Notes

For this edition, I have made a few revisions and amendments, and added some notes, which are indicated by asterisks. These are mainly for clarification or to bring some point up to date.

I must thank all those who have written to me about the book, and those who have taken part in the public argument and discussion about it, which has been even more extensive than in the case of Culture and Society. The point was reached, quite early, when I could not do much more than listen, but I have at least done that.

The book is, of course, still controversial and difficult: more so, for many reasons, than Culture and Society. The earlier book gathered and tried to restate an existing tradition, whereas this book is an attempt to reach new ground. Its method is then much harder to grasp, for the method is in this sense the substance. If readers have found parts of the book useful, as many have said, that in its own way is welcome. But also, if the connexions I make and try to describe are not seen or not accepted, the book as a whole is bound to be difficult to bring into focus, and then its local difficulties are exaggerated. The many kinds of analysis which are necessary to the essential case carry their own additional problems. I do not want to argue any of the difficulties away, but most of them belong, as I see it, to the intention, and I am especially grateful to those who, realising this, have met me on that ground. Even where this, as in some cases, was the true source of the controversy, I found the recognition deeply encouraging.

R. W. 1965

For the 1980 reprint I have not made any further revisions, but I would refer any reader interested in the subsequent development of the analyses and arguments of The Long Revolution to the detailed discussion in the interviews published as Politics and Letters (NLB, 1979, pp. 133–74).

R. W. 1980