Once you have translated a line of English text, replace the English text with the new translation.
Please do not change the time codes.
0:00:01.569,0:00:02.840
» НИЛ СМИТ: Итак, сегодня у меня для вас подарок.
0:00:02.840,0:00:07.259
Мы поговорим с Дэвидом Харви о
0:00:07.259,0:00:08.809
его лекциях, где он
0:00:08.809,0:00:11.300
вот уже на протяжении почти 40 лет рассказывает
0:00:11.300,0:00:13.919
о "Капитале". Меня зовут Нил Смит.
0:00:13.919,0:00:19.019
Я преподаю антропологию и географию в Городском университете Нью-Йорка.
0:00:19.019,0:00:21.640
С Дэвидом мы работаем вместе с первых его дней здесь.
0:00:21.640,0:00:25.199
Но до этого, задолго до этого — более 30 лет назад,
0:00:25.199,0:00:30.009
я учился у Дэвида в университете Джонса Хопкинса в Балтиморе. Именно там
0:00:30.009,0:00:33.180
я впервые
0:00:33.180,0:00:37.580
не только узнал, что есть такая книга "Капитал", но и прочитал её
0:00:37.580,0:00:41.620
под чутким руководством Дэвида. Дэвид, что вдохновило Вас
0:00:41.620,0:00:44.570
приступить к чтению "Капитала" тогда, примерно,
0:00:44.570,0:00:46.830
в самом начале 70-х?
0:00:46.830,0:00:48.790
» ДЭВИД ХАРВИ: Это был один из тех
0:00:48.790,0:00:50.480
исторических моментов,
0:00:50.480,0:00:53.360
когда казалось правильным сделать это.
0:00:53.360,0:00:56.320
Я приехал из Англии,
0:00:56.320,0:00:59.770
прибыл на корабле летом 69-го.
0:00:59.770,0:01:01.670
И прибыл я в Балтимор,
0:01:01.670,0:01:07.250
где в 68-м произошёл огромный всплеск насилия
0:01:07.250,0:01:11.240
из-за убийства Мартина Лютера Кинга.
0:01:11.240,0:01:14.660
Положение с правами человека было ужасным,
0:01:14.660,0:01:17.750
расизм процветал,
0:01:17.750,0:01:20.530
шла Война во Вьетнаме,
0:01:20.530,0:01:21.970
а антивоенные протесты
0:01:21.970,0:01:24.030
только разгорались.
0:01:24.030,0:01:27.620
Это было очень запутанное время…
0:01:27.620,0:01:29.560
Припоминаю, как,
0:01:29.560,0:01:32.330
кажется, в декабре 69-го
0:01:32.330,0:01:36.530
в Чикаго был убит Фред Хэмптон,
0:01:36.530,0:01:37.920
лидер "Чёрных пантер",
0:01:37.920,0:01:39.489
а вскоре после этого,
0:01:39.489,0:01:41.700
в мае 70-го, произошли убийства
0:01:41.700,0:01:44.740
в Кентском государственном университете.
0:01:44.740,0:01:48.020
Это повлекло за собой большую студенческую забастовку: миллионы студентов со всей страны
0:01:48.020,0:01:52.100
приняли в ней участие. Вскоре после этого произошли убийства и в Джексонском государственном университете.
0:01:52.100,0:01:57.970
То есть это было очень, очень, очень смутное время.
0:01:57.970,0:01:59.009
И мне кажется,
0:01:59.009,0:02:03.119
мне, во всяком случае, было понятно, что мы не совсем понимали как с этим справиться, или
0:02:03.119,0:02:07.290
как объяснить это.
0:02:07.290,0:02:11.800
К тому же, я был вроде как специалистом в "общественных науках", все время размышлял обо всех этих вещах, но не мог найти подход, который бы
0:02:11.800,0:02:13.499
по-настоящему охватил все происходящее.
0:02:13.499,0:02:17.539
Поэтому я сказал своим студентам:
"А почему бы нам не почитать "Капитал"?
0:02:17.539,0:02:18.770
Раз уж эту книгу мы не читали,
0:02:18.770,0:02:20.669
может быть, там есть то
0:02:20.669,0:02:21.980
что сработает".
0:02:21.980,0:02:25.829
И так, в составе нескольких человек мы сели и организовали группу чтения "Капитала".
0:02:25.829,0:02:30.779
С этого все началось. А потом,
когда мы закончили, то совершенно
0:02:30.779,0:02:32.599
неверно интерпретировали книгу,
0:02:32.599,0:02:35.059
совершенно неверно.
Сейчас я оглядываюсь назад,
0:02:35.059,0:02:38.499
И понимаю, что мне было бы стыдно слушать все то,
что мы говорили в тот первый год.
0:02:38.499,0:02:42.679
Знаете, это было будто слепой ведет слепых через колоссальный текст.
0:02:42.679,0:02:45.509
И мы не понимали, что мы делали, поэтому мы подумали: "Что ж, мы сделали это раз,
0:02:45.509,0:02:49.189
и лучше бы повторить, так как, очевидно, мы не совсем правильно все поняли".
0:02:49.189,0:02:51.799
Но одна вещь, которую я понял в тот момент,
0:02:51.799,0:02:56.359
из всего этого, это то, что ты начинаешь понимать "Капитал" только тогда, когда добираешься до конца.
0:02:56.359,0:02:58.950
Очень сложно в самом начале…
0:02:58.950,0:02:59.979
» НИЛ СМИТ: Да.
0:02:59.979,0:03:02.049
» Дэвид Харви: …достичь общего понимания.
0:03:02.049,0:03:04.449
Итак, на следующий год мы решили
пройтись еще раз по тексту,
0:03:04.449,0:03:05.800
и мы прошлись.
0:03:05.800,0:03:08.009
И я подумал про себя: Что ж,
0:03:08.009,0:03:10.700
это интересно, сейчас я уже вижу в этом
структуру и метод
0:03:10.700,0:03:15.739
который поможет объяснить происходящее.
Я подумал: Надо продолжать.
0:03:15.739,0:03:18.010
К тому же вокруг меня были люди,
0:03:18.010,0:03:21.079
такие же как я, которые чувствовали потребность в методе
и таким образом,
0:03:21.079,0:03:22.829
шаг за шагом
0:03:22.829,0:03:26.049
Я начал повторять:
ладно, я буду делать это каждый год.
0:03:26.049,0:03:29.609
И, конечно же, одна из вещей, которая
случается с тем, кто читает "Капитал" каждый год, это то
0:03:29.609,0:03:33.289
что вас вдруг начинают называть марксистом.
0:03:33.289,0:03:37.059
Я не имел понятия о том, что значит быть марксистом
и я совершенно
0:03:37.059,0:03:40.139
не обращал на это внимание поначалу, но внезапно
просто потому что ты читаешь книгу
0:03:40.139,0:03:42.289
и воспринимаешь ее серьезно,
0:03:42.289,0:03:45.709
и хочешь знать больше о том, как
использовать подход Маркса сегодня
0:03:45.709,0:03:49.349
ты вдруг оказываешься затиснутым в определенный
политический угол. И постепенно начинаешь говорить:
0:03:49.349,0:03:54.649
Наверное, если так и есть, то так и есть.
Поэтому…
0:03:54.649,0:03:56.979
» НИЛ СМИТ: Ну, я думаю, это может быть полезно
если
0:03:56.979,0:03:59.859
в течение лекции,
0:03:59.859,0:04:02.680
если сейчас Вы нам объясните немного,
0:04:02.680,0:04:04.249
или проясните
0:04:04.249,0:04:11.290
что по-вашему является важными моментами
в первом томе "Капитала".
0:04:11.290,0:04:15.229
» Дэвид Харви: Одна из вещей,
которые кажутся мне полезными,
0:04:15.229,0:04:16.359
и одна из причин,
0:04:16.359,0:04:20.750
по которой мне, собственно, нравилось
работать над этим курсом,
0:04:20.750,0:04:24.639
это то, что многие организовывали курсы,
в которых немного затрагивали Маркса,
0:04:24.639,0:04:28.870
немного Вебера, Дюркгейма, еще чего-то,
читали фрагменты из Маркса или других авторов,
0:04:28.870,0:04:31.620
но никогда не читали "Капитал" как цельную книгу,
0:04:31.620,0:04:36.430
а это на самом деле фантастическое литературное произведение.
Поэтому, одна из идей, которые я действительно хочу
0:04:36.430,0:04:38.139
подчеркнуть
0:04:38.139,0:04:40.349
это то, что "Капитал" - это отличное чтиво!
0:04:40.349,0:04:44.919
Когда вы наконец-то разберетесь со спецификой
языка и продеретесь через все эти
0:04:44.919,0:04:50.120
понятия и термины, вот тогда поймете, что это очень, очень
динамичный текст, он очень легко читается.
0:04:50.120,0:04:54.840
И он легко воспринимается с самого начального понятия
- с такой простой идеи как "товар".
0:04:54.840,0:04:59.190
Вы идете в супермаркет, находите товар,
покупаете товар, приносите домой, едите его,
0:04:59.190,0:05:03.629
или носите его, или еще что-то, и,
0:05:03.629,0:05:08.710
начиная с этого простого понятия, о котором
мы все прекрасно знаем, вы начинаете шаг за шагом
0:05:08.710,0:05:10.649
постепенно,
0:05:10.649,0:05:14.499
прояснять для себя как работает капиталистическая экономика.
0:05:14.499,0:05:20.509
А потом начинают появляться догадки,
удивительные догадки о том, почему существует
0:05:20.509,0:05:24.150
безработица, или почему существует борьба за
0:05:24.150,0:05:26.290
время, то есть почему
0:05:26.290,0:05:28.309
капиталисты всегда пытаются
0:05:28.309,0:05:30.529
украсть ваше время,
0:05:30.529,0:05:33.270
почему мы живем в мире,
0:05:33.270,0:05:35.050
который будто
0:05:35.050,0:05:39.090
подчинен логике
определенной темпоральности,
0:05:39.090,0:05:43.150
и что такое угнетение и какие виды угнетения
существуют вокруг. То есть, я думаю, этот текст
0:05:43.150,0:05:46.979
очень многое открывает.
0:05:46.979,0:05:53.979
0:06:05.360,0:06:09.099
И цель курса в том, чтобы
0:06:09.099,0:06:14.189
заставить прочитать книгу,
0:06:14.189,0:06:18.189
и сделать это как можно лучше,
с точки зрения самого Маркса,
0:06:18.189,0:06:20.869
что может звучать немного глупо,
0:06:20.869,0:06:22.789
ведь если вы не читали книгу,
0:06:22.789,0:06:24.779
вы и не будете знать наверняка
0:06:24.779,0:06:26.749
какова эта точка зрения.
0:06:26.749,0:06:31.630
Один из важных моментов - то, что вы читаете,
0:06:31.630,0:06:35.479
тем самым вы понимаете гораздо больше
вне стен этого класса,
0:06:35.479,0:06:38.349
если вы читаете заданную литературу
0:06:38.349,0:06:42.029
перед тем как прийти на лекцию,
вместо того, чтобы просто сидеть и слушать.
0:06:42.029,0:06:46.080
Если и другая причина,
которая…
0:06:46.080,0:06:49.729
Вы должны бороться, всегда
0:06:49.729,0:06:52.990
бороться с пониманием чего-нибудь.
0:06:52.990,0:06:56.190
И когда эта борьба происходит в вас самих
0:06:56.190,0:06:58.379
вы можете достичь собственного
0:06:58.379,0:06:59.880
понимания того, о чем говорил Маркс
0:06:59.880,0:07:04.520
и это будет иметь значение для вас. То есть вы втягиваетесь во
взаимодействие с книгой,
0:07:04.520,0:07:06.969
с текстом,
0:07:06.969,0:07:07.860
и я это взаимодействие
0:07:07.860,0:07:11.699
поощряю.
0:07:11.699,0:07:13.749
Однако, в процессе чтения,
0:07:13.749,0:07:18.099
возникает сложность,
обусловленная тем, что
0:07:18.099,0:07:22.659
к тексту очень сложно подойти без каких-либо
предубеждений. Все мы
0:07:22.659,0:07:25.050
слышали о Карле Марксе
0:07:25.050,0:07:30.209
и каждый знает
понятие "марксизм" или "марксист",
0:07:30.209,0:07:33.379
и это тянет за собой различные коннотации,
0:07:33.379,0:07:35.509
которыми эти слова обладают.
0:07:35.509,0:07:41.370
Поэтому, я хочу попросить вас с самого
начала попытаться отбросить множество
0:07:41.370,0:07:43.689
предрассудков, все, из того,
0:07:43.689,0:07:47.289
что вы думали или знали о Марксе,
и попытаться просто читать текст,
0:07:47.289,0:07:52.179
попытаться понять что же на самом деле
он хотел сказать.
0:07:52.179,0:07:55.229
И это, конечно же,
0:07:55.229,0:07:59.270
не так легко в силу множества
причин, которые
0:07:59.270,0:08:03.679
я хочу упомянуть в своеобразном "введении" в курс.
0:08:03.679,0:08:06.870
Еще одно предубеждение, с
которым мы пытаемся
0:08:06.870,0:08:09.680
приблизиться к тексту вроде "Капитала"
0:08:09.680,0:08:13.610
это наша особая
интеллектуальная история, и наша особая
0:08:13.610,0:08:17.449
интеллектуальная практика,
0:08:17.449,0:08:21.009
и для людей, которые являются
выпускниками университетов, например,
0:08:21.009,0:08:26.249
эта интеллектуальная практика очень
четко ограничена дисциплинарным аппаратом,
0:08:26.249,0:08:27.530
дисциплинарным мышлением,
0:08:27.530,0:08:30.169
дисциплинарными задачами.
0:08:30.169,0:08:32.580
Поэтому и тенденция в том
0:08:32.580,0:08:37.050
чтобы читать книгу
с точки зрения определенной дисциплины.
0:08:37.050,0:08:42.720
Вообще-то, одна из отличных вещей, касающихся Маркса в том,
что он бы никогда не получил постоянную должность ни в одной из существующих дисциплин,
0:08:42.720,0:08:46.090
и если вы хотите читать его правильно, тогда
надо забыть о мечте получить "бессрочный контракт"
0:08:46.090,0:08:48.130
по вашей специальности;
0:08:48.130,0:08:51.600
не навсегда забыть, конечно, но
хотя бы во время прохождения этого курса.
0:08:51.600,0:08:53.350
Надо думать о том,
0:08:53.350,0:08:54.430
что он говорит
0:08:54.430,0:08:58.400
независимо от
0:08:58.400,0:09:03.270
понятийного аппарата, с которого вы начинаете думать в рамках
вашей дисциплины.
0:09:03.270,0:09:07.800
С другой стороны, еще одна причина почему я так говорю это
то, что книга оказывается необычайно богатой
0:09:07.800,0:09:10.660
в смысле ссылок.
0:09:10.660,0:09:14.550
Отсылки к Шекспиру,
древним грекам, Бальзаку,
0:09:14.550,0:09:17.740
отсылки ко всем этим
политэкономистам, философам,
0:09:17.740,0:09:21.100
антропологам и прочим.
Другими словами,
0:09:21.100,0:09:22.920
Маркс работает
0:09:22.920,0:09:25.950
с огромным количеством источников,
0:09:25.950,0:09:29.980
и то, как он это делает, может по-настоящему
заинтриговать и заставить задуматься
0:09:29.980,0:09:32.140
что это за источники,
0:09:32.140,0:09:36.700
и, на самом деле, многие из них невозможно отследить,
я пытался это сделать долгое время.
0:09:36.700,0:09:41.250
Но на самом деле это
очень волнующе, когда ты начинаешь видеть
0:09:41.250,0:09:42.589
некоторые
0:09:42.589,0:09:45.259
связи. Например, когда я впервые
начал читать книгу, я не был знаком со многими
0:09:45.259,0:09:48.850
романами Бальзака, затем я начал читать
эти романы и сказал себе:
0:09:48.850,0:09:51.690
"О, вот откуда Маркс взял это!"
0:09:51.690,0:09:55.550
и тогда ты вдруг видишь все
эти источники, из которых он черпал информацию
0:09:55.550,0:09:57.400
о целом эмпирическом мире,
0:09:57.400,0:10:00.570
в котором есть Гете,
Шекспир, и все остальные.
0:10:00.570,0:10:01.510
То есть, это очень
0:10:01.510,0:10:04.710
богатый текст в том смысле,
что ты начинаешь ценить его,
0:10:04.710,0:10:06.359
я думаю, еще больше
0:10:06.359,0:10:08.860
если прекращаешь спрашивать себя: "Ладно,
0:10:08.860,0:10:11.660
о каком историческом персонаже он говорит?", или "О каком
0:10:11.660,0:10:14.380
экономисте идет речь?" и т.п.
0:10:14.380,0:10:17.260
И еще одна вещь, на которую натыкаешься,
если читаешь подобным образом, это понимание, что ты
0:10:17.260,0:10:19.930
вообще-то читаешь очень интересную книгу.
0:10:19.930,0:10:22.460
Это захватывающая книга,
0:10:22.460,0:10:25.980
но и здесь тоже мы сталкиваемся
с целым набором предубеждений, так как
0:10:25.980,0:10:28.660
многие из вас уже сталкивались
0:10:28.660,0:10:31.020
с Марксом в своих занятиях.
0:10:31.020,0:10:34.620
Возможно, вы читали Манифест коммунистической
партии в школе.
0:10:34.620,0:10:37.710
Может, вы посещали один из тех
чудесных курсов, которые называются
0:10:37.710,0:10:40.880
"Ведение в обществознание",
в рамках которого вы провели две недели, читая Маркса,
0:10:40.880,0:10:46.460
еще две недели читали Вебера, несколько недель -
Дюркгейма и тому подобных персонажей.
0:10:46.460,0:10:48.910
А может, вы читали
некоторые выдержки из "Капитала".
0:10:48.910,0:10:54.000
Но чтение фрагментов из "Капитала" это
совершенно не то же самое, что читать книгу целиком,
0:10:54.000,0:10:58.269
потому что так ты начинаешь видеть как кусочки и отрывки
так или иначе,
0:10:58.269,0:11:02.270
составляются в большее,
полное повествование и, мне кажется
0:11:02.270,0:11:05.430
мне бы хотелось, чтобы вы на самом деле попробовали
охватить все это, в каком-то смысле
0:11:05.430,0:11:11.170
уловить общее повествование, понять
общую задумку, потому что это, если хотите,
0:11:11.170,0:11:14.040
то, чего, по моему мнению, хотел
бы и сам Маркс. Он бы ненавидел
0:11:14.040,0:11:15.230
если кто-нибудь бы сказал:
0:11:15.230,0:11:19.000
"Эй, вот тебе отрывок этой главы",
или "Ты работай с этим разделом", и ты, якобы, сможешь
0:11:19.000,0:11:20.080
понять Маркса.
0:11:20.080,0:11:23.680
И ему определенно не понравилось бы если бы он узнал, что ему
выделят три недели в курсе "Введение
0:11:23.680,0:11:25.290
в обществознание".
0:11:25.290,0:11:27.440
И я думаю, вам тоже это должно не нравиться,
0:11:27.440,0:11:30.280
потому что таким образом вы получаете определенное
представление о Марксе,
0:11:30.280,0:11:32.070
которое радикально отличается
0:11:32.070,0:11:35.290
от представления, которое
вы можете получить читая
0:11:35.290,0:11:38.600
книгу подобную "Капиталу" Маркса.
0:11:38.600,0:11:43.120
Еще одна вещь, которая, конечно, случается,
если подходить с дисциплинарных позиций
0:11:43.120,0:11:49.320
это то, что очень часто люди
начинают организовывать свою интерпретацию
0:11:49.320,0:11:52.930
вокруг этой самой дисциплинарной
точки зрения. Так, вы говорите:
0:11:52.930,0:11:56.380
"Что ж, я не экономист, я совершенно
ничего не смыслю в экономике, поэтому я не
0:11:56.380,0:11:59.190
собираюсь беспокоить себя
чтением всех этих экономических пояснений,
0:11:59.190,0:12:00.200
я буду придерживаться
0:12:00.200,0:12:01.819
философских аргументов".
0:12:01.819,0:12:02.819
А на самом деле,
0:12:02.819,0:12:04.830
очень интересно читать
0:12:04.830,0:12:07.460
Маркса именно в этой перспективе.
0:12:07.460,0:12:11.290
Я читал этот курс
каждый год, начиная с 1971,
0:12:11.290,0:12:12.780
за исключением одного года.
0:12:12.780,0:12:17.240
Иногда получалось прочитать его дважды за год,
иногда даже три раза.
0:12:17.240,0:12:20.880
И поначалу я
преподавал его для самых
0:12:20.880,0:12:22.310
разных групп.
0:12:22.310,0:12:23.670
Один год это были
0:12:23.670,0:12:27.430
студенты философского факультета
из бывшего Государственного колледжа
0:12:27.430,0:12:29.949
Моргана, который сейчас является Государственным
университетом Моргана. В другой раз
0:12:29.949,0:12:33.690
это были студенты старших курсов
факультета английского языка из университета Джонса Хопкинса.
0:12:33.690,0:12:34.579
Еще другой год
0:12:34.579,0:12:38.960
это были экономисты, и все в таком роде.
Вот то, что действительно поражало меня,
0:12:38.960,0:12:43.170
это то, что каждый раз ты читаешь текст с новой группой,
и каждый раз ты открываешь все новые моменты в нем.
0:12:43.170,0:12:46.540
И признаться, я узнал очень многое о
самой книге, когда пробирался сквозь нее
0:12:46.540,0:12:49.670
с этими разными группами из разных дисциплин.
0:12:49.670,0:12:52.680
Иногда это сводило меня с ума,
но я многому научился.
0:12:52.680,0:12:55.100
Однажды, например,
0:12:55.100,0:13:00.930
я занимался с группой студентов с
факультета сравнительного литературоведения из университета Джонса Хопкинса,
0:13:00.930,0:13:03.630
их было около семи.
0:13:03.630,0:13:07.290
И мы занимались первой главой,
0:13:07.290,0:13:11.040
весь семестр мы провели над первой главой.
0:13:11.040,0:13:14.710
Это раздражало меня. Я говорил: "Слушайте, мы должны
как-то согласовываться с расписанием", ну знаете и все в таком
0:13:14.710,0:13:17.029
духе, очень важные моменты,
но они говорили:
0:13:17.029,0:13:20.690
"Нет, нет, нам нужно все понять правильно,
нам нужно все понять правильно. Что на самом деле
0:13:20.690,0:13:23.870
означает "стоимость"? Что это такое "денежный товар"? Что
0:13:23.870,0:13:26.070
такое фетиш? Что все это означает?"
0:13:26.070,0:13:27.270
И оказалось…
0:13:27.270,0:13:30.830
Я сказал: "Зачем вы все это делаете?"
Они ответили: "Ну мы много работаем в
0:13:30.830,0:13:33.679
традиции…" кого-то, о ком я ничего не
слышал в то время, и кого полагал
0:13:33.679,0:13:37.430
очевидным болваном, раз уж
он занимался подобными вещами,
0:13:37.430,0:13:39.980
и которого звали Жак Деррида.
0:13:39.980,0:13:44.240
Он провел много времени
в университета Хопкинса в конце 1960х - начале
0:13:44.240,0:13:47.460
1970х. И он был вообще-то
0:13:47.460,0:13:50.890
очень влиятельной фигурой на
факультете сравнительного литературоведения.
0:13:50.890,0:13:53.100
И одна из вещей, которые я позже
0:13:53.100,0:13:55.150
понял обо всем этом…
0:13:55.150,0:14:00.080
Это то, что они научили меня обращать
больше внимания на язык Маркса;
0:14:00.080,0:14:05.040
то, что он говорит, и как он говорит, и что
он имеет в виду, и, может, даже что он пропускает,
0:14:05.040,0:14:08.160
и все это ужасно важно.
0:14:08.160,0:14:12.800
Таким образом, я вообще-то, научился…
я очень благодарен той группе,
0:14:12.800,0:14:16.530
не говоря уже о том, что я больше
не выгляжу идиотом, говоря, что я не…
0:14:16.530,0:14:19.270
что я никогда не слышал о Жаке Деррида, знаете ли.
0:14:19.270,0:14:23.380
То есть это было очень полезно
0:14:23.380,0:14:28.170
поработать с такой группой, они будто
помогли мне пробраться через первую главу
0:14:28.170,0:14:30.100
с хорошей гребенкой,
0:14:30.100,0:14:33.360
пройтись практически по каждому слову,
каждому предложению, каждому смысловому
0:14:33.360,0:14:34.910
сочетанию и так далее.
0:14:34.910,0:14:38.860
Да, так и есть, я хочу чтобы мы уложились в
график. Да, я хочу добраться
0:14:38.860,0:14:41.629
до конца тома, чтобы
мы не тратили все время
0:14:41.629,0:14:43.090
на первую главу, но
0:14:43.090,0:14:46.580
это тот момент, когда взгляд с другой
дисциплинарной перспективы может многое открыть.
0:14:46.580,0:14:51.300
Потому что Маркс писал свой текст
0:14:51.300,0:14:55.890
используя различные
точки зрения, о чем я уже говорил.
0:14:55.890,0:14:56.610
И я думаю, что
0:14:56.610,0:14:58.280
мы должны понять
0:14:58.280,0:15:03.330
как эти точки зрения
переплетаются в тексте.
0:15:03.330,0:15:06.130
Вообще, есть три главных
0:15:06.130,0:15:08.430
источника вдохновения
0:15:08.430,0:15:10.550
в этой книге,
0:15:10.550,0:15:13.790
и все они подталкивают к
0:15:13.790,0:15:18.940
глубокой приверженности, в случае Маркса, к
0:15:18.940,0:15:22.540
критической теории, к критическому анализу.
0:15:22.540,0:15:27.890
Когда он был относительно молод, он написал небольшой
текст для одного из своих коллег по редакции
0:15:27.890,0:15:30.070
в одном немецком журнале.
0:15:30.070,0:15:35.360
И название этого текста:
'For a Ruthless Criticism of Everything Existing'.
0:15:35.360,0:15:40.440
Очень скромное название, но я
рекомендую всем прочитать этот текст,
0:15:40.440,0:15:42.780
потому что это завораживает.
0:15:42.780,0:15:45.640
Что он делает? Маркс не говорит
0:15:45.640,0:15:46.680
что все вокруг
0:15:46.680,0:15:50.800
тупые, что он собирается громить всех,
критиковать в пух и прах
0:15:50.800,0:15:51.790
человеческое существование. Нет.
0:15:51.790,0:15:53.760
Он говорит,
0:15:53.760,0:15:57.050
что есть очень много серьезных людей,
которые задумывались об устройстве мира,
0:15:57.050,0:15:58.760
серьезно задумывались.
0:15:58.760,0:16:04.830
И они видели определенные вещи
и то, что они видели, это наши источники информации.
0:16:04.830,0:16:09.540
Критический метод заключается в том, чтобы
взять всю эту информацию, и
0:16:09.540,0:16:15.080
проработать ее, превратить
ее во что-то совершенно новое.
0:16:15.080,0:16:18.200
Позже Маркс сказал одну вещь,
и я считаю, это характеризует его метод
0:16:18.200,0:16:19.750
очень метко:
0:16:19.750,0:16:24.220
он сказал, что для того, чтобы
достичь необходимой трансформации, надо взять
0:16:24.220,0:16:26.699
радикально несхожие концептуальные блоки
0:16:26.699,0:16:32.370
начать тереть их друг о друга
и, таким образом, получить революционный огонь.
0:16:32.370,0:16:36.790
И это он, собственно, и делает.
Он берет очень, очень несхожие традиции,
0:16:36.790,0:16:38.340
сталкивает их,
0:16:38.340,0:16:39.800
растирает их друг с другом,
0:16:39.800,0:16:43.960
и создает совершенно
новую систему знания.
0:16:43.960,0:16:47.790
И как он говорит в одном из вступительных
0:16:49.670,0:16:52.350
предисловия, он говорит: если ты пытаешься
создать новую систему знания, тогда
0:16:52.350,0:16:55.790
тебе придется переформулировать весь концептуальный аппарат.
0:16:55.790,0:17:00.590
Надо переформулировать сам метод мышления.
0:17:00.590,0:17:04.939
Итак, три концептуальных блока,
которые он сталкивает в "Капитале"
0:17:04.939,0:17:07.110
это:
0:17:07.110,0:17:09.579
Первый, это концептуальный блок
0:17:09.579,0:17:12.180
политической экономии.
0:17:12.180,0:17:17.640
Восемнадцатый век, ранний
девятнадцатый век.
0:17:17.640,0:17:20.010
Здесь в основном английские авторы.
0:17:20.010,0:17:22.600
Не только английские, но
0:17:22.600,0:17:28.070
от Локка до Хоббса и Юма, и
конечно же, Адам Смит и Рикардо и Мальтюс.
0:17:28.070,0:17:32.180
И еще масса других авторов,
как Стюарт, и другие, менее значимые.
0:17:32.180,0:17:35.880
И он подвергает всех этих людей
0:17:35.880,0:17:39.730
глубокой, глубокой критике, в
0:17:39.730,0:17:45.040
трех томах под названием "Теории прибавочной стоимости".
0:17:45.040,0:17:48.240
У него не было не копировальных аппаратов
и он не использовал интернет и тому подобное,
0:17:48.240,0:17:51.240
поэтому он
старательно переписывал вручную
0:17:51.240,0:17:52.980
пассажи из Адама Смита,
0:17:52.980,0:17:54.770
и затем писал комментарии к ним.
0:17:54.770,0:17:59.290
Длинные пассажи из Стюарта,
0:17:59.290,0:18:03.390
опять, и длинные комментарии к ним.
0:18:03.390,0:18:07.990
На самом деле, то, что он делал еще тогда,
это то, что мы называем деконструкцией.
0:18:07.990,0:18:10.210
Одна из вещей, которую я понял
0:18:10.210,0:18:12.950
читая "Теории прибавочной стоимости" - это
0:18:12.950,0:18:16.170
как таким образом деконструировать любую аргументацию.
0:18:16.170,0:18:18.340
Вообще-то, он говорит:
0:18:18.340,0:18:19.979
"Адам Смит приводит аргумент.
0:18:19.979,0:18:22.770
Что он упускает?
0:18:22.770,0:18:25.030
Чего не хватает? Какой фрагмент
0:18:25.030,0:18:26.400
целого отсутствует,
0:18:26.400,0:18:28.299
фрагмент, который может соединить все вместе,
0:18:28.299,0:18:32.390
и если его поместить внутрь,
то он преобразовывает аргументацию?"
0:18:32.390,0:18:34.470
Итак, политическая экономия
0:18:34.470,0:18:37.750
- это очень мощная
0:18:37.750,0:18:38.540
одна из…
0:18:38.540,0:18:42.760
…одна из частей истории.
0:18:42.760,0:18:46.429
Сейчас я знаю политэкономию довольно неплохо.
Я прочитал немало по этой теме и ощущаю
0:18:46.429,0:18:50.140
себя довольно осведомлённым в ней. Возможно это
потому, что я происхожу из английской
0:18:50.140,0:18:53.260
традиции и всё такое,
что я чувствую себя весьма комфортно с ней.
0:18:53.260,0:18:56.080
И так что когда мы будем проходить,
0:18:56.080,0:18:58.960
я дам вам немного
0:18:58.960,0:19:00.850
материалов, происходящих
оттуда, в плане того
0:19:00.850,0:19:02.960
откуда Маркс черпает своё вдохновение,
0:19:02.960,0:19:05.240
поскольку он не всегда цитирует это в Капитале.
0:19:05.240,0:19:06.789
Некая идея поднимается,
0:19:06.789,0:19:08.830
которая явно повзаимствована из одного места,
0:19:08.830,0:19:10.400
и очень существенна,
0:19:10.400,0:19:14.410
но Маркс не всегда цитирует её.
0:19:14.410,0:19:15.820
Есть, понятно,
0:19:15.820,0:19:21.420
также и некоторые другие теоретики, даже
из Соединенных Штатов, но прежде всего французы.
0:19:21.420,0:19:25.230
Так что была французская традиция
в политэкономии, тоже, довольно отличающаяся.
0:19:25.230,0:19:29.370
Маркс ссылается на неё, но это
одна из, если хотите, одна из крупных областей
0:19:29.370,0:19:32.920
его… его рассмотрения.
0:19:32.920,0:19:36.460
Вторая область
0:19:36.460,0:19:39.770
это немецкая классическая критическая философия,
0:19:39.770,0:19:41.870
которая корнями уходит к грекам.
0:19:41.870,0:19:45.660
Так вот, Маркс написал свою диссертацию
0:19:45.660,0:19:50.040
по Эпикуру, так что он был очень, очень
знаком с греческой мыслью,
0:19:50.040,0:19:52.750
и конечно же с
путём, каким греческая мысль
0:19:52.750,0:19:56.230
перешла в немецкую философскую
критическую традицию,
0:19:56.230,0:20:01.340
Спиноза, Лейбниц, и конечно же Гегель,
0:20:01.340,0:20:04.390
и многие другие,
0:20:04.390,0:20:08.470
такого типа традиция
тоже исключительно важна,
0:20:08.470,0:20:13.390
и во многом он использует
немецкую традицию критической философии
0:20:13.390,0:20:17.310
в отношении к политэкономии. Он сводит их воедино.
0:20:17.310,0:20:19.200
И он также обильно почерпнул,
0:20:19.200,0:20:21.980
во многих отношениях, от Канта.
0:20:21.980,0:20:23.760
Так что эта традиция
0:20:23.760,0:20:27.660
тоже очень значительна. Я не
0:20:27.660,0:20:31.320
очень знающий в ней. Я не
глубоко подготовлен в этой традиции, так что те
0:20:31.320,0:20:32.590
из вас, кто
0:20:32.590,0:20:36.620
имеет более глубокую подготовку в ней, чем я,
возможно заметят вещи, которые я пропущу.
0:20:36.620,0:20:38.970
Это одна из тех вещей, что я узнал, когда я
0:20:38.970,0:20:41.900
работал с группой философов, которые были
0:20:41.900,0:20:45.600
очень погружены в Гегеля, и так что я получил
очень гегелевский такой взгляд
0:20:45.600,0:20:49.720
на то, как Маркс действует/двигается. Я
знаю кое-что оттуда, но я не
0:20:49.720,0:20:50.870
так силён в этом
0:20:50.870,0:20:53.140
как мне хотелось бы.
0:20:53.140,0:20:57.170
И я должен сказать, на ранней стадии
я имел определенные симпатии к
0:20:57.170,0:21:00.700
британской экономистке Джоан Робинсон, когда
она сказала, что она реально воспротивилась тому,
0:21:00.700,0:21:06.880
как Гегель "сунул свой нос"
между ней и Рикардо в работе Маркса.
0:21:06.880,0:21:09.130
У меня было сочувствие к…
0:21:09.130,0:21:11.870
…к этому, и некоторым из…
0:21:11.870,0:21:15.929
…проблем, что у меня есть с приобщением к
Гегелю, у меня есть,
0:21:15.929,0:21:19.340
есть некоторое сочувствие здесь.
0:21:19.340,0:21:23.760
На самом деле, я в шутку говорю, и я наверное не должен
этого говорить, и расстрою всех гегельянцев вокруг,
0:21:23.760,0:21:27.530
что на самом деле, одна из лучших вещей
в чтении Гегеля перед чтением Маркса,
0:21:27.530,0:21:32.730
- это то, что оно делает чтение Маркса довольно простым.
0:21:32.730,0:21:37.270
Так что ты добываешь себе дозу Гегеля перед тем,
как ты примешь Маркса, и всё будет окей.
0:21:37.270,0:21:38.990
Третья традиция
0:21:38.990,0:21:41.750
которую он использует, и к которой много обращается,
0:21:41.750,0:21:46.070
это традиция утопических социалистов.
0:21:46.070,0:21:48.570
Так, она в основном французская,
0:21:48.570,0:21:52.460
хотя есть Роберт Оуэн, и некоторые британцы,
и конечно Томас Мор, в
0:21:52.460,0:21:54.100
британской традиции,
0:21:54.100,0:21:57.570
который возникает время от времени
в тексте,
0:21:57.570,0:21:59.900
но большие социалистические мыслители - был
0:21:59.900,0:22:10.180
этот невероятный взрыв утопической мысли
в 1830х и 1840х во Франции, -
0:22:10.180,0:22:15.510
Люди как Этьен Кабе, который создал группу,
названную Икарийцами, которая приехала сюда и осела
0:22:15.510,0:22:19.050
в Соединённых Штатах после 1848.
0:22:19.050,0:22:25.490
Прудон. Сэн-Симон. Фурье.
0:22:25.490,0:22:28.810
Маркс был очень, очень знаком -
он провёл некоторое время в Париже -
0:22:28.810,0:22:30.169
очень знаком с их работами,
0:22:30.169,0:22:37.210
и если ты читаешь Манифест коммунистической партии,
обнаруживаешь, что он малость раздражен их работами.
0:22:37.210,0:22:40.780
Ему не нравится то, как
0:22:40.780,0:22:46.800
утописты практически конфигурируют там некое
идеальное сообщество, безо всякой идеи
0:22:46.800,0:22:51.080
как попасть отсюда - туда.
0:22:51.080,0:22:54.810
Для Маркса, что он хочет
сделать - это попробовать преобразовать
0:22:54.810,0:22:58.270
социалистический проект
из утопического социалистического проекта
0:22:58.270,0:23:02.930
в научный социалистический проект.
0:23:02.930,0:23:06.220
Но чтобы это сделать,
он не может просто так взять
0:23:06.220,0:23:09.490
английский эмпирицизм, английскую
политэкономию, все эти вещи.
0:23:09.490,0:23:14.760
Ему нужно вновь создать, реконфигурировать
0:23:14.760,0:23:17.870
то, о чем вообще научный метод.
