Homage to Edward Thompson, Part I Bryan D

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Homage to Edward Thompson, Part I Bryan D Document generated on 09/28/2021 6:40 p.m. Labour/Le Travailleur Homage to Edward Thompson, Part I Bryan D. Palmer Volume 32, 1993 URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/llt32ob01 See table of contents Publisher(s) Canadian Committee on Labour History ISSN 0700-3862 (print) 1911-4842 (digital) Explore this journal Cite this article Palmer, B. D. (1993). Homage to Edward Thompson, Part I. Labour/Le Travailleur, 32, 10–72. All rights reserved © Canadian Committee on Labour History, 1993 This document is protected by copyright law. Use of the services of Érudit (including reproduction) is subject to its terms and conditions, which can be viewed online. https://apropos.erudit.org/en/users/policy-on-use/ This article is disseminated and preserved by Érudit. Érudit is a non-profit inter-university consortium of the Université de Montréal, Université Laval, and the Université du Québec à Montréal. Its mission is to promote and disseminate research. https://www.erudit.org/en/ OBITUARY / NÉCROLOGIE Homage to Edward Thompson, Parti Bryan D. Palmer EDWARD PALMER (E.P.) THOMPSON, described in 1980 as "our finest socialist writer today — certainly in England, possibly in Europe,"1 died at his home, Wick Episcopi, Worcester on 28 August 1993. Born 3 February 1924, he is survived by his wife of 45 years, fellow historian and political comrade, Dorothy, their daughter Kate, sons Mark and Ben, and numerous grandchildren. He left us—whom I define as those interested in and committed to the integrity of the past and the humane possibilities of a socialist future — a most enduring legacy, his example. There are those who would disagree. For as long as I have been an historian there has been an uncomfortable respect for Thompson's histories, a recognition that they occupy a special and influential place. But there has also been a nagging denigration of his accomplishments that runs through an honest and understandable articulation of critique and intellectual difference into less benign realms of malice. Much of this is developed as caricature, but its distortions and disfigurements are fundamentally political, even as they are, at times, trite. From some quarters this is so much to be expected that it can almost be regarded as a phenomenon of political nature; from others it is more disturbingly noteworthy. Seemingly 'naturalistic,' the antagonism to Thompson within elite circles of complacent scholasticism has been longstanding, whatever its softening in recent years. In England it often reached heights difficult to comprehend in North America.2 1 Perry Anderson, Arguments Within English Marxism (London 1980), 1 2In a review of Customs in Common ( 1991 ) in The Independent on Sunday, 5 January 1992, 26, Linda Colley noted that the English tradition of making iconoclasts and dissidents "national possessions" in their old age was almost certainly not going to overtake Thompson, who would continue to draw antagonism precisely because of his commitment to protest and irreverent mockery of established authority, academic and political. 11 12 LABOUR/LE TRAVAIL It must not be forgotten that the first academic response to Thompson's William Morris: Romantic To Revolutionary (19SS) was a stifling silence, punctuated by a Times Literary Supplement review — a mere 600-words in length — titled "Morris and Marxism" that bemoaned the book's "splenetic" tone, castigated its ideological 'bias,' and identified the author's "remarkable feat" of sustaining a "mood of ill-temper through a volume of 900 pages." While The Making of the English Working Class (1963) played to a more appreciative audience, the reviews were not without the shadows of this Cold War posture, which Gertrude Himmelfarb, for one, cast promiscuously across the pages of The New Republic. It is perhaps too easy to declare, in hindsight, that the book "was instantly recognized as a classic," as does EJ. Hobsbawm in an appreciative passage in his recent Thompson obituary; this is a voice that speaks through the obviousness of the book's importance over three decades. But in the early-to-mid 1960s, other voices spoke, shrill and often faltering with fear. In "A Tract of Secret History," Himmelfarb declared: "Thompson is not merely engagé ... [he] is positively enragé." This, apparently, was not good; nor did it produce history