[Xmca-l] Re: Eisenstein-Vygotsky-Luria

[Ulvi İçil]

I think Vassilieva's work is wonderful, exceptional.

<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virüs
bulunmuyor. www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On 25 May 2017 at 22:36, Ulvi İçil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> https://marxismocritico.com/2014/09/26/eisenstein-vygotsky-lurias-project/
>
> I knew already from Autobiography the friendship between the three.
>
> It is really incredibly nice that they knew each other, they discussed,
> they projected...
>
> It is really fantastic as if you bring them and make them live in the same
> decades.
>
> It is also very interesting that Vygotsky was the one who tried to
> persuade Eisenstein not to reject art.
>
> In such instances, I feel myself frozen in the face of such wonderful
> facts.
>
> This occurs when I am face to face with intellectual, artistic, scientific
> figures, human beings who, like revolutions, make live humanity such leaps
> that can never occur in "normal" times.
>
> And moreover, it is such a pity that these giants, after their physical
> disappearences, are handled by other people during years and years
> sometimes so vulgarly and in such a mediocr manner that these giants are
> made dwarfs consciously or unconsciously.
>
> One such case is about Nazim Hikmet and Lenin.
>
> Why people who are sincere followers of these giants are so incapable of
> continuing on the same path consistently and in fidelity?
>
> Why they misinterpret and/or are complete incapable of interpreting them
> creatively?
>
> It is understandable why some some insist not to see in Nazim Hikmet the
> class determination, October Revolution, Lenin, Leninism and bolshevism,
> anti imperialism and in Lenin determination for a socialist revolution but
> why
> some others are so few to see the original content in their work in
> fidelity?
>
> This is what is condemning humanity's thinking to a regression.
>
> I think that Nazim Hikmet and Lenin are so badly read universally and
> another  instance is that in one of our communications Bella told me that
> people restrict themselves to mention only to people of the last 15 years
> but do not extend until examples like Luria.
>
> I firmly believe the essential, fundamental reason in all of them  is the
> following: that the mechanisms of capitalism do not allow or restrain
> people to think in a revolutionary way, in poetry, in neuropsychology, in
> cinema, in art theory and in politics.
>
> Because I believe that great leaps come with great social revolutions.
> Then, after the waters calm down, people move on more ordinary paths.
>
> "In later recalling his plans to work with Vygotsky, Eisenstein wrote
> that he had had a strong affection for “this wonderful man with the
> strangely
> cropped hair. It seemed to have grown out permanently, as after typhus or
> another illness when the head is shaved. Gazing out at the world from under
> this strange array of hair were the eyes, clear and transparent as the
> sky, of
> one of the most brilliant psychologists of our time” (The Grundproblem,
> note 1)
>
>
>
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Virüs
> bulunmuyor. www.avg.com
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
> <#m_-6634144830770013484_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>