b – I have tried to insert the TrackBacks (several times) but it did not work, I do not understand why.
Posted by: Jérôme | Mar 1 2005 22:07 utc | 1
Strauss is a wonderful writer, and I have to believe that Billmon hasn’t read a single word of his work, since, if he had, he wouldn’t be lending his name to such a stupid, anti-intellectual put-down. And if Billmon wants to give Strauss a try, he might start start with Persecution and the Art of Writing, a great essay by anyone’s standards. The monographs on Maimonides, Al Farabi and Spinoza are fundamental to the literature on those philosophers, and the work on Hobbes belongs on the shelf with the writings of Kojeve and Koyré (but Billmon, I suspect, has never heard of Kojeve or Koyré). It’s not unusual for enthusiastic “acolytes” to drag the name of a thinker through the mud of their own misconceptions–as we see in the case of Rousseau–but since when do we have to reduce the wisdom (or the stupidity) of an excellent writer (and Strauss could be very stupid indeed) to the vulgarizing brutality of those self-proclaimed “acolytes”? Persecution and the art of writing indeed!
Posted by: alabama | Mar 2 2005 0:42 utc | 4
Seems to me, alabama, the website is only a parody of the “straussians” and not Strauss per se.
But, ok. People should understand why the man’s writings/teachings inspired these creepy neoplatonic enthusiasts like young Kristol. I say, in the interests of speedy condemnation of neoconservatism, we permit this ugly moment of posterity’s condescension toward the man. The value of the “real” Strauss can be rehabilitated by worthy intellectuals at some later date.
BTW. I’ve read Kojeve’s Hegel lectures. I can sort of see how Kojeve could be criticized as rightwing. Same goes for Jean Hypollite. But, in what little I’ve read of Strauss, I can say his politics are more transparently anti-democratic, though, these days, I’m less sure “democracy” is so great especially in the way it is ground out like sausage by our political class.
I’ll reserve judgment until I read the book you suggest, but I’m pretty sure Strauss earns the reputation the Billmon’s linked website gives him.
Posted by: slothrop | Mar 2 2005 1:56 utc | 5
I’m with slothrop, like the case of Gottlob Frege, history will sort out the relative importance of the idea and the advocacy. Strauss should be so lucky as Frege.
Posted by: anna missed | Mar 2 2005 2:42 utc | 6
suggest reading bio on hannah arendt for her early thoughts on strauss – she knew enough to stay clear of the man and his work.
Posted by: old | Mar 2 2005 3:16 utc | 7
No, slothrop, he does not earn the reputation that the linked website gives him. You’re an academic and a scholar, and so I will admit that I’m a little shocked at the easy attitude you bring to this particular challenge. So I’ll offer you another challenge that might just prompt you, in a spirit of gleeful malice, to do a little extra spade-work on the subject: find me one single page by Strauss that can be read as an attack on democracy, and I will tear it out of a copy purchased by me, chew it slowly and thoroughly, and swallow it whole along with a glass of cold water.
People who trash Strauss are as sleazy as the politcal con-men who advertise him as their ideological hero–those being, I happily agree, some of the sleaziest characters to be found anywhere on the scholarly scene. They can’t read, write, think, or argue, and they bray like Nietzsche’s asses.
Posted by: alabama | Mar 2 2005 4:58 utc | 8
Western “canonical” philosophers considered as action heroes! I personally want an Edward Said and a Noam Chomsky action figures so I can keep it right next to my Osama Bin Laden and Pol Pot dolls. I fantasize of a caged death match with Jesus and Edward Said in one corner and Bush and Sammual P. Huntington in the other corner while Capt kirk Mc’s the match!
Posted by: Uncle $cam | Mar 2 2005 7:02 utc | 9
“but Billmon, I suspect, has never heard of Kojeve or Koyré”
Well for once, Alabama, you’re right about something.
Posted by: Billmon | Mar 2 2005 15:39 utc | 10
Do you mean Kojeve or Kojève? Never heard of the first one either 😉
As it were, it’s Kojevnikoff. (thanks to Google, another Russian import…)
Posted by: Jérôme | Mar 2 2005 16:06 utc | 11
Jérôme, since you’ve always been a generous tutor, in the matter of locating the diacritical markings on the Mac keyboard, I’ll ask for your help in finding the “e grave”. Ten minutes of trial and error failed to turn it up.
I certainly I accept the fact that that we’re not conducting a survey of Western philosophy hereabouts, but I notice also that we make an effort, now and then, to speak up for academics and intellectuals being trashed by idiots hither and yon–often from blind ignorance of the man, his work and his context. In Billmon’s case–since his reading is confined, it would seem, to a few things by Vonnegut, Heller and Orwell (worthy writers all)–we should feel free to speak up as early and as often as possible. We learn from each other on this site.
Posted by: alabama | Mar 2 2005 16:55 utc | 13
ô slothrop
there are tinkers/thinkers who are worth only a moments meditation. strauss & heidegger are hardly even worth that – you would be well advised my friend to return to husserl & uncle karl jaspers
it is not anti intellectual to dismiss ideas or even the oeuvre of certain writers – their profoundly anti democratic thoughts preclude me at least from devoting time to other, keener researches. & contrary to a certain myth within cultural studies for example their is greater circles outside the trinty of kojéve, hippolyte beuffret
jean pierre faye has written a number of very interesting books & articles on this crew & he is an ancient acolyte, though they are no longer fashionable the phenomenologists need to be reread up to & including sarte critique of dialectical reason
herr heidgerr & his pals have poisoned some of the most rich discourse here even amongst the most gifted thinkers. at a pinch i’d rather reread alfred doblin than herr heidegger whose only contribution to real philosphy was silence
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Mar 2 2005 19:51 utc | 14
rgiap
I admit I’ve only read the essays and the 4 vols. of heidegger’s nietzsche lectures. The criticism of heidegger by adorno in negative dialectic is hard to follow, but adorno says dasein ontology is really idealism totally justifying alienation of humans from nature. That’s the gist of it. adorno sure didn’t like him. also, heidegger was, regretably, a nazi.
Posted by: slothrop | Mar 2 2005 20:14 utc | 15
slothrop
more importantly, unlike his french comrades, he did not respect herr heidegger & before you are attacked for it – now there exists so much damning proof outside of his rectors speech including his increasing & active support fot the party throughout the nazi period, his active influence for academic appointments. his consistent inability to demand pardon – even when it was ‘offered’ by paul celan in the black forest but for me his most despicable sins are human – his theft & treatment of edmund husserl is one amongst many examples of his inhhumanity to others in a very practical, unlofty way
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Mar 2 2005 20:24 utc | 16
in any case, i prefer to think of old leo strauss as the barry manilow of political philosophy & herr heidegger as meatloaf
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Mar 2 2005 21:57 utc | 17
Strauss is a wonderful writer …
Only on the say-so of alabama – I will now have to read this stuff.
Hope it’s worth it (life is short).
Posted by: DM | Mar 2 2005 22:36 utc | 18
In any smackdown involving the Copacobana and the waterfront, there’s really no contest.
Posted by: Ineluctable | Mar 4 2005 11:34 utc | 19