Caught Between a soul in every stone unturned under the inexhorable Goldman's Sack

[alice wellintown]

Vibe is a free will capitalist and the workers are free will laborers.

 Or are both detemined by some forced or unforced Willer Unseen? If
so, is this force of Man's making? Even if it is God?


Does Charles Montgomery "Monty" Burns make the Plant? Is he free to
make it in his own image? Or does the Plant, or some Force That
through the Green Fuse Drives the Flower, drive him and his Plants?
Are the workers either Waylon Smithers or Homer? Or are the Workers
Free to exercise their will? To muder and create? To make themselves
and make themselves free?

Erich Fromm 1961

2. Marx's Historical Materialism


  It is very important to understand Marx's fundamental idea: man
makes his own history; he is his own creator. As he put it many years
later in Capital: "And would not such a history be easier to compile
since, as Vico says, human history differs from natural history in
this, that we have made the former, but not the latter." [15] Man
gives birth to himself in the process of history. The essential factor
in this process of self-creation of the human race lies in its
relationship to nature. Man, at the beginning of his history, is
blindly bound or chained to nature. In the process of evolution he
transforms his relationship to nature, and hence himself.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/works/1961/man/ch02.htm


On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 10:18 PM, Michael Bailey
<michael.lee.bailey at gmail.com> wrote:
>  alice wellintown wrote:
>>
>>
>> Even in deterministic works, like Melville's or Pynchon's or Hellers,
>> where a grander and more powerful force (Marxian, Freudian,
>> Nietzscheian ...) is set in an agon with the creative principle (or
>> Free will), a kind of dialectic functions or a paradox titilates. It's
>
> so Vibe represents free will?
> I sort of like the guy, in some ways, but I don't see a lot of
> freedom as his lot
> he's just jacked into a way of life that has as many limitations
> and irritations as any laborer in "his" mines
>
>>
>> only art after all. Art for art's sake and for the sake of those who
>> need a romantic escape from the brusing heel of free will and take
>> solace in forced beyond.
>
> forced beyond - typo?  or genius concept?
> I'll go with the latter: Art as a reaction to stress, in which one
> is forced beyond, Art is the beyond into which one is forced?
>
>