Re: [OPE-L] Alienated and abstract labour

From: John Holloway (johnholloway@PRODIGY.NET.MX)
Date: Thu Jun 21 2007 - 11:04:04 EDT


    That is wonderfully helpful, thanks vey much. John

El 21/6/07 09:16, "Rakesh Bhandari" <bhandari@BERKELEY.EDU> escribió:

>> Another request for help.
>> Does anyone know of discussions of the relation between the alienated or
>> estranged labour of the 1844 Ms and the abstract labour of Capital?
>> Many thanks,
>>     John
> Looking forward to what others say,  John.
>   I do know where I would look to see whether the connection has been
> made (but no promises!)-- Istvan Meszaros Marx's Theory of
> Alienation,  Michel Henry Karl Marx, Moishe Postone Time Labor and
> Social Domination, and of course Chris Arthur Dialectic of Labour.
> There is a new book by Bruno Gulli titled Labor of Fire (Temple
> University Press); haven't read it yet, first chapter seems to be on
> the Manuscripts, seems to connect the early concept of labor to the
> later works.
> I have also been wanting to read Michael Evans' essay on the Paris
> Manuscripts, but I can't remember where it was published.  Marcuse's
> early essays have been published in a volume Heideggerian Marxism,
> ed. John Abromeit and Richard Wolin. I would like to reread Marcuse's
> analysis of the Paris Manuscripts written soon after they had been
> discovered.
> And to make the argument for a connection one would probably have to
> critique Ranciere's argument for a break from the Paris Manuscripts.
> I hear third or fourth hand that Ranciere dismisses the chapter
> missing from the English translation of Reading Capital as a
> schoolboy exercise (the chapter was translated in a volume edited by
> Ali Rattansi).  His later patricide of Althusser is well known.  But
> he was obviously a very smart schoolboy.
> Rakesh

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 30 2007 - 00:00:04 EDT