0:23:17.870,0:23:21.970
И его научный метод таким образом
0:23:21.970,0:23:25.780
во многом продиктован этим
0:23:25.780,0:23:29.490
допросом, если хотите,
в основном английской
0:23:29.490,0:23:32.190
традиции классической политэкономии,
0:23:32.190,0:23:36.000
с позиций в основном немецкой традиции
критической философии,
0:23:36.000,0:23:39.500
и с, можно сказать, утопическим импульсом,
0:23:39.500,0:23:42.559
спрашивая: что есть коммунизм?
Что есть социалистическое общество?
0:23:42.559,0:23:44.970
Как мы можем критиковать капитализм?
0:23:44.970,0:23:49.660
как будто, третьей силой, которая
несёт его вперёд.
0:23:49.660,0:23:52.710
Я довольно хорошо знаком с
0:23:52.710,0:23:56.549
французской социалистической традицией,
особенно этого периода, утопической
0:23:56.549,0:23:58.440
традицией этого периода,
0:23:58.440,0:24:02.560
и писал даже об этом так что, так что… Вы знаете,
я читал многих из тех людей, как Фурье,
0:24:02.560,0:24:08.559
Сэн-Симон, и, и Прудон,
в частности, я думаю, в действительности
0:24:08.559,0:24:14.280
что происходит - это что Маркс часто
черпает от них больше, чем он хотел бы признавать,
0:24:14.280,0:24:18.940
ведь он хотел как бы дистанцировать себя
0:24:18.940,0:24:22.030
от этой откровенно утопической традиции,
0:24:22.030,0:24:25.440
которая была здесь в 1830х и
1840х, в которой, во многих
0:24:25.440,0:24:31.330
отношениях, он видел хроническое поражение
революции 1848го в Париже.
0:24:31.330,0:24:35.330
И раз он хотел дистанцироваться от
этого всего, то, что он сделал, было: сказать
0:24:35.330,0:24:39.820
"Окей, я не собираюсь их признавать вообще, в принципе", но
на самом деле он использует очень много,
0:24:39.820,0:24:44.049
в частности от Сэн-Симона,
0:24:44.049,0:24:50.390
а также, через отрицание, Фурье.
На самом деле, множество его идей
0:24:50.390,0:24:52.490
- что-то вроде отрицания Фурье.
0:24:52.490,0:24:55.820
Так что вы не можете реально понять его
без понимания того, кого он отрицает,
0:24:55.820,0:24:57.850
и он отрицает Фурье, таким же образом,
0:24:57.850,0:24:59.570
как он отрицает
0:24:59.570,0:25:03.470
ряд политэкономистов довольно напрямую,
в частности Мальтуса, которого
0:25:03.470,0:25:05.220
ему было особенно
0:25:05.220,0:25:09.740
непросто принимать.
0:25:09.740,0:25:15.940
Так что, всё это, если хотите, некоторые из основных
линий, которые сходятся в данной книге
0:25:15.940,0:25:18.610
я предположил однако,
что мы должны читать её
0:25:18.610,0:25:23.550
в Марксовых собственных терминах, но это же ставит
0:25:23.550,0:25:28.220
множество трудностей, которые Маркс и сам
сознавал.
0:25:28.220,0:25:31.510
Он довольно интересно комментировал
0:25:31.510,0:25:33.850
в одном из своих предисловий,
0:25:33.850,0:25:41.900
конкретно к французскому изданию,
0:25:41.900,0:25:46.029
когда было предложение, что
Французское издание должно быть выпущено
0:25:46.029,0:25:51.140
как сериал - французы любят
публиковать всё как фельетоны,
0:25:51.140,0:25:55.170
это когда - статья выходит
и там только первые две главы…
0:25:55.170,0:26:00.370
а на следующей неделе…как бы сериализованный тип публикации.
0:26:00.370,0:26:04.220
И вот что Маркс пишет (это в 1872),
0:26:04.220,0:26:08.270
(он) говорит, "…Одобряю вашу идею публикации
Капитала в виде периодически выходящих выпусков…
0:26:08.270,0:26:11.570
…в этой форме сочинение будет более
доступным для рабочего класса…
0:26:11.570,0:26:17.540
… а это для меня решающее соображение.
0:26:17.540,0:26:20.460
Такова положительная сторона вашего предложения.
0:26:20.460,0:26:22.940
Но есть здесь и обратная сторона медали.
0:26:22.940,0:26:26.120
Метод анализа, который я применил…
0:26:26.120,0:26:29.799
…и который до сих пор не применялся
к экономическим вопросам…
0:26:29.799,0:26:31.960
делает чтение первых глав
0:26:31.960,0:26:37.310
особенно изнурительным и следует опасаться,
что французская публика…"
0:26:37.310,0:26:38.770
(и тут мы включаем и вас)
0:26:38.770,0:26:42.690
"…что всегда в нетерпении идёт к заключению,
жаждет узнать связь между
0:26:42.690,0:26:44.110
основными принципами
0:26:44.110,0:26:47.040
и непосредственными вопросами
которые возбудили её энтузиазм,
0:26:47.040,0:26:51.870
может пасть духом, поскольку они
окажутся неспособны сразу же перейти к дальнейшему.
0:26:51.870,0:26:54.659
Этот недостаток я бессилен преодолеть,
0:26:54.659,0:26:57.840
если только через предупреждение и вооружение заранее
0:26:57.840,0:27:00.850
тех читателей, кто рьяно ищет истину.
0:27:00.850,0:27:04.490
В науке нет широкой столбовой дороги, и лишь те,
кто не страшась усталости,
0:27:04.490,0:27:06.759
карабкается по её каменистым тропам
0:27:06.759,0:27:08.150
имеют шанс достичь
0:27:08.150,0:27:12.710
сияющих вершин её."
0:27:12.710,0:27:15.399
Ну раз вы все здесь рьяно озабочены
0:27:15.399,0:27:17.830
стремлением к истине
0:27:17.830,0:27:20.019
я должен предупредить вас, да, действительно,
0:27:20.019,0:27:25.870
чтение первых нескольких глав особенно
трудно. Это конкретно сложно.
0:27:25.870,0:27:28.740
И есть ряд причин на это.
0:27:28.740,0:27:32.320
Одна из причин это его метод,
о коем мы поговорим через минуту.
0:27:32.320,0:27:35.640
Другая причина связана
0:27:35.640,0:27:40.010
с особенным способом, которым
он возводит свой проект.
0:27:40.010,0:27:42.700
Его проект - это понять
0:27:42.700,0:27:48.650
как капиталистический способ производства работает.
0:27:48.650,0:27:55.159
И он всегда имеет в виду, что это будет огромный,
громадный проект.
0:27:55.159,0:27:59.290
Дабы сдвинуть этот проект с места,
0:27:59.290,0:28:05.850
ему нужно разработать концептуальный аппарат,
который поможет ему понять,
0:28:05.850,0:28:11.860
всю сложность, которая существует при капитализме.
0:28:11.860,0:28:16.900
И, опять, в одном из своих введений он говорит о том,
0:28:16.900,0:28:20.050
как он собирается с этим быть.
0:28:20.050,0:28:28.320
Он говорит: "Метод представления",
0:28:28.320,0:28:31.610
и мы сейчас имеем дело
с методом представления,
0:28:31.610,0:28:34.450
он говорит в послесловии ко второму изданию,
0:28:34.450,0:28:40.200
"Метод представления должен отличаться
по форме от метода исследования."
0:28:40.200,0:28:43.230
"Последний", то есть, процесс исследования,
0:28:43.230,0:28:47.210
"должен соответствовать материалу в деталях,
чтобы исследовать различные формы
0:28:47.210,0:28:52.510
развития, и отследить их внутреннюю связь.
0:28:52.510,0:28:57.580
Только после того, как эта работа проделана,
реальное движение может быть адекватно представлено.
0:28:57.580,0:28:59.950
Если это сделано успешно,
0:28:59.950,0:29:01.900
если жизнь предмета рассмотрения",
0:29:01.900,0:29:04.380
то есть, капиталистический способ производства,
0:29:04.380,0:29:08.090
"теперь отражена в идеях, тогда может
показаться, что мы имеем
0:29:08.090,0:29:13.910
перед собой априорную конструкцию."
0:29:13.910,0:29:15.809
Маркс говорит здесь о том, что
0:29:15.809,0:29:21.120
его метод исследования отличается от
его метода представления.
0:29:21.120,0:29:26.440
Его метод исследования начинается со всего,
что существует, - всего, что происходит.
0:29:26.440,0:29:29.169
Итак, начинаешь с реальности,
какой её испытываешь,
0:29:29.169,0:29:31.500
какой видишь, какой чувствуешь.
0:29:31.500,0:29:33.660
Начинаешь со всех
0:29:33.660,0:29:36.440
описаний реальности
0:29:36.440,0:29:40.669
политэкономистами, новелистами, кем угодно.
0:29:40.669,0:29:42.919
Начав со всего этого материала,
0:29:42.919,0:29:46.559
затем ищешь в нём
0:29:46.559,0:29:49.020
некоторые простые концепции.
0:29:49.020,0:29:51.380
Это то, что он называет "методом спуска."
0:29:51.380,0:29:53.040
Метод спуска от
0:29:53.040,0:29:54.980
реальности, которую ты обнаруживаешь,
0:29:54.980,0:29:57.020
глубже вниз, в поиске
0:29:57.020,0:30:00.440
неких основополагающих, фундаментальных концепций.
0:30:00.440,0:30:06.060
И когда ты раскрыл и открыл
эти фундаментальные концепции,
0:30:06.060,0:30:09.970
поднимаешься обратно на поверхность
0:30:09.970,0:30:13.060
и смотришь на то, что происходит
вокруг на поверхности и видишь,
0:30:13.060,0:30:16.980
что за внешним миром
видимости, с которого ты начал,
0:30:16.980,0:30:22.670
есть иной способ интерпретировать,
что происходит.
0:30:22.670,0:30:26.070
В результате Маркс стал пионером метода, который
если вы,
0:30:26.070,0:30:30.860
знаете, если вы знакомы с психоанализом,
я думаю, тоже бы поняли.
0:30:30.860,0:30:34.490
Там ты начинаешь с поверхностных поведений
и ищешь некий
0:30:34.490,0:30:37.380
концептуальный аппарат,
как делал Фрейд.
0:30:37.380,0:30:40.710
Ты находишь концептуальный аппарат
и он возвращает тебя обратно, и ты можешь
0:30:40.710,0:30:46.210
объяснить, "А! Этот человек действует
таким образом, и выглядит так-то, но в реальности это
0:30:46.210,0:30:48.100
манифестация вон того."
0:30:48.100,0:30:51.549
Маркс делает то же самое.
На самом деле Маркс - первопроходец
0:30:51.549,0:30:54.510
этого метода в социальных науках:
0:30:54.510,0:30:58.120
начать с поверхности явления;
найти глубинные концепции.
0:30:58.120,0:31:03.330
В Капитале он собирается начать с
глубинных концептов. Он собирается начать
0:31:03.330,0:31:07.950
с выводов его исследований.
0:31:07.950,0:31:11.580
"Какие мои основные концепции?"
0:31:11.580,0:31:14.480
И он выкладывает эти базовые концепции,
0:31:14.480,0:31:18.029
очень просто, очень прямо,
0:31:18.029,0:31:21.860
и конечно это выглядит как априорная
конструкция. Когда ты первый раз читаешь это,
0:31:21.860,0:31:23.010
ты думаешь,
0:31:23.010,0:31:25.540
"Откуда всё это исходит?"
0:31:25.540,0:31:29.720
"Где он это взял?
Почему он делает это?"
0:31:29.720,0:31:35.880
И половину времени у тебя нет идей, о чем
он говорит всеми этими концепциями.
0:31:35.880,0:31:37.780
Но затем, мало по малу,
0:31:37.780,0:31:44.340
по мере продвижения, начинаешь видеть, как эти
концепции освещают вещи, происходящие вокруг нас.
0:31:44.340,0:31:47.250
Так что спустя время ты начинаешь говорить "А!
0:31:47.250,0:31:49.759
"Так вот что "теория стоимости" реально значит."
0:31:49.759,0:31:52.390
"Вот о чем реально был аргумент стоимости."
0:31:52.390,0:31:56.799
"А! Так вот о чем реально был этот фетиш."
0:31:56.799,0:31:57.720
"Вот что эти
0:31:57.720,0:32:00.440
концепции делают для нас."
0:32:00.440,0:32:04.110
Но в результате ты только начинаешь
понимать как эти концепции работают
0:32:04.110,0:32:08.250
к моменту, когда ты доберёшься
к концу книги.
0:32:08.250,0:32:10.460
Вот это очень непривычная стратегия.
0:32:10.460,0:32:14.050
В смысле, мы привыкли к стратегиям,
когда люди вбивают в тебя:
0:32:14.050,0:32:17.600
"Понимаешь эту концепцию напрямую, и затем
переходишь к следующей." Как если ты строишь
0:32:17.600,0:32:21.240
кирпич за кирпичом, за кирпичом, за кирпичом.
0:32:21.240,0:32:23.250
Маркс больше такой,
0:32:23.250,0:32:26.540
знаете, рассекающий лук.
Я использую эту метафору и она злополучная,
0:32:26.540,0:32:27.960
потому что как кто-то однажды отметил,
0:32:27.960,0:32:31.530
ну, когда ты рассекаешь
лук, обычно это доводит тебя до слёз.
0:32:31.530,0:32:35.320
Но что он делает в результате это
начать с внешней стороны лука,
0:32:35.320,0:32:38.610
добраться до центра лука, найти
то, что заставляет лук расти, а затем
0:32:38.610,0:32:41.210
вернуться обратно на поверхность.
0:32:41.210,0:32:45.020
И ты понимаешь, под занавес,
о чем он вообще,
0:32:45.020,0:32:48.380
когда он возвращается к поверхности.
0:32:48.380,0:32:52.310
И его аргумент про то, что заставляет всё это
расти… Когда ты начинаешь с
0:32:52.310,0:32:54.880
внутреннего и идёшь наружу,
по всем этим слоям…
0:32:54.880,0:32:58.280
вот то, что ты делаешь:
Ты вечно обогащаешь концепции.
0:32:58.280,0:32:59.910
Нечто, что кажется
0:32:59.910,0:33:03.029
каким-то абсолютным и очень абстрактным понятием,
0:33:03.029,0:33:06.780
постепенно становится богаче и
богаче и богаче, по мере твоего продвижения.
0:33:06.780,0:33:08.890
Это экспансия
0:33:08.890,0:33:11.430
данных концепций.
0:33:11.430,0:33:15.290
Это не подход "кирпичик за кирпичиком",
абсолютно, и многие из нас к такому не привыкли, так что
0:33:15.290,0:33:19.520
одна из вещей, к которым придётся привыкнуть -
это что здесь такие вещи происходят.
0:33:19.520,0:33:21.770
Что это значит для вас -
0:33:21.770,0:33:25.540
что вам придётся цепляться как сумасшедшим
за первые три главы, как минимум,
0:33:25.540,0:33:29.940
поскольку вы вряд ли поймёте
смысл того, о чем они,
0:33:29.940,0:33:31.039
пока не доберётесь
0:33:31.039,0:33:33.790
далее по тексту, и пока не
начнёте видеть
0:33:33.790,0:33:34.950
как эти понятия
0:33:34.950,0:33:37.570
работают, и прочее… и тогда,
0:33:37.570,0:33:39.129
если угодно, доказательство
0:33:39.129,0:33:42.550
пуддинга - в его съедении,
к тому времени, как вы начнёте действительно
0:33:42.550,0:33:45.440
выводить некие последствия,
0:33:45.440,0:33:49.150
которые Маркс выкладывает, конечно,
0:33:49.150,0:33:54.250
вы уже чего-то достигнете.
0:33:54.250,0:33:57.270
Включая его выбор начальной точки.
0:33:57.270,0:33:59.629
Как вы увидите, он начинает
с точки зрения…
0:33:59.629,0:34:04.040
с понятия товара.
0:34:04.040,0:34:07.680
Вот это очень странная
стартовая точка. В смысле,
0:34:07.680,0:34:10.970
большинство из вас, думая о Марксе,
будут представлять фразы вроде "вся история есть
0:34:10.970,0:34:13.089
история классовой борьбы".
0:34:13.089,0:34:17.499
И вы думаете: "Ну, Капитал
должен начинаться с классовой борьбы".
0:34:17.499,0:34:21.789
Тут нужно добраться где-то до 300-ой страницы
прежде чем будет хоть какая-то классовая борьба в Капитале.
0:34:21.789,0:34:24.589
Очень огорчительно для тех из вас,
кто очень хотел бы
0:34:24.589,0:34:27.889
добраться туда и думать о классовой борьбе.
0:34:27.889,0:34:30.789
Почему он не начинает с денег?
0:34:30.789,0:34:33.349
В действительности, в ранних
исследованиях, он
0:34:33.349,0:34:36.089
хотел начать с денег,
0:34:36.089,0:34:40.809
но затем обнаружил всё более
и более невозможным начинать с денег.
0:34:40.809,0:34:44.269
Почему не начал с труда?
0:34:44.269,0:34:47.739
В общем, он мог бы начать с самых
разных мест, но решает
0:34:47.739,0:34:49.109
начать с товара.
0:34:49.109,0:34:54.359
И если вернуться назад и почитать его предварительные
записи, обнаружится, что был долгий период,
0:34:54.359,0:34:57.519
около 20 или 30 лет, когда он
мучился с этим вопросом.
0:34:57.519,0:34:58.859
Что реально есть лучшая начальная точка
0:34:58.859,0:35:00.479
для данного исследования?
0:35:00.479,0:35:03.439
Что в центре этого лука,
если вернуться к метафоре,
0:35:03.439,0:35:05.190
когда я размышляю об этом,
0:35:05.190,0:35:06.449
начинаю реально
0:35:06.449,0:35:09.579
понимать, как всё это работает
0:35:09.579,0:35:11.640
И он решил начать с товара.
0:35:11.640,0:35:13.859
Это случайная начальная точка.
0:35:13.859,0:35:17.249
Не понять эту логику. Он не объясняет
её. Он даже не пытается
0:35:17.249,0:35:19.779
взять и убедить вас насчет этого.
Он только говорит:
0:35:19.779,0:35:23.639
"Здесь я начну. Так я начинаю думать.
Вот эти понятия
0:35:23.639,0:35:27.249
я собираюсь использовать."
0:35:27.249,0:35:31.979
Очень таинственный тип начала для всей темы.
Он не применяет попыток какого-либо убеждения - вообще.
0:35:31.979,0:35:35.619
Тут ты говоришь себе: "Ну, знаешь ли, если нет
никакого обоснования, почему бы мне
0:35:35.619,0:35:37.069
не отложить текст в сторону?"
0:35:37.069,0:35:39.420
Затем оно становится слегка
сложнее.
0:35:39.420,0:35:44.209
Когда доходишь до третьей главы,
на которой большинство, кто читают Капитал, останавливаются,
0:35:44.209,0:35:46.230
если пытаются читать самостоятельно,
0:35:46.230,0:35:49.970
когда доходишь до третьей главы,
ты говоришь себе: "Это невозможно. Это не
0:35:49.970,0:35:50.909
придёт куда-либо."
