Monbiot's tropics of discourse

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

I finally got round to buying George Monbiot's Captive State the other day (for non-Brit non-Guardian readers, it's kind of our equiv. of No Logo, detailing the havoc wreaked by Private Finance Initiatives and corporate intervention in public services). I'm struggling with it a bit, which surprises me cos I'm v sympathetic to Monbiot's politics. What irks me, I think, is his *style* of writing political history and argument. He presents the protestors (against, for example, the Skye Bridge) as a raggle taggle army of impoverished but loveable eccentrics, or noble working class Stahkanovs, their hands gnarled by years of labour and goes to great length to present their idiolects against the Anonymity of Power. Now, he didn't make these people up, but it's the way he writes about them (an insufferable earnestness, or vaguely patriarchal affection) that rubs me up the wrong way. Lots of people (notably Hayden White) have written about how certain ideologies inscribe history as genre - tragedy, romance, comedy, farce. It seems to me, Monbiot writes history as Ken Loach (or, for those unfortunate enough to have seen Gregory's Two Girls, Bill Forsyth). What I'm wondering is: is this just decadent and formalist of me? Monbiot is trying to communicate difficult ideas in the form of pop journalist narratives for a big audience, and I'm sulking because he glosses over complications and ambiguities and writes without irony. Or does something have to be *stylistically* correct to be *politically* correct? Furthermore, what would an *ironic* politically committed voice sound like anyway?

― Edna Welthorpe, Mrs, Thursday, 13 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

What about, for example, Mike Davies - the guy who wrote City of Quartz about the histories of Los Angeles? Do I find him more readable than Monbiot just because I'm not as familiar the subject matter? Or is style of history and argument (drawing on myth, literature, cinema, subculture) more compelling?

― Edna Welthorpe, Mrs, Thursday, 13 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Furthermore, what would an *ironic* politically committed voice sound like anyway?

Dave Q.

― Tom, Thursday, 13 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Poor old Bill Forsyth. I interviewed him, you know, and he looked ever so tired. Anyway, I agree with Edna. George's attempts at presenting the 'humanity' behind the politics are like Antonio Gramsci meets kids from fame. 'We don't need that expensive and private-sector funded Skye Bridge, guys! Let's get together and read up detailed archaic Scottish legislation! 'Let's beat them at their own game!'' 'YAYYY!'. If it were a novel, you'd be nodding your head at the simplistic characterisation. It's a shame that the facts Monbiot presents would not be enough to sway a big audience on their own... his more analytical work is dryer, but more inte

― Will, Thursday, 13 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Questions of style I can't answer, but I think Monbiot does have a projection problem which I think is also felt by the "raggle taggle argy of impoverished by loveable eccentrics" he ponderously speaks for. These people do exist - *kinda* - but Monbiot's simultaneous romanticising of the lifestyle, rather than the politics, and sometimes actual *disregard* for the less lofty side of that lifestyle annoys me as a reader and (if the time I spent with some of the raggle taggle army, admittedly some time ago, is representative) is problematic for them also.

If you're decadent and formalist to recoil from his prose, it's no worse a crime than Monbiot's decision that an articulate, middle- class, borderline establishement spokesman is needed for the groups and ideas he supposedly prosecutes. Try John Vidal on this stuff: not a stunning writer but his more conventional political- journalistic style I think avoids some of the claustrophobia you get with Monbiot. I also think his politics is more clear-sighted.

To be honest, thinking about it more, it's perhaps Monbiot's politics that annoy me as much as his writing, or his political conclusions. With him I'm appalled in the same way I was with Naomi Klein (I think the comparison is a good one) at the end of No Logo - the answer to all the ills she describes is Kinder Capitalism. A ha ha ha. Fine, that might be the only pragmatic answer, but I'd be embarrassed if analytically that was the best I could do.

Mike Davis rules. Just does.

― Ellie, Thursday, 13 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

resting.

― Will, Thursday, 13 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

>>> what would an *ironic* politically committed voice sound like anyway?

BERTOLT BRECHT.

― the pinefox, Thursday, 13 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I rather like the way the computer cuts off the last little bits of your messages will, it adds tension and frission to the air :)

― Menelaus Darcy, Thursday, 13 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

"frission" = nuclear power generated by inter-molecular frottage?

― Edna Welthorpe, Mrs, Thursday, 13 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

hey, I liked the look of it, its 4 in the morning so I will make up as many damn words as I like :)

I quite like your devination Edna, can I steal it?

― Menelaus Darcy, Thursday, 13 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

i can't read him: all the more so because i probably often very much agree with him

― mark s, Thursday, 13 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Edna hits home the *one* thing I dislike about Monbiot, who otherwise I think is GRATE.

He did do a column about giving football "back" to "the people" (who, of course, never had it in the first place) which merited the comparison one Grauniad correspondent made with Ron Manager. That, however, was an aberation.

― Robin Carmody, Thursday, 13 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.