Talk:F. O. Matthiessen

message: I find certain aspects to be too polemical . . . as with the following:
{Matthiessen's politics were left-wing, socialist if not dogmatically Marxist (as he felt his {Christianity was incompatible with Marxist atheism). Since he was already financially secure, {Matthiessen donated an inheritance he received in the late 1940s to his friend and Marxist {economist Paul Sweezy; Sweezy used the money to achieve his ambition of founding a new {journal, which became Monthly Review.
Matthiessen was "left-wing" admittedly, but this seems too partsian in this particualr case esp. in reagrds to its connection to "dogmatically Marxist" which is not only wrong in spirit, but in content as well.  He hardly was, given such others as Hicks et. al.  Also: I have no bone to pick with Sweezy, but our conclusion seems to implie we do: "his ambition."
Any thoughts about making this better -- we certainly should make it more extensive.  The American Renaissance article, for example, should link directly to the literature section and not to the arch./furn. section as these are merely secondary.
contog
 
I also find certain portions of this article to be somewhat homophobic ... and more given to poopularist accounts of Matt. and not considering his own work, or more extensive biographical info, all of which is available.
-c
If you choose to revert, please have a discussion.  My above points stand.
: First, thanks for contributing, and welcome to Wikipedia.  I would request that you not delete material without providing something more by way of justification; this is already a slender article.  Please feel free to add more to it, though, and fix the wording that you have a problem with; as you say, there is much more to be written about Matthiessen, and what is already here is just a brief summary of the important facts about him.  Apart from your dismissive tone, I don't understand the complaints about "polemic" or "partisanship" here -- the point of the article's characterization of Matthiessen's politics is that he was a Christian socialist, not an orthodox Marxist, despite his funding of Sweezy's Monthly Review founding (with which I also have no bone to pick, and I don't see what you mean about the article's wording at all).  Your allegation of "homophobia" in the article is also puzzling and not very productive, but the new text about Matthiessen's sexual orientation does seem improved. -- Rbellin|Talk 06:18, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that looks quite reasonable, and I hope you'll add more to the article, as I only know a bit about Matthiessen's biography (and not that much about his work outside American Renaissance, really, either).  Your expertise is welcome!  Have a look around Wikipedia -- for instance, you might want to look at Wikipedia:Featured articles for an example of the community's best work and the kind of writing it encourages -- and then please do come back and expand this article.  (By the way, you can sign your comments by typing four tildes: ~~~~.)  -- Rbellin|Talk 06:34, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: : Regarding the founding of Monthly Review: Matthiessen gave the money to Sweezy in 1948, when Matthiessen was still very much alive.  Here is the account from Monthly Review 51:1 (which I ought to have added to the reference list, and will now add):
:: In late autumn 1948, after the debacle of Henry Wallace's independent presidential campaign, which both men had supported, Matthiessen visited Sweezy at the family farm in New Hampshire where Paul was residing, having resigned from Harvard a few years before. After a walk outdoors, they were sitting by the fire, having a drink. Out of the blue, Matty informed Paul that he had unexpectedly inherited a considerable trust fund after his father had died as a result of an automobile accident in California. Matty was a full professor at Harvard, a successful author, with no dependents. He didn't need the money. Would Paul like it to start that magazine he and Leo Huberman were always talking about?
::This windfall-a commitment of $5,000 for three years in succession, totalling $15,000, or $75,000 in today's purchasing power-made the launching of Monthly Review possible.(n1)
::(n1) Francis Otto Matthiessen (1902-1950), afflicted by a profound sense of isolation and hopelessness as a gay man and a radical in the context of deepening Cold War anti-radicalism, committed suicide in 1950. His life and work were commemorated in Monthly Review 2 (October 1950), the first of such extra-thick special issues; see also the superb appraisal by Leo Marx, "Double Consciousness and the Cultural Politics of F.O. Matthiessen," Monthly Review 34 (February 1983): 34-55. The executors of his state honored the original pledge at the slightly, reduced level of $4,000 in each of the remaining two years. The story of Matthiessen's crucial role was recounted by Paul Sweezy in his address at MR's thirtieth birthday celebration, May 1979, tape recording, Oral History of the American Left, Tamiment Institute, New York University.
: Rbellin|Talk 06:56, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Monthly Review'' founding

message: This edit by Lantog again deleted discussion of Matthiessen's late 1930s hospitalization for a nervous breakdown and his grief following Cheney's death as possible contributing factors in his suicide.  (Since the motivations for his suicide are much debated, it seems necessary to include all the possibilities to me.)  This edit deleted "Since he was already financially secure..." and the amount of Matthiessen's contribution to Sweezy's journal.  There's no point at all to this, as far as I can tell; all the deleted material is basically factual and is well-sourced (the first from the Levin article, and the second from the Monthly Review citation just above).  I find these deletions unmotivated and unhelpful, so I am restoring the material. -- Rbellin|Talk 15:08, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see what point you think I'm trying to make here -- Matthiessen's funding of the initial issues of MR is a fact forming part of his biography (and an interesting fact if you ask me). The fact that he was already well-off helps the reader understand the circumstances of this very substantial donation (otherwise it might lead to the misunderstanding that Matthiessen was impoverishing himself by making it).  Regarding the parenthetical aside, please feel free to reword it into a separate sentence, but please don't delete substantive material like this. -- Rbellin|Talk 15:52, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletions 

message: This article ought to mention another contribution of F.O. Mathiessen to scholarship, "The James Family,"  published in 1947. The book as it stands is as valuable an addition to scholarship as any of his other works, but of coures "Amerian Renaissance" towers above them all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by  71.250.133.23 (talk) 
:Does anyone think this article would benefit with a full list of Matthiessen's publications? I'd like to add a "Publications" section.. Divine (talk) 16:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The James Family" by F.O. Matthiessen was Published by Knopf in 1961 

message: The $1.5 million endowment for the Harvard Professorship actually came from "members of the Harvard Gay & Lesbian Caucus" not from the Caucus itself.  I know this because I was a leader of the fund raising effort.  I don't know how to correct this, however, since this item accurately repeats the error made in the news media it cites.  There is more information on the fund raising process at this link:  http://hglc.org/matthiessen.html  Robert Mack Mergy (talk) 13:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing that out; I've made a quick change, but will incorporate your new source later today. Thanks again! — TAnthonyTalk 14:52, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source of Funding for the Harvard Professorship 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on F. O. Matthiessen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203005431/http://www.kenyonhistory.net/kcpedia/Kenyon_School_of_English to http://www.kenyonhistory.net/kcpedia/Kenyon_School_of_English
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120101200214/http://www.eliot.harvard.edu/eliot/facilities to http://www.eliot.harvard.edu/eliot/facilities
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131202223324/http://www.registrar.fas.harvard.edu/courses-exams/courses-instruction/women-gender-and-sexuality to http://www.registrar.fas.harvard.edu/courses-exams/courses-instruction/women-gender-and-sexuality
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130107020710/http://www.wesleyan.edu/templates/dept/engl/skeleton_faculty.htt?function=f1&department=ENGL&faculty=habelove to http://www.wesleyan.edu/templates/dept/engl/skeleton_faculty.htt?function=f1&department=ENGL&faculty=habelove
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:18, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified