From: Michael Schauerte (mikeschauerte@GMAIL.COM)
Date: Sat Apr 28 2007 - 21:43:30 EDT
Rakesh, I sort of touched on that temporal question in the email I sent a moment ago (although I used the term "chronological") There is a passage in Theory of the Value Form & Theory of the Exchange Process, where Kuruma emphasizes how the two "moments" of the "detour" of value expression occur simultaneously, so to speak: "Having said that a commodity only obtains the form of value through a detour, this does not mean that the detour involves passing through two processes that temporally follow each other. Rather, this is achieved at once, through a *single* process. For the linen to express its value in the form of a coat, it only has to posit the coat as equal to itself, and through this same action of equating, the linen makes the coat the value-body, thus simultaneously coming into a relation with this coat qua value-body. This is how the linen comes to express its own value in the form of a coat." On 4/28/07, Rakesh Bhandari <bhandari@berkeley.edu> wrote: > > One advantage of the concepts of detour and roundabout over the concept of > mediated is the preservation of the temporal sense. To say that the > expression of value is mediated does not express well that it is not > im-mediate in a temporal sense. However, detour and roundaboutness do > suggest temporal deferment, the absence of immediacy. This detour or > roundaboutness creates problems in a credit economy if it is too time > consuming. It's difficult to get at that by simply saying that the > expression of value is mediated. That seems to be a logical not temporal > point. Some argue that Hegel's logic abstracts from real temporal > processes. So there may be a reason why Marx is not strictly committed to > Hegelian concepts. > Differering here with Chris A, I think Michael has a strong argument to > use detour and/or roundabout in translation. > > Rakesh > > > I listed three versions of the passage from Marx that uses the term > > "detour" or "roundabout way." You can see that there is a variation > > between > > using the pronoun "we" or "commodity owners" as the subject, and that > > expressions like "equating to" or "equating with" are used. At any rate, > > this is one example of the "detour" Kuruma is referring too. I have used > > > it > > in my translation too, although in some respects "roundabout way" (not > > "roundabout way of saying") might be better. For most of the passages > > quoted > > from Marx in my translation of Kuruma's book I have relied on Hans > > Ehrbar's > > excellent translation, but here I think I will have to make a number of > > alterations. > > > > I would be interested if anyone has an alternative translation of this > > passage from Capital that begins: "Indem z.B. der Rock als Wertig der > > Leinwand gleichgesetzt wird, wird die in ihm steckende Arbeit der in ihr > > steckenden Arbeit gleichgesetzt…" > > > > > > "By equating, for example, the coat as a thing of value to the linen, we > > > equate the labor embedded in the coat with the labor embedded in the > > linen. > > Now it is true that the tailoring labor which makes the coat is concrete > > labor of a different sort from the weaving labor which makes the linen. > > But > > the act of equating tailoring with weaving reduces the former in fact to > > what is really equal in the two kinds of labor, to the characteristic > they > > have in common of being human labor. This is a roundabout way of saying > > that > > weaving too, in so far as it weaves value, has nothing to distinguish it > > from tailoring, and, consequently is abstract human labor." (Penguin, p. > > 142) > > > > > > > > "By making the coat the equivalent to the linen, we equate the labor > > embodied in the former to that of the latter. Now, it is true that the > > tailoring, which makes the coat, is concrete labor of a different sort > > from > > the weaving which makes the linen. But the act of equating it to the > > weaving, reduces the tailoring to that which is really equal in the two > > kinds of labor, to their common character of human labor. In this > > roundabout > > way, then, the fact is expressed, that weaving also, in so far as it > > weaves > > value, has nothing to distinguish it from tailoring, and, consequently, > is > > abstract human labor." (International, pp. 60-1) > > > > > > > > "By setting the coat, for example, as a thing of value equal to the > linen, > > the commodity owners also set the labor embedded in the coat equal to > the > > labor embedded in the linen. It is true, tailoring, which makes the > coat, > > is > > concrete labor of a different sort than weaving, which makes the linen. > > But > > by equating the tailoring with weaving, the commodity owners reduce > > tailoring in fact to what is really equal in the two kinds of labor, > > namely, > > that they are both human labor. Through this detour over tailoring they > > say > > that weaving too, in so far as it weaves value, has nothing to > distinguish > > it from tailoring, and consequently, is abstract labor." (Ehrbar) > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 30 2007 - 00:00:17 EDT