Nice article. I haven't engaged with Gramerci very closely. His work seems more instrumental and political than I tend to attend to. It's a level above my area of focus, but interesting nonetheless.
Well this was a nice read,really opened my mind to more forms of oppression that just passively seeped into norms. Still grappling around how something so seemingly simple and overlooked can hold so much weight. Looking foward to the next article on Peirre,he's one of my recently discovered favourites.
This was an exceptional read! While there's been a lot of slop around Gramsci, as I've come to discover with my years of studying political philosophy, your article an aspect of his theories which are crucial yet ignored. Loved reading it, can't wait to read more.
My first piece on the site also happened to be on Gramsci, although I take a more literary route of exploration. Would love your thoughts on it, if you have the time.
Such a good and very interesting article! Gramsci has been on my reading list for a while now and now I can’t wait for my semester break to have some more time and read his works.
Interesting article. When you wrote that the central question that the notebooks tried to answer is how does the ruling class maintain power with out recourse to force I thought that you must have read the selections, not Buttegiegs three volume translation of the actual notebooks, but there it is in the bibliography. Working my way through the full three volumes was the most difficult reading that I've done since my days at university and the last thing that I would have thought was that there was a central question or theme. I am a philosopher and political scientist by training and not a linguist (though I am married to one) and my take on the importance of hegemony, or cultural hegemony is slightly different. First of all your statement that it is about keeping power I think is a little inaccurate. It's not wrong, but I think that Gramschi is talking about getting and keeping power. That the primary importance of achieving cultural hegemony is in getting to power in the first place. He was informed by his engagement in the struggle between the fascists and the communists and he was an important part of the leadership of the Communist party of Italy. I don't dare to psychoanalyze a brilliant intellectual as Gramschi, but I'm sure that the analysis of the fascist success and the communist failure would have occupied his mind over most other things. As important as the linguistic framing of the concept is, I think that Gramschi was also describing the realpolitik techniques of achieving cultural hegemony by controlling the press, radio, and other means of communication to tailor a useful mythology. We call this capturing the narrative or spin in todays parlance. The linguistic techniques that you discuss in the article are employed in this regard and you have done a brilliant job of explaining them. Bravo. I think about this all the time in trying to figure out a way forward in the U.S and will reread what you have written many times.
Many thanks for your your really interesting comments which add useful context. First of all though, respects for working your way through all three volumes of the critical edition!
I have some interest in philosophy and political theory but they are not my fields of primary interest and I choose to limit myself to linguistics. It is therefore so good to have people like you with a different background and knowledge who take the time to engage, offer a different angle, add a precision or gently correct.
You are right that my framing leans too heavily toward keeping power, underplaying completely getting power. The war of position argument, that cultural hegemony in civil society is the precondition for political power rather than its reward, is something my article fails to address.
Your point about press and radio control connects directly to that argument.
I have made a couple of revisions to incorporate your comments and hope Ihave done justice to your contribution.
Many thanks for your kind words on the linguistic technique of my article.
Nice article. I haven't engaged with Gramerci very closely. His work seems more instrumental and political than I tend to attend to. It's a level above my area of focus, but interesting nonetheless.
Looking forward to Bourdieu.
Nicely done. A lot of power packed into a few paragraphs. ✊🏼
Enjoyed reading it.
Antonio Gramci work is still relevant to this era of monstrosities in world politics, his left side of view doesn't mean wasn't right, obviously was.
Well this was a nice read,really opened my mind to more forms of oppression that just passively seeped into norms. Still grappling around how something so seemingly simple and overlooked can hold so much weight. Looking foward to the next article on Peirre,he's one of my recently discovered favourites.
Thank you.
Many thanks. The Pierre Bourdieu article is out. You can read it https://linguistically.substack.com/p/bourdieu-the-price-of-speaking?r=4mukj5
Very interesting! I'm glad I was directed to your Substack! Looking forward to the next one.
Thank you!
Thank you for your excellent posts! I love reading your essays
What a series!! Cannot wait for the next one, you know I love Bourdieu 🥳
This was an exceptional read! While there's been a lot of slop around Gramsci, as I've come to discover with my years of studying political philosophy, your article an aspect of his theories which are crucial yet ignored. Loved reading it, can't wait to read more.
My first piece on the site also happened to be on Gramsci, although I take a more literary route of exploration. Would love your thoughts on it, if you have the time.
https://lacanpremi.substack.com/p/antonio-gramsci-the-megumi-fushiguro?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=3xaz08
Such a good and very interesting article! Gramsci has been on my reading list for a while now and now I can’t wait for my semester break to have some more time and read his works.
Interesting article. When you wrote that the central question that the notebooks tried to answer is how does the ruling class maintain power with out recourse to force I thought that you must have read the selections, not Buttegiegs three volume translation of the actual notebooks, but there it is in the bibliography. Working my way through the full three volumes was the most difficult reading that I've done since my days at university and the last thing that I would have thought was that there was a central question or theme. I am a philosopher and political scientist by training and not a linguist (though I am married to one) and my take on the importance of hegemony, or cultural hegemony is slightly different. First of all your statement that it is about keeping power I think is a little inaccurate. It's not wrong, but I think that Gramschi is talking about getting and keeping power. That the primary importance of achieving cultural hegemony is in getting to power in the first place. He was informed by his engagement in the struggle between the fascists and the communists and he was an important part of the leadership of the Communist party of Italy. I don't dare to psychoanalyze a brilliant intellectual as Gramschi, but I'm sure that the analysis of the fascist success and the communist failure would have occupied his mind over most other things. As important as the linguistic framing of the concept is, I think that Gramschi was also describing the realpolitik techniques of achieving cultural hegemony by controlling the press, radio, and other means of communication to tailor a useful mythology. We call this capturing the narrative or spin in todays parlance. The linguistic techniques that you discuss in the article are employed in this regard and you have done a brilliant job of explaining them. Bravo. I think about this all the time in trying to figure out a way forward in the U.S and will reread what you have written many times.
Many thanks for your your really interesting comments which add useful context. First of all though, respects for working your way through all three volumes of the critical edition!
I have some interest in philosophy and political theory but they are not my fields of primary interest and I choose to limit myself to linguistics. It is therefore so good to have people like you with a different background and knowledge who take the time to engage, offer a different angle, add a precision or gently correct.
You are right that my framing leans too heavily toward keeping power, underplaying completely getting power. The war of position argument, that cultural hegemony in civil society is the precondition for political power rather than its reward, is something my article fails to address.
Your point about press and radio control connects directly to that argument.
I have made a couple of revisions to incorporate your comments and hope Ihave done justice to your contribution.
Many thanks for your kind words on the linguistic technique of my article.