Anarchy 31/The spontaneous university - Revision history

Ivanhoe at 18:59, 11 October 2021

2021-10-11T18:59:43Z

Ivanhoe at 04:06, 26 September 2021

2021-09-26T04:06:41Z

Ivanhoe at 03:18, 26 September 2021

2021-09-26T03:18:30Z

Show changes

69.50.165.95 at 22:52, 18 July 2017

2017-07-18T22:52:40Z

69.50.165.95 at 22:47, 18 July 2017

2017-07-18T22:47:48Z

Show changes

imported>Ivanhoe at 16:40, 12 April 2017

2017-04-12T16:40:58Z

imported>Ivanhoe at 23:12, 11 April 2017

2017-04-11T23:12:20Z

imported>Ivanhoe at 01:06, 11 April 2017

2017-04-11T01:06:10Z

imported>Ivanhoe: Created page with "
{{header | title = ANARCHY 31 (Vol 3 No 9) SEPTEMBER 1963
The spontaneous university | author = Alexander Trocchi | sec..."

2017-04-11T00:21:22Z

Created page with "<div style="text-align:justify;">{{header | title = [[../|ANARCHY 31 (Vol 3 No 9) SEPTEMBER 1963]]<br>The spontaneous university | author = Alexander Trocchi | sec..."

New page

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 31 (Vol 3 No 9) SEPTEMBER 1963]]<br>The spontaneous university
| author = Alexander Trocchi
| section =
| previous = [[../Anarchism and practicability|Anarchism and practicability]]
| next = '''[[Anarchy 32]]'''
| notes = ''ALEXANDER TROCCHI graduated in philosophy at {{w|Glasgow University|University_of_Glasgow}} and has since lived in {{w|Paris|Paris}} and {{w|America|United_States}}. He is the author of ''{{w|Young Adam|Young_Adam}}'' and ''{{w|Cain{{s}} Book|Cain's_Book}}.'' These fragments are from his {{qq|Invisible Insurrection of a Million Minds}}, and readers will notice their relevance to the ideas canvassed in ''[[Anarchy 24|{{sc|Anarchy}} 24]] (''The Community of Scholars'')'' and ''[[Anarchy 30|{{sc|Anarchy}} 30]] (''The Community Workshop'').
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|293}}

<font size="5">'''The spontaneous university'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Alexander Trocchi|ALEXANDER TROCCHI]]'''</font>

{{sc|In a recent essay {{w|Arnold Wesker|Arnold_Wesker}}}}, concerned precisely with the gulf between art and pupular culture and with the possibility of reintegration refers to the threatened strike of 1919 and to a speech of {{w|Lloyd George|David_Lloyd_George}}. The strike could have brought down the government. The Prime Minister said:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}… you will defeat us. But if you do so have you weighed the consequences? The strike will be in defiance of the government of the country and by its very success will precipitate a constitutional crisis of the first importance. For, if a force arises in the state which is stronger than the state itself, then it must be ready to take on the functions of the state. Gentlemen have you considered, and if you have, are you ready?</font></blockquote>

The strikers, as we know, were not ready. Mr. Wesker comments:

{{DEFAULTSORT:Spontaneous university}}
[[Category:Education]]
[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Republished from other sources]]

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 {{sc|In a recent essay {{w|Arnold Wesker|Arnold_Wesker}}}}, con&shy;cerned pre&shy;cisely with the gulf be&shy;tween art and pup&shy;ular cul&shy;ture and with the pos&shy;si&shy;bil&shy;ity of re&shy;inte&shy;gra&shy;tion refers to the threat&shy;ened strike of 1919 and to a speech of {{w|Lloyd George|David_Lloyd_George|David Lloyd George}}. The strike could have brought down the gov&shy;ern&shy;ment. The Prime Min&shy;is&shy;ter said:
-<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}&hellip; you will defeat us. But if you do so have you weighed the conse&shy;quen&shy;ces? The strike will be in defi&shy;ance of the gov&shy;ern&shy;ment of the country and by its very suc&shy;cess will pre&shy;cip&shy;it&shy;ate a con&shy;stitu&shy;tional crisis of the first im&shy;port&shy;ance. For, if a force arises in the state which is stronger than the state itself, then it must be ready to take on the func&shy;tions of the state. Gentle&shy;men have you con&shy;sidered, and if you have, are you ready?</font></blockquote>
+<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}{{e}} you will defeat us. But if you do so have you weighed the conse&shy;quen&shy;ces? The strike will be in defi&shy;ance of the gov&shy;ern&shy;ment of the country and by its very suc&shy;cess will pre&shy;cip&shy;it&shy;ate a con&shy;stitu&shy;tional crisis of the first im&shy;port&shy;ance. For, if a force arises in the state which is stronger than the state itself, then it must be ready to take on the func&shy;tions of the state. Gentle&shy;men have you con&shy;sidered, and if you have, are you ready?</font></blockquote>
 The strikers, as we know, were not ready. Mr. Wesker com&shy;ments:
-<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}The crust has shifted a bit, a num&shy;ber of people have made for&shy;tunes out of the pro&shy;test and some&shy;where a host of Lloyd Georges are grin&shy;ning con&shy;ten&shy;tedly at the situa&shy;tion &hellip; All pro&shy;test is al&shy;lowed and smiled upon be&shy;cause it is known that the force—eco&shy;nomic&shy;ally and cul&shy;tur&shy;ally—lies in the same dark and secure quar&shy;ters, and this secret know&shy;ledge is the real des&shy;pair of both artist and intel&shy;lec&shy;tual. We are para&shy;lysed by this know&shy;ledge, we pro&shy;test every so often but really the whole cul&shy;tural scene—par&shy;ticu&shy;larly on the left—{{q|is one of awe and in&shy;ef&shy;fec&shy;tual&shy;ity}}. I am certain that this was the secret know&shy;ledge that largely ac&shy;coun&shy;ted for the de&shy;cline of the cul&shy;tural activ&shy;ities in the Thir&shy;ties—no one really knew what to do with the phil&shy;istines. They were om&shy;nipo&shy;tent, friendly, and se&shy;duct&shy;ive. The germ was carried and passed on by the most un&shy;sus&shy;pected; and this same germ will cause, is begin&shy;ning to cause, the de&shy;cline of our new cul&shy;tural up&shy;surge unless &hellip; unless a new sys&shy;tem is con&shy;ceived where&shy;by we who are con&shy;cerned can take away, one by one, the secret reins.</font></blockquote>
+<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}The crust has shifted a bit, a num&shy;ber of people have made for&shy;tunes out of the pro&shy;test and some&shy;where a host of Lloyd Georges are grin&shy;ning con&shy;ten&shy;tedly at the situa&shy;tion {{e}} All pro&shy;test is al&shy;lowed and smiled upon be&shy;cause it is known that the force—eco&shy;nomic&shy;ally and cul&shy;tur&shy;ally—lies in the same dark and secure quar&shy;ters, and this secret know&shy;ledge is the real des&shy;pair of both artist and intel&shy;lec&shy;tual. We are para&shy;lysed by this know&shy;ledge, we pro&shy;test every so often but really the whole cul&shy;tural scene—par&shy;ticu&shy;larly on the left—{{q|is one of awe and in&shy;ef&shy;fec&shy;tual&shy;ity}}. I am certain that this was the secret know&shy;ledge that largely ac&shy;coun&shy;ted for the de&shy;cline of the cul&shy;tural activ&shy;ities in the Thir&shy;ties—no one really knew what to do with the phil&shy;istines. They were om&shy;nipo&shy;tent, friendly, and se&shy;duct&shy;ive. The germ was carried and passed on by the most un&shy;sus&shy;pected; and this same germ will cause, is begin&shy;ning to cause, the de&shy;cline of our new cul&shy;tural up&shy;surge unless {{e}} unless a new sys&shy;tem is con&shy;ceived where&shy;by we who are con&shy;cerned can take away, one by one, the secret reins.</font></blockquote>
