Difference between revisions of "Anarchy 31/The spontaneous university"

From Anarchy
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Ivanhoe
(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...")
 
imported>Ivanhoe
Line 21: Line 21:
  
 
The strikers, as we know, were not ready. Mr. Wesker com&shy;ments:
 
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 know that the force{{dash|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{{dash|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{{dash}}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>
 +
 +
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-<wbr>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.
  
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:Spontaneous university}}
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:Spontaneous university}}

Revision as of 18:06, 10 April 2017


293

The spon­tan­eous uni­vers­ity

ALEXANDER TROCCHI


In a recent essay 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 Lloyd George. The strike could have brought down the gov­ern­ment. The Prime Min­is­ter said:

  … 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?

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

  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—

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—

par­ticu­larly on the left—

‘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—

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.

Al­though I found Mr. Wesker’s essay in the end dis­ap­point­ing, it did con­firm for me that in England as else­where there are groups of people who are act­ively con­cerned with the prob­lem. As we have seen, the polit­ical-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 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 ‘Centre 42’ is a prac­tical at­tempt to alter his rela­tion­ship.