0:35:50.909,0:35:55.239
Так что это весьма тяжело,
по подобным причинам.
0:35:55.239,0:36:00.309
Ещё одна причина, почему это тяжело,
0:36:00.309,0:36:04.179
это как я сказал, концептуальный аппарат
предназначен
0:36:04.179,0:36:07.039
не только для Капитала Том 1.
0:36:07.039,0:36:08.549
Ему суждено
0:36:08.549,0:36:13.519
проделать с ним весь путь, в плане всего,
о чем он хотел бы подумать далее.
0:36:13.519,0:36:18.009
Так, вы будете огорчены узнать,
что есть три тома Капитала.
0:36:18.009,0:36:21.189
И если вы реально хотите понять
капиталистический способ производства,
0:36:21.189,0:36:24.109
придётся прочитать три тома Капитала.
0:36:24.109,0:36:28.229
Том 1 - это одна особая перспектива на
0:36:28.229,0:36:30.199
капиталистический способ производства,
0:36:30.199,0:36:36.019
но ещё хуже, все три тома Капитала
только о восьмой части того, что он задумал.
0:36:36.019,0:36:39.849
Вот что он писал в тексте,
названнном Grundrisse,
0:36:39.849,0:36:44.389
подготовительном тексте, где
он выставляет разработки для Капитала.
0:36:44.389,0:36:45.649
Он говорит: "Итак,
0:36:45.649,0:36:50.229
я планирую провести
0:36:50.229,0:36:51.719
анализ следующим образом:
0:36:51.719,0:36:55.999
Необходимо разобраться с: "1) общие
абстрактные составляющие, которые присущи более
0:36:55.999,0:37:01.049
или менее всем формам обществ.
0:37:01.049,0:37:04.599
2) Категории, которые составляют внутреннюю структуру
буржуазного общества,
0:37:04.599,0:37:08.079
и на которых покоятся основные классы:
капитал,
0:37:08.079,0:37:12.899
наёмный труд, земельный участок, их взаимодействие.
0:37:12.899,0:37:14.669
Город и деревня.
0:37:14.669,0:37:17.409
Три великих социальных класса;
0:37:17.409,0:37:19.299
обмен между ними.
0:37:19.299,0:37:20.519
Циркуляция.
0:37:20.519,0:37:22.599
Кредитная система."
0:37:22.599,0:37:24.489
Хорошая тема сейчас.
0:37:24.489,0:37:27.759
"Частное.
0:37:27.759,0:37:31.650
3) Концентрация буржуазного общества в
форме государства,
0:37:31.650,0:37:34.249
рассмотренная в отношении к себе.
0:37:34.249,0:37:36.909
Непродуктивные классы.
0:37:36.909,0:37:38.160
Налоги,
0:37:38.160,0:37:39.499
Госдолг.
0:37:39.499,0:37:41.059
Государственный кредит.
0:37:41.059,0:37:42.709
Население.
0:37:42.709,0:37:44.180
Колонии.
0:37:44.180,0:37:47.699
Эмиграция.
0:37:47.699,0:37:50.969
4) Международные отношения производства,
0:37:50.969,0:37:52.869
международное разделение труда,
0:37:52.869,0:37:54.589
международный обмен,
0:37:54.589,0:37:56.039
экспорт и импорт,
0:37:56.039,0:37:57.230
обменный курс,"
0:37:57.230,0:38:01.359
ещё одна неплохая тема.
0:38:01.359,0:38:02.209
"Пятое," отличная тема,
0:38:02.209,0:38:07.759
"Мировой рынок и кризисы."
0:38:07.759,0:38:08.440
Так что это, если угодно,
0:38:08.440,0:38:12.330
панорама, раскладываемая им
в Grundrisse, про то, что он намеревался сделать.
0:38:12.330,0:38:14.799
Это то, что он имел в виду,
0:38:14.799,0:38:17.779
что он собирался сделать,
0:38:17.779,0:38:20.489
когда писал Капитал.
0:38:20.489,0:38:22.279
И так никогда и не закончил.
0:38:22.279,0:38:24.259
Так никогда и не поднял
0:38:24.259,0:38:26.390
большинство этих тем.
0:38:26.390,0:38:27.940
И то, что мы имеем в Капитале,
0:38:27.940,0:38:29.999
это начало
0:38:29.999,0:38:33.449
такого массивного проекта,
0:38:33.449,0:38:35.639
массивного проекта, на который он
0:38:35.639,0:38:37.360
намекает во многих
0:38:37.360,0:38:41.950
местах, о, например, том, как понять
государство, как понять
0:38:41.950,0:38:46.849
гражданское общество, как понять
эмиграцию, как понимать
0:38:46.849,0:38:52.759
курсы валют, и тому подобное.
0:38:52.759,0:38:56.979
Так что здесь, тоже, необходимо понимать одновременно, что
0:38:56.979,0:39:00.109
концептуальный аппарат
0:39:00.109,0:39:02.119
в начале, это…
0:39:02.119,0:39:06.709
он реально пытается спроектировать его таким
образом, чтобы тот нёс бремя всего перечисленного,
0:39:06.709,0:39:08.890
но в действительности, что этот аппарат даёт,
0:39:08.890,0:39:12.699
он обеспечивает
каркас, в котором Том 1
0:39:12.699,0:39:14.020
работает, и Том 1
0:39:14.020,0:39:17.569
- всего один кусочек этого целого
0:39:17.569,0:39:19.719
паззла, который Маркс выкладывает.
0:39:19.719,0:39:24.229
Том 1 реально по существу
рассматривает капиталистический способ производства
0:39:24.229,0:39:27.839
с точки зрения производства,
0:39:27.839,0:39:29.659
не рынка,
0:39:29.659,0:39:34.279
не глобальной торговли, а
с точки зрения производства.
0:39:34.279,0:39:37.149
Поэтому вам придётся признать,
что то, что вы получите от этого
0:39:37.149,0:39:41.190
курса - это анализ, от Маркса,
0:39:41.190,0:39:46.949
капиталистического способа производства
с точки зрения производства.
0:39:46.949,0:39:50.459
Том 2 - с точки зрения обмена.
0:39:50.459,0:39:55.099
Том 3 - там материалы о формировании кризисов,
0:39:55.099,0:39:59.959
также некоторые правила распределения,
0:39:59.959,0:40:02.829
процентная ставка, рента, налоги,
0:40:02.829,0:40:08.419
тому подобные проблемы.
0:40:08.419,0:40:10.929
Но затем идёт метод,
But then comes the method,
0:40:10.929,0:40:12.839
the other part of the method,
0:40:12.839,0:40:18.259
which is very important in terms of the
method of presentation and the method of inquiry.
0:40:18.259,0:40:23.809
And that is Marx's use of dialectics.
0:40:23.809,0:40:27.999
What he says, again in his preface,
0:40:27.999,0:40:32.190
is that in dialectics we find
0:40:32.190,0:40:34.999
a completely different
0:40:34.999,0:40:38.189
concept of analysis.
0:40:38.189,0:40:45.189
You'll find hardly any causal language
in Marx. Marx doesn't say, 'This causes that.'
0:40:45.219,0:40:47.119
He nearly always says that
0:40:47.119,0:40:51.679
'This is dialectically related to that.'
0:40:51.679,0:40:55.119
And a dialectical relation
0:40:55.119,0:40:56.529
is an inner relation,
0:40:56.529,0:41:01.069
not a causative external
relation. It's an inner relation.
0:41:01.069,0:41:05.259
And he talks about this dialectical method
0:41:05.259,0:41:09.509
again in the postface
to the second edition.
0:41:09.509,0:41:11.619
He says: 'Okay,
0:41:11.619,0:41:21.209
I took up some ideas from Hegel.
0:41:21.209,0:41:24.900
"But," he says, "my dialectical
method is, in its foundations, not only
0:41:24.900,0:41:29.479
different from the Hegelian,
but exactly opposite to it."
0:41:29.479,0:41:31.029
There are ways in which, I think,
0:41:31.029,0:41:34.579
we're going to find that's not exactly true.
0:41:34.579,0:41:38.109
That, in fact, Marx revolutionized
0:41:38.109,0:41:42.269
the dialectical method;
he didn't simply invert it,
0:41:42.269,0:41:45.189
as is sometimes said.
0:41:45.189,0:41:49.069
He then goes on to say this: "I criticized
the mystificatory side of the Hegelian
0:41:49.069,0:41:53.160
dialectic nearly thirty years ago."
0:41:53.160,0:41:58.689
What Marx is referring to here is
0:41:58.689,0:42:01.719
his tract called A Critique
of Hegel's Philosophy of Law,
0:42:01.719,0:42:05.159
Critique of Hegel's Philosophy
of Right, whichever the title is,
0:42:05.159,0:42:06.989
and I think that that critique
0:42:06.989,0:42:09.999
played a very foundational
0:42:09.999,0:42:12.819
moment in which Marx
0:42:12.819,0:42:17.169
defined his relationship to the Hegelian dialectic.
0:42:17.169,0:42:19.959
So he goes on talking about
0:42:19.959,0:42:22.809
this mystificatory aspect.
0:42:22.809,0:42:27.739
And the way in which this
mystified form of the dialectic
0:42:27.739,0:42:29.789
as purveyed by Hegel,
0:42:29.789,0:42:34.729
became the fashion in Germany,
0:42:34.729,0:42:39.759
and why it was that he had to reform it
0:42:39.759,0:42:43.619
in such a way as so it could take account
0:42:43.619,0:42:50.619
of every historical developed
form as being in a fluid state, in motion.
0:42:51.039,0:42:53.779
He had to re-figure it
so that it could grasp
0:42:53.779,0:42:59.910
the transient aspects of
a society as well.
0:42:59.910,0:43:04.859
And he then goes on to
talk about this as being,
0:43:04.859,0:43:09.099
"This dialectical method does not
let itself be impressed by anything, being
0:43:09.099,0:43:14.749
in it's very essence critical and revolutionary."
0:43:14.749,0:43:18.999
Now, what he's talking about here is,
0:43:18.999,0:43:22.639
he's going to use a
version of dialectical method
0:43:22.639,0:43:27.679
to establish relations between
0:43:27.679,0:43:29.979
elements within his system.
0:43:29.979,0:43:32.479
but he is going to do it in such a way
0:43:32.479,0:43:37.299
as to capture fluidity and motion.
0:43:37.299,0:43:41.959
Marx above all is incredibly, incredibly
0:43:41.959,0:43:44.419
impressed with the fluidity
0:43:44.419,0:43:48.739
and the dynamics of capitalism.
0:43:48.739,0:43:51.939
Now this is very weird,
because Marx is often
0:43:51.939,0:43:53.959
talked about as if he is a
0:43:53.959,0:43:57.979
static, structural analyst.
0:43:57.979,0:44:03.309
The weird thing is, when you read Capital,
you realize he sees the motion.
0:44:03.309,0:44:06.369
He sees the movement all of the time.
0:44:06.369,0:44:09.609
He is constantly talking about
0:44:09.609,0:44:14.939
that movement and that
movement is a dialectical movement.
0:44:14.939,0:44:16.710
So one of the ways in which
0:44:16.710,0:44:22.729
also you have to read Marx in Marx's
own terms is to try to grapple with
0:44:22.729,0:44:26.119
what he means by dialectics.
0:44:26.119,0:44:28.589
Because the problem is he never wrote
0:44:28.589,0:44:31.939
a tract on dialectics.
0:44:31.939,0:44:33.259
He never said:
0:44:33.259,0:44:35.499
'Okay, this is my dialectical method'.
0:44:35.499,0:44:36.630
There are hints of it.
0:44:36.630,0:44:38.800
If you really want to
understand his dialectical method,
0:44:38.800,0:44:42.259
you read Capital.
0:44:42.259,0:44:45.739
That's the best place to get it.
0:44:45.739,0:44:49.469
And when you've read
Capital very carefully you will come out
0:44:49.469,0:44:53.140
with a sense of how dialectical method works.
0:44:53.140,0:44:56.769
But again, this is going
to be a bit confusing because
0:44:56.769,0:45:01.249
you're probably not yet used
to dialectical reasoning, and the curious thing about
0:45:01.249,0:45:04.009
academia is that the more
well trained you are in a discipline,
0:45:04.009,0:45:06.549
probably less used you are
0:45:06.549,0:45:08.280
to dialectical method.
0:45:08.280,0:45:10.329
In fact young children are very dialectical.
0:45:10.329,0:45:12.449
They see everything in motion.
0:45:12.449,0:45:15.709
They see contradiction everywhere
and they are quite contradictory about everything.
0:45:15.709,0:45:18.609
Every contradiction goes
into everything else and
0:45:18.609,0:45:19.649
your kids say all kinds of
0:45:19.649,0:45:22.469
wondrous contradictory things to you.
0:45:22.469,0:45:25.819
And you kind of say 'Now you stop
thinking about that. You have to think rationally'.
0:45:25.819,0:45:28.619
So, actually, we train people
0:45:28.619,0:45:33.460
out of being good
dialecticians almost from day two.
0:45:33.460,0:45:38.519
But in fact dialectical method
is intuitively very, very powerful.
0:45:38.519,0:45:42.489
And in a sense what
Marx is doing is recovering
0:45:42.489,0:45:48.069
that incredibly intuitive
dialectical method and putting it to work,
0:45:48.069,0:45:51.400
both in terms of an
analytic schema, as we will see,
0:45:51.400,0:45:53.900
but also in terms of understanding
0:45:53.900,0:45:56.440
that everything is in process.
0:45:56.440,0:45:58.759
Everything is in motion.
0:45:58.759,0:46:01.889
Everything is defined in those terms.
0:46:01.889,0:46:03.879
He doesn't talk about labor.
0:46:03.879,0:46:07.900
He talks about the labor process.
0:46:07.900,0:46:09.289
Capital is not a thing;
0:46:09.289,0:46:13.549
it is a process; it is in motion.
0:46:13.549,0:46:18.209
Value does not exist unless it is in motion.
0:46:18.209,0:46:22.589
When things stop, value disappears,
0:46:22.589,0:46:27.269
and the whole system comes tumbling down.
0:46:27.269,0:46:28.769
And those of you who
0:46:28.769,0:46:32.410
remember very well what
happened in the aftermath of 9/11.
0:46:32.410,0:46:38.619
Most things stopped. Motion stopped.
0:46:38.619,0:46:41.869
Planes stopped flying. You
couldn't get through the bridges,
0:46:41.869,0:46:43.770
everything, and then in three days
0:46:43.770,0:46:47.099
suddenly everybody realized that
capitalism would collapse
0:46:47.099,0:46:50.420
if things didn't get in motion again,
so suddenly, you know, Giuliani
0:46:50.420,0:46:51.099
comes on and says:
0:46:51.099,0:46:54.299
'For god's sake, get out
your credit cards and go shop.
0:46:54.299,0:46:58.019
Go back to Broadway. Go back
and do this kind of stuff; go back.'
0:46:58.019,0:47:01.599
Bush even appeared on a TV
ad for the airline industry, saying:
0:47:01.599,0:47:04.509
'Get back and start flying.
0:47:04.509,0:47:07.719
Get back in motion.' You know.
0:47:07.719,0:47:12.919
In other words, capitalism is, as
Jack Kerouac would say, 'perpetually on the road.'
0:47:12.919,0:47:17.069
And if it's not always
on the road, then it's nothing.
0:47:17.069,0:47:21.650
So Marx is incredibly
appreciative of that. And it's very
0:47:21.650,0:47:25.559
strange to find him so
often depicted as this static
0:47:25.559,0:47:30.119
figure who's got it all worked out.
No, it's in motion and it's changing,
0:47:30.119,0:47:33.929
perpetually in motion.
0:47:33.929,0:47:35.609
So here, I think, too,
0:47:35.609,0:47:39.699
what Marx is trying to do
is to find a conceptual apparatus
0:47:39.699,0:47:44.640
that would help you to understand that motion.
0:47:44.640,0:47:47.329
And so, some of his concepts
0:47:47.329,0:47:49.539
are formulated in such a way
0:47:49.539,0:47:55.450
that they're about relations;
they're about transformative activity.
0:47:55.450,0:48:00.459
This is like this at this moment;
and it's like that in the next moment.
0:48:00.459,0:48:03.369
And this can get quite confusing,
0:48:03.369,0:48:06.599
but what he's trying to do is to get
behind the confusion, come up with a
0:48:06.599,0:48:08.130
conceptual apparatus,
0:48:08.130,0:48:10.089
a deep structure, if you like,
0:48:10.089,0:48:12.180
which is going to help you understand
0:48:12.180,0:48:15.959
all of that motion which
is going on around us perpetually.
0:48:15.959,0:48:20.029
And, particularly, the way in which motion is
0:48:20.029,0:48:27.029
actually instantiated within a
capitalist mode of production.
0:48:27.569,0:48:29.579
So, one of the ways
in which I think you have to
0:48:29.579,0:48:33.119
try to understand Marx is by appreciating
0:48:33.119,0:48:37.209
his dialectical method.
0:48:37.209,0:48:44.069
Now there are a lot of people, including
many Marxists, who really don't like his dialectics.
0:48:44.069,0:48:45.430
There is a whole sphere
0:48:45.430,0:48:48.189
called 'analytical Marxism,' for example,
0:48:48.189,0:48:50.819
which kind of says:
'You know, all of that dialectics…'
0:48:50.819,0:48:52.699
They actually like to call themselves
0:48:52.699,0:48:55.479
'no bullshit Marxists,'
0:48:55.479,0:49:02.599
because they just basically say:
'All that dialectics is just B.S.'
0:49:02.599,0:49:04.030
And then there are actually
0:49:04.030,0:49:09.390
other people who want to somehow or other
take something that's very dialectical and turn it into
0:49:09.390,0:49:12.809
a causative structure.
0:49:12.809,0:49:20.749
And in fact there's a whole positivist version
of what Marx says; that is, strip away the dialectics.
0:49:20.749,0:49:23.959
Now, this may be perfectly correct; I mean,
I'm not making an argument, saying, you know,
0:49:23.959,0:49:27.579
the analytical Marxists are wrong.
0:49:27.579,0:49:31.049
I'm not going to make an argument,
saying that people who turn it into
0:49:31.049,0:49:34.109
a positivist mathematical model are wrong.
0:49:34.109,0:49:36.779
Maybe they're right.
0:49:36.779,0:49:41.029
But what you have to do if you're
going to understand Marx's text in Marx's terms.
0:49:41.029,0:49:45.759
you're going to have to
grapple with the dialectic.
0:49:45.759,0:49:49.139
And it's fine afterwards
if you want a say 'Marx is wrong
0:49:49.139,0:49:52.239
the dialectic is wrong, I don't like it,
it doesn't work', this kind of thing.
0:49:52.239,0:49:53.309
That's fine.
0:49:53.309,0:49:57.619
But before you say that you've got to
understand what it is and how it is working.
0:49:57.619,0:50:01.410
So part of what we want to do
0:50:01.410,0:50:05.229
is to spend some time
0:50:05.229,0:50:08.659
recognizing that dialectical aspect of Marx,
0:50:08.659,0:50:14.269
and seeing how it works.