of value. Thompson's Making was "large deduction from very little evidence... stance rather than substance." Many reviews carried their sneer in titles of condescension: "Hard Times," "Enter the Cloth Cap," and "The Common Man as Hero." There was obviously worry that Thompson's prose, unique in its almost sexual seductive­ ness, carried with it a libidinal charge capable of corrupting impressionable youth. J.D. Chambers, writing in History, thought it imperative that the "residue of ideological importation be laid bare" lest it lure the unsuspecting innocents of scholarship into its nefarious lair of "sheer fantasy." Dazzled by "the apocalyptic vision of a minority of desperate men," obsessed by "the colour of a bloody revolution," Thompson was an author who, in certain quarters, conjured up the symbolism of the black-coated, anarcho-communist writer-as-bomb-thrower. Worse, there was an audience for this curdling stuff. Students were not only "reading his book — they [were] sometimes buying it." Maybe they were "punch- drunk" like the miserable hand-loom weavers and others who formed the insurrec­ tionary core of Thompson's imagined revolutionary underground. The dangers were clearly great. To use words such as "psychic masturbation," applying them to a reading of aspects of Methodism's history, or to metaphorically (and perhaps problematically) allude to Francis Place's cautious constitutionalism and ultra-re­ spectability as posing for the portrait of "the White Man ' s Trusty Nigger," disturbed academic proprieties, freezing the professional disciplinary countenance in a look of shocked disbelief. Decades later, as Thompson's historical researches took him back into the eighteenth century, on to ground less immediately politically threaten­ ing and less littered with the anti-communism of the 1950s academy, the reaction to his Whigs and Hunters ( 1975) and the edited volume Albion's Fatal Tree ( 1975) appeared slightly more generous. The crude ideological dismissals of Cambridge's J.C.D. Clark were offset by the more knockabout casuistries of the New York Review of Book's Lawrence Stone, the latter taking great pleasure in pointing out E.P. THOMPSON 13 tb^HAndsotbeoMMairàttiuiuouttx>bearKwWMgaf^aU/'Revoludonaries of tbe NYRB, unite! But the mainstream, by and large, gave little to Thompson, and that begrndgmgly. By the early-to-mid-1980s, tbe reinvigorated New Right refocussed generalized conservative sights on Thompson. His peace journalism prompted one Conservative member of the House of Lords to pontificate: "I think this passes the bounds of decency in journalism (Cheers). It was not a thing which anyone, not even Mr. E.P. Thompson, should have written, and having written it, it is not a thing which a great newspaper, read throughout the world, should have been willing to print (Cheers)." Roger Scruton opened his 'philosophical' case against the sentimentality of Marxism with a treatment of Thompson, including him in his diatribe against "thinkers of the New Left"3 JOn the academic response to the Morris volume see EJ>. Thompson, "Postscript," in WZUiom Morris: Romantic to Revolutionary (New York 1977), esp. 768-71; Times literary Supple­ ment, IS July 19S5, 391; Edmund Penning-RowselL "The remodelling of Morris,'* Times Literary Supplement, 11 August 1978,913-14. On the more extensive and engaged com­ mentary on the The Making of the English Working Class, see Thompson's reply to his critics in Thompson, "Postscript,*' The Making of the English Working Class (Harmondsworth 1968), 916-39; my own comments on and citations of various reviews in Bryan D. Palmer, The Making ofEP. Thompson: Marxism, Humanism, and History (Toronto 1980), esp. 65-7, 78; F.K. Donnelly, "Ideology and early English Working-Class History," Social History, 2 (May 1976), 219-38; Gertrude Himmelfarb, "A Tract of Secret History,'' The New Republic, ISO (11 April 1964), 24-6; "Eater the Cloth Cap," Economist, 210 (February 1964), 622; John Gross, "Hard Tunes,'' New York Review of Books, 2 (16 April 1964), 8-10; Herman Ausubel, "The Common Man as Hero," New York Times Book Review (26 April 1964), 44; J.D. Chambers, "Making of tbe English Working Class,** History, 1 (June 1966), 183-9; R. Currie and R.M. Hartwell, "The Making of tbe English Working Class?" in Hartwell, The Industrial Revolution and Economic Growth (London 1971), 361-76. A unique review is Tom Nairn, "Tbe English Working Class," in Robin Blackburn, éd.. Ideology in Social