Wang Jie:Here are some questions that I think are very important to China’s research on Marxism,so I’d like to know your opinions.I’d like to start with the research on Terry Eagleton.As far as I know,you are the first to have written a book on Terry.In China,there are also many scholars who are researching Terry and a group of articles are recently coming out in China’s most important core journal,Theory and Criticism of Literature and Art.When I talked with Terry at the University of Manchester,he specially mentioned that he was a Marxist,instead of a Post-marxist.Later,he wrote me a letter to add that it was a matter of principle.For the relationship between Marxism and Postmarxism, there are still confusions among scholars in China,so can you make further clarifications in combination with Terry’s situation? David:I would say that Terry is without doubt a Marxist,not a Post-Marxist. That is very clear to me.At a recent conference about Terry’s career at Manchester University,there was discussion about the extent to which his thought had changed over years,and one of the comments that he made was that he believes roughly the same things as he used to believe in the 1960s.From having read and studied his work,I would say that there’s overwhelmingly a sense of continuity through the work. Wang Jie: Here are some questions that I think are very important to China’s research on Marxism, so I’d like to know your opinions. I like it to start with the research on Terry Eagleton. As far as I know, you are the first to have written a book on Terry.In China, there are also many scholars who are researching Terry and a group of articles are recently coming out in China’s most important core journal, Theory and Criticism of Literature and Art.When I talked with Terry at the University of Manchester, he specifically mentioned that he was a Marxist, instead of a Post-marxist. Lot, he wrote me a letter to add that it was a matter of principle. For the relationship between Marxism and Postmarxism, there are still confusions among scholars in China, so can you make further further secretings in combination with Terry’s situation? David: I would say that Terry is without doubt a Marxist, not a Post-Marxist. That is very clear to me. At a recent conference about Terry’s career at Manchester University, there was discussion about the extent to which his thought had changed over years, and one of the comments that he made was that he he believes roughly the same things as he used to believe in the 1960s.From having read and studied his work, I would say that there’s overwhelmingly a sense of continuity through the work.