Modernist Politics

Perhaps it’s highly in part of my lack of knowledge of politics, but this week’s blog is extremely difficult to write. Aside from a consciousness of general world history at the time, I had and probably still have no idea what all the political factions of the time were. With that said, much of the readings were a complete blur except for the understanding of the Modernists extreme interest in politics. The most accessible reading was the chapter in the Cambridge Companion to Modernism. It provided a simple basis for the lay-politician/historian. Building from T.E. Hulme’s “Romanticism and Classicism”, something I was finally familiar with, Sara Blair discusses Ezra Pound and T.S. Eliot’s intense political forces. I had no idea that Ezra Pound was so political. While I am intrigued by his passion, I was sorely disappointed by many of his anti-Semitic and Fascist viewpoints. What repercussions, if any, did this have within the Bloomsbury group and other Modernists of the time? I have a hard time believing that these ideals were upheld by many of these highly-educated, intelligent people, so where is the discordance within the group? Leonard Woolf was of Jewish descent himself, so did that cause issues within the group? Thankfully, Blair incorporates the Modernist movement within America as well, exposing us to other aspects of politics and aesthetics – movements not based upon hate, but rather on freedom, such as the women’s and African-American movements.

As for Leonard’s standpoint on preserving peace, I found that to be much less offending. While I am not quite sure that world peace can ever be attained, I think Leonard’s propositions for it were extremely noble. He and Virginia appear to have been quite a team in their political notoriety, but is there the possibility that Virginia may have overshadowed him slightly with the coming of women’s suffrage and such? Instead of Leonard’s work being praised for its ingenuity, is it possible that it may have been seen as oppressive? And while Leonard and Virginia worked together for their political causes, didn’t Virginia also have problems with Jews? That would make their relationship a rather conundrum – working together for one cause, yet at odds with another.

I also think it is interesting that many of the Bloomsbury group would be Marxists, socialists, or essentially in favor of the labor party. From what I have gathered from class and readings, many, if not all, of the group was particularly well off. What advantage would there be for them in supporting such causes?

Personally, I really enjoyed E.M. Forster’s “What I Believe”. I think the creed that he develops on his own is something that we could all live by. Right off the bat, his work is not pushy. The reader does not feel overwhelmed with his politics, as if they are being shoved down one’s throat. Forster’s respect for classical thought appears to be a great influence to him, specifically Dante. Unlike many other Bloomsbury members, Forster is in support of democracy because of the importance it places on the individual, although he is careful not to be too overzealous in his belief, offering only “two cheers for democracy”. I thought that this piece really gave insight to Forster’s work, especially Howard’s End. His main focus in the novel is the relationships between different people as well as the individual. Finally, I can see the politics in the aesthetics, whereas with Leonard’s work I have no aesthetics to work with other than he is Mr. Virginia Woolf.