0:50:14.269,0:50:16.189
Now there is one
0:50:16.189,0:50:19.259
final point before we get to the break.
0:50:19.259,0:50:25.709
I asked to try to read Marx in
Marx's own terms but obviously I am your guide.
0:50:25.709,0:50:27.259
And so you going to read it
0:50:27.259,0:50:32.119
with my help and my terms
are going to be very important.
0:50:32.119,0:50:37.669
So one of the things I want to
say here is that of course my interest
0:50:37.669,0:50:41.339
in urbanisation, in uneven
geographical development, imperialism
0:50:41.339,0:50:44.059
and all those kinds of things,
0:50:44.059,0:50:48.549
that my interests have actually
0:50:48.549,0:50:53.529
become very, very important in terms of
0:50:53.529,0:50:55.659
affecting the way in
which I read this text.
0:50:55.659,0:50:56.549
In other words,
0:50:56.549,0:51:01.529
I've been through 30 odd years
of dialogue between me and this text.
0:51:01.529,0:51:04.949
And one of the reasons
I like to teach it every year is:
0:51:04.949,0:51:09.309
every year I ask to myself: 'How I'm
going to read it differently this year?
0:51:09.309,0:51:15.549
What about will strike me
that I didn't notice before?'
0:51:15.549,0:51:19.439
And new things strike me because
new events crop up, that is history
0:51:19.439,0:51:22.910
and geography change.
0:51:22.910,0:51:27.109
And so, there are certain things which arise,
and I can come back and I can look at Marx and say:
0:51:27.109,0:51:30.400
'Well, does he have anything to say about this?',
and sometimes you find something really acute
0:51:30.400,0:51:32.369
which he has to say about it,
0:51:32.369,0:51:35.239
sometimes not at all.
0:51:35.239,0:51:38.289
So, I have been through a long dialogue
0:51:38.289,0:51:41.849
and I used this way of thinking
0:51:41.849,0:51:47.949
many of these conceptional
apparatuses all of the time in the work I do.
0:51:47.949,0:51:54.159
And in the process, of course, I changed
the way in which I understand the text.
0:51:54.159,0:51:58.079
I suspect that if you could
get a recording of this class
0:51:58.079,0:51:59.759
from twenty five years ago,
0:51:59.759,0:52:01.130
you would find me saying
0:52:01.130,0:52:05.379
very different things
from what I'm saying now.
0:52:05.379,0:52:07.419
For a variety of reasons both
0:52:07.419,0:52:11.259
the historical climate has changed,
the intellectual climate has changed.
0:52:11.259,0:52:15.109
All sorts of issues have cropped
up which didn't exist before. Therefore,
0:52:15.109,0:52:17.289
you read it in a different way.
0:52:17.289,0:52:19.199
Interesting point:
0:52:19.199,0:52:23.649
in one of the prefaces Marx talks
about that process,
0:52:23.649,0:52:25.890
about how bourgeois theory
0:52:25.890,0:52:29.559
understood the world in a certain way
and then history moved on to make that
0:52:29.559,0:52:31.950
theoretical formulation redundant,
0:52:31.950,0:52:34.569
and that therefore ideas had to change
0:52:34.569,0:52:39.769
as circumstances change.
0:52:39.769,0:52:43.179
Or ideas had to be reconfigured.
0:52:43.179,0:52:44.690
So you're going to get
0:52:44.690,0:52:47.269
some of my reading in it, too.
0:52:47.269,0:52:49.370
And there's no way you
can avoid that, but
0:52:49.370,0:52:50.849
at the end of the day,
0:52:50.849,0:52:54.669
what I want you to do, is to come
to your own reading of it,
0:52:54.669,0:52:59.959
that is, engage with the text in
terms of your experience, both intellectual,
0:52:59.959,0:53:03.189
social, political,
0:53:03.189,0:53:05.599
and have a good time talking to the text,
0:53:05.599,0:53:08.130
and letting the text talk to you,
0:53:08.130,0:53:11.340
and appreciating the way
in which Marx tries
0:53:11.340,0:53:12.499
to understand the world.
0:53:12.499,0:53:17.020
Because above all I think this text is a
wonderful, wonderful exercise
0:53:17.020,0:53:19.149
in seeking to understand
0:53:19.149,0:53:21.299
what appears almost
0:53:21.299,0:53:24.039
impossible to understand.
0:53:24.039,0:53:25.900
So from this standpoint
0:53:25.900,0:53:30.919
you have to engage with the text.
And okay I'm going to be in your way a little of the time,
0:53:30.919,0:53:33.139
but I hope not too much
because at the end of the day
0:53:33.139,0:53:37.869
it is your business to really translate
0:53:37.869,0:53:40.089
what's going on in this text into
0:53:40.089,0:53:42.299
meaning in your own life.
0:53:42.299,0:53:43.490
That's what this book
0:53:43.490,0:53:46.490
is so great at. I think it will
speak to you in some way. Probably not in the
0:53:46.490,0:53:49.329
same way to you as it does to me.
0:53:49.329,0:53:52.219
And that is perfectly valid
0:53:52.219,0:53:54.420
and perfectly reasonable.
And I'd like therefore for you
0:53:54.420,0:53:58.549
to confront it in that kind of spirit.
0:53:58.549,0:54:03.799
Okay that's all I want to
say by way of introduction.
0:54:03.799,0:54:06.949
What I thought would be very useful
to do is just to read through this first
0:54:06.949,0:54:10.579
section with you and
try to give you an idea
0:54:10.579,0:54:17.809
what I mean about method and all the rest of it.
0:54:17.809,0:54:20.709
Okay, he starts off simply saying:
0:54:20.709,0:54:23.989
"The wealth of societies in which
the capitalist mode of production prevails
0:54:23.989,0:54:27.299
appears as an immense
collection of commodities;
0:54:27.299,0:54:28.739
(…)individual commodity(…)"
0:54:28.739,0:54:30.079
(…)elementary form.
0:54:30.079,0:54:31.699
Our analysis therefore begins
0:54:31.699,0:54:34.339
with the commodity."
0:54:34.339,0:54:36.099
Okay, this is the a priori
0:54:36.099,0:54:38.889
beginning point which
we've already mentioned.
0:54:38.889,0:54:40.789
But notice something
0:54:40.789,0:54:43.889
about the language: "appears".
0:54:43.889,0:54:48.549
Always watch out when
Marx uses the word "appear".
0:54:48.549,0:54:51.349
"Appears" is not "is",
0:54:51.349,0:54:53.889
"appears" means that
something else is going on,
0:54:53.889,0:54:58.410
and you better watch out and figure
out what that "something else" is.
0:54:58.410,0:55:02.899
And notice also that
0:55:02.899,0:55:05.259
he is exclusively concerned with
0:55:05.259,0:55:08.839
the "capitalist mode of production".
0:55:08.839,0:55:12.439
He's not concerned with ancient
modes of production or socialist
0:55:12.439,0:55:14.339
modes of production or
0:55:14.339,0:55:18.559
even hybrid modes of production.
He's going to be concerned with
0:55:18.559,0:55:20.329
a capitalist mode of production
0:55:20.329,0:55:23.589
in a pretty pure form.
0:55:23.589,0:55:26.670
And I think that is a very important
0:55:26.670,0:55:32.279
thing to remember when
we're reading through this text.
0:55:32.279,0:55:34.519
So this is a beginning point.
0:55:34.519,0:55:36.579
Now, when you think about it,
0:55:36.579,0:55:44.579
it's actually a very good beginning point.
0:55:44.709,0:55:46.209
Why? …How many of us
0:55:46.209,0:55:53.059
in this room have never had
any experience of a commodity?
0:55:53.059,0:55:56.949
Everybody has experiences of commodities.
0:55:56.949,0:55:59.509
Did you see one today?
0:55:59.509,0:56:01.579
Did you see one yesterday?
0:56:01.579,0:56:08.819
Are you constantly shopping for them?
Are you constantly wandering around looking at them?
0:56:08.819,0:56:13.529
The thing there is that
of what he's done is to really choose
0:56:13.529,0:56:16.509
a common denominator,
0:56:16.509,0:56:18.569
something that is common to us all,
0:56:18.569,0:56:20.619
something we know about.
0:56:20.619,0:56:24.219
We go into the shop, we buy it
0:56:24.219,0:56:27.639
and it's absolutely
necessary for our existence.
0:56:27.639,0:56:31.239
We can't live without consuming commodities.
0:56:31.239,0:56:35.169
We have to buy
commodities in order to live.
0:56:35.169,0:56:38.429
It's a simple relation as that,
so we start with that, and the other great
0:56:38.429,0:56:41.309
thing about it is,
0:56:41.309,0:56:44.439
and again I'll probably get
some flack for saying this, is:
0:56:44.439,0:56:48.119
it doesn't matter whether you're a man
or a woman or a Japanese or an ethnic
0:56:48.119,0:56:51.689
or a religious or
whatever it is, in other words:
0:56:51.689,0:56:52.699
this just very
0:56:52.699,0:56:57.619
simple kind of economic
transaction which you are looking at.
0:56:57.619,0:57:00.949
And then he says: Well, what kind of
economic transaction is it?
0:57:00.949,0:57:02.729
Well, the commodity is
0:57:02.729,0:57:08.199
something, he says,
0:57:08.199,0:57:11.849
which meets a human want or need.
0:57:11.849,0:57:13.200
and he says: I'm not
0:57:13.200,0:57:17.599
interested… and this is the cryptic
form of that … he says in the next paragraph…
0:57:17.599,0:57:20.119
OK, something external to us
0:57:20.119,0:57:24.920
which we then make ours in a way.
0:57:24.920,0:57:28.729
And it "satisfies human needs of whatever
kind. The nature of these needs whether
0:57:28.729,0:57:34.679
they arise, for example from the
stomach, or from the imagination, makes no difference."
0:57:34.679,0:57:38.159
In other words: he is not really interested in
psychologizing about it, he's laying it all aside.
0:57:38.159,0:57:42.439
Saying: I'm not really interested
0:57:42.439,0:57:47.269
in why people buy commodities.
They can buy it because
0:57:47.269,0:57:50.429
they want it, they need it, they desire it.
0:57:50.429,0:57:53.789
I can buy it for fun or
out of necessity or whatever. I'm not
0:57:53.789,0:57:56.900
interested in talking about all of that.
All I'm interested in is the very fact
0:57:56.900,0:58:01.599
of simply somebody buying a commodity.
0:58:01.599,0:58:04.279
And he then goes on and says: Well look at this.
0:58:04.279,0:58:09.159
How many commodities are there in the world?
0:58:09.159,0:58:12.269
Well, there are millions of them,
all made up of different qualities,
0:58:12.269,0:58:16.739
and we all kind of assess them in
terms of different quantitative measures.
0:58:16.739,0:58:20.549
And he again shunts this aside
and says: "The discovery of these ways
0:58:20.549,0:58:27.199
and hence of the manifold uses
of things is the work of history.
0:58:27.199,0:58:30.689
So also is the invention of socially
recognized standards of measurement for the
0:58:30.689,0:58:33.639
quantities of these useful objects.
0:58:33.639,0:58:36.749
The diversity of the measures for commodities
0:58:36.749,0:58:43.239
arises in part from the diverse nature of
the objects to the measured, and in part from convention.
0:58:43.239,0:58:46.419
The usefulness of a
thing makes it a use-value."
0:58:46.419,0:58:51.549
First big concept: use-value.
0:58:51.549,0:58:55.149
It's useful to you. I'm not interested in
discussing how it's useful to you. I'm not
0:58:55.149,0:58:59.249
interested in discussing
the history of use-values
0:58:59.249,0:59:02.669
or anything of that kind, or the way in which they
measure this kind of thing. All I'm interested in
0:59:02.669,0:59:04.429
is the concept of use-value.
0:59:04.429,0:59:10.919
Notice how he's abstracting very fast.
0:59:10.919,0:59:15.389
And he talks in one of the prefaces about
0:59:15.389,0:59:19.469
the problem for a social scientist, like himself,
0:59:19.469,0:59:24.789
is that you can't go into a laboratory
and isolate things and run experiments.
0:59:24.789,0:59:28.049
So what you have to do
in order to run an experiment
0:59:28.049,0:59:31.499
is to use what he calls:
'The power of abstraction.'
0:59:31.499,0:59:33.789
And you see immediately:
0:59:33.789,0:59:36.789
the commodity is central.
0:59:36.789,0:59:41.459
I'm abstracting from human
wants, needs and desires.
0:59:41.459,0:59:45.219
I'm abstracting from any
consideration of this specific
0:59:45.219,0:59:46.879
properties of things.
0:59:46.879,0:59:48.949
I'm just going to home in on the fact that
0:59:48.949,0:59:51.199
in some sense this commodity
0:59:51.199,0:59:58.199
has something called a use-value.
0:59:59.180,1:00:03.150
And this then immediately leads him into,
1:00:03.150,1:00:05.279
by the middle of
1:00:05.279,1:00:07.929
page hundred and twenty-six,
1:00:07.929,1:00:11.620
he says: "In the form of society
to be considered here" - i.e.
1:00:11.620,1:00:15.669
within a capitalist mode of production -
1:00:15.669,1:00:21.699
"they are also the material
bearers of exchange-value."
1:00:21.699,1:00:24.929
Again… watch this word "bearers",
1:00:24.929,1:00:27.549
a commodity is a bearer of something.
1:00:27.549,1:00:30.529
It's not to say: it "is" something.
1:00:30.529,1:00:36.259
It is a bearer of something
1:00:36.259,1:00:38.819
which we have yet to define.
1:00:38.819,1:00:41.169
And how do we think about it?
1:00:41.169,1:00:43.150
Well, when we look at exchange
1:00:43.150,1:00:48.939
processes, geographically, temporally,
1:00:48.939,1:00:52.679
what we find is an enormous kind of
1:00:52.679,1:00:56.589
process of exchange, of market exchange.
1:00:56.589,1:00:59.519
We see different ratios occurring
1:00:59.519,1:01:03.489
between shirts and shoes depending
upon the time, depending upon the place.
1:01:03.489,1:01:10.529
We see different quantitative
relations between bushels of wheat and
1:01:10.529,1:01:14.079
pairs of shoes and tons of
steel and that kind of thing.
1:01:14.079,1:01:19.849
So the first sight, what
we see in the world of exchange
1:01:19.849,1:01:26.709
is exchange-values which are
incoherent, they're all over the place.
1:01:26.709,1:01:30.400
As he says: "exchange-value
1:01:30.400,1:01:35.569
appears to be something
accidental and purely relative,
1:01:35.569,1:01:40.079
and consequently an intrinsic
value, i.e. an exchange-value that is
1:01:40.079,1:01:42.539
inseparably connected with the commodity,
1:01:42.539,1:01:50.890
inherent in it, seems to be a contradiction in terms."
1:01:55.159,1:01:56.689
We noticed something
1:01:56.689,1:01:58.990
about this world of exchange. That everything
1:01:58.990,1:02:04.869
is in principle exchangeable
with everything else.
1:02:04.869,1:02:11.089
And what this immediately implies,
as he says at page hundred and twenty-seven,
1:02:11.089,1:02:14.459
is that you are always in a position
having exchanged something for something else to
1:02:14.459,1:02:18.069
then exchange what you've
just got for something else.
1:02:18.069,1:02:19.209
In other words: You can just
1:02:19.209,1:02:21.409
keep on exchanging.
1:02:21.409,1:02:24.839
So a thing can keep on moving.
1:02:24.839,1:02:29.279
So it can be exchanged for all
the other commodities at some point.
1:02:29.279,1:02:32.649
And if that's the case, he then says
1:02:32.649,1:02:35.049
on hundred and twenty-seven,
1:02:35.049,1:02:40.049
"It follows from this that, firstly,
the valid exchange-values of a particular commodity
1:02:40.049,1:02:43.630
express something equal
1:02:43.630,1:02:47.669
and secondly, exchange-value cannot
be anything other than the mode of expression,
1:02:47.669,1:02:53.799
the form of appearance of
a content distinguishable from it."
1:02:53.799,1:02:56.349
That is: if I have a commodity in my hand,
1:02:56.349,1:02:58.559
I can't dissect it
1:02:58.559,1:03:03.469
and find out that element
inside of it that makes it exchangeable.
1:03:03.469,1:03:07.789
It's something else.
1:03:07.789,1:03:11.059
No. It is exchangeable for something else
and I can't find out what makes it exchangeable
1:03:11.059,1:03:13.189
just by looking at the commodity.
1:03:13.189,1:03:15.150
I have to look at the commodity
1:03:15.150,1:03:21.099
in motion. This is where
we start to get in motion, in movement.
1:03:21.099,1:03:24.029
I have to look at it.
1:03:24.029,1:03:24.859
And as it moves,
1:03:24.859,1:03:27.909
it is obviously expressing something
1:03:27.909,1:03:29.180
about exchangeability,
1:03:29.180,1:03:33.139
a commensurability in exchange.
1:03:33.139,1:03:36.479
It means that all things
are commensurable in exchange.
1:03:36.479,1:03:40.640
Why are they commensurable?
And what is that commensurability
1:03:40.640,1:03:42.459
made up of?
1:03:42.459,1:03:44.669
Where does it come from?
1:03:44.669,1:03:47.319
How is it defined?
1:03:47.319,1:03:51.849
And the commodity is the
bearer of that something.
1:03:51.849,1:03:54.409
But it is not inside of the commodity.
1:03:54.409,1:03:57.390
It is borne by the commodity.
1:03:57.390,1:03:58.870
It's a relation
1:03:58.870,1:04:00.379
inside of the commodity,
1:04:00.379,1:04:03.399
not a material thing.
1:04:03.399,1:04:06.569
He then goes through corn and iron
1:04:06.569,1:04:11.919
and gets into one of his geometrical examples,
1:04:11.919,1:04:14.360
but says crucially right
by the middle of the page:
1:04:14.360,1:04:18.769
"Each of them, so far as it is exchange-value,
1:04:18.769,1:04:24.789
must therefore be reducible to
this third thing," whatever it is.
1:04:24.789,1:04:28.809
And "this common element cannot
be a geometrical, physical, chemical or other
1:04:28.809,1:04:33.569
natural property of commodities,"
he says further down the page.
1:04:33.569,1:04:36.869
We're hitting something
here that is rather significant.
1:04:36.869,1:04:38.410
Marx is often
1:04:38.410,1:04:43.239
depicted as some sort of grubby materialist.
You know: Everything has to be material.
1:04:43.239,1:04:50.909
But here what we're seeing immediately: he's not
talking about the materiality of the thing at all.
1:04:50.909,1:04:54.289
You can inspect the materiality of the
commodity all you like, and you won't
1:04:54.289,1:04:55.729
find out the secret of its
1:04:55.729,1:04:58.190
commensurability and its exchangeability.
1:04:58.190,1:05:04.549
You won't find it.
