I really should be doing many other things. Instead I’m watching Harvey’s lectures on Capital v1. Currently watching, or at least listening to, the introduction. (This reminds me - I think I’m going to pitch the next Marx reading group like it’s sort of a 12 step program, like a “Not Having Read Volume One Of Capital Anonymous.”) I really like it so far.
He’s got a lovely voice and accent, and I like his admission that he initially didn’t have a sense of how to understand the world or Marx, and I really like the point that we don’t understand Marx’s Capital v1 until you get to the end. I don’t know if I agree that v1 is a good read, though. I love that book, but I think it’s got some big writerly flaws.
I really like Harvey’s exasperation with classes that excerpt out a few chapters of Capital as if that gives a clear sense of what Marx is on about, and his general orientation toward reading Marx in a group - checking preconceptions, sticking close to the text, etc, all good stuff for any reading.
Hey Nate,
Maybe you should try a reading group on Harvey’s ‘Limits to Capital’ instead… in my opinion it’s a better idea to start with than the whole Capital. It covers the whole structure of Capital but improves the organisation. It’s good for a reading group because Harvey always mentions various disagreements of interpretation, at least the debates as they were circa 1980, and they make good discussion points. At 450 pages it’s maybe a more realistic target for a reading group, without being a too-basic introduction. We did it in Sydney a couple of years ago. I have a few disagreements with Harvey’s more recent stuff but I don’t think Limits to Capital has been beaten as an interpretation of Capital.
Comment by Mike Beggs — March 17, 2009 @ 4:01 am
hi Mike,
Interesting. I’ve not read that one, I’ll think about that for a reading group. I should say, though, I’m sort of a Marx fundamentalist and protestant, I think The Book is the key to the faith and that we should prosletyze folk to read it and accept it into their hearts…. that’s only partly a joke.
This reminds me - at one point I had an idea for an advanced undergraduate class to teach on Capital I, on an interdisciplinary basis, with some common readings and some independent and small group readings - like give everyone a small chunk of a novel that illustrates some point, make everyone read a good historian’s account of enclosure, make everyone read a bit of philosophy around a concept like commodification or labor power, give everyone a flyover of some relevant Marx commentators, then assign people to pick a thematic or disciplinary approach that they will do independent reading on and present. I could really use a collaborator in designing the syllabus, I keep forgetting to ask folk (my short list is you, NP, and JCD). Interested in brainstorming at all on that?
take care,
Nate
Comment by Nate — March 17, 2009 @ 9:55 am
Hey Nate,
I watched about half of them this summer at my workspace when things got boring (thank goodness for headphones when there are no patrons to help). I really liked his description of things, although I think I would prefer to see the lectures in person. Sometimes he gets into deep, heavy theory and its hard to keep up, particularly if you’re staring at a computer/doing other things.
Good luck, I hope you’ll like it as much as I did.
Comment by Brendan — March 17, 2009 @ 6:28 pm
Hey Nate,
Sounds good (about the brainstorming).
My own little discomfort with Capital reading groups probably comes from my focus on the economics. Harvey says the early chapters of Vol I don’t make sense until you’ve read the whole volume; I would go further and say that reading vol I without reading vol III gives a seriously misleading view of what Marx thought about prices and money, in particular.
Comment by Mike Beggs — March 18, 2009 @ 5:43 pm
hi Mike,
I’ve still not gotten through v2, let alone v3! Argh!
I think the 1st section of v1, the 1st 3 chapters or so, are really over-rated personally and it’s annoying that those are the bits so many people excerpt from.
take care,
Nate
Comment by Nate — March 18, 2009 @ 6:21 pm
Yeah I think you’re right there too… I’ve been thinking about finally trying to write up my thoughts on those first few chapters to ’settle accounts’ and move on… The trouble is that there is just so bloody much interpretation around to refer to. So I thought I might just ignore it all, or just go through one source that summarises the controversy, like Harvey’s book. Actually I really like N. Pepperell’s take on those first chapters from her blog last year. Haven’t had a chance to read the thesis draft yet because of having to finish my own, but looking forward to that.
Oh yes and I still want to do that music post we were talking about earlier…
Comment by Mike Beggs — March 19, 2009 @ 4:56 pm
hi Mike,
I encourage you to write up your thoughts initially just using Marx and your brains plus whatever interpretations you’ve got on file in those neurons, then refer back to to some secondary source afterward.
More importantly, the music post…!
take care,
Nate
Comment by Nate — March 19, 2009 @ 6:57 pm
I think the best chapter in vol i is the one on the working day; that’s when you really get a sense of where the categories and regulations of capitalism come from–class struggle!
Hey Nate, if you want to do vol ii, I’m working through it with a friend and we’re doing discussion via IRC since we’re located in different places. You’re more than welcome if you like. Drop me a line if so and I’ll send you details.
Comment by JCD — March 20, 2009 @ 9:26 am
hey JCD,
That’s really tempting and I appreciate the offer very much. I have to think about it as this is the semester of my prelims. How far into the book are you and what pace are you going between now and May?
take care,
Nate
Comment by Nate — March 20, 2009 @ 9:45 am
We’re going to discuss chs 3 and first half of 4 next Thursday at 9pm eastern. Probably go at about that pace (20-30 pp/wk) until we’re finished, then head onto vol iii. If you’re up for it, let me know, but if not no worries.
Comment by JCD — March 20, 2009 @ 2:49 pm