Alexandre Kojeve: The Roots of Postmodern Politics

Alexandre Kojeve: The Roots of Postmodern Politics [Reading] ➻ Alexandre Kojeve: The Roots of Postmodern Politics ➱ Shadia B. Drury – Thomashillier.co.uk Alexandre Kojve was Hegel s most famous interpreter, reading Hegel through the eyes of Marx and Heidegger simultaneously The result was a wild if not hypnotic mlange of ideas In this book, Drury rev Alexandre Kojve was Hegel s most The Roots MOBI î famous interpreter, reading Hegel through the eyes of Marx and Heidegger simultaneously The result was a wild if not hypnotic mlange of ideas In this book, Drury reveals the nature of Kojve s Hegelianism and the extraordinary influence it has had on French postmodernists on the left Raymond Queneau, Georges Bataille, and Michel Foucault and American postmodernists on the right Leo Strauss, Allan Bloom, and Francis Fukuyama According to Drury, Alexandre Kojeve: PDF \ Kojve followed Hegel in thinking that reason has triumphed in the course of history, but it is a cold, soulless, instrumental, and uninspired rationalism that has conquered and disenchanted the world Drury maintains that Kojve s conception of modernity as the fateful triumph of this arid rationality is the cornerstone of postmodern thought Kojve s picture of the world gives birth to a dark romanticism that manifests itself in a profound nostalgia for what reason has banished Kojeve: The Roots ePUB ´ myth, madness, disorder, spontaneity, instinct, passion, and virility In Drury s view, these ideas romanticize the gratuitous violence and irrationalism that characterize the postmodern world.


10 thoughts on “Alexandre Kojeve: The Roots of Postmodern Politics

  1. AC AC says:

    I ll give this four stars, though I really intend to give it only three and a half The book is pretty good and it is useful I have a special need for it, since I am surrounded in the Academy or at least, in MY academy , where I often feel like the last gasp of the Enlightenment myself with people who are inspired if that s the word by thinkers like Strauss and Koj ve , ideas that I, quite frankly, despise I ve not read Koj ve at first hand and so cannot comment, but Strauss is a write I ll give this four stars, though I really intend to give it only three and a half The book is pretty good and it is useful I have a special need for it, since I am surrounded in the Academy or at least, in MY academy , where I often feel like the last gasp of the Enlightenment myself with people who are inspired if that s the word by thinkers like Strauss and Koj ve , ideas that I, quite frankly, despise I ve not read Koj ve at first hand and so cannot comment, but Strauss is a writer that I have had to read and one that has not one redeeming feature, in my opinion Needless to say, what he writes has NOTHING to do, from a scholarly point of view, with Plato or with ANY of the philosophers he writes about It s not only that their politics are repulsive Strauss, in my opinion, is unquestionably a fascist of some sort but that the very categories in which they present their analyses are of little value Their language is all wrong Marx is useful, for example, even when he s off the wall but Strauss is useless, even when he s right.This particular book is good, as I ve said but not nearly as good nor as rigorously analytical as her Strauss book The Politics of Leo Strauss That one is really masterful If it s a tedious read, it s only because Strauss himself is tedious, and the book sticks closely to an analysis of Strauss But it repays careful studies in multiples This one, by contrast, reads almost like a collection of set pieces written at different times, with the Koj ve piece being the longest and the anchor of the collection The other pieces deal with Bataille, Foucault, Strauss, Bloom, and Fukuyama It is all quite familiar stuff, and these pieces are themselves somewhat fragmentary, not systematic or complete undertaken entirely from the point of view of her departure Koj ve s analysis of the end of history Moreover, and what is worse, she cannot restrain herself from offering asides some amounting to littlethan snark Success has gone to her head.She also takes a big risk here and I have to question the wisdom of it of interpreting Koj ve almost entirely in the light of his premises, and then arguing that as his conclusions do not in her opinion follow from those premises, they can safely be ignored The Koj ve she presents is thus the antithesis of the Koj ve that Koj ve himself often presents as Drury admits This is a methodologically dubious position to maintain.On the other hand, I am quite sympathetic to her general position on these figures These are writers who put me in mind of a single phrase intellectual onanism An image which I can t get out of my head whenever I think of Leo Strauss is this one of Wolfowitz.Anyway, I personally get little from reading these types of writers At least Drury makes the unpalatableor less palatable Hence, the extra just barely deserved star


  2. Mike Mike says:

    I ve labored through two of Drury s books now, and I think I can say with confidence that Drury is a terrible reader of both Koj ve and Strauss, as well as being a shallow and tendentious writer In short, she s a hack She repeatedly falls into the cheap, journalistic trap of drawing ridiculously simplistic causal pictures, in which complex ideological and sociopolitical realities are reduced to dimensionless shadow plays Honestly, her hamfisted conclusions consist of nothing but trite laments I ve labored through two of Drury s books now, and I think I can say with confidence that Drury is a terrible reader of both Koj ve and Strauss, as well as being a shallow and tendentious writer In short, she s a hack She repeatedly falls into the cheap, journalistic trap of drawing ridiculously simplistic causal pictures, in which complex ideological and sociopolitical realities are reduced to dimensionless shadow plays Honestly, her hamfisted conclusions consist of nothing but trite laments, rhetorical scare tactics, and an extensive appeal to guilt by association It s very unfortunate, given that the topics she seems inclined to write about e.g., Strauss s influence on American neoconservative thought, Koj ve s strange popularity among elements of both the radical left and the radical right are quite interesting Yet Drury, in all her fury, consistently manages to cast no illumination whatsoever Rather, she obscures the topics almost entirely


  3. Paul Rhodes Paul Rhodes says:

    Professor s Drury s argument is that post modernism is a reaction to Kojeve s End of History Thesis which holds that once the substantive global struggle over ideology is over, we will have nothing but a tyranny of number crunching reason We will have nothing but a civilization of commerce, trade, and accountant So, the post moderns enter and say, well, if this is what reason brings, the dull, complacent life of bean counters, then to hell with reason, let s bring down reason and replace it wi Professor s Drury s argument is that post modernism is a reaction to Kojeve s End of History Thesis which holds that once the substantive global struggle over ideology is over, we will have nothing but a tyranny of number crunching reason We will have nothing but a civilization of commerce, trade, and accountant So, the post moderns enter and say, well, if this is what reason brings, the dull, complacent life of bean counters, then to hell with reason, let s bring down reason and replace it with insanity and lots of kinky, transgressive sex This is a persuasive account of post modernism, I must admit, and also provides to my mind the best explanation of why the Straussian cabal in the Bush Administration got us into the Iraq War They did not just want the oil, they wanted to relieve the inevitable boredom of Kojevean globalization by killing lots and lots of Iraqis The Iraq War gives the Straussians meaning in precisely the same way the casual murder of an anonymous Arab gave Mersault meaning The Straussians are dangerous post modern wackoes.As for the trangressive sex, I have no doubt that Wolfowitz was buggering both Rumsfeld and Rove.I might haveto say about Drury s book later


  4. Andrew Schirmer Andrew Schirmer says:

    I haven t yet read Koj ve s lectures on Hegel, so I can t comment on her fealty or accuracy, though the polemical tone throughout this compact and readable guide raised my eyebrow a few times Essentially, this book purports to analyze Koj ve s interpretations of Hegel and their influence on other influencers in France and in the United States Drury should write a book on Hegel her lucidity and memorable metaphors make ideas stick.


  5. Jeff Samuelson Jeff Samuelson says:

    Finally a writer that can make Kojeve, Hegel, and Heidegger comprehensible to me Would give 6 stars if possible


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *