[ show plain text ]
I remarked in [OPE-L:2310]:
> It would seem to me that it would be rather odd for Marx to just assume
> a "black box" where the (unpaid labor in the) domestic sphere "just
> happens".
Mike W responded in [OPE-L:2330:
> My last published thoughts are incorporated in Value Form and the
> State (ch. 7, I think)
With VFS in hand I can see that the "private sphere" is viewed as a
"separate" sphere from the bourgeois economy but that the two are
"interdependent for their material reproduction": "there is thus an
element of value-form determination of the private sphere" (189).
This, however, does not address the specific characteristics of the
interdependency between the two spheres. In particular, it does not
address the question of the input and output of value to and from the
private sphere. Thus, while there is not the supposition that the domestic
sphere "just happens" or that it is a "black box", there isn't a further
investigation into the specifics of the interdependency.
Or have I missed something in your presentation?
btw (referring to footnote 3 on p. 189),
a) was the Hanlon dissertation completed? If so, when, where, title?
b) Was the Kleiber article ever published?
c) any further writings by Hanlon and Kleiber (or others) on the subject
of a VFT of the private sphere?
In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 21 2000 - 09:47:45 EDT