1:05:04.549,1:05:08.869
And then he goes on to the
next page, hundred twenty-eight, to say:
1:05:08.869,1:05:12.689
"As use-values,
1:05:12.689,1:05:15.380
commodities differ above all in quality,
1:05:15.380,1:05:19.130
while as exchange-values they
can only differ in quantity,"
1:05:19.130,1:05:22.779
that is: how much of this
exchanges for how much of that,
1:05:22.779,1:05:27.939
"and therefore do not
contain an atom of use-value."
1:05:27.939,1:05:33.709
The commensurability that
he's talking about is not constituted
1:05:33.709,1:05:39.189
out of the utility of something.
1:05:39.189,1:05:42.999
Then he goes on to say: "If then we
disregard the use-value of commodities, only one
1:05:42.999,1:05:46.869
property remains…" and here
we're going to have another a priori leap.
1:05:46.869,1:05:48.379
What's the property?
1:05:48.379,1:05:52.079
They are all products of human labor.
1:05:52.079,1:05:55.919
That is what they have in common
1:05:55.919,1:06:04.369
and what exchange- and use-values
are bearers of is that quality
1:06:04.369,1:06:09.229
of being products of human labor.
1:06:09.229,1:06:11.599
But, he then immediately goes on to say:
1:06:11.599,1:06:14.159
What kind of labor is it?
1:06:14.159,1:06:16.899
Well, it can't be
1:06:16.899,1:06:20.599
based on the fact that
if I'm lazy and I take,
1:06:20.599,1:06:25.239
you know, fifteen days to make a shirt,
then indeed, you should pay, you know, the equivalent…
1:06:25.239,1:06:27.789
should be fifteen days of your labor,
1:06:27.789,1:06:32.079
when I can go and find somebody who has made a
shirt in three days, you know, I would exchange it
1:06:32.079,1:06:34.900
with somebody for 3 days of labor.
1:06:34.900,1:06:37.339
So he says on the bottom of that passage:
1:06:37.339,1:06:40.339
"They can no longer be distinguished,
1:06:40.339,1:06:43.999
but are all together
reduced to the same kind of labor,
1:06:43.999,1:06:46.739
human labor in the abstract."
1:06:46.739,1:06:50.559
Well, this is moving very fast, very cryptic.
1:06:50.559,1:06:51.349
Use-value,
1:06:51.349,1:06:52.659
exchange-value,
1:06:52.659,1:06:54.889
human labor in the abstract.
1:06:54.889,1:06:56.769
And here it comes:
1:06:56.769,1:06:59.660
"Let us now I look at the residue of the
products of labor. There is nothing left
1:06:59.660,1:07:01.000
of them in each case
1:07:01.000,1:07:03.999
but the same phantom-like objectivity;"
1:07:03.999,1:07:06.609
Marx loves all this stuff about phantoms and
1:07:06.609,1:07:10.009
werewolves and all that kind of
stuff. So you're gonna get a lot of that.
1:07:10.009,1:07:13.969
He's a great admirer of Shelley and
Frankenstein and all the rest of it,
1:07:13.969,1:07:16.779
so you'll get a lot of
that kind of language. It's great.
1:07:16.779,1:07:22.639
"they are merely congealed
quantities of homogeneous human labor,
1:07:22.639,1:07:26.459
human labor-power expended without
regard to the form of its expenditure.
1:07:26.459,1:07:29.989
(…)As crystals of this
social substance which is common to them all,
1:07:29.989,1:07:39.369
they are values, commodity values."
1:07:39.369,1:07:45.420
Okay, he's taken four pages to lay out
1:07:45.420,1:07:46.959
three fundamental concepts.
1:07:46.959,1:07:53.619
Use-value, exchange-value, value.
1:07:53.619,1:07:55.619
Value is what is passed on
1:07:55.619,1:07:58.909
in the process of commodity exchange.
1:07:58.909,1:08:05.629
It's the hidden element in a commodity that makes
1:08:05.629,1:08:13.819
all commodities in principle
exchangeable with each other.
1:08:13.819,1:08:19.309
So he then goes on to say:
Well, having abstracted from use-value
1:08:19.309,1:08:22.999
then we go back and
look again at exchange-value.
1:08:22.999,1:08:26.929
We then see exchange-value, as he says,
on the bottom of page hundred and twenty-eight,
1:08:26.929,1:08:29.289
"as the necessary mode of expression,
1:08:29.289,1:08:34.219
or form of appearance, of value."
1:08:34.219,1:08:37.650
Appearance, form of appearance; but
this time you're looking at it the other way.
1:08:37.650,1:08:42.049
That is there is something mysterious about
the exchangeability of all of those commodities.
1:08:42.049,1:08:47.759
There is something mysterious
about the way in which
1:08:47.759,1:08:52.639
all of those commodities could
be commensurable with each other.
1:08:52.639,1:08:56.389
And the mystery is that they're values,
1:08:56.389,1:08:58.560
But values are represented now
1:08:58.560,1:09:01.330
by exchange-value, so exchange-value,
1:09:01.330,1:09:03.069
i.e. how much you are actually get for
1:09:03.069,1:09:04.549
the product in the market,
1:09:04.549,1:09:06.250
is a representation of value,
1:09:06.250,1:09:10.749
is a representation of labor.
1:09:10.749,1:09:13.909
Now, when you go to the supermarket,
1:09:13.909,1:09:17.859
can you see the labor in the commodity?
1:09:17.859,1:09:21.719
But it has an exchange-value, right?
1:09:21.719,1:09:22.859
Again, Marx's point is:
1:09:22.859,1:09:26.969
Yeah, they are products of
labor but you can't see the labor,
1:09:26.969,1:09:29.499
you can't see the labor on the commodity.
1:09:29.499,1:09:34.949
But you get a sense of what it is
because it is represented by its price.
1:09:34.949,1:09:36.659
So that is, if you like,
1:09:36.659,1:09:42.269
exchange-value is a
representation of something else.
1:09:42.269,1:09:47.670
Now again: to say something is a
representation of something is not to say "is".
1:09:47.670,1:09:48.830
Because, as anybody would
1:09:48.830,1:09:52.170
quickly tell you, the difference
between the representation and what
1:09:52.170,1:09:55.710
actually something is, there can be quite a gap.
And Marx is going to spend quite a bit of
1:09:55.710,1:09:59.400
time talking about the nature of that gap between
1:09:59.400,1:10:06.400
value and its representation.
1:10:08.659,1:10:12.329
On hundred twenty-nine he says:
1:10:12.329,1:10:15.659
"A use-value, or useful article,
1:10:15.659,1:10:19.959
therefore, has value only because
abstract human labor is objectified
1:10:19.959,1:10:26.959
or materialized in it."
1:10:26.959,1:10:30.910
Objectified - a very important kind of concept.
1:10:30.910,1:10:37.619
A process, in fact a labor process,
becomes objectified in a thing.
1:10:37.619,1:10:42.630
This is an idea that's going to
become very important in Marx.
1:10:42.630,1:10:44.659
You have a thing
1:10:44.659,1:10:46.659
and then there is a labor process.
1:10:46.659,1:10:48.360
What's the relationship then
1:10:48.360,1:10:51.370
between the process and the thing?
This is going to come up
1:10:51.370,1:10:56.809
again and again and again in the text.
1:10:56.809,1:10:59.250
Processes and things,
1:10:59.250,1:11:05.409
the thing is a representation of the process.
1:11:05.409,1:11:07.849
You want a simple example of that?
1:11:07.849,1:11:10.369
If I set an examination right now,
1:11:10.369,1:11:13.909
I made you write out little
paper about what these concepts mean.
1:11:13.909,1:11:15.169
And then I graded you.
1:11:15.169,1:11:19.030
I'll be grading you on the thing.
1:11:19.030,1:11:23.790
What would it have to do with the
process that's going on in here?
1:11:23.790,1:11:28.150
I mean you might feel very, very outraged
1:11:28.150,1:11:33.849
when I graded you C or D or F, or something
like that, because you haven't quite got it yet.
1:11:33.849,1:11:37.149
When in fact you're struggling in the process,
1:11:37.149,1:11:41.909
the intellectual labor-process of trying
to command on what the hell is going on in this text.
1:11:41.909,1:11:43.959
It's a very important thing.
1:11:43.959,1:11:48.719
But if I try to test it as a thing…and actually,
1:11:48.719,1:11:52.119
education is full of this kind of problem.
1:11:52.119,1:11:54.249
Education is about a process,
1:11:54.249,1:11:58.599
it's about people learning things,
it's about process, thinking, all this kind of stuff.
1:11:58.599,1:12:02.149
And we are constantly testing how good
people are in terms of that process by the
1:12:02.149,1:12:04.029
things they make.
1:12:04.029,1:12:09.360
Dissertations, essays, papers,
1:12:09.360,1:12:12.669
multiple choice questions, all the rest of it.
1:12:12.669,1:12:16.320
So what Marx is doing here
is to say: Well, the representation,
1:12:16.320,1:12:18.469
i.e. the exchange-value,
1:12:18.469,1:12:21.960
is something which you can
really see, but it is
1:12:21.960,1:12:25.419
representing something which is value.
1:12:25.419,1:12:32.389
And as we will see, value is always in motion.
1:12:32.389,1:12:37.900
And that means that a
process is objectified in a thing.
1:12:37.900,1:12:40.980
A labor process, a potter making a pot
1:12:40.980,1:12:44.150
is finally objectified in a thing. And
it's the thing which is sold in the
1:12:44.150,1:12:47.000
market, not the process.
1:12:47.000,1:12:51.119
But the thing would not
exist without the process.
1:12:51.119,1:12:54.479
So the process has to be objectified.
1:12:54.479,1:12:58.059
There are some people who would
love to write a dissertation without ever
1:12:58.059,1:13:01.260
actually producing the thing.
1:13:01.260,1:13:03.449
You may come an say: Oh the process is great!
1:13:03.449,1:13:07.179
…Ah, yeah okay, PhD immediately…
1:13:07.179,1:13:09.560
…but of course, no, you've got to objectify it…
1:13:09.560,1:13:12.550
And as everybody knows who's
gone through this to some degree,
1:13:12.550,1:13:15.889
you can have great ideas and think it is
fantastic, and when you try to objectify it on paper
1:13:15.889,1:13:20.780
you say:
good god, what nonsense this is!
1:13:20.780,1:13:22.150
And so, you've got to…
1:13:22.150,1:13:25.130
so Marx is talking about that relationship.
1:13:25.130,1:13:26.159
That's right in…
1:13:26.159,1:13:27.989
that's implied in this, immediately in this
1:13:27.989,1:13:30.280
notion of objectification.
1:13:30.280,1:13:34.699
Human labor is objectified, materialized in
1:13:34.699,1:13:37.989
this thing called a commodity.
1:13:37.989,1:13:41.849
But then inside of that thing, the quantity
1:13:41.849,1:13:47.849
is measured by the duration
of the labor which is put into the thing. But…
1:13:47.849,1:13:51.969
And that itself has measures, which he said…
1:13:51.969,1:13:57.219
scale of hours, days etc.
1:13:57.219,1:13:59.199
Again, there's a reference here,
1:13:59.199,1:14:02.349
a coded reference,
if you like, to the the way in which
1:14:02.349,1:14:07.830
capitalist mode of production
sets up a certain notion of temporality.
1:14:07.830,1:14:14.570
Time, how does the capitalist mode
of production structure time?
1:14:14.570,1:14:18.060
And Marx is going to make an argument,
saying: you've got to understand that
1:14:18.060,1:14:24.280
a lot of it has to do with
the fact that time is money.
1:14:24.280,1:14:27.420
Time is connected to value in
a certain kind of way, and therefore even our
1:14:27.420,1:14:30.710
measures of time start to take on
1:14:30.710,1:14:33.950
a certain kind of allure, simply
1:14:33.950,1:14:40.950
because of the way in
which it capitalist mode of production works.
1:14:43.630,1:14:50.089
He then comes, down this paragraph, to say this:
1:14:50.089,1:14:56.039
"I'm really looking at
the total labor power of society
1:14:56.039,1:15:03.039
which is manifested in
the values of the world of commodities."
1:15:03.729,1:15:10.729
Now, where does this society exist,
and where does this world of commodities prevail?
1:15:11.469,1:15:12.850
Here you're not looking at
1:15:12.850,1:15:19.519
just one particular place, you're
actually looking at a global situation.
1:15:19.519,1:15:22.429
The world of commodities,
1:15:22.429,1:15:25.889
where is the world
of commodities right now?
1:15:25.889,1:15:29.690
It's in China, it's in Mexico, it's in Japan,
1:15:29.690,1:15:32.190
it's in Russia…
1:15:32.190,1:15:34.959
It's a global thing.
1:15:34.959,1:15:36.780
And he's looking at
1:15:36.780,1:15:39.429
society, in a sense,
1:15:39.429,1:15:42.820
the whole of the capitalist world.
1:15:42.820,1:15:47.679
So he's looking at the notion of labor,
1:15:47.679,1:15:50.639
and the measure of value,
if you like, is going to be
1:15:50.639,1:15:56.110
judged against that whole world,
it's not the specific
1:15:56.110,1:16:02.580
activity of a particular labor in a
particular place and time, now it's a whole world.
1:16:02.580,1:16:05.979
A global situation, even at this point,
1:16:05.979,1:16:08.499
and actually, there's a brilliant
1:16:08.499,1:16:11.719
sort of description of globalization, if
you want to call it that, in the
1:16:11.719,1:16:13.869
Communist Manifesto.
1:16:13.869,1:16:17.599
Where Marx talks about the impulsions
of the Bourgeoisie to create the world market
1:16:17.599,1:16:20.389
and the consequence of making that,
1:16:20.389,1:16:24.589
in which old industries get destroyed,
new ones get created, there's tremendous
1:16:24.589,1:16:26.189
kind of fluidity.
1:16:26.189,1:16:31.469
Marx was writing this in a context
where the world was opening very fast-
1:16:31.469,1:16:35.149
through the steamship and
the railways and all this kind of stuff
1:16:35.149,1:16:39.449
to a global economy.
1:16:39.449,1:16:43.159
And he understood very well the
consequences of that, which meant that
1:16:43.159,1:16:46.059
value was not something that was
determined in our backyard, but was
1:16:46.059,1:16:52.039
something which was determined
in the world of commodities.
1:16:52.039,1:16:55.439
And the result of that
is that we end up as he says:
1:16:55.439,1:16:58.340
"Each of these units,"
1:16:58.340,1:17:03.780
that is of homogenous labor-power,
1:17:03.780,1:17:07.289
"each of these units is the same as any
other to the extent that it has the
1:17:07.289,1:17:09.390
character of a socially average unit
1:17:09.390,1:17:13.109
of labor-power and acts as such(…)"
1:17:13.109,1:17:16.600
And here comes the crucial definition:
1:17:16.600,1:17:19.050
"Socially necessary labor-time
1:17:19.050,1:17:22.690
is the labor-time required to produce
1:17:22.690,1:17:27.209
any use-value under the conditions
of production normal for a given society and
1:17:27.209,1:17:32.569
with the average degree of skill and
intensity of labor prevalent in that society."
1:17:32.569,1:17:36.139
This is his first cut definition of value.
1:17:36.139,1:17:43.139
Value is socially necessary labor-time.
1:17:44.270,1:17:48.640
One of the reasons, I think, Marx thought
he could get away with this very cryptic presentation
1:17:48.640,1:17:52.249
of use-value, exchange-value and value
1:17:52.249,1:17:55.889
was because anybody who read Ricardo
1:17:55.889,1:18:00.409
would say: 'Yeah, this is pure Ricardo.'
1:18:00.409,1:18:08.499
And it is pure Ricardo, with however
one exceptional insertion.
1:18:08.499,1:18:15.019
Ricardo used the concept
of labor-time as value.
1:18:15.019,1:18:21.840
Marx uses the concept
of socially necessary labor-time.
1:18:21.840,1:18:25.420
And you should immediately
ask yourself the question:
1:18:25.420,1:18:28.420
What is 'socially necessary'?
1:18:28.420,1:18:31.699
How is that established?
1:18:31.699,1:18:34.550
He doesn't give any answer to it here.
1:18:34.550,1:18:38.429
And you only begin to get the
sense of the answer of that, when you are way on
1:18:38.429,1:18:40.969
the way through Capital.
1:18:40.969,1:18:43.389
In other words, what Marx has done
1:18:43.389,1:18:48.719
here, is simply set up the
Ricardian conceptual apparatus.
1:18:48.719,1:18:55.829
Repeat it, and in a sense say:
'Ricardo missed something out.'
1:18:55.829,1:19:03.039
It is not adequate the call value labor-time.
1:19:03.039,1:19:05.360
We have to insert that question mark:
1:19:05.360,1:19:07.759
What is socially necessary labor-time?
1:19:07.759,1:19:11.699
How is it determined? Who determines it?
1:19:11.699,1:19:14.579
And that is the big issue.
1:19:14.579,1:19:19.210
And I would submit it actually continues to
be the big issue in global capitalism,
1:19:19.210,1:19:24.279
who and how is value established?
1:19:24.279,1:19:27.729
I mean we all like to think we have our
own values and this kind of stuff, and everybody likes
1:19:27.729,1:19:31.519
to go on talking about values.
1:19:31.519,1:19:35.659
But Marx is kind of saying: 'Look,
there is a value which is being determined
1:19:35.659,1:19:38.469
by a process that we do not understand.'
1:19:38.469,1:19:41.090
And it's not our choice,
1:19:41.090,1:19:44.689
it's something that is happening to us.
1:19:44.689,1:19:46.210
And how it is happening
1:19:46.210,1:19:49.499
has to be unpacked. If you
want to understand who you are,
1:19:49.499,1:19:52.739
and where you stand in this maelstrom of
1:19:52.739,1:19:55.409
churning values and everything.
What you've got to do
1:19:55.409,1:19:58.270
is to understand how value gets created,
1:19:58.270,1:20:02.360
how it gets produced and with what consequences,
1:20:02.360,1:20:06.409
socially, environmentally, all the rest of it.
1:20:06.409,1:20:07.539
And if you think
1:20:07.539,1:20:10.780
you can solve the environmental
question of global warming and all that
1:20:10.780,1:20:13.440
kind of stuff without actually confronting
1:20:13.440,1:20:16.760
the whole kind of question of
who determines the value structure
1:20:16.760,1:20:19.819
and how is it determined by these processes,
1:20:19.819,1:20:22.980
then you got to be kidding yourself.
1:20:22.980,1:20:24.790
So what Marx in effect is saying:
1:20:24.790,1:20:28.699
You got to understand
what social necessity is.
1:20:28.699,1:20:30.550
And we've got to spend a lot of time
1:20:30.550,1:20:35.079
looking at what is socially necessary.
1:20:35.079,1:20:39.539
He immediately points out however
1:20:39.539,1:20:42.489
that value is not fixed.
1:20:42.489,1:20:46.280
I've mentioned already, he's
always on about the fluidity of things.
1:20:46.280,1:20:48.239
He says:
1:20:48.239,1:20:53.989
Of course value changes with productivity.
1:20:53.989,1:20:57.420
"The introduction of
power-looms into England, for example,
1:20:57.420,1:21:00.780
probably reduced by one half the
labor required to convert a given
1:21:00.780,1:21:04.489
quantity of yarn into woven fabric.
