Anyone want to read some stuff together?
I’m open to any method and (non)structure for discussion. I’d be keen to talk about the how part before starting, though. (A symposium per work? A symposium at the end? A blogpost a week? No plan, just post and comment as we like?)
I propose starting in a week or two and ending end of December or second week of January, with the following reading:
Marx’s 1859 Introduction to the Critique of Political Economy, Lenin’s Philosophical Notebooks, Mao’s On Contradiction, the long final section of Althusser’s “On the Materialist Dialectic,” and Althusser’s “Marx in his Limits.”
Here’s the inspiration, a long quote from “On the Materialist Dialectic,” written in 1963:
I said that Marx left us no Dialectics. This is not quite accurate. He did leave us one first-rate methodological text, unfortunately without finishing it: the Introduction to the Critique of Political Economy, 1859. This text does not mention the ‘inversion’ by name, but it does discuss its reality: the validating conditions for the scientific use of the concepts of Political Economy. A reflection on this use is enough to draw from it the basic elements of a Dialectics, since this use is nothing more nor less than the Dialectics in a practical state.
I said that Lenin left us no Dialectics that would be the theoretical expression of the dialectic in action in his own political practice; more generally, that the theoretical labour of expressing the dialectic in action in the Marxist practice of the class struggle had still to be performed. This is not quite accurate. In his Notebooks Lenin did leave us some passages which are the sketch for a Dialectics. Mao Tse-tung developed these notes in the midst of a political struggle against dogmatic deviations inside the Chinese party in 1937, in an important text On Contradiction.
I hope to be able to show how we can find in these texts — in a form which has already been considerably elaborated and which it is only necessary to develop, to relate to its basis and to reflect on continually — the theoretical answer to our question: what is the specificity of the Marxist dialectic? (182.)
Page numbers etc —
Introduction to the Critique of Political Economy is the an intro that Marx wrote for and later omitted (sp?) from A Contribution to the Critique of P0litical Economy. The intro is in v28 of the Collected Works, p17-48. That’s 31 pages.
(The Contribution itself is in v29 and is pages 261-417, just under 160 pages. Also included in that volume is an earlier draft of the Contribution, p430-510, 80 pages, we could later read some of this stuff if we wanted to, or leave it optional for Marx fetishists).
The Philosophical Notebooks is an entire volume of Lenin’s Collected Works, volume 38. I propose reading just the short conspectus on Hegel’s smaller logic (3 pages), and from the conspectus on the greater logic reading just Lenin’s notes on the intro (13 pages) and his concluding notes (3 pages). That’s 19 pages.
We can treat the rest of the long conspectus on Hegel’s greater logic (that’s 167 pages) and the rest of the Philosophical Notebooks (I dunno how many pages the Notebooks are in total) the same way as A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy - optional, or something we return to later if we decide we want to.
On Contradiction is about fifty pages.
The section of “On the Materialist Dialectic” is pages 182-218 in For Marx, 36 pages.
That’s 136 pages not counting any of Lenin’s longer conspectus.
“Marx in his Limits” is 155 pages (pages 7-162 in Philosophy of the Encounter), and is unfortunately not online and so perhaps the plan should initially not include that essay.
I’m pretty busy, but, obviously, these texts interest me. I can’t guarantee regular posts, but, at the very least, I’m interested in reading along and making comments. Perhaps another approach would be to “assign” texts to one or two people who would make posts, thus lessening the overall burden. Of course, my own schedule should never be determinant in these situations!
Comment by Craig — November 11, 2006 @ 10:50 pm
hi Craig,
Glad you’re interested. If it ends up being you and me and no one else then your schedule is quite determinant. Let’s wait a minute and see who else is interested. I think your idea of assigning folks is good, particularly if we make assignments not a monopoly but a minimum - anyone can do whatever they like, but some people agree to definitely write on X or Y. Gotta run, fixing dinner…
take care,
n8
Comment by Nate — November 11, 2006 @ 11:38 pm
Well, I hope there is more than just us.
Comment by Craig — November 12, 2006 @ 2:07 am
*Raises hand*
Hi guys - sure, would give it a go too. My copy of Althusser’s For Marx is probably due for a dusting off …
cheers
Barry
Comment by Barry — November 12, 2006 @ 9:02 am
i might be down, i’m reading a lot, and maybe am in too many reading groups but hey.
Comment by todd — November 12, 2006 @ 8:06 pm
Count me in. Anyway we could do pdf files?
Comment by Anthony Paul Smith — November 13, 2006 @ 2:04 am
Sounds good y’all, glad yr interested. Anthony, re: PDFs, I don’t know how to make them, except by saving an HTML file as a PDF. I’d be happy to do that and email them all to you, but I don’t know that that’s any help. Let me know.