Science: readings in critical social theory (New York 1973), 187-206, which originally appeared in New Left Review. Hobsbawm's comment is in "Obituaries: E.P. Thompson,'* The Independent, 30 August 1993. Place as "the White Man's Trusty Nigger," appears in The Making of the English Working Class (New York 1963), 155, but in tbe 1968 edition this has been altered to "the White Man's Uncle Tom." (170) For the eighteenth-century studies note, especially, J.C.D. Clark, "The Namierism of the Left," Cambridge Review, 22 October 1976; Lawrence Stone, "Whigs, Marxists and Poachers," New York Review of Books, 23 (5 February 1976), 25-7. Other statements include Keith Thomas, "Folk Law," New Statesman, 90 (10 October 1975), 443-5; George Rude, "Poachers and Protesters," Times
Recommended publications
  • Disraeli and the Early Victorian ‘History Wars’ – Daniel Laurie-Fletcher
    Disraeli and the Early Victorian ‘History Wars’ – Daniel Laurie-Fletcher FJHP Volume 25 (2008 ) Disraeli and the Early Victorian ‘History Wars’ Daniel Laurie-Fletcher Flinders University The American historian, Gertrude Himmelfarb, once put the question: ‘Who now reads Macaulay?’ Her own reply to the rhetorical question was: Who, that is, except those who have a professional interest in him–and professional in a special sense: not historians who might be expected to take pride in one of their most illustrious ancestors, but only those who happen to be writing treatises about him. In fact, most professional historians have long since given up reading Macaulay, as they have given up writing the kind of history he wrote and thinking about it as he did. i The kind of history and thinking Himmelfarb was referring to is the ‘Whig interpretation of history’ which is one based on a grand narrative that demonstrated a path of inevitable political and economic progress, a view made famous by the Whig politician and historian Thomas Babington Macaulay (1800-1859). ii In his History of England: From the Accession of James II (1848-1860), Macaulay maintained that the development of political institutions of the nation had brought increased liberties accompanied by the growth of economic prosperity. Macaulay’s study was begun when the educated classes of early Victorian Britain held a widespread fear of a French-style revolution during a time of extensive social, economic and political change. Many, in order to cope with such changes, looked to British history to yield role models as well as cautionary tales of what to avoid in creating a better society.
    [Show full text]
  • The Neoconservative Persuasion: Selected Essays, 1942-2009
    PHILANTHROPY / EVENT TRANSCRIPT The Neoconservative Persuasion: Selected Essays, 1942-2009 By Irving Kristol Edited by Gertrude Himmelfarb February 2, 2011 Panel Discussion of The Neoconservative Persuasion: Selected Essays, 1942-2009 By Irving Kristol Edited by Gertrude Himmelfarb Wednesday, February 2, 2011 Table of Contents Ken Weinstein 1 Amy Kass 1 Charles Krauthammer 3 Irwin Stelzer 7 Leon Kass 11 William Kristol 15 Q&A 23 Gertrude Himmelfarb (“Bea Kristol”) 30 Speaker Biographies 31 © 2011 Hudson Institute Hudson Institute is a nonpartisan, independent policy research organization. Founded in 1961, Hudson is celebrating a half century of forging ideas that promote security, prosperity, and freedom. www.hudson.org Ken Weinstein Good afternoon. I’m Ken Weinstein, CEO of Hudson Institute. I’d like to welcome everyone to today’s Book Forum on the newly published The Neoconservative Persuasion: Selected Essays 1942- 2009, by Irving Kristol, which has been edited by the redoubtable Gertrude Himmelfarb. The book is available for sale in the back at the discounted price of $20, and I urge all of you to get one before you leave. This is a truly remarkable book, one that shows the breadth and the depth of Irving Kristol’s thought over some 67 years, which you’ll be hearing about shortly. My colleagues and I frankly feel privileged that Hudson Institute is the venue for today’s book forum, and I should thank the book’s editor, Gertrude Himmelfarb, for giving us this auspicious honor. (Applause.) We have a truly distinguished panel, who will offer their reflections shortly, but before we get underway I should note that this is Hudson Institute’s 50th anniversary year, and to mark this occasion, the Institute has begun a 50th anniversary seminar series, and today’s exceptional Book Forum is the second event in this series.
