**********************************
The Western Canon Mailing List
Moderator: Paul John Barnette Jr.
Activation Date: March 8, 1997
Current Date:  April 14, 1997
Current Membership: 33
**********************************


Hello all:

     My name is Bret Williams and I am a lawyer in Virginia. 
I'm not exactly sure how many people will read or comment on this, but
I thought I might throw out a few initial thoughts I have had on
Veblen's work after reading the first few chapters especially in light
of our moderator's last posting ex cathedra.


     As I read "The Theory of the Leisure Class", I have tried to
focus on our moderator's initial questions concerning the work, 
namely:


1.  What exactly is Veblen's attitude toward his subject matter?  Is
it an objective and scholarly analysis of a social class, or is it an
attack against a social class disguised as an objective analysis? 

and

2.  How does Veblen's description of the leisure class of his time
(1899) differ from the leisure class of today?  And would these
differences point out any of the flaws in Veblen's fundamental
analysis of this class?


     For now, I would like to restrict my comments to the first issue
presented and reserve comment on the latter until I have read more of
the work.  I believe Veblen is criticizing this class and is doing so
in a very subtle and sophisticated manner.  At first, it was difficult
to determine whether Veblen was actually intending to criticize this
class or whether his description was simply playing on my own negative
preconceptions about the leisure class.  The more I read, however, the
more I think it was both.  I think Veblen's method of attack on this 
class is to describe it in such a way as to play on the reader's 
potential negative preconceptions about a social class that is not 
very popular to a majority of indiviuals in society.  Veblen doesn't 
directly condemn this class, he simply evokes and clarifies society's 
latent dislike of this economic and social strata.     


     Veblen choice of vocabulary and examples help build for the
reader a mental image of this class which is negative, and in some 
cases, absurd. Examples that come to mind include Veblen's repetitive 
use of the term "invidious" and "waste" (notwithstanding Veblen's 
attempt to redefine words), and his incredible description of the 
individual burning to death in front of the fire.  Since I am not 
familiar with any scholarly material on this work, I am not sure 
whether my comments support or contradict any generally recognized 
interpretations. However, if he has done what I think he has done, I 
applaud him. Speaking as a professional persuader, what he has done 
is no easy task.


     I look forward to hearing from the rest of the group and thank
you for your kind attention.


                                         Bret Williams      


*********************************************************
The Western Canon Mailing List
pbarnett@geocities.com
The Western Canon WWW Site
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/6681/index.html
*********************************************************