I’m not proposing we start right this second. But, once we start, could folks read the Marx in a week’s time? If so, then how about two weeks for Marx plus Lenin, aim for about a week to read Mao, and a week for the Althusser. Does that sound feasible? If not, what else should we do? When do we start?
Lastly - how to proceed? Anyone want to commit to writing on a certain piece? I’m going to try to write at least something on each piece.
Comment by Nate — November 13, 2006 @ 2:39 am
I posted this already, but it didn’t go through.
I read this late last night and didn’t follow the links, which I assumed led to some place to buy the actual books. No need for pdfs, I can print stright from the net. Sorry about that.
Where will we be posting?
Comment by Anthony Paul Smith — November 13, 2006 @ 12:58 pm
Thanks for doing this, Nate. I’m in, but also extremely busy. What have we decided the weekly work load will amount to?
And, yeah, I’m fine with writing on a certain reading; has anyone claimed the “Marx in his Limits” stuff yet?
Comment by Garnet — November 13, 2006 @ 4:50 pm
If you wouldn’t mind a visitor from the West Bank, I’d love to join. I’m working on the Big A for my dis. and could realy use a trip back to the Lenin and Mao.
Comment by Isaac — November 13, 2006 @ 6:56 pm
Certainly welcome Isaac, though I think a lot of folks here aren’t going to get that “West Bank” refers to the banks of the muddy Mississipp, rather than elsewheres.
Comment by Nate — November 13, 2006 @ 7:24 pm
After spending most of yesterday with a crashing headache from overwork, can I just provisionally put my hand up? As in a maybe ..
Comment by s0metim3s — November 14, 2006 @ 1:09 am
I’m too busy, haven’t started on my book revisions yet and my own blog is now disabled/frozen since I came to Japan - didn’t realise I’d set it up with an email I’ve now cancelled (doh!) - so too many things to do. A shame though, as I know some of these texts quite well.
Comment by David McInerney — November 14, 2006 @ 3:14 am
Can I commit to not committing? I’m not sure I can make it through the Mao and Lenin at this point in my life–though I might feel differently come December–but I’d like to do the Marx and Althusser. I have no preferences on format, though I do like Craig’s idea of one or two people doing a post and the rest commenting.
Comment by Eric — November 14, 2006 @ 2:34 pm
hey all,
Proposed timetable, what y’all think?
Read the Marx by the 25th.
Read the Lenin by December 1st.
Read the Mao by December 8th.
Read the shorter early Althusser by December 15th.
Figure out when to read “Marx in his Limits” later.
Folks can post as they like. (I hope to write a little at least on each piece cuz writing helps me think.)
Feel free to propose revisions of the timeline or the process. I’m gonna start the Marx this weekend.
take care,
Nate
Comment by Nate — November 16, 2006 @ 4:33 am
Hi Nate - proposal fine for me - will try to comment on each and then at the end draw it together in some critical evaluation of the lot.
cheers
B
Comment by Barry — November 16, 2006 @ 10:04 am
hey all, just an interested observer offering a note. there is a good course available on the sojourner truth web archive that I and my comrade maintain on dialectics. obviously the whole course my not be what you want but its got sections on mao and althusser plus its got alot of what ya’ll are wanting to read, just a thought. you can find it at how to think: a guide to the study of dialectical materialism good luck whatever you choose
peace,
rob
Comment by Rob — November 16, 2006 @ 4:22 pm
okay so the link didn’t work, but you can find the archive at www.sojournertruth.net and the course will be found in urgent tasks number 7
peace
Comment by Rob — November 16, 2006 @ 4:24 pm
hi Rob,
Thanks for that. Nice whatsits… coincidence. I was just this morning glancing over a copy of that “how to think” course, which I printed out a long time ago from I’m not sure where (Ralph Dumain’s web site, I think). Some comrades and I have been reading some other STO material in another context, in regard to workplace organizing, so I had dug out my stack of STO stuff from a box in my closet and found the how to think course among other stuff. I would love to read through that whole course at some point. It would take a good long while, though, just to do the regular readings, let alone the suggested further readings.
Anyway, thanks for the link and for maintaining the STO archive. Great stuff.
take care,
Nate
Comment by Nate — November 16, 2006 @ 5:24 pm
Rob - I just ran across a reference to an STO pamphlet called “Marx on American Slavery.” I printed out the symposium on it, reprinted/archived on your web site. Any plans to digitize that? (If not, maybe Mike from the STO history blog has a copy I can convince him to photocophy for me….)
Comment by Nate — November 16, 2006 @ 8:46 pm
Hey there,
I can certainly get you a copy of the “Marx on American Slavery” pamphlet, which was written by Ken Lawrence. I gave a copy to Rob and co. a few months back, so maybe they’ll be able to post it soon. As for the readings, I’d love to participate (partly to figure out what people see in Althusser…), but I’m super busy these days, so I’ll have to pass.
