Hi folks,

Today we’ll be discussing:

Make Way for Winged Eros - Alexandra Kollontai

Today’s discussion is:

  • 1/25 - Make Way for Winged Eros - Alexandra Kollontai

I’m reading the copy from Marxists.org:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/kollonta/1923/winged-eros.htm

Discussion Prompts

These are some ideas to address while considering this work. None of them are essential, and any of your own thoughts are very much welcome! I’ll be adding my own thoughts later today.

  • What seems to be the main point of this work? What question is Kollontai trying to answer?

  • What has she missed? Is she wrong about anything?

  • Did anything surprise you?

  • Is this work applicable outside of the conditions of the early USSR?

  • Is this really a “nonessential” or would it be good for any communist to read it?

Next Discussion

The next book will be:

  • 2/1 - The Red Deal - Red Media. - discussion 1.
  • 2/8 - The Red Deal - Red Media - discussion 2.

I haven’t gotten my copy yet, so those discussions may change once I see how long it is.

I’d appreciate a line on a free e-copy if you’ve got one. I’ll probably purchase it here: https://www.commonnotions.org/red-media

Next Title

If you would like to suggest the next title please put in a separate comment with the words “submission suggestion”. I think the highest voted title should win.

Books should be:

  • not suggested for beginners.
  • not overly technical or philosophical (I’m just not smart enough to lead those discussions).
  • relatively short (so as not to lose too much momentum).
  • regionally or subject specific (like Che’s Guerilla Warfare is topically specific, or Decolonization is Not a Metaphor is regionally specific?).
  • readily available.

Thanks for your time! :)

  • diegeticscream[all]🔻OP
    6•1 year ago

    This was an interesting read. I’m glad I read it, but I’ve got kind of mixed feelings on the work as a whole.

    The question Kollontai seems to be asking is “what place proletarian ideology gives love?”. She clarifies later that she considers love an “important psychological and social factor, which society has always instinctively organized in its interests”.

    The implicit question seems to be “how has and will the concept of love change as we build this new society?”. Written in 1923 (100 years ago!), just after the revolution and civil war, the question of how this society would grow must have been huge!

    Kollontai spends almost a third of the work on “historical notes”. I found this section very frustrating. There are no sources, and it’s clear that she’s making very sweeping statements off of a few Roman myths and a little information on Western European feudal traditions. The most surprising claims I found were:

    “in fact, for the first time in the history humanity it received a certain recognition” (on love between the sexes in the feudal age)

    and “emotional conflicts grew and multiplied, and found their expression in the new form of literature - the novel”. I don’t think I agree that novels are unique to the bourgeois revolutions of Western Europe.

    I found the work powerfully emotional and persuasive, but I’m not sure if it’s meant to be emotionally persuasive or factually persuasive. It works very well on the one regard, and I find it very frustrating as a factual work. If this had been in “Caliban and the Witch” it would’ve had 8 pages of sources!

    The final section on “love-comradeship” has some very touching points. She talks about the proletariat developing love and solidarity for each other on a class basis. This development of love will necessarily move away from a “bourgeois property-holding” form. I especially like the quotes:

    “The ideal of love-comradeship is necessary to the proletariat in the important and difficult period of the struggle for and the consolidation of the dictatorship. But there is no doubt that with the realization of communist society love will acquire a transformed and unprecedented aspect”

    “What will be the nature of this transformed Eros? Not even the boldest fantasy is capable of providing the answer to this question”

    The writing in this is lovely, and I think any of us can benefit from considering how our society and interpersonal relationships will change with the advent of communism. I am glad I read it!

    • @redtea
      7•1 year ago

      Great comments!

      The lack of sources is frustrating.

      The references to the classics also made me wonder… If she were a twenty-first century reactionary, I’d challenge her on the following quote:

      The ancient world considered friendship and “loyalty until the grave” to be civic virtues. Love in the modern sense of the word had no place, and hardly attracted the attention either of poets or of writers.

      If we see all those Greek and Roman pots as evidence of ‘love’, Kolontai could be read as rejecting evidence of homosexuality and calling it ‘friendship’ to avoid having to discuss it. As it is, she does not seem to be saying that homosexual love did not exist but that this kind of love, even heterosexual, was less important than friendship. I’m unsure what to think about this.

      And speaking of friendship, that material could be expanded. It would be nice to see some more analysis of how friendship is treated in capitalism. I think you’re right. This message gets a bit lost in the political rhetoric about revolutionaries being the ones with solidarity, etc.

      • diegeticscream[all]🔻OP
        4•1 year ago

        If we see all those Greek and Roman pots as evidence of ‘love’, Kolontai could be read as rejecting evidence of homosexuality and calling it ‘friendship’ to avoid having to discuss it.

        I thought the same!

        • @redtea
          4•1 year ago

          I’m glad you prompted me to read it, still. But there are parts that Kolontai would (I hope) write differently if she were writing today.