316
PARTISAN REVIEW
UClsm centers on the epistemology of "representation." Benjamin's
"allegorical" criticism focuses rather on the "image."
In
a conception which evidently owes much to Freud's theory of
dreams, Benjamin asserts that new means of production give rise to
images in which new and old are intermingled. Fantasy,.stimulated by
the new to break with the immediate past, returns to a more distant,
primal past in order to image the epoch which is to succeed the present.
The "materialist method" begins with these mix<td images, not in
order to find their "sources" either in the social milieu or in the
collective unconscious, but to name the forces of new and old, truth
and falsehood, which struggle within them. Benjamin seeks to view
these images in relation both to "the production process in which they
originated" and to "the production process in which they survive. "
These are the production processes of art itself as well as of society, so
that in responding to innovations in daily life, artistic experiment
strives towards the limits of what it can represent by traditional means
and at that limit anticipates a new art form that will represent the same
material effortlessly. Because Benjamin sees in the "image" a close
interconnection between social development, artistic experiment, and
the emergence of new art forms, he can respond to modernist technical
experiments with an imaginative comprehension Lukacs is incapable
of. Benjamin retraces the development of modern culture instead of
simply imposing by bureaucratic fiat what it mayor may not do. By
connecting Baudelaire's images and techniques with the concrete
texture of Parisian life, Benjamin finds in him an historical lesson, not
just a bad example. Benjamin does not fall into uncritical approval but
does insist that "critical reading" must be the "critical revision " of just
this historical lesson.
Benjamin's interpretation of modernism is, I believe, profoundly
right, and it deserves the fullest possible exploration, elaboration, and
testing. His method of investigation may depend too much on the
unique qualities of his own spirit for others simply to take it over.
Some have questioned whether Benjamin is "truly" Marxist. I think he
is. His writings have the immense merit of reminding us of the
potential variety of legitimate Marxist approaches to cultural phe–
nomena. Benjamin's use of both Marx and Freud can help us see in
them resources for liberating interpretations, instead of reductionist
and "scientistic" models of causation. Benjamin encourages a serious
criticism of modernism rather than a mindless blanket charge of
"decadence." I am pleased to add that Benjamin's
Origin of German
Tragedy
has now appeared in English.
DONALD MARSHALL
