Oh yeah....
Just finished this, really enjoyed and was a little scared by how closely it all resonated with my own life
Just finished this, really enjoyed and was a little scared by how closely it all resonated with my own life
In Russia only clowns and dangerous pro-Soviet revisionists support Karl Marx. Usually Marxism there goes hand in hand with aggressive anti-Americanism and anti-West position in general. Surprisingly in the West Marx's dangerous and poisonous ideas ( particularly idiotic theory of class struggle which was the kernel of the whole teaching) are more vital and still influential for example in such spheres as feminism and social equality.
Just finished:
And I loved it. Next one is:
'Norwegian Wood' didn't really do it for me, but I did get absorbed by 'The Wind-up Bird Chronicle'.
I'd be interested to hear your opinion comparing the two books once you have finished the latter.
Yeah I agree - Norwegian Wood was the most conventional, and least gripping Murakami I've read. Hard-Boiled Wonderland is probably my favourite (kinda reminded me of Iain Banks' Walking On Glass with the twin narratives), although Wind-Up Bird Chronicle is up there - I prefer his more surreal stuff. I went through a phase a few years ago of caning Murakami but got a little jaded with his books in the end - although superficially very engaging, I find a lot of his stuff is very similar and there's a sort of 'politeness' to his prose style and characters that irks me. Haven't read anything of his since After Dark.
Thats a polite way of saying he writes the same book every time.
If you read 1Q84 there is probably no need to read any of his other stuff, it's all in there.
Interestingly, my university makes almost all its students read Marx for a year in their education here. My reading of Marx (ie my teacher's reading of Marx) was not a class-struggle one -- in fact, we did not talk about class conflict even once! Rather, we talked about internal contradictions of capitalism, and spent a large amount of time on the economic and philosophical manuscripts (along with the Gundrisse), discussing Marx's notion of the human being.
Next year were going to talk about his ideas in terms of society and personal identity, including readings of Foucault and Durkheim.
Can I conclude then, that if I read all his other stuff, I can skip the 1Q84 books?
Yeah I agree - Norwegian Wood was the most conventional, and least gripping Murakami I've read. Hard-Boiled Wonderland is probably my favourite (kinda reminded me of Iain Banks' Walking On Glass with the twin narratives), although Wind-Up Bird Chronicle is up there - I prefer his more surreal stuff. I went through a phase a few years ago of caning Murakami but got a little jaded with his books in the end - although superficially very engaging, I find a lot of his stuff is very similar and there's a sort of 'politeness' to his prose style and characters that irks me. Haven't read anything of his since After Dark.
If they didn't speak about class conflict theory which was the kernel of the whole Marx's political ideology around which all his other ideas including economical revolved then they don't teach you Marx per se, as he was but they teach you interpretation of Marx which suits liberal leftist agenda and American universities are known for their liberalism. They misinterpret Marx ignoring the key concepts of his teaching ( as if they didn't exist) and concentrating on points which give Marxism more "positive" look.
If they didn't speak about class conflict theory which was the kernel of the whole Marx's political ideology around which all his other ideas including economical revolved then they don't teach you Marx per se, as he was but they teach you interpretation of Marx which suits liberal leftist agenda and American universities are known for their liberalism. They misinterpret Marx ignoring the key concepts of his teaching ( as if they didn't exist) and concentrating on points which give Marxism more "positive" look.
It's been said before, but I think it's worth re-iterating: start a thread on Marxism is you wish to discuss the work of Marx in this level of detail (or use the spoiler approach suggested by @metalsonata); it's essentially spam for those of us who aren't interested in the subject. This is the reason I un-subbed from this thread last time - 3 pages or more of over-zealous discussion of a niche subject.