1:21:04.489,1:21:07.979
In order to do this, the
English hand-loom weaver needed
1:21:07.979,1:21:10.760
the the same amount of
labor-time as before;
1:21:10.760,1:21:14.530
but the product of his individual
hour of labor now only represented
1:21:14.530,1:21:16.280
half an hour of social labor,
1:21:16.280,1:21:17.660
and consequently fell
1:21:17.660,1:21:22.109
to one half of its former value."
1:21:22.109,1:21:27.690
Okay, so value is in
the first instance extremely
1:21:27.690,1:21:32.620
sensitive to revolutions in technology,
1:21:32.620,1:21:34.489
revolutions in productivity.
1:21:34.489,1:21:38.399
And much of Capital is going to
be taken up with the discussion
1:21:38.399,1:21:41.289
of those revolutions in productivity,
1:21:41.289,1:21:47.519
those revolutions in value-relations.
1:21:47.519,1:21:49.290
This leads into the conclusion then,
1:21:49.290,1:21:51.520
on the bottom of one twenty nine:
1:21:51.520,1:21:55.869
"What exclusively determines the
magnitude of the value of any article
1:21:55.869,1:21:59.279
is therefore the amount
of labor socially necessary,
1:21:59.279,1:22:03.179
or the labor time
socially necessary for its production."
1:22:03.179,1:22:06.479
There's your definition.
1:22:06.479,1:22:12.169
"The individual commodity counts
here only as an average sample of its kind."
1:22:12.169,1:22:13.809
Then he re-iterates.
1:22:13.809,1:22:17.149
You often find Marx doing this, by the way.
1:22:17.149,1:22:19.249
He repeats himself.
1:22:19.249,1:22:22.409
He kind of…figures if you didn't get the
1:22:22.409,1:22:23.979
hand-loom, the power-loom
1:22:23.979,1:22:27.260
example, so he is going to
1:22:27.260,1:22:30.599
hammer it home by pointing out
1:22:30.599,1:22:35.349
that the value of the commodity does
not remain constant, he says on hundred and thirty:
1:22:35.349,1:22:39.309
"…if the labor-time required for its
production also remained constant.
1:22:39.309,1:22:42.699
But the latter changes with every variation
in the productivity of labor." He then goes
1:22:42.699,1:22:46.480
on to talk about this. But, notice:
1:22:46.480,1:22:51.530
"This is determined by a
wide range of circumstances;
1:22:51.530,1:22:57.560
it is determined amongst other things by
the workers average degree of skill,
1:22:57.560,1:23:01.859
the level of development of
science and its technological application,…"
1:23:01.859,1:23:09.989
Marx is very hot on the significance of
technology and science to capitalism.
1:23:09.989,1:23:13.249
"…the social organization
of the process of production,
1:23:13.249,1:23:16.829
the extent and effectiveness of the means
of production, and the conditions found in
1:23:16.829,1:23:23.539
the natural environment."
1:23:23.539,1:23:30.320
Vast array of elements
which can impinge upon value.
1:23:30.320,1:23:35.139
Transformations in the natural
environment mean revolutions in value.
1:23:35.139,1:23:36.620
Technology and science,
1:23:36.620,1:23:39.159
social organization of production,
1:23:39.159,1:23:41.780
technologies, all the rest of it…
1:23:41.780,1:23:43.829
So, in fact, we've got
1:23:43.829,1:23:48.429
value which is subject to a powerful
array of forces, and he's not
1:23:48.429,1:23:52.119
here attempting a definitive categorization
of all of them, he just simply wants to
1:23:52.119,1:23:59.049
alert us, that this thing we're
calling value is not constant.
1:23:59.049,1:24:07.619
It is subject to perpetual
revolutionary transformations.
1:24:08.600,1:24:12.500
But then a peculiar thing happens.
1:24:12.500,1:24:16.659
Right in the last paragraph
on hundred and thirty one
1:24:16.659,1:24:19.849
he suddenly says:
1:24:19.849,1:24:22.610
"A thing can be a
use-value without being a value."
1:24:22.610,1:24:25.979
Okay, we can all agree on that.
1:24:25.979,1:24:29.520
We breathe air and so far we
haven't managed to bottle it, although,
1:24:29.520,1:24:36.449
we're beginning to, I guess, so…
1:24:36.449,1:24:42.219
A thing can be useful and
a product of human labor without being a commodity.
1:24:42.219,1:24:46.039
I grow tomatoes in my
backyard and I eat them…
1:24:46.039,1:24:48.749
Lots of people, even within capitalism, actually
1:24:48.749,1:24:52.749
produce a lot of things for themselves.
1:24:52.749,1:24:57.829
With a little help
from DIY and all the rest of it.
1:24:57.829,1:25:00.280
"In order to produce the latter,"
1:25:00.280,1:25:02.619
that is commodities,
1:25:02.619,1:25:03.809
"he must not only produce use-values,
1:25:03.809,1:25:08.530
but use-values for others."
1:25:08.530,1:25:13.050
Furthermore, just not simply
use-values for the lord, as a serf would do,
1:25:13.050,1:25:18.359
but use-values which are going
to go to others through the market.
1:25:18.359,1:25:20.460
So it's use-values
1:25:20.460,1:25:27.460
which you are producing,
which are going to be sent to market.
1:25:27.499,1:25:32.960
"Finally", he says, "nothing can
be a value without being an object of utility.
1:25:32.960,1:25:36.400
If the thing is useless, so is the labor
contained in it; the labor does not count
1:25:36.400,1:25:42.679
as labor, and therefore creates no value."
1:25:42.679,1:25:47.739
Now he seems to dismiss
and abstract from use-value earlier on.
1:25:47.739,1:25:48.980
Saying: 'I'm not concerned
1:25:48.980,1:25:53.050
with use-values, I'm not
interested in them, etcetera.
1:25:53.050,1:25:56.079
I abstract from them, I get to
exchange-value, and that gets me to
1:25:56.079,1:25:59.329
value. But now I've got
value, but now I'm saying:
1:25:59.329,1:26:03.289
it doesn't matter what kind of labor went
into something, if somebody doesn't want it
1:26:03.289,1:26:08.090
if it doesn't meet a human
want, need or desire, then it ain't value.'
1:26:08.090,1:26:10.949
So value is also dependent
upon it being a use-value,
1:26:10.949,1:26:13.309
for somebody, somewhere.
1:26:13.309,1:26:18.829
You have to be able to sell it.
So what he has done
1:26:18.829,1:26:25.829
is to suddenly bring
back use-value into the idea of value.
1:26:27.590,1:26:30.449
Now, there's a very interesting
1:26:30.449,1:26:31.980
kind of a structure that
1:26:31.980,1:26:34.530
goes on here. Goes like this:
1:26:34.530,1:26:39.909
And this is what I would like you to do: at
the end of almost every section you read
1:26:39.909,1:26:45.019
think about how the conceptional
apparatus is constructed,
1:26:45.019,1:26:47.999
and how it hangs together.
1:26:47.999,1:26:52.380
What we've got here is
something that goes like this:
1:26:52.380,1:27:00.679
We've got the commodity.
1:27:00.679,1:27:01.960
And we said, actually,
1:27:01.960,1:27:05.209
the commodity has a dual character.
1:27:05.209,1:27:13.309
It has a use-value.
1:27:13.610,1:27:20.610
It also has an exchange-value.
1:27:24.989,1:27:27.879
exchange-value is a
representation of something.
1:27:27.879,1:27:30.519
What is it a representation of?
1:27:30.519,1:27:36.739
It's a representation of value.
1:27:36.739,1:27:41.619
But value doesn't mean anything
1:27:41.619,1:27:47.239
unless it connects back to use-value.
1:27:47.239,1:27:50.989
What is value?
1:27:50.989,1:27:57.989
Socially necessary labor-time.
1:28:08.329,1:28:16.820
Now, if you own a house, are you more
interested in its use-value or its exchange-value?
1:28:16.820,1:28:23.820
Yeah, you're interested in both,
you'd like to have your cake and eat it.
1:28:27.469,1:28:28.699
Right?
1:28:28.699,1:28:34.999
This is sort of opposition here. If you want
to realize the exchange-value of something,
1:28:34.999,1:28:37.399
you can't have the use-value of it.
1:28:37.399,1:28:40.820
If you have the use-value of it then
it's difficult to get the exchange-value, unless you do
1:28:40.820,1:28:43.529
a reverse mortgage, or, you know,
all those kinds of things that people did
1:28:43.529,1:28:47.939
over the last few years.
1:28:47.939,1:28:50.830
But notice the structure:
1:28:50.830,1:28:53.719
Commodity, a singular concept
1:28:53.719,1:28:55.599
which has two aspects.
1:28:55.599,1:28:57.750
Now when you look at a commodity,
1:28:57.750,1:29:03.579
can you actually divide it in half and say:
that's the exchange-value and that's the use-value?
1:29:03.579,1:29:05.599
No, there's a unity.
1:29:05.599,1:29:09.260
But within that unity
there is a dual aspect.
1:29:09.260,1:29:11.079
And that dual aspect
1:29:11.079,1:29:15.999
allows us to define something, called
value, as socially necessary labor-time.
1:29:15.999,1:29:21.260
Which is what the use-value of a
commodity is a bearer of.
1:29:21.260,1:29:27.039
That's what it is a bearer of.
1:29:27.039,1:29:31.059
But, in order to be a value,
it has to be useful.
1:29:31.059,1:29:33.160
And of course, on this link
1:29:33.160,1:29:38.199
we'll see all kinds of
issues arising about supply and demand.
1:29:38.199,1:29:43.609
If the supply is too great, the value will go
down, if the supply is too little, the value will go up.
1:29:43.609,1:29:47.619
So there is an element here of
supply and demand involved.
1:29:47.619,1:29:51.320
Marx is actually not
terribly interested in that.
1:29:51.320,1:29:55.719
As he will say at various points, as he goes on,
1:29:55.719,1:29:59.170
what I'm interested in is, what happens when
1:29:59.170,1:30:04.599
supply and demand are in equilibrium.
1:30:04.599,1:30:07.949
When they are in equilibrium
I have to have a different kind of analysis
1:30:07.949,1:30:10.290
and the value of the commodities is fixed
1:30:10.290,1:30:13.869
by this socially necessary
labor-time, whatever that
1:30:13.869,1:30:20.610
social necessity is. So what you've got here
1:30:20.610,1:30:23.939
is something of this form,
which then allows us to talk about
1:30:23.939,1:30:27.849
the value of a commodity.
1:30:27.849,1:30:31.689
We can talk about commodity values.
1:30:31.689,1:30:33.420
We've got to the point where we understand:
1:30:33.420,1:30:36.420
commodity values are constituted
1:30:36.420,1:30:41.159
as socially necessary labor-time.
1:30:41.159,1:30:48.230
Now this is partly, what I would suggest,
1:30:48.230,1:30:53.579
is Marx's dialectical method working here.
1:30:53.579,1:30:59.539
Would you say that exchange-values cause value?
1:30:59.539,1:31:01.520
Would you say exchange-values
1:31:01.520,1:31:05.469
cause use-value, or use-value
is caused, or anything is caused by anything else?
1:31:05.469,1:31:09.530
This is an analysis which is not causal.
1:31:09.530,1:31:15.679
It's about relations, about dialectical relations.
1:31:15.679,1:31:21.119
Can you talk about exchange-value
without talking about use-value?
1:31:21.119,1:31:24.469
No you can't.
1:31:24.469,1:31:29.050
Can you talk about value without
talking about use-value? No you can't.
1:31:29.050,1:31:32.550
In other words, you can't talk about any
one of these concepts without talking
1:31:32.550,1:31:35.820
about all of the others.
1:31:35.820,1:31:39.690
This is what I mean about, you know,
beginning to sort of work through
1:31:39.690,1:31:43.119
the conceptual apparatus of the onion.
1:31:43.119,1:31:51.489
It's an organic, hanging together,
a set of relations, between these concepts.
1:31:51.489,1:31:54.849
But we've also seen, that we'll be
1:31:54.849,1:31:59.369
going to be talking about motion, about movement,
1:31:59.369,1:32:02.639
about the making of things, about labor processes,
1:32:02.639,1:32:08.009
which become objectified in use-values,
1:32:08.009,1:32:13.269
and which become represented by exchange-value.
1:32:13.269,1:32:17.179
So we've got a very interesting
1:32:17.179,1:32:21.270
kind of conceptual framework here,
which is not about causality at all.
1:32:21.270,1:32:23.630
It's about inner relations.
1:32:23.630,1:32:25.590
And by understanding
1:32:25.590,1:32:30.119
then we start to see also
certain tensions I've already mentioned.
1:32:30.119,1:32:31.939
That yes, it'd be very nice
1:32:31.939,1:32:36.699
to have use-value and
exchange-value at the same time.
1:32:36.699,1:32:40.159
But a lot of time we
are faced with a difficult choice.
1:32:40.159,1:32:43.380
Do I have the use-value, or do I
1:32:43.380,1:32:45.380
realize the exchange-value?
1:32:45.380,1:32:50.249
Or do I give up the
exchange-value and get the use-value?
1:32:50.249,1:32:54.609
And those are the daily decisions we
have to make when we go into the market, right?
1:32:54.609,1:32:55.629
Do I give up
1:32:55.629,1:32:58.960
the exchange-value…
money for this or do I not..?
1:32:58.960,1:33:01.730
Do I hang on to the money or what do I do?
1:33:01.730,1:33:08.239
So Marx has set up something,
that is explaining something, OK, already.
1:33:08.239,1:33:14.530
And even as he explains however,
he is not saying: this causes that.
1:33:14.530,1:33:17.250
So it's not a causal analysis.
1:33:17.250,1:33:18.459
This is where I'm beginning to…
what I want you to start to think about,
1:33:18.459,1:33:24.039
is a dialectical mode of argument.
1:33:24.039,1:33:26.980
Which is already revealing something about
1:33:26.980,1:33:31.320
the kinds of choices you
make when you go into the supermarket.
1:33:31.320,1:33:34.429
And the kinds of things
you see in the supermarket.
1:33:34.429,1:33:37.639
You're going to get a representation of
human labor in the supermarket. You're not
1:33:37.639,1:33:41.119
going to see the human labor.
You're going to get a representation.
1:33:41.119,1:33:45.590
You're gonna have to to deal with the
representation as it is objectified,
1:33:45.590,1:33:47.990
and as its value is represented,
1:33:47.990,1:33:52.260
and then you have to make a
decision about use- and exchange-value.
1:33:52.260,1:33:58.460
So this is a way of situating
what people do on a daily basis.
1:33:58.460,1:34:01.970
And you can see that
this apparatus, although Marx
1:34:01.970,1:34:05.679
doesn't take it in the
way that I'm taking it,
1:34:05.679,1:34:10.199
but if you think about it you see
immediately what this can help you understand.
1:34:10.199,1:34:14.219
So you just don't learn it as a formal abstraction.
1:34:14.219,1:34:15.869
You try to put sort of
1:34:15.869,1:34:19.809
meat on the bones of this,
by sort of thinking through.
1:34:19.809,1:34:23.260
Well, what does that actually mean?
1:34:23.260,1:34:28.840
How does that help me
understand things that are going on around me?
1:34:28.840,1:34:33.929
This is the kind of crucial sort of question
1:34:33.929,1:34:37.900
which this form of analysis sets up.
1:34:37.900,1:34:40.110
So my purpose reading through
1:34:40.110,1:34:43.939
this first section is
to give you some idea about,
1:34:43.939,1:34:47.540
if you like, create a model of
how you should try to read this.
1:34:47.540,1:34:49.470
It won't always work for you. But
1:34:49.470,1:34:53.579
what you should do at the end of every
section is: draw back, say: all right,
1:34:53.579,1:34:57.039
what kind of relationships
was he talking about here?
1:34:57.039,1:34:59.400
What do those relationships tell me
1:34:59.400,1:35:05.349
both about all of this stuff,
but also tell me about what's going on?
1:35:05.349,1:35:09.169
In my daily life, in other people's daily life,
what's going on in the market and all the
1:35:09.169,1:35:12.070
rest of it? What does it tell me?
1:35:12.070,1:35:14.880
Is it telling me anything?
1:35:14.880,1:35:18.300
And initially it will be very
hard to see what it might tell you, as you go on
1:35:18.300,1:35:21.499
Marx will start to tell
stories coming out of these relationships
1:35:21.499,1:35:23.999
and he'll spin outwards from this
1:35:23.999,1:35:29.360
into a far, far greater
understanding of the dynamics of this.
1:35:29.360,1:35:34.119
So this is the way in which he's working.
1:35:34.119,1:35:35.630
And I think what
1:35:35.630,1:35:38.499
I suggested to you is that
1:35:38.499,1:35:41.069
you should go back over this section
1:35:41.069,1:35:46.070
and look carefully at the way in which
these concepts unfold and how they work
1:35:46.070,1:35:50.030
in these sorts of terms.
1:35:50.030,1:35:52.550
Now generally speaking,
1:35:52.550,1:35:55.969
I've been talking all the time on this occasion,
1:35:55.969,1:35:58.839
as an introductory thing.
1:35:58.839,1:36:02.359
Rather necessary I
found out of bitter experience.
1:36:02.359,1:36:03.260
But I would like,
1:36:03.260,1:36:07.489
actually, to try to get
you to engage a little bit, so
1:36:07.489,1:36:09.790
in the future,
1:36:09.790,1:36:13.460
precisely because you've
read the text very carefully in advance,
1:36:13.460,1:36:17.239
you doubtless come with
all kinds of questions in your mind.
1:36:17.239,1:36:18.300
And so when
1:36:18.300,1:36:23.009
I'm talking about something and you don't
get it because it doesn't fit with what
1:36:23.009,1:36:26.619
you got, then interrupt me, Ok.
1:36:26.619,1:36:36.169
That's fine, but interrupt me about the text.
1:36:36.169,1:36:40.829
As he says about this in his
introduction to the French edition, you know,
1:36:40.829,1:36:45.729
people very often want to talk politics
1:36:45.729,1:36:49.349
in here, I love to talk politics.
1:36:49.349,1:36:52.959
But sometimes if you talk
all politics you forget the text,
1:36:52.959,1:36:56.280
and actually the politics
of this class is to get you to read the text
1:36:56.280,1:36:58.249
and understand the text.
1:36:58.249,1:37:01.570
If you want to discuss politics we go
down to O'Reilly's bar on 35th street afterwards
1:37:01.570,1:37:04.119
and discuss as much politics as you like,
1:37:04.119,1:37:06.709
over several beers and that's
1:37:06.709,1:37:08.799
part of the joy of this course.
1:37:08.799,1:37:12.819
This is…,
in here we wanna try to
1:37:12.819,1:37:14.520
keep it with the text.
1:37:14.520,1:37:18.909
But there are instances of the
sort that I sort of indicated here where
1:37:18.909,1:37:23.110
people might have a particular kind of
experience which actually is illuminated
1:37:23.110,1:37:26.209
by the framework of analysis.
