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