[OPE] [Eldred on:] John Holloway _Crack Capitalism_ reviewed by Christian Garland

From: GERALD LEVY <gerald_a_levy@msn.com>
Date: Wed Apr 06 2011 - 07:27:38 EDT

_______________________________
> Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 12:36:45 +0200
> From: me@arte-fact.org
> Subject: John Holloway _Crack Capitalism_ reviewed by Christian Garland
>
> John Holloway
> Crack Capitalism
> Pluto Press, London, 2010. 320pp., £17.99 pb
> ISBN 9780745330099
>
> Reviewed by Christian Garland
>
> http://marxandphilosophy.org.uk/reviewofbooks/reviews/2011/291
>
> Cologne 06-Apr-2011
>
> The reviewer intimates how John Holloway reveals the cracks in
> capitalism, evoking a first person plural 'we' who are to "negate"
> capitalism, to “break it in as many ways as we can and try to expand
> and multiply the cracks and promote their confluence.” (Holloway, as
> cited by Garland). The cracks of mis-fitting are the interstices in
> which singularity can find its niche for living beneath the abstract,
> reified sociation achieved by intermeshing value-forms, resisting the
> Siren enticements of winning-or-losing proffered by the gainful game.
> The cracks are therefore capitalism's cracks, to which this 'we' is
> indebted. What is problematic is whether and how singularity can exist
> mis-fittingly in the interstices precisely as a conjured, plural 'we'
> (in Marxism, paradigmatically, that elusive 'revolutionary subject'
> inherited from subjectivist metaphysics). This would require
> thematizing intensively the differences between the third person (the
> preferred inflexion for metaphysical discourse) and the first and
> second persons, both singular and plural. These are not merely dry
> grammatical categories, but, more deeply, folds in being.that are ways
> of existing-in-the-world. Hence they call for, and still await,
> explicit ontological reflection. As a singularity, I may just gain my
> self in an interstitial niche, that is, if I do not exist assimilated
> to the way 'people' live. You, too, may gain your self in the crack
> that you singularly cast open. But are 'we' ever more than a fleeting
> moment, that is. if we are to be singular and not merely a bunch of
> people living under capitalism?
>
> _-_-_-_-_-_-_- artefact text and translation _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
> _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- made by art _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
> http://www.arte-fact.org -_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Dr Michael Eldred (c)_-_-
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Wed Apr 6 07:28:38 2011

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Apr 30 2011 - 00:00:03 EDT