Lukács’ critique of modernism predates his Marxist turn

Evidence

At this point it should be noted that Lukács’ criticism of modernism was already implicit in the Theory of the Novel itself. We showed how the four typological chapters of the latter tended to fall into two groups, the first (on the two basic types) apprehending man’s relationship to the world in a metaphysical way, the second (on Goethe and Tolstoy) seeing it in social or historical terms. It was no accident that the first two chapters were so rich in suggestions and intimations of modernism: for modern or symbolic art is characterized precisely by its ahistorical, metaphysical way of viewing human life in the world. — Fredric Jameson, Marxism and Form, 400

Categorization

• XREF: Shows the continuity of the soul/world, meaning/life schema from Theory of the Novel through to his later realism/modernism distinction — a methodological thread the reader would want to trace across Lukács’s whole corpus. — connects to: Narration problems drove Lukács to Marxism, not the reverse — Fredric Jameson, Marxism and Form, 372; Lukacs’s Leninist loyalty and anti-modernist taste limited his critical flexibility — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 537

Broader Connections

• Lukacs’s Leninist loyalty and anti-modernist taste limited his critical flexibility #corroborates (0.78) — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 537