Ian Birchall’s reply to my article on Goldmann is to be welcomed as a contribution to the debate between ‘neo-Hegelian’ and ‘scientific’ maxism. Obviously this debate cannot be solved in a few short polemics, but I should like to take this opportunity to answer Birchall by clarifying some of the fundamental points made.
1. I do not claim to have made a comprehensive analysis of Goldmann, as Birchall implies, but merely attempted to analyse the basic concepts which Goldmann uses, and the way these interrelate to form a coherent theoretical framework, referring primarily to his sociology of literature, and briefly to his other work. However it would have required a much longer article to do justice to all his writings on philosophy and epistemology.