    [Show full text]
  • One World Or Three? a Critique of the World-System Theory of Immanuel Wallerstein*
    ONE WORLD OR THREE? A CRITIQUE OF THE WORLD-SYSTEM THEORY OF IMMANUEL WALLERSTEIN* Peter Worsley Our thinking about the process of development has been fundamentally changed in recent years by the emergence of world-system theory, notably in the writings of Andri. Gunder Frank, Immanuel Wallerstein and Samir Amin. It is with the thought of the first two, and primarily Wallerstein, that I shall be concerned here. All of us stand deeply in their debt, not only for the clarity with which they have presented their theoretical frameworks, but also for the serious documentation they have adduced from the historical record. One has only to contrast, for example, the impressionistic account of the 'creation of the world' that I sketched in the first chapter of my book, The Third World, in 1964, to see what a step forward their work represents in terms of theoretical rigour and empirical research. ' World-system theory was initially generated in reaction to 'dualistic' notions which informed most of the development theory of the period following World War 11. The most important theoretical statement of the dualist approach was Arthur Lewis' The Theory of Economic Growth (Allen and Unwin, London, 195 5), for which he has been awarded a Nobel Prize. But in terms of its influence upon government policy, the Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA) achieved much more than did Lewis' abortive venture into planning in Africa and elsewhere. The basic assumption was that the economies of the backward countries could be divided into a modern and a traditional sector respectively. The task of 'modernisation' then consists, it was argued, in shifting resources from the latter to the former; the strategy advocated that of import-substitution.
    [Show full text]
  • Postmodern Theory of History: a Critique
    Postmodern Theory of History: A Critique Trygve R. Tholfsen Teachers College, Columbia University 1. Among the more striking spinoffs of postmodernism in the past fifteen years or so has been an arresting theory of history. On the assumption that "the historical text is an object in itself, made entirely from language, and thus subject to the interrogations devised by the sciences of language use from ancient rhetoric to modern semiotics"1, postmodernists have set out to enlighten historians about their discipline. From that perspective, they have emphasized the intrinsic fictionality of historical writing, derided the factualist empiricism that purportedly governs the work of professional historians, dismissed the ideal of objectivity as a myth, and rejected the truth claims of traditional historiography. Historians have been invited to accept the postmodern approach as a means to critical self reflection and to the improvement of practice. Some postmodern theorists have taken a more overtly anti-histori• cal line that bears directly on important questions of theory and prac• tice. Rejecting the putative "autonomy" claims of professional histo• riography, they dismiss the notion of a distinctively "historical" mode of understanding the past. On this view, the study of origins and de• velopment is of limited analytical value; and the historicist principle of historical specificity or individuality is the remnant of a venerable tradition that has been displaced. It follows that historians ought to give up their claim to special authority in the study of the past. This article will concentrate on the postmodern rejection of the notion that the past has to be understood "historically." 1 Hans KELLNER, "Introduction: Describing Re-Descriptions" in Frank ANKERSMIT and Hans KELLNER (eds.), A New Philosophy of History, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1995, p.
