Dennis R Redmond dredmond at
Mon Dec 4 03:22:30 MST 2000

On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky wrote:

> I understand that many people are amazed at the immense abilities of
> Borges (I am the first to acknowledge them), what I mean is that he
> could almost never (save for some of his first writings, when he was
> still more free) _express_ anything he _actually felt_.

But if he had, he would've been just one more comprador bourgeois. There's
a fascinating dialectic of futility in his work, you know, he describes
thieves who escape, detectives trapped by their quarry, alternate worlds
which virulently infect our own, this ambiguous fear and yet
identification with the underworld. He was unconsciously mapping out the
underbelly of gangster capitalism, I think -- the shocking realization
that the names of the dictators change, but the structure of accumulation
stays the same. His texts undermine his own class position, and the
resulting vertigo (Southern Cone existentialism, if you will) opens up a
space, however briefly, for radical intellectual and political
alternatives -- something which should be a rich source of materials for a
Marxist literary analysis.

-- Dennis

More information about the Marxism mailing list