And that's extremely helpful.
1:37:26.209,1:37:29.449
When people can kinda say:
yeah, that reminds me off,
1:37:29.449,1:37:33.079
you know, when I was working for
AT&T this happened etc, you know, and
1:37:33.079,1:37:36.929
this happened and this happened, and it is
exactly what Marx is talking about. In other words:
1:37:36.929,1:37:39.670
there are constant ways in which
1:37:39.670,1:37:43.520
this refers to experience. I don't
mind some of that, in fact, that's always
1:37:43.520,1:37:45.609
very, very useful, but really,
1:37:45.609,1:37:47.769
what we're trying to do
is try to make sure we
1:37:47.769,1:37:51.400
get through to the text, and we have also
1:37:51.400,1:37:54.890
a little bit more fluidity, so that
I'm not just preaching all the time
1:37:54.890,1:37:57.849
and telling all the time, a
little bit more fluidity so that you can get into
1:37:57.849,1:37:59.329
discussing some things. Now,
1:37:59.329,1:38:02.909
we have about ten minutes left
so if anybody wants to raise some
1:38:02.909,1:38:08.150
issues about what we've done?
1:38:08.150,1:38:13.909
»STUDENT: I was just wondering, because I think that,
in the philosophical tradition, when we speak of value,
1:38:13.909,1:38:14.889
you usually have this conception of something
1:38:14.889,1:38:15.689
that is absolute or that has
1:38:15.689,1:38:19.739
an independent existence grounded in reality,
1:38:19.739,1:38:23.149
and I'm wondering, whether
we can understand Marx's
1:38:23.149,1:38:27.359
definition of value as
socially necessary labor-time,
1:38:27.359,1:38:31.960
as itself, something that is socially
conditioned, and is there any way
1:38:31.960,1:38:34.489
that is totally outside,
might there be a social configuration
1:38:34.489,1:38:37.409
that we can imagine
1:38:37.409,1:38:46.280
in which value is,
1:38:46.280,1:38:49.800
actually itself its representation,
1:38:49.800,1:38:53.689
when those two things are reconciled.
1:38:53.689,1:38:57.159
Or is value always, inevitably kind of a chimera?
1:38:57.159,1:39:00.969
»HARVEY: No, I think you gotta understand:
1:39:00.969,1:39:04.949
Marx's concept of value is
1:39:04.949,1:39:11.619
something which is internalized in the
processes of a capitalist mode of production.
1:39:11.619,1:39:15.380
And what he will say to you is: you may
have alternative values, and that's fine.
1:39:15.380,1:39:19.759
And you can dream about
them and want them, this kind of stuff.
1:39:19.759,1:39:26.219
But they don't mean very much,
unless you can transform
1:39:26.219,1:39:30.760
the real value system which is
governing our daily lives which is this one.
1:39:30.760,1:39:34.760
So Marx is not against, necessarily,
thinking about alternative values. And in
1:39:34.760,1:39:37.610
fact, I think, one of the big issues
1:39:37.610,1:39:43.380
which we face right now, is
precisely about what alternative values we
1:39:43.380,1:39:46.349
would like to see
1:39:46.349,1:39:49.060
operating in in the global marketplace.
1:39:49.060,1:39:52.709
Values of fairness…
1:39:52.709,1:39:57.559
and this is particularly coming up in
the environmental issue, for example.
1:39:57.559,1:40:01.820
People want to talk about
environmental values which should be
1:40:01.820,1:40:04.680
part in this. And the
answer again, as I suggested, is:
1:40:04.680,1:40:06.949
Marx would say: that's fine.
1:40:06.949,1:40:10.600
Well, he might not say that's fine, he had a
particular kind of aim of where he wants to go.
1:40:10.600,1:40:13.310
But I think, theoretically he would say:
1:40:13.310,1:40:18.090
that's fine. But in order to
make your notion of value work
1:40:18.090,1:40:21.979
you have to confront the one which is actually
1:40:21.979,1:40:23.820
dominating us in terms of
1:40:23.820,1:40:27.159
what's going on in the supermarket, how we're
living our daily lives and all the rest of it.
1:40:27.159,1:40:29.840
And we're talking about a value theory
1:40:29.840,1:40:32.059
which is implicated inside of
1:40:32.059,1:40:34.340
a capitalist mode of production.
1:40:34.340,1:40:40.260
Now, there's been a
categorical mistake in many instances,
1:40:40.260,1:40:43.979
precisely because value is located
in relationship to labor and labor processes,
1:40:43.979,1:40:49.589
that there's been a lot of
thinking in socialist societies of taking
1:40:49.589,1:40:54.229
Marx's labor theory of value
also almost as a normative device
1:40:54.229,1:40:56.439
to think about how
1:40:56.439,1:40:57.499
socialism should work.
1:40:57.499,1:41:00.150
But this is not what
Marx is saying, he's saying:
1:41:00.150,1:41:02.179
value is inherent
1:41:02.179,1:41:03.949
within a capitalist mode of production.
1:41:03.949,1:41:06.889
And we have to come to terms
1:41:06.889,1:41:08.879
with what that value is.
1:41:08.879,1:41:11.159
Now, there are alternative value theories.
1:41:11.159,1:41:12.810
And you know, you can
1:41:12.810,1:41:17.050
philosophize about them, think
about them and worry about them, socially,
1:41:17.050,1:41:18.939
politically, all the rest of it…
1:41:18.939,1:41:22.499
But his point is, as I suggested,
1:41:22.499,1:41:25.420
you've always got to come
back to confront this one,
1:41:25.420,1:41:28.570
because this is very basic to how
capitalist mode of production works.
1:41:28.570,1:41:29.119
And if you wanna
1:41:29.119,1:41:31.969
instantiate a different set of
values, then you've gotta
1:41:31.969,1:41:35.300
overthrow a capitalist mode of production.
1:41:35.300,1:41:38.280
And that's his revolutionary intent.
1:41:38.280,1:41:43.530
Sorry, there was a question here.
1:41:43.530,1:41:47.869
»STUDENT: Yeah, I just was wondering if
you could talk a little bit about how we should think
1:41:47.869,1:41:49.339
about objectification. Because, I know, the
preconceived notion I bring to it is
1:41:49.339,1:41:52.219
much more static in terms of,
1:41:52.219,1:41:54.480
as labor is objectified, it
moves away from the laborer
1:41:54.480,1:41:57.030
and there's this separation.
1:41:57.030,1:42:01.509
How can I think about that in terms of,
1:42:01.509,1:42:04.409
more process oriented?
1:42:04.409,1:42:08.270
»HARVEY: Well, again…
the thing is not…
1:42:08.270,1:42:11.159
…is not…, for instance:
1:42:11.159,1:42:13.189
Just to give you an example:
1:42:13.189,1:42:14.639
1:42:14.639,1:42:17.749
Let's suppose that labor produces a house.
1:42:17.749,1:42:20.090
Okay the laborers that
produced the house move away from it,
1:42:20.090,1:42:23.510
then maybe other laborers move in to it.
1:42:23.510,1:42:27.769
And then there's the issue of: is that
house then fixed forever in terms of
1:42:27.769,1:42:32.080
its value? Well, given the way
he set it up, the answer is no.
1:42:32.080,1:42:36.329
Because let's suppose
there are revolutions in technology
1:42:36.329,1:42:40.199
which suddenly make housing
production much easier.
1:42:40.199,1:42:44.480
Then you can go away from, I don't know,
shanty towns to sort of housing of a
1:42:44.480,1:42:47.300
different kind, and therefore there's a dynamic
1:42:47.300,1:42:50.900
involved in this, and therefore,
1:42:50.900,1:42:53.540
you know, this gets back to the fact that
1:42:53.540,1:42:57.699
something like a house has a use-value and
the use-value remains a long time and you can still
1:42:57.699,1:43:00.889
trade its exchange-value,
so it has a residual exchange-value.
1:43:00.889,1:43:02.019
So…,
1:43:02.019,1:43:03.930
so again there's a dynamic here,
1:43:03.930,1:43:05.370
so the thing
1:43:05.370,1:43:07.849
and the qualities of things are not fixed.
1:43:07.849,1:43:10.550
In fact, again, there's a lot of
1:43:10.550,1:43:14.989
dynamism in this. But again Marx,
by and large, is not going to be concerned about that
1:43:14.989,1:43:16.929
in Capital. He's going to sort of say:
1:43:16.929,1:43:21.589
OK, I'm gonna assume it's fixed for the moment.
1:43:21.589,1:43:24.000
But nevertheless, what
he's saying here is:
1:43:24.000,1:43:29.109
watch out!, it's always in motion,
it's never fixed, it's always changing, it's a dynamic
1:43:29.109,1:43:32.429
concept, not a static one.
And the objectification
1:43:32.429,1:43:37.189
is there, but again, the meaning
of the objectification itself changes over time
1:43:37.189,1:43:39.699
and according to place. So you know
1:43:39.699,1:43:45.199
there are all those elements within it.
1:43:45.199,1:43:46.779
» STUDENT: This particular vision of the capitalist
1:43:46.779,1:43:50.590
world that Marx deals with
1:43:50.590,1:43:52.469
diverges, I mean obviously
1:43:52.469,1:43:53.679
diverges with the modern day…
1:43:53.679,1:43:59.539
Specifically with the way in which laws, and
you know, create a proprietary… you know
1:43:59.539,1:44:01.769
only certain companies
can make one thing, and then,
1:44:01.769,1:44:06.690
corporations sort of
1:44:06.690,1:44:07.700
dominate the scene.
1:44:07.700,1:44:12.019
It's not a free market- protectionist laws,
1:44:12.019,1:44:15.800
…does that…
1:44:15.800,1:44:18.959
affect the values being purely
about the socially necessary labor-time.
1:44:18.959,1:44:21.800
»HARVEY: Well that's one of the
questions which you have to ask about. What is
1:44:21.800,1:44:23.989
socially necessary labor-time?
1:44:23.989,1:44:25.800
How is it determined?
1:44:25.800,1:44:30.120
To what degree is there a monopoly
power in the market which is determining it?
1:44:30.120,1:44:36.380
To what degree is there imperialist
politics which is determining it?
1:44:36.380,1:44:38.739
To what degree is there
1:44:38.739,1:44:41.189
colonial enslavement which is determining it?
1:44:41.189,1:44:42.130
In other words:
1:44:42.130,1:44:43.869
those are open questions.
1:44:43.869,1:44:47.479
And Marx is very much open to
1:44:47.479,1:44:49.459
discussing those sorts of questions
1:44:49.459,1:44:53.699
in principle. But again, what
we're going to look at is
1:44:53.699,1:44:57.359
Marx's conception of a pure
capitalist mode of production.
1:44:57.359,1:45:01.449
Which in many ways, as we will see,
is guided by the vision of classical
1:45:01.449,1:45:03.249
political economy.
1:45:03.249,1:45:06.510
In other words: classical political economy
1:45:06.510,1:45:09.969
assumes there were going to be perfectly
functioning markets and the state power
1:45:09.969,1:45:14.070
is going to be out of the way,
and there's gonna be no monopoly.
1:45:14.070,1:45:17.739
So Marx tends to say:
okay, let's assume that
1:45:17.739,1:45:21.469
the classical political economists are
correct and that's how the world is.
1:45:21.469,1:45:23.969
We will see examples where
1:45:23.969,1:45:27.659
that presumption gets him into difficulties.
1:45:27.659,1:45:29.699
But actually, there's nothing
1:45:29.699,1:45:33.320
in this conception that says you can't
consider all those things, because,
1:45:33.320,1:45:36.099
for me anyway, the category socially necessary
1:45:36.099,1:45:38.170
is something which is perpetually open,
1:45:38.170,1:45:39.650
is constantly changing.
1:45:39.650,1:45:41.659
What is socially necessary now?
1:45:41.659,1:45:45.650
as opposed to what was
socially necessary in 1850.
1:45:45.650,1:45:50.099
Very different. And so you know,
1:45:50.099,1:45:52.510
I would want you to think about this as
1:45:52.510,1:45:55.580
having a flexible reading in this,
but realize that Marx is using it
1:45:55.580,1:45:59.219
in a very specific way, in a very specific situation
1:45:59.219,1:46:03.340
for very specific purposes.
1:46:03.340,1:46:06.739
»STUDENT: Does socially necessary
imply the amount of labor required
1:46:06.739,1:46:10.729
for a laborer to reproduce him- or herself?
1:46:10.729,1:46:12.559
»HARVEY: Socially necessary
1:46:12.559,1:46:15.849
can include that kind of question.
1:46:15.849,1:46:19.290
As many socialist feminists pointed out in the
1:46:19.290,1:46:22.690
debates of the nineteen
sixties/nineteen seventies,
1:46:22.690,1:46:26.489
the whole question of socially necessary,
1:46:26.489,1:46:28.650
has to take into account
1:46:28.650,1:46:31.860
certain basic costs of reproduction
that are born inside of the household
1:46:31.860,1:46:35.369
and which may be
disproportionately born by women.
1:46:35.369,1:46:38.429
Even though, actually, if you look
at the whole history of the industrial
1:46:38.429,1:46:40.480
revolution, it was women's labor
1:46:40.480,1:46:44.070
in the factories that was
fundamental, as it is today. And most of
1:46:44.070,1:46:47.840
the global proletariat right now is women.
1:46:47.840,1:46:51.190
So the kind of social
reproduction aspect of it, and how to
1:46:51.190,1:46:53.289
integrate that into
socially necessary, has been
1:46:53.289,1:46:58.230
a contentious issue amongst Marxists.
1:46:58.230,1:47:01.690
And what you have to
remember by the way, is that Marx
1:47:01.690,1:47:07.969
was a little skeptical of this
term "Marxist". He once said: 'I am not a Marxist.'
1:47:07.969,1:47:11.489
What he meant by that, was, there
were a lot of things being said in his name, that were
1:47:11.489,1:47:13.639
not exactly what he had to say.
1:47:13.639,1:47:18.309
So again, that's one of the reasons
why I want you to think about this in Marx's
1:47:18.309,1:47:21.940
own terms. Because, you know,
1:47:21.940,1:47:24.139
it's very, it's very important to realize
1:47:24.139,1:47:28.309
how he expands this
notion of social necessity,
1:47:28.309,1:47:29.679
we will see.
1:47:29.679,1:47:32.889
How you might want to expand it,
is again something that is open
1:47:32.889,1:47:34.479
to discussion and debate.
1:47:34.479,1:47:37.039
How we should expand it,
1:47:37.039,1:47:41.719
in terms of a socialist project, or
socio-ecological project, or a social-
1:47:41.719,1:47:43.070
feminist project, or whatever.
1:47:43.070,1:47:44.899
How we should expand it,
1:47:44.899,1:47:47.730
again, is something very much up to us.
1:47:47.730,1:47:51.609
And I don't think Marx would want to be read
1:47:51.609,1:47:55.389
as someone providing a
gospel within which you
1:47:55.389,1:47:56.590
can find yourself.
1:47:56.590,1:48:00.110
It's not about confining mode of
argument, it's a matter of
1:48:00.110,1:48:03.469
liberating you to think about
all kinds of possibilities,
1:48:03.469,1:48:05.369
all kinds of alternatives,
1:48:05.369,1:48:08.780
all kinds of ways to go.
1:48:08.780,1:48:09.929
Just one more.
1:48:09.929,1:48:13.959
»STUDENT: Could you just
clarify very specifically
1:48:13.959,1:48:15.649
the difference between
use-value and exchange-value?
1:48:15.649,1:48:19.880
»HARVEY: Use-value is a shirt or a shoe,
1:48:19.880,1:48:21.889
whatever you use. The exchange-value is:
1:48:21.889,1:48:25.880
shirts and shoes in the market,
and about the prices on them,
1:48:25.880,1:48:30.099
put very simply. And it's…
1:48:30.099,1:48:33.419
I don't like to use the word price at this
point, because we haven't talked very much about
1:48:33.419,1:48:35.969
money. But when you get
further down the line
1:48:35.969,1:48:40.610
you see it's really about prices realized
in the market, and exchange-value is the price
1:48:40.610,1:48:43.769
of a commodity.
1:48:43.769,1:48:46.609
Okay, we should leave it there.
So thanks very much.
1:48:46.609,1:48:52.909
We don't meet next week, right?,
because…What is it?
1:48:52.909,1:48:55.679
» STUDENT: Labor Day.
» DAVID HARVEY: Oh, Labor Day, what a good idea.
1:48:55.679,1:48:57.739
Next time I want you to read
1:48:57.739,1:49:03.840
the rest of chapter one, and chapter two.
1:49:03.840,1:49:08.169
So we will get to the end
of chapter two. Chapter two is pretty short.
1:49:08.169,1:49:12.650
The rest of this chapter is very
curious for a variety of reasons. I mentioned
1:49:12.650,1:49:17.599
Marx's literary style. His
literary style changes from
1:49:17.599,1:49:23.369
crisp analytic, like you've seen here,
and that goes on for the next one,
1:49:23.369,1:49:27.419
to what I can only call
his kind of 'accountancy style',
1:49:27.419,1:49:29.869
which is deadly boring.
1:49:29.869,1:49:31.629
Where: 'this is worth two shillings
1:49:31.629,1:49:34.650
and that's worth three shillings,
1:49:34.650,1:49:38.269
and that's worth two and a half pence.
And if we add this to that we will end up with…'
1:49:38.269,1:49:39.269
Deadly boring.
1:49:39.269,1:49:42.980
So the third section is rather long
1:49:42.980,1:49:46.550
and rather boring of that style.
1:49:46.550,1:49:49.510
And he could have done
it much quicker in my view.
1:49:49.510,1:49:52.860
But it has some very important
insights in it. And so you're going to
1:49:52.860,1:49:53.810
find yourself struggling.
1:49:53.810,1:49:57.070
The last section of chapter one is the
fetishism of commodities, where it's
1:49:57.070,1:50:00.300
about werewolves and Robinson Crusoe,
1:50:00.300,1:50:04.489
in an incredible kind of literary
style. So you suddenly find in this chapter
1:50:04.489,1:50:08.159
you're going to have a big
sample of Marx's different writing styles.
1:50:08.159,1:50:09.479
And they are all together.
1:50:09.479,1:50:13.699
Now, if you wrote a PhD that way, people
would say: For god's sakes!, smooth this out,
1:50:13.699,1:50:15.320
you can't do that.
1:50:15.320,1:50:18.380
Which style you're gonna write in?
But he writes in different styles.
1:50:18.380,1:50:19.559
And he enjoys it.
1:50:19.559,1:50:21.810
And it's fun, actually, because you starts to say:
1:50:21.810,1:50:25.049
How on earth does this relate to that?
1:50:25.049,1:50:28.939
And what does this really mean?
So anyway, chapter one is like that.
1:50:28.939,1:50:30.369
Chapter two is relatively short,
1:50:30.369,1:50:33.389
and again fairly analytic.
1:50:33.389,1:50:36.969
Key concepts are laid out a bit like here. So
it's a step further along the conceptional apparatus.
1:50:36.969,1:50:42.199
Okay? So chapters one and two
1:50:42.199,1:50:45.859
for next time.