    [Show full text]
  • The Press in the Arab World
    The Press in the Arab World a Bourdieusian critical alternative to current perspectives on the role of the media in the public sphere Hicham Tohme A thesis submitted to the Department of Politics in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy October 2014 1 Abstract The current literature on the role of media in the public sphere in general, and particularly politics, is divided among two opposing trends. The liberal/pluralists argue that media is playing a democratic role consisting of either representing public opinion and/or informing it. The critical theorists argue that media is in fact controlled by and represents elite interests. But even critical theories of the role of media in politics are driven by the belief that media ought to play a democratic and liberal role in society. Both theories therefore share a common normative understanding of what the role of media ought to be and are therefore the product of a common normative ideological framework, the liberal paradigm. This prevents them from properly framing the question of what media actually do in societies which lie beyond the scope of the experience of liberal Europe. This dissertation seeks to transcend this debate, and the liberal paradigm along with it, by arguing that, given a different historical context than the European one, the practice and ethos of media develop differently, and cannot therefore be understood from the lens of the European experience and the liberal paradigm born from within it. To do that, I use Bourdieu's theory of fields to trace the birth and evolution of the private press in Beirut and Cairo from 1858 till 1916.
    [Show full text]
  • Neoconservatism Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative Hberkc Ch5 Mp 104 Rev1 Page 104 Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative Hberkc Ch5 Mp 105 Rev1 Page 105
    Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative hberkc ch5 Mp_103 rev1 page 103 part iii Neoconservatism Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative hberkc ch5 Mp_104 rev1 page 104 Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative hberkc ch5 Mp_105 rev1 page 105 chapter five The Neoconservative Journey Jacob Heilbrunn The Neoconservative Conspiracy The longer the United States struggles to impose order in postwar Iraq, the harsher indictments of the George W. Bush administration’s foreign policy are becoming. “Acquiring additional burdens by engag- ing in new wars of liberation is the last thing the United States needs,” declared one Bush critic in Foreign Affairs. “The principal problem is the mistaken belief that democracy is a talisman for all the world’s ills, and that the United States has a responsibility to promote dem- ocratic government wherever in the world it is lacking.”1 Does this sound like a Democratic pundit bashing Bush for par- tisan gain? Quite the contrary. The swipe came from Dimitri Simes, president of the Nixon Center and copublisher of National Interest. Simes is not alone in calling on the administration to reclaim the party’s pre-Reagan heritage—to abandon the moralistic, Wilsonian, neoconservative dream of exporting democracy and return to a more limited and realistic foreign policy that avoids the pitfalls of Iraq. 1. Dimitri K. Simes, “America’s Imperial Dilemma,” Foreign Affairs (Novem- ber/December 2003): 97, 100. Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative hberkc ch5 Mp_106 rev1 page 106 106 jacob heilbrunn In fact, critics on the Left and Right are remarkably united in their assessment of the administration. Both believe a neoconservative cabal has hijacked the administration’s foreign policy and has now overplayed its hand.
    [Show full text]
  • History 80020 – Literature Survey – European History Tuesdays, 6:30-8
    History 80020 – Literature Survey – European History Tuesdays, 6:30-8:30pm (classroom TBA) Professor Steven Remy ([email protected]) Weekly office hour: Tuesdays 5-6 (room TBA) This course has two purposes: (1) to introduce you to recent scholarship on the major events, themes, and historiographical debates in European history from the Enlightenment to the present; and (2) to prepare you to take the written exam in this field. Each week you will read - and come to class prepared to summarize and discuss - a different title. The titles are assigned below. Each student will write a 700-900 word summary of the book s/he has been assigned and bring a paper copy for me and for each of his/her classmates. I will determine your final course grade as follows: 60% book summaries and 40% in class discussions. Written book summary and class participation requirements are found at the end of the syllabus. A word about the titles I’ve selected: I have selected high-quality scholarship reflecting the temper and direction of current research on and methodological approaches to modern European history. I have also emphasized literature that situates European developments in global contexts. An expanded list of titles for further reading is attached to the syllabus. In addition to keeping up with scholarly journals in your area of interest, I encourage you to stay current by tracking reviews and debates in the following publications: Journal of Modern History, The New York Review of Books, the Times Literary Supplement, the London Review of Books, aldaily.com, H-Net reviews, The Nation, Jewish Review of Books, and Chronicle of Higher Education book reviews.
