From: Michael Schauerte (mikeschauerte@GMAIL.COM)
Date: Sat Apr 28 2007 - 21:31:45 EDT
Fred, I think I understand your explanation, thanks. And I do not think it differs too much from the views of Kuruma, except perhaps for what points are emphasized. Kuruma was quite interested in a sentence by Marx in Chapter two (also invariably mistranslated--except for Hans Ehrbar), where Marx writes about how "The difficulty lies not in comprehending that money is a commodity, but in discovering how, why and through what a commodity is money." He viewed this as a key phrase indicating the theoretical tasks that Marx sets himself in Sec. 3, Sec. 4 and Ch. 2. That is, in Section 3, the task is looking at "how a commodity is money," or more specifically the how of value-expression; Section 4 examines "why" value has to be expressed in a mediated manner in the first place, which is connected to the nature of commodity production; and then Ch. 2 on the exchange process discusses "through what" money emerges, with the answer being the "social act" of the other commodities. In this sense, as I alluded to in another email, Kuruma tries to identify the particular theoretical issues Marx is addressing without concerning himself too much with fitting them into a theoretical or historical *development, *or seeking out some underlying "motive force." Mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 30 2007 - 00:00:17 EDT