
PARTICIPANTS: HANNAH ARENDT<br /> | |||
IRVING HOWE<br /> | |||
JOHN MEISL<br /> | |||
KARL POLANYI<br /> | |||
NATHAN COHEN, MODERATOR<br /> | |||
Cohen: Let us proceed to tour first quotation… “<u>1984</u> is not a rational attempt to imagine a probable future”… Any idea of the author? A vagabond for four years against his distinguished's mother's wishes, however he had no use for bohemian life. A novelist of little success, more celebrated as a reviewer of a famous American magazine… No? His latest novel… | |||
[…] | |||
Polanyi: Well, I think it's a utopia, a negative utopia of terrific consequences and I should like to say that in my lifetime I would range three books together, that is <u>Mein Kampf</u>, Stalin's <u>History of the Communist Party of Russia</u> falsified history for a long time to come and Orwell's 1984. | |||
Howe: Why this conjunction, Dr. Polanyi? | |||
Polanyi: For the following reason. If today, we are fairly all agreed, well we are well on the way to a return to sanity, and all good wishes in this regard, well if there is one obstacle which is a literary obstacle, one which | |||
[[#mw-page-base|↑]] | [[#mw-page-base|↑]] | ||
Revision as of 01:31, 24 November 2018
Text in English to type
Comments on my "Not by Organization Alone" Draft #2
Paul Medow and the East
Comments on K.P.'s "A Note" on "Rousseau's
Comments of my letter of Jan. 31, 1958
[13][1] P. liked the letter with the four points and thought all were valid.
In point 1), the second paragraph (moralizing a premature resignation to the r. of s.) is the operative one.
Point 2), is the same thing and gives it content.
Point 3), the formulation should be on the illusion of freedom (which is clearer than ultimate freedom). What do we mean by native freedom? It needs an answer. The continuum of compromise is no answer.
Point 4), certainly there is the freedom of women, children and the working-calss, but it is quite true that they are only freedoms. It is not a satisfactory answer. ↑
"Freedom and Technology" (4)
P. read Hegel (Phenomenology) and half of Lukacs and he could now easily write the Marx.
The real difficulty is then the Shaw. “Back to Methuselah” etc. proves that Shaw was the only thinker who starts from the reality of society and the individual who doesn't feel this limitation is funny.
On existentialism P. doesn't know where to put his foot. He read Camus (also a recent story in Partisan Review) and he is a tremendous writer. ↑
Comments of Adam's Review of Trade and Market
Notes
Arendt
Adler and Keslo Book
Appendix
1984 - A discussion
Excerpt From “Fighting Words”, C.B.C. - TV. Feb 16, 1958.
PARTICIPANTS: HANNAH ARENDT
IRVING HOWE
JOHN MEISL
KARL POLANYI
NATHAN COHEN, MODERATOR
Cohen: Let us proceed to tour first quotation… “1984 is not a rational attempt to imagine a probable future”… Any idea of the author? A vagabond for four years against his distinguished's mother's wishes, however he had no use for bohemian life. A novelist of little success, more celebrated as a reviewer of a famous American magazine… No? His latest novel…
[…]
Polanyi: Well, I think it's a utopia, a negative utopia of terrific consequences and I should like to say that in my lifetime I would range three books together, that is Mein Kampf, Stalin's History of the Communist Party of Russia falsified history for a long time to come and Orwell's 1984.
Howe: Why this conjunction, Dr. Polanyi?
Polanyi: For the following reason. If today, we are fairly all agreed, well we are well on the way to a return to sanity, and all good wishes in this regard, well if there is one obstacle which is a literary obstacle, one which
Excerpt from "Fighting Words", C.B.C. - TV. February 16, 1958
November 2, 1957 ↑
Text Informations
Date: February 15, 1958 (Interview)
KPA: 45/16
Editor's Notes
- ↑ Archive pagination.