    [Show full text]
  • Roger Scruton
    ROGER SCRUTON Roger Vernon Scruton 27 February 1944 – 12 January 2020 elected Fellow of the British Academy 2008 by ANTHONY O’HEAR There can be little doubt that by the time of his death in 2020 Sir Roger Scruton had become one of the most important thinkers of his time, not just in Britain, but throughout the English-speaking world and in Europe, particularly in Central Europe. The term ‘thinker’ is used advisedly here. For while Scruton was primarily and pre- eminently a philosopher, indeed an academic philosopher, his range and influence extended into many fields, including religion, music, architecture, politics, the environ- ment, culture in a general sense, the writing of novels, the appreciation of wine, defences of hunting and traditional country life and the nature of animal rights. In addition to his writing, he composed music, including two operas, was a publisher and editor and advised governments. He was active politically in this country and played a significant role in dissident movements in the Eastern bloc before and after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the British Academy, XIX, 447–465 Posted 26 November 2020. © British Academy 2020. ROGER SCRUTON Academic career Roger Vernon Scruton was born in Lincolnshire in 1944, and educated at the Royal Grammar School in High Wycombe from 1954 to 1961. He then attended Jesus College, Cambridge, from 1962 to 1965 and again from 1967 to 1969. He took a Double First in Moral Sciences (Philosophy) in 1967, after which he spent a year as a lecteur in the University College of Pau.
    [Show full text]
  • Stuart Hall Bibliography 25-05-2021
    Stuart Hall (3 February 1932 – 10 February 2014) Editor — Universities & Left Review, 1957–1959. — New Left Review, 1960–1961. — Soundings, 1995–2014. Publications (in chronological order) (1953–2014) Publications are given in the following order: sole authored works first, in alphabetical order. Joint authored works are then listed, marked ‘with’, and listed in order of co- author’s surname, and then in alphabetical order. Audio-visual material includes radio and television broadcasts (listed by date of first transmission), and film (listed by date of first showing). 1953 — ‘Our Literary Heritage’, The Daily Gleaner, (3 January 1953), p.? 1955 — ‘Lamming, Selvon and Some Trends in the West Indian Novel’, Bim, vol. 6, no. 23 (December 1955), 172–78. — ‘Two Poems’ [‘London: Impasse by Vauxhall Bridge’ and ‘Impasse: Cities to Music Perhaps’], BIM, vol. 6, no. 23 (December 1955), 150–151. 1956 — ‘Crisis of Conscience’, Oxford Clarion, vol. 1, no. 2 (Trinity Term 1956), 6–9. — ‘The Ground is Boggy in Left Field!’ Oxford Clarion, vol. 1, no 3 (Michaelmas Term, 1956), 10–12. 1 — ‘Oh, Young Men’ (Extract from “New Landscapes for Aereas”), in Edna Manley (ed.), Focus: Jamaica, 1956 (Kingston/Mona: The Extra-Mural Department of University College of the West Indies, 1956), p. 181. — ‘Thus, At the Crossroads’ (Extract from “New Landscapes for Aereas”), in Edna Manley (ed.), Focus: Jamaica, 1956 (Kingston/Mona: The Extra-Mural Department of University College of the West Indies, 1956), p. 180. — with executive members of the Oxford Union Society, ‘Letter: Christmas Card Aid’, The Times, no. 53709 (8 December 1956), 7. 1957 — ‘Editorial: “Revaluations”’, Oxford Clarion: Journal of the Oxford University Labour Club, vol.