Solidarity,
Mike
Comment by Mike — November 17, 2006 @ 3:55 pm
I should be getting up that pamphlet soon (hopefully) it is a poor copy (no offense mike but that first page sucks) so that makes scanning it pretty hard it’s been on the top of my list for awhile but it keeps getting moved to the bottom whenever i get something thats a little cleaner. but thanks for checking in and hope everybody enjoys the new html format we just threw up for all the urgent tasks, makes it a little easier on the eyes.
peace,
rob
Comment by Rob — November 19, 2006 @ 2:08 am
oh and by the way there’s also a good symposium of althusser in urgent tasks number 4 which is up on the site. it has a fantastic article by marty glaberman on how althusser attempts to subordinate history to the communist party. i can’t say i’ve read too much of the guy but what i’ve read hasn’t been of much value and i know that he told the workers to go back to work in ‘68. but hey, he was pretty en vogue for awhile before falling into obscurity so its probably worthwhile to see what the big deal was, i’m sure i’ll get around to it someday.
peace,
rob
Comment by Rob — November 19, 2006 @ 2:14 am
hi Mike, Rob,
Mike, depending on Rob’s timeline I may ask you to photocopy that for me.
Rob I saw that thing on Althusser, thanks for reminding me. I think I have a printout of it somewhere but if not I’ll have to print it out. I find Althusser a real mixed bag. This collection came out this summer of stuff where he’s changed his mind on a lot of things. There are friends and comrades I respect very much who’ve gotten a lot from Althusser so I try to take him seriously. I never really did till I started reading the late stuff this summer. I’m more interested in some of his former students, and I’ve been reading him more for the back-story, so to speak. I’m really ambivalent about the whole “producing a philosophy for Marxism” thing. On the one hand, I really like philosophy. On the other hand I don’t know that it’s particularly needed and there’s a way that that can be kind of arrogant.
On Glaberman, do you know if his piece in the Althusser symposium is the piece published in Glaberman’s pamphlet on Mao? I saw that a friend’s not too long ago when I was out of town. The folks in the IWW that I know who take the STO pretty seriously are also into Glaberman and Stan Weir (who I noticed wrote something on James in the James issue of Urgent Tasks dedicated). Staughton Lynd, too - I just printed the letters published in Urgent Tasks that Lynd and Ignatin wrote back and forth to Radical America, that was nice to find on your site. I ran across a site recently with e-copies of a lot of issues of that journal too, a lot of real gems in there, as with Urgent Tasks.
take care,
Nate
Comment by Nate — November 19, 2006 @ 5:15 am
nate,
the piece in mao as dialectician on althusser is not the same as the urgent tasks piece but they fall along the same line and may have even been written about the same time. i’m not sure. its kinda like when you see a comedian on leno one night and letterman the next, same stuff but the delivery might be a little different.
but as far as glaberman goes he generally makes for some pretty enjoyable reading, he just speaks very plainly and clearly. some of his stuff is reproduced on the marxists internet archive and is of real value. he’s up there on my list of people i read something by when i need to get my head straight, concise and to the point.
peace,
rob
Comment by Rob — November 20, 2006 @ 5:28 pm
hi Rob,
Thanks for that as well. I like that metaphor of the comedian two night in a row. I’ll have to see if my friend will photocopy that pamphlet for me, I’d like to have the stuff on Mao anyways. I’m a big Glaberman fan (glaberfan?). A bit of trivia, a friend and I met Antonio Negri at a conference and started talking to him a bit. English isn’t Negri’s strong suit and my Italian is pretty bad, but we both speak Spanish. So it was sort of a soup, language wise, but anyways I brought up Glaberman and he got very animated, talked about Glaberman and James and all that stuff. I thought that was pretty cool.
take care,
Nate
oh yeah - Note to self: the Intro to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy is also pages 81-111 of the Vintage edition of the Grundrisse. That translation, the Nicolaus one, differs slightly from the one in v28 of the Collected Works. V28 says (page 48) that the introduction was written in late August 1857, and that it was first published in Die Neue Zeit, Bd I, #23-25, in 1902-03.
Comment by Nate — November 21, 2006 @ 4:35 pm
Well…I’m searching for a copy of Lenin’s “Philosophical Notebooks” and am interested in pursuing a dialectical discussion of this and other works, as long as such discussion places them in historical and sexist context, and seeks to move forward into the 21st Century…
Comment by Karen B. Lewis — November 12, 2007 @ 9:38 pm
hi Karen,
Some of the Notebooks are online here:
http://marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/cw/volume38.htm
Comment by Nate — November 12, 2007 @ 9:43 pm