Announcing: The Anvil Review #3

  • Posted on: 14 March 2012
  • By: worker

<table><tr><td>From <a href="">The Anvil Review</a>

After a too long absence we have finally released into the wild the brand new issue of <em>The Anvil Review</em> (#3). This issue includes reviews of Anarchist News (and wikipedia), Firefly, the Cynics, Windmills & Black Flags, and more. This issue also expands the content coverage of <em>The Anvil</em> to include fiction. We hope to include more fiction in future issues. We also plan on a more aggressive print schedule, ramping up to three times a year. We hope to start serializing interesting books & including more cultural material over time.

The print edition of this publication is 44 pages and <a href="">FREE (plus postage) at Little Black Cart</a>.

In addition we are now producing an "ebook" (both <a href="">epub</a> & <a href="">mobi</a>) version of The Anvil Review. This version is free for the month of March (coupon code: TARMAR).

<a href="">The editorial concern the spectacle and the end of do-it-yourself culture</a></td><td><img title="What does this have to do with revolutionary anarchism?" src=""></td></tr></table>


oh thank god the anvil has come out again! hallelujah! lololololol

oOo A!, ur such a poet <3

by "released into the wild" do you mean pestering everyone at the bay area book fair to take more than enough copies for everyone to use as wall-paper? I hope so.

I'd download it if I didn't have to make an account. Guess I'll just wait 'til the bookfair.

Wait there's people who actually read this??

oooooooooo oooooooooo ooooooooooo oooooooooooooooh!

* eats popcorn and waits for next awesome comeback *

I hope the new issue is better. The last issue was banal. It was like reading a pseudo intellectual version of People's magazine.

Based on the definitions of "pseudo intellectual" and the content of People magazine and taking them in tandem, I think your criticism of the Anvil issue is either an accidental approval based on complimentary concepts, or that you're a common clown.

I think it's more of the latter, but not that much more, because you're right about the last issue being kinda banal.

(I just have yet to see a use of the term "pseudo intellectual" that did not apply to itself in embarrassing and self-discrediting ways.)

Definition of "pseudo-intellectual": someone who uses a word I don't understand.

The last issue of Anvil had long winded discussions about movies, people's favorite songs, and TV shows, while at the same time posturing as an attempt to transcend spectator society. How do you reconcile the two? My use of the term "pseudo-intellectual" wasn't meant to condemn complexity, but to criticize Anvil for masquerading as if it were breaking down walls while actually reinforcing them.

You are a fucking moron.

Since when do intellectuals try to break down walls, literally or metaphorically? Most professional intellectuals are housebroken by academic institutions and/or on salary at think-tanks; they are almost always reinforcing the status quo. The putative insult "pseudo-intellectual" tells you more about the person using it than it does about any alleged target.

Talking about pop culture and bringing anarchist perspectives to bear on things that "normal people" care about IS a way to challenge or "break" walls.
I think anon is right and you ARE a moron. I'm sorry.

i like the anvil... but the way they usually talk about pop culture is more in line with cultural studies than anything 'normal people' (ie those who are not steeped in a very specific lexicon and language) would have an easy time accessing.

i don't think people outside of the anarchist theory scene read it- university degrees or not. not to down the project, but i don't think they aspire to be read by 'normal people' do they?- it always seems like a rather self-referential dialogue.

With regard to Anvil, in capitalist society concepts like intellectual, philosophy, theory etc. are mostly considered bad words, and limited vocabulary is supposed to denote normalcy, particularly due to intelligence being regarded the preserve of specialists (scientists, professors etc.) The average kind of Joe or Jane becomes the ideal. I am not telling anyone to shut up because I disagree with them, which is, somewhat ironically, mostly the standard used by those posting comments on Anarchist news.

Anyway, I've always differentiated the common usage of "intellectual" with my own reference being someone who uses his or her intellect. Nevertheless, I thought the point about my use of the concept "pseudo-intellectual" interesting.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Enter the code without spaces.