    [Show full text]
  • The Anthropology of Frank Girling and Okot P'bitek
    Introduction Colonial Encounters in Acholiland and Oxford: The Anthropology of Frank Girling and Okot p’Bitek Tim Allen The work of Frank Girling on the Acholi of Uganda and the prose works of Okot p’Bitek about Acholi customs should be recognised as seminal. Written at the time when the classic texts were being published about other Ugandan groups, such as the Alur and the Lugbara, they are the most significant publications on Acholi ways of life from the late Protectorate and early independence era. Both scholars wrote their Doctorate of Philosophy theses as students at Oxford, and were both taught by Professor E.E. Evans-Pritchard (one of the founding figures of British Social Anthropology). Yet their ethnographic publications are commonly ignored. The problem is not that they are lacking in perception or are hard to read – on the contrary. In the case of Frank Girling, it is obvious why his work is neglected. Although he managed to secure his D. Phil in 1952, he had fallen foul of the Protectorate authorities in Uganda, failed to find an academic job in an anthropology depart- ment, and to date there has never been a widely available version of The Acholi of Uganda (1960). Moreover, Girling himself became disillusioned with the kind of anthropological approach his African work represented, and openly disparaged it as a neo-colonial product. Some international researchers focussing on the Acholi region appear not to have read it, and it is largely unknown to Acholi people themselves. Scholars based at Gulu University, located in the largest town in the Acholi region, have told me that they have never heard of his book.
    [Show full text]
  • A Re-Issue of the Text of the May Day Manifesto, with a New Introduction by Michael Rustin
    MAY DAY MANIFESTO1967-68 A re-issue of the text of the May Day Manifesto, with a new introduction by Michael Rustin May 2013 May Day Manifesto 1967-68 A re-issue of the text of the May Day Manifesto, with a new introduction by Michael Rustin May 2013 Note on text May Day Manifesto 1967-8 - Edited by Raymond Williams There are two versions of the May Day Manifesto. The first published in May 1967 was the result of a large group of contributors and edited by Stuart Hall, Edward Thompson and Raymond Williams. The second, a Penguin special was released with Raymond Williams as sole editor. Both versions are copyright the May Day Manifesto Committee of which Michael Rustin was secretary. The 1968 version has been preferred. Typesetting: Ed Sherman Cover: Yoav Segal Project co-ordinator: Ben Little © Mayday Manifesto Committee Published by Soundings With thanks to: Avni Shah Middlesex University ii Contents Note on text ii Revisiting the May Day Manifesto of 1967-68 vi Original preface xxii 1. May Day 1 2. Where the analysis starts 5 3. Social realities 8 4. Poverty today 11 5. The facts of inequality 16 6. Social poverty 19 7. Housing, health and education 23 8. The realities of work 29 9. Communications 34 10. Advertising 36 11. The meaning of modernization 39 12. New capitalist requirements 42 13. The laws of the new market 47 iii Contents 14. The laws of the United States economy 51 15. The economic drive outwards 55 16. America and Europe 58 17. The technological gap 61 18.
    [Show full text]
  • Hobart and William Smith Colleges L>*>€
    HOBART AND WILLIAM SMITH COLLEGES L>*>€. GENEVA, NEW YORK November 2, 1962 Dear *>aula: Thank you for your letter. I was touched by your comment on "loving each other more, but write less". I can only echo such sentiments. At the moment I am, as usual, up to my earlaps in work - work of all sorts. Some of it is of popular value, other stuff more esoteric. The really BIG things of moment is two paperbacks of mine to be is­ sued February 1st - one called THE NKW CIVILIAN MILITARISTS is timely, topical, and can even be understood by normal people; the other is the work of Mills which I have edited with an introduction to be called POWER, POLITICS AND ^EOPLE. We shall probably have an author's party in New York City - I hope you will be able to come. What a clown I am: a wedding party I never had, but a book party yes. vSo goes the life. y plans are a trifle on the grandiose side at the moment. I plan on being at Brooklyn College next year (if all goes well) as a Visiting Professor; and the following year to ditto this at the University of Buenos Aires. Both would be at figures substantially above what I am now making, and if a two-year leave of absence cannot be obtained, well, I shall have to move along anyhow. Apparently my writing has caught on sufficiently in pop-kitsch cir­ cles to warrant getting an agent. I have a big-fallow who handles some important folks, and he promises me results.
    [Show full text]