 Al&shy;though I found Mr. Wesker{{s}} essay in the end dis&shy;ap&shy;point&shy;ing, it did con&shy;firm for me that in {{w|England|England}} as else&shy;where there are groups of people who are act&shy;ively con&shy;cerned with the prob&shy;lem. As we have seen, the polit&shy;ical-eco&shy;nomic struc&shy;ture of west&shy;ern so&shy;ci&shy;ety is such that the gears of creat&shy;ive intel&shy;li&shy;gence mesh with the gears of power in such a way that, not only is the former pro&shy;hibited from ever ini&shy;tiat&shy;ing<!-- 'imitiating' in original --> any&shy;thing, it can only come into play at the be&shy;hest of forces (vested inter&shy;ests) that are often in prin&shy;ciple anti&shy;path&shy;etic towards it. Mr. Wesker{{s}} {{q|{{popup|Centre 42|a theatre founded by Arnold Wesker}}}} is a prac&shy;tical at&shy;tempt to alter his rela&shy;tion&shy;ship.
-{{tab}}I should like to say at once that I have no funda&shy;mental quar&shy;rel with Mr. Wesker. My main criti&shy;cism of his pro&shy;ject (and I admit my know&shy;ledge of it is very hazy indeed) is that it is lim&shy;ited in char&shy;ac&shy;ter and that this is re&shy;flec&shy;ted in his ana&shy;lysis of the histor&shy;ical back&shy;ground. {{p|294}}He takes the 1956 pro&shy;duc&shy;tion of {{w|Osborne|John_Osborne|John Osborne}}{{s}} ''{{w|Look Back in Anger|Look_Back_in_Anger}}'', for ex&shy;ample, to be the first land&shy;mark in {{q|our new cul&shy;tural up&shy;surge}}. A seri&shy;ous lack of histor&shy;ical per&shy;spect&shy;ive, the in&shy;sul&shy;arity of his view &hellip; these feat&shy;ures are, I am afraid, in&shy;dic&shy;at&shy;ive of a kind of church-bazaar philo&shy;sophy which seems to under&shy;lie the whole pro&shy;ject. Like handi&shy;crafts, art should not be ex&shy;pec&shy;ted to pay. Mr. Wesker calls for a tradi&shy;tion {{q|that will not have to rely on finan&shy;cial suc&shy;cess in order to con&shy;tinue}}. And so he was led to seek the patron&shy;age of trade unions and has begun to organ&shy;ise a series of cul&shy;tural fest&shy;ivals under their aus&shy;pices. While I have noth&shy;ing against such fest&shy;ivals, the ur&shy;gency of Mr. Wesker{{s}} ori&shy;ginal diag&shy;nosis led me to ex&shy;pect re&shy;com&shy;menda&shy;tions for ac&shy;tion at a far more funda&shy;mental level. Cert&shy;ainly, such a pro&shy;gramme will not carry us very far towards seiz&shy;ing what he so hap&shy;pily refers to as {{q|the secret reins}}. I do not think I am being over&shy;cau&shy;tious in as&shy;sert&shy;ing that some&shy;thing far less ped&shy;estrian than an ap&shy;peal to the public-spirited&shy;ness of this or that group will be the im&shy;per&shy;ative of the vast change we have in mind.
+{{tab}}I should like to say at once that I have no funda&shy;mental quar&shy;rel with Mr. Wesker. My main criti&shy;cism of his pro&shy;ject (and I admit my know&shy;ledge of it is very hazy indeed) is that it is lim&shy;ited in char&shy;ac&shy;ter and that this is re&shy;flec&shy;ted in his ana&shy;lysis of the histor&shy;ical back&shy;ground. {{p|294}}He takes the 1956 pro&shy;duc&shy;tion of {{w|Osborne|John_Osborne|John Osborne}}{{s}} ''{{w|Look Back in Anger|Look_Back_in_Anger}}'', for ex&shy;ample, to be the first land&shy;mark in {{q|our new cul&shy;tural up&shy;surge}}. A seri&shy;ous lack of histor&shy;ical per&shy;spect&shy;ive, the in&shy;sul&shy;arity of his view {{e}} these feat&shy;ures are, I am afraid, in&shy;dic&shy;at&shy;ive of a kind of church-bazaar philo&shy;sophy which seems to under&shy;lie the whole pro&shy;ject. Like handi&shy;crafts, art should not be ex&shy;pec&shy;ted to pay. Mr. Wesker calls for a tradi&shy;tion {{q|that will not have to rely on finan&shy;cial suc&shy;cess in order to con&shy;tinue}}. And so he was led to seek the patron&shy;age of trade unions and has begun to organ&shy;ise a series of cul&shy;tural fest&shy;ivals under their aus&shy;pices. While I have noth&shy;ing against such fest&shy;ivals, the ur&shy;gency of Mr. Wesker{{s}} ori&shy;ginal diag&shy;nosis led me to ex&shy;pect re&shy;com&shy;menda&shy;tions for ac&shy;tion at a far more funda&shy;mental level. Cert&shy;ainly, such a pro&shy;gramme will not carry us very far towards seiz&shy;ing what he so hap&shy;pily refers to as {{q|the secret reins}}. I do not think I am being over&shy;cau&shy;tious in as&shy;sert&shy;ing that some&shy;thing far less ped&shy;estrian than an ap&shy;peal to the public-spirited&shy;ness of this or that group will be the im&shy;per&shy;ative of the vast change we have in mind.
 {{tab}}Never&shy;the&shy;less, at one point in what re&shy;mains an in&shy;ter&shy;esting essay, Mr. Wesker quotes Mr. {{w|Raymond Williams|Raymond_Williams}}. Who Mr. Williams is and from what work the quota&shy;tion is taken I am un&shy;fortun&shy;ately ignor&shy;ant. I only wonder how Mr. Wesker can quote the fol&shy;low&shy;ing and then go out and look for patron&shy;age.

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
   | previous   = [[../Anarchism and practicability|Anarchism and practicability]]
   | next       = '''[[Anarchy 32]]'''
-  | notes      = ''ALEX&shy;ANDER TROCCHI gradu&shy;ated in philo&shy;sophy at {{w|Glas&shy;gow Univer&shy;sity|University_of_Glasgow|University of Glasgow}} and has since lived in {{w|Paris|Paris}} and {{w|Amer&shy;ica|United_States|United States}}. He is the au&shy;thor of ''{{w|Young Adam|Young_Adam}}'' and ''{{w|Cain{{s}} Book|Cain's_Book}}.'' These frag&shy;ments are from his {{qq|In&shy;vis&shy;ible In&shy;sur&shy;rec&shy;tion of a Million Minds}}, and readers will notice their rel&shy;ev&shy;ance to the ideas can&shy;vassed in ''[[Anarchy 24|{{sc|Anarchy}} 24]] (''The Com&shy;mun&shy;ity of Schol&shy;ars'')'' and ''[[Anarchy 30|{{sc|Anarchy}} 30]] (''The Com&shy;mun&shy;ity Workshop'').
+  | notes      = ''ALEX&shy;ANDER TROCCHI gradu&shy;ated in philo&shy;sophy at {{w|Glas&shy;gow Univer&shy;sity|University_of_Glasgow|University of Glasgow}} and has since lived in {{w|Paris|Paris}} and {{w|Amer&shy;ica|United_States|United States}}. He is the au&shy;thor of ''{{w|Young Adam|Young_Adam}}'' and ''{{w|Cain{{s}} Book|Cain's_Book}}.'' These frag&shy;ments are from his {{qq|{{l|In&shy;vis&shy;ible In&shy;sur&shy;rec&shy;tion of a Million Minds|http://www.notbored.org/invisible.html|Full text at NOT BORED!}}}}, and readers will notice their rel&shy;ev&shy;ance to the ideas can&shy;vassed in ''[[Anarchy 24|{{sc|Anarchy}} 24]] (''The Com&shy;mun&shy;ity of Schol&shy;ars'')'' and ''[[Anarchy 30|{{sc|Anarchy}} 30]] (''The Com&shy;mun&shy;ity Workshop'').
 }}

