Anarchist Studies

Volume 16, 2008 No.1

Editorial RUTH KINNA

Welcome all. This issue is packed, so I'll keep it brief. First, thanks to all the contributors, readers and referees for their time and hard work and particularly to Sharif, for facilitating such a smooth transition.

Eagle-eyed readers will notice that history looms large in this issue: Allan Antliff's examination of abstract art takes us back to the '30s and focusses on Herbert Read; Alexandre Christoyannopoulos provides an assessment of Tolstoy's Christian anarchism and its enduring relevance; Charles Thorpe and Ian Welsh take inspiration from Bakunin, in their analysis of anarchism, science and technology; and Ginger Frost examines ideas of free love in Edwardian England. I don't think this marks a 'return to the sages', as John Quail lamented in last issue, at least not in so far as any of the authors here are looking for answers or solutions or timeless truths or in the sense that they are re-treading familiar, well-worn ground. Rather, the historical bent of this collection reflects a far more complex and nuanced set of ideas: a desire to recover a long-neglected, poorly understood and badly misrepresented past; to discuss the parameters of anarchist thought (perhaps the relationship between anarchism and the anarchistic); to develop new concepts using the insights of past theory and/or to refect on early experiments in anarchist living and the some of the problems of what's now called prefigurative politics or the politics of everyday life. Brian Martin asked what anarchist theory should be and where it should be going. Maybe, as part of this discussion, we need to reflect of the point of history and/or the kind of history we think is relevant to anarchist studies.

Of the papers printed here, two were originally submitted during Sharif's tenure, so in a way this is a co-edited issue and whatever view some readers have of 'history' (I can almost hear the low groans of my school classmates), the collection shouldn't be taken as a sign. Looking back on Sharif's achievements in 15 (2), Lewis Call said that he had set an ambitious agenda. At the moment, even having an agenda seems ambitious. But the policy is, as ever, open door: to promote and facilitate good research on anarchism. AS is open to multi-disciplinary and inter-disciplinary approaches: and positively encourages contributions from historicans, theorists, political scientises, sociologists, anthropologists, psychologists, utopians, geographers, philosopers …

So, finally, to allay any suspicions, if you're concerned to draw a line under the past and move on, Saul Newman's cavalry is readying itself, with a special issue on postanarchism on the horizon.