For all of his faults, and while he is often associated with postmodernism, he's one of its staunchest critics. As an out-and-out Marxist any argument against Eagleton is ultimately an argument against Marxism. a s such, he definitely believes there is a 'true' answer (namely a class revolution leading to the dictatorship of the proletariat). The
validity of his answer is of course another matter.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lurker
"Privileges" is the key word there, with it's negative connotations of elitism. He's basically saying there are no good and bad books. I suppose that ties in with his Marxism with it's depressing levelling or society.
|
I think you're right in a sense, although he definitely seems to distinguish between a bourgeois (self-serving and bad) and a progressive (and therefore good) strand within, for want of a better word, 'literature'. Although ultimately I think he finds all books 'useful' in terms of the way in which they serve either to highlight or conceal class conditions - hence his 'reading against the grain' argument.