@@ Line 48: / Line 48: @@
 {{tab}}We en&shy;vis&shy;age an inter&shy;na&shy;tional or&shy;gan&shy;isa&shy;tion with branch uni&shy;ver&shy;sities near the capital cities of every coun&shy;try in the world. It will be au&shy;tono&shy;mous, un&shy;polit&shy;ical, eco&shy;nomic&shy;ally in&shy;de&shy;pend&shy;ent. Mem&shy;ber&shy;ship of one branch (as teacher or stu&shy;dent) will en&shy;title one to mem&shy;ber&shy;ship of all branches, and to travel to and resid&shy;ence in foreign branches will be ener&shy;get&shy;ic&shy;ally en&shy;cour&shy;aged. It will be the ob&shy;ject of each branch uni&shy;ver&shy;sity to par&shy;ticip&shy;ate in and {{q|super&shy;charge}} the cul&shy;tural life of the re&shy;spect&shy;ive capital city at the same time<!-- 'of the respective capital city at the same time' repeated in original --> as it pro&shy;motes cul&shy;tural ex&shy;change inter&shy;na&shy;tion&shy;ally and func&shy;tions in itself as a non-<wbr>spe&shy;cial&shy;ised ex&shy;peri&shy;mental school and creat&shy;ive work&shy;shop. Resid&shy;ent pro&shy;fes&shy;sors will be them&shy;selves cre&shy;at&shy;ors. The staff at each uni&shy;ver&shy;sity will be pur&shy;pos&shy;ively inter&shy;na&shy;tional; as far as prac&shy;tic&shy;able, the students<!-- 'studnts' in original --> also. Each branch of the spon&shy;tan&shy;eous uni&shy;ver&shy;sity will be the nuc&shy;leus of an ex&shy;peri&shy;mental town to which all kinds of people will be at&shy;trac&shy;ted for shorter or longer peri&shy;ods and from which, if we are suc&shy;cess&shy;ful, they will derive a re&shy;newed and in&shy;fec&shy;tious sense of life. We en&shy;vis&shy;age an organ&shy;isa&shy;tion whose struc&shy;ture and mech&shy;an&shy;isms are in&shy;fin&shy;itely elastic; we see it as the grad&shy;ual crys&shy;tal&shy;lisa&shy;tion of a re&shy;gener&shy;at&shy;ive cul&shy;tural force, a per&shy;petual brain&shy;wave, creat&shy;ive in&shy;tel&shy;li&shy;gence every&shy;where re&shy;cog&shy;niz&shy;ing and af&shy;firm&shy;ing its own in&shy;volve&shy;ment.
-{{tab}}It is im&shy;pos&shy;sible in the present con&shy;text to de&shy;scribe in pre&shy;cise de&shy;tail the day-<wbr>to-<wbr>day func&shy;tion&shy;ing of the uni&shy;ver&shy;sity. In the first place, it is not pos&shy;sible for one in&shy;divid&shy;ual writing a brief intro&shy;duct&shy;ory essay. The pilot pro&shy;ject does not exist in a phys&shy;ical sense, and from the very begin&shy;ning, like the Israeli {{w|kib&shy;butzes|Kibbutz}}, it must be a com&shy;munal af&shy;fair, tac&shy;tics de&shy;cided ''{{popup|in situ|locally}},'' de&shy;pend&shy;ing upon just what is avail&shy;able when. My as&shy;so&shy;ciates and I during the past dec&shy;ade have been amazed at pos&shy;sibil&shy;ities aris&shy;ing out of the spon&shy;tan&shy;eous inter&shy;play of ideas within a group in con&shy;structed situa&shy;tions. It is on the basis of such ex&shy;peri&shy;ences that we have ima&shy;gined an inter&shy;na&shy;tional ex&shy;peri&shy;ment. Secondly, and con&shy;se&shy;quently, any de&shy;tailed pre&shy;con&shy;cep&shy;tions of my own would be so much ex&shy;cess bag&shy;gage in the spon&shy;tan&shy;eous gener&shy;ation of the group situa&shy;tion.
+{{tab}}It is im&shy;pos&shy;sible in the present con&shy;text to de&shy;scribe in pre&shy;cise de&shy;tail the day-<wbr>to-<wbr>day func&shy;tion&shy;ing of the uni&shy;ver&shy;sity. In the first place, it is not pos&shy;sible for one in&shy;divid&shy;ual writing a brief intro&shy;duct&shy;ory essay. The pilot pro&shy;ject does not exist in the phys&shy;ical sense, and from the very begin&shy;ning, like the Israeli {{w|kib&shy;butzes|Kibbutz}}, it must be a com&shy;munal af&shy;fair, tac&shy;tics de&shy;cided ''{{popup|in situ|locally}},'' de&shy;pend&shy;ing upon just what is avail&shy;able when. My as&shy;so&shy;ciates and I during the past dec&shy;ade have been amazed at pos&shy;sibil&shy;ities aris&shy;ing out of the spon&shy;tan&shy;eous inter&shy;play of ideas within a group in con&shy;structed situa&shy;tions. It is on the basis of such ex&shy;peri&shy;ences that we have ima&shy;gined an inter&shy;na&shy;tional ex&shy;peri&shy;ment. Secondly, and con&shy;se&shy;quently, any de&shy;tailed pre&shy;con&shy;cep&shy;tions of my own would be so much ex&shy;cess bag&shy;gage in the spon&shy;tan&shy;eous gener&shy;ation of the group situa&shy;tion.
 {{tab}}The cul&shy;tural pos&shy;sibil&shy;ities of this move&shy;ment are im&shy;mense and the time is ripe for it. Sci&shy;ent&shy;ists, art&shy;ists, teachers, creat&shy;ive men of good&shy;will every&shy;where are in sus&shy;pense. Waiting. Re&shy;mem&shy;ber&shy;ing that it is our kind even now who oper&shy;ate, if they don{{t}} con&shy;trol, the grids of ex&shy;pres&shy;sion, we should have no dif&shy;fi&shy;culty in re&shy;cog&shy;nis&shy;ing the spon&shy;tan&shy;eous uni&shy;ver&shy;sity as the pos&shy;sible det&shy;on&shy;ator of the in&shy;vis&shy;ible in&shy;sur&shy;rec&shy;tion.

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:12, 11 April 2017
Line 25:		Line 25:

	Although I found Mr. Wesker{{s}} essay in the end disappointing, it did confirm for me that in {{w\|England\|England}} as elsewhere there are groups of people who are actively concerned with the problem. As we have seen, the political-<wbr>economic structure of western society is such that the gears of creative intelligence mesh with the gears of power in such a way that, not only is the former prohibited from ever initiating<!-- 'imitiating' in original --> anything, it can only come into play at the behest of forces (vested interests) that are often in principle antipathetic towards it. Mr. Wesker{{s}} {{q\|{{popup\|Centre 42\|a theatre founded by Arnold Wesker}}}} is a practical attempt to alter his relationship.		Although I found Mr. Wesker{{s}} essay in the end disappointing, it did confirm for me that in {{w\|England\|England}} as elsewhere there are groups of people who are actively concerned with the problem. As we have seen, the political-<wbr>economic structure of western society is such that the gears of creative intelligence mesh with the gears of power in such a way that, not only is the former prohibited from ever initiating<!-- 'imitiating' in original --> anything, it can only come into play at the behest of forces (vested interests) that are often in principle antipathetic towards it. Mr. Wesker{{s}} {{q\|{{popup\|Centre 42\|a theatre founded by Arnold Wesker}}}} is a practical attempt to alter his relationship.
		+
		+	{{tab}}I should like to say at once that I have no fundamental quarrel with Mr. Wesker. My main criticism of his project (and I admit my knowledge of it is very hazy indeed) is that it is limited in character and that this is reflected in his analysis of the historical background. {{p\|294}}He takes the 1956 production of {{w\|Osborne\|John_Osborne}}{{s}} ''{{w\|Look Back in Anger\|Look_Back_in_Anger}}'', for example, to be the first landmark in {{q\|our new cultural upsurge}}. A serious lack of historical perspective, the insularity of his view … these features are, I am afraid, indicative of a kind of church-<wbr>bazaar philosophy which seems to underlie the whole project. Like handicrafts, art should not be expected to pay. Mr. Wesker calls for a tradition {{q\|that will not have to rely on financial success in order to continue}}. And so he was led to seek the patronage of trade unions and has begun to organise a series of cultural festivals under their auspices. While I have nothing against such festivals, the urgency of Mr. Wesker{{s}} original diagnosis led me to expect recommendations for action at a far more fundamental level. Certainly, such a programme will not carry us very far twoards seizing what he so happily refers to as {{q\|the secret reins}}. I do not think I am being overcautious in asserting that something far less pedestrian than an appeal to the public-<wbr>spiritedness of this or that group will be the imperative of the vast change we have in mind.
		+
		+	{{tab}}Nevertheless, at one point in what remains an interesting essay, Mr. Wesker quotes Mr. {{w\|Raymond Williams\|Raymond_Williams}}. Who Mr. Williams is and from what work the quotation is taken I am unfortunately ignorant. I only wonder how Mr. Wesker can quote the following and then go out and look for patronage.
		+
		+	<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}The question is not who will patronise the arts, but what forms are possible in which artists will have control of their own means of expression, in such ways that they will have relation in a community rather than to market or a patron.</font></blockquote>

