[Marxism] Re: Interview with Peter Handke

Gilles d'Aymery aymery at ix.netcom.com
Sun Jul 2 21:27:59 MDT 2006


Lou Proyect wrote:

>>Maybe all the hounding of the NY Times about their failure to cover the 
Handke controversy by Marxmailer and Swans publisher Gilles d'Aymery has 
finally had an impact. Handke became an "unperson" in Europe after 
attending Milosevic's funeral. The interview is a regular column by 
Deborah Solomon, who has interviewed Noam Chomsky in the past, to give 
you a sense of her willingness to engage with dissident intellectuals, 
even though she is hardly a dissident herself.  
(http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20031102.htm).<<

Proud to be a Marxmailer (though not much active, sorry) and a humble 
publisher.

That the NYT finally addressed the Handke's affairs in France and Germany 
is significant, even if the "interview" was as sleazy as the one 
conducted with Chomsky. Some of us have been assailing the NYT and its 
public editor for weeks on end on the matter.

I had a piece laid up for this edition of Swans on Handke, his 
vilification in Europe for bailing out from the main stream narrative on 
the Yugoslav tragedy. I had the piece in sync with a deconstruction of 
Michael Berube and the usual humanitarian folks' -- including the 
demagogue Marc Cooper -- attack on Noam Chomsky, Ed Herman, Diana 
Johnstone, and Michael Parenti.

Unfortunately, it was not up to prime time and did not meet deadline. 
Hopefully, I will be up to the task in two weeks.

It's difficult, at least to me, to textualize (shades of gray) the like 
of Chomsky, whom I am not a fan of, and the disgrace of the like of 
Michael Berube, Marc Cooper, Michael Ignatieff, Mark Danner, Ian 
Williams, Danny Postel, Bill Weinberg, Chris "Comrade" Hitchens,  Roger 
Lippman (and brothers Peter and David), Eric Gordy, Michael Karadjis (a 
usual anti-Serb on Marxmail and beyond), Marko Attila Hoare, Brad Delong, 
et al.

I wish Marxmailers, in their majority, would not fall into the anti-
Serbian trap again and again or remain silent about it. One needs not be 
*pro-Serb* or in defense of Serbia and Milosevic. One needs not either 
embrace the narrative of the "humanitarian left." And one should not 
remain silent because of the fear of being ostracized for one analysis of 
what really happened in the Balkans.

Accept complexity; reject demonization, especially when it's promoted by 
the Citadelle, and seconded by its guard dogs.

That's why Handke is important and why I regret that Marxmailers did not 
address the matter much at all. Why is it that all military interventions 
are clearly analyzed and criticized, but when it comes to Yugoslavia, 
silence prevails?

Don't tell me. Ask yourself.

Sincerely,
Gilles d'Aymery
Swans Commentary







More information about the Marxism mailing list