As someone who has enjoyed Rothfeld’s essays (especially the sanctimony literature one) and considers her a good writer and thinker, I was prepared to dislike and find fault with this review. But you won me over. This was an interesting and thought provoking piece on its own terms (I haven’t read Rothfeld’s book). I’ll be curious to see if she responds, and I hope she does.
thank you! Yeah I'm disappointed of course that it didn't get published, and skeptical that she'd respond or respond in a useful way (Rothfeld's engagement with the idea of critics criticizing each other seems notably silly: https://afeteworsethandeath.substack.com/p/womand) but would be happy to be proved wrong!
Great points, especially about Rothfeld’s apparent inability to appreciate irony. I found it striking how she opened the book with a nod to Rawls (as if his Christ-like principles are in any way politically achievable) to justify a Luciferian approach to personal appetites.
thank you! I did wonder at points if she's doing some like meta-ironic deadpan and I'm just missing the irony... and yeah the Rawls thing is weird because like, when did I and everyone else sign some agreement that Rawls is the person to turn to for answers?
I don't know that she'd put in terms of the proverb--more that she's afraid people's political/moral desires will snuff out the supposedly rich complexity of inner life... I am not a fan of Hamid, but I do think Lefevre's point about liberalism as a way of life is right and is substantiated by most of the most interesting writing about the history of liberal thought, and the most interesting figures who can be linked to that tradition... so for example I wrote something a while ago on the Chinese liberal Yan Fu along these lines: https://www.palladiummag.com/2021/02/16/yan-fus-lessons-on-the-true-mission-of-liberalism/
or again making the case for liberalism as a state religion via Durkheim:
As someone who has enjoyed Rothfeld’s essays (especially the sanctimony literature one) and considers her a good writer and thinker, I was prepared to dislike and find fault with this review. But you won me over. This was an interesting and thought provoking piece on its own terms (I haven’t read Rothfeld’s book). I’ll be curious to see if she responds, and I hope she does.
thank you! Yeah I'm disappointed of course that it didn't get published, and skeptical that she'd respond or respond in a useful way (Rothfeld's engagement with the idea of critics criticizing each other seems notably silly: https://afeteworsethandeath.substack.com/p/womand) but would be happy to be proved wrong!
Great points, especially about Rothfeld’s apparent inability to appreciate irony. I found it striking how she opened the book with a nod to Rawls (as if his Christ-like principles are in any way politically achievable) to justify a Luciferian approach to personal appetites.
thank you! I did wonder at points if she's doing some like meta-ironic deadpan and I'm just missing the irony... and yeah the Rawls thing is weird because like, when did I and everyone else sign some agreement that Rawls is the person to turn to for answers?
Does Rothfeld also tout tolerance and sublimating politics to a private realm because “Good fences make good neighbors”?
You might enjoy this episode from Wisdom Of Crowds, which tackled the issue of Liberalism as non-neutral arbiter of morals: https://wisdomofcrowds.live/p/liberalism-is-not-neutral
I don't know that she'd put in terms of the proverb--more that she's afraid people's political/moral desires will snuff out the supposedly rich complexity of inner life... I am not a fan of Hamid, but I do think Lefevre's point about liberalism as a way of life is right and is substantiated by most of the most interesting writing about the history of liberal thought, and the most interesting figures who can be linked to that tradition... so for example I wrote something a while ago on the Chinese liberal Yan Fu along these lines: https://www.palladiummag.com/2021/02/16/yan-fus-lessons-on-the-true-mission-of-liberalism/
or again making the case for liberalism as a state religion via Durkheim:
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/the-religion-of-liberal-democracy