	{{DEFAULTSORT:Spontaneous university}}		{{DEFAULTSORT:Spontaneous university}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:06, 11 April 2017
Line 21:		Line 21:

	The strikers, as we know, were not ready. Mr. Wesker comments:		The strikers, as we know, were not ready. Mr. Wesker comments:
		+
		+	<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}The crust has shifted a bit, a number of people have made fortunes out of the protest and somewhere a host of Lloyd Georges are grinning contentedly at the situation … All protest is allowed and smiled upon because it is know that the force{{dash\|economically and culturally}}lies in the same dark and secure quarters, and this secret knowledge is the real despair of both artist and intellectual. We are paralysed by this knowledge, we protest every so often but really the whole cultural scene{{dash\|particularly on the left}}{{q\|is one of awe and ineffectuality}}. I am certain that this was the secret knowledge that largely accounted for the decline of the cultural activities in the Thirties{{dash}}no one really knew what to do with the philistines. They were omnipotent, friendly, and seductive. The germ was carried and passed on by the most unsuspected; and this same germ will cause, is beginning to cause, the decline of our new cultural upsurge unless … unless a new system is conceived whereby we who are concerned can take away, one by one, the secret reins.</font></blockquote>
		+
		+	Although I found Mr. Wesker{{s}} essay in the end disappointing, it did confirm for me that in {{w\|England\|England}} as elsewhere there are groups of people who are actively concerned with the problem. As we have seen, the political-<wbr>economic structure of western society is such that the gears of creative intelligence mesh with the gears of power in such a way that, not only is the former prohibited from ever initiating<!-- 'imitiating' in original --> anything, it can only come into play at the behest of forces (vested interests) that are often in principle antipathetic towards it. Mr. Wesker{{s}} {{q\|{{popup\|Centre 42\|a theatre founded by Arnold Wesker}}}} is a practical attempt to alter his relationship.

	{{DEFAULTSORT:Spontaneous university}}		{{DEFAULTSORT:Spontaneous university}}

@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 <blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}The ques&shy;tion is not who will patron&shy;ise the arts, but what forms are pos&shy;sible in which art&shy;ists will have con&shy;trol of their own means of ex&shy;pres&shy;sion, in such ways that they will have rela&shy;tion in a com&shy;mun&shy;ity rather than to market or a patron.</font></blockquote>
 {{DEFAULTSORT:Spontaneous university}}
 [[Category:Education]]
 [[Category:Articles]]
 [[Category:Republished from other sources]]