IMPORTANT: If you cite this message, OPE-L policy requires you not to reveal the identity of the author.
You may cite this message only if you do not disclose who wrote it.
|
Another thought occurred to me upon further reflection (it's hard
trying
to reconstruct your intentions from a post written 10 years ago!) : I
was
replying to a question from (former member) Massimo de Angelis.
Massimo,
you might recall, was influenced in his interpretations of _Capital_
by
Harry Cleaver's _Reading Capital Politically_. By answering Massimo
in
the way that I did -- by highlighting undead _labor_ -- I was perhaps being
a
tad mischievous since I wanted to suggest that the vampire metaphor
which
he himself in effect raised for discussion is not consistent
with Harry's
interpretation. I couldn't locate a response from Massimo and
I'm not sure
if he sent one. What I would have liked, I think, was an exchange
between Harry's and Massimo's interpretation of
_Capital_ vs. Mike L's
(and that's one reason when I then initiated a thread on
subjectivity).
[This relates to a discussion we had in Fall, 1995 on Book III
(Wage-Labour)
in the 6-book-plan -- a subject that I tried to re-raise for discussion
at various times in various ways in the years since.]
In solidarity, Jerry
|
- Re: [OPE-L] Bloody Capital and Dead Labour Cultural Studies or the Critique of Political Economy? By Mark Neocleous, (continued)
- Re: [OPE-L] Bloody Capital and Dead Labour Cultural Studies or the Critique of Political Economy? By Mark Neocleous, Rakesh Bhandari Tue 25 Apr 2006, 19:27 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Bloody Capital and Dead Labour Cultural Studies or the Critique of Political Economy? By Mark Neocleous, Jerry Levy Tue 25 Apr 2006, 21:05 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Bloody Capital and Dead Labour Cultural Studies or the Critique of Political Economy? By Mark Neocleous, Rakesh Bhandari Tue 25 Apr 2006, 21:16 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Bloody Capital and Dead Labour Cultural Studies or the Critique of Political Economy? By Mark Neocleous, Rakesh Bhandari Tue 25 Apr 2006, 21:17 GMT