On the MLG-ICS

as Marxist criticism increasingly gained a foothold in the academy, the MLG lost some of its raison d'etre. These remarks should not be taken to imply that the MLG has gradually but irreversibly declined since the heydays of the early 70's but that, as I shall point out in relation to the summer Institute, its function has significantly changed in the recent past as it has come to address a new, more theoretically and politically aware, audience.

Having just come from the MLG, I can only say that I don't know if I can count myself as one of these theoretically and politically aware audience members and, therefore, I don't know what purpose the Institute played for me. I heard some smart papers and witnessed some unique interchanges between speakers and audiences. The confidence and consideration that the participants had for themselves and one another displays not only a deep self awareness but also a sense of community. In this way, I might describe my experience there as somewhat anomic.

as a side note I am becoming habituated to only speaking with people I know at conferences. I can't actually recall meeting anyone at a conference since my first at KSU when I was the only person from GMU who attended. This is a combination of a wierd egotism that inspires introversion. I say it is because I do not want to force my views on others, but deep down it is because I secretly don't beleive they could stand up to scrutiny. Learning more about the subjects I am trying to talk on only lends itself to this secret insecurity I rarely admit to myself. I also think that much of it is a desire to continue to be open to new ideas and be reflexive about the ones I have. But it is clear that, on topics I care about, I am willing to take a stand: What is cultural studies, for instance. At the past three conferences I've been to, the difference has been that I have not been able to produce a paper that clearly takes a stand. When I do, it inspires conversation. When I only produce analysis--convoluted and usually filled with jargon that I don't take enough time to unpack--like this weekend, it falls flat. I have had no comments except for pity comments from people vaguely interested in the topics that think they might glean some observation for their own work. I don't blame them for this. I just can't expect an audience to be so generous as to truly engage with ideas that aren't framed in a polemical argument or posed in terms of pop-culture references.

On the other hand, the greater problem I face, which the Institute has certainly helped me to see, is my level of abstraction. I am neither theoretical nor practical enough. The people in this group are obviosuly interested in immersing themselves in a variety of ideas and learning about them deeply. But they also are committed to Marxism in a way that is completely foreign to me. I think I have traveled a very long distance from my suburban Texas roots in my critical thinking about culture and society, but I have never imagined a day when I would identify myself as a Marxist. This is mostly because I wouldn't know what that meant at this point. I can confidently say that the Institute hasn't really cleared that up for me because it was used in a way I am always supicious of: "I think we, as Marxists should do/think..." Ever since I started to question christianity in th 7th grade, any doctrine and especially one that requires allegiance that seems unclear or instrumental, something inside me revolts. Of course I have the same reaction whether someone is asking me to give money to a charity or attend a meeting, so this could basically be rooted in some fundamentally selfish individualism which I don't believe in ever really renouncing. Then again, part of this is also rooted in a lack of confidence in my own interpretation. I simply lack the qualifications to be able to argue with someone experienced about what Marxism means. Therefore it is not something I can argue about or help to define or participate in considering in that way. It is something that I have been content to be inspired by at times and to consider things through, but I have never felt interested in having it define me or my existence.

There is no such lack of committment on the part of the folks at the MLG and, for the most part, there wasn't a lot of questioning of people's committment. There was an implicit solidarity to what was a vague notion of Marxism that was never defined upfront. The final panel, however, helped to solidify for me how different their notion of what this means is from my own. Labor organizers were there to speak on that subject and of the need for organizing.

pick this up later...