From: Thomas Schumacher <tschumac-AT-magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> Subject: Re: Some theses on Marx Date: Sat, 30 Jul 94 18:23:45 EDT Yes, the Harvey book is "that green one": Harvey, David. (1989). THE CONDITION OF POSTMODERNITY: AN INQUIRY INTO THE ORIGINS OF CULTURAL CHANGE. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell. I just re-read it (again) and think it's quite good (Meaghan Morris's criticisms notwithstanding: THEORY, CULTURE, & SOCIETY, v. 9, no. 1), although he does get a bit sloppy at the end. Whatever. The Jhally cite is: Jhally, Sut. (1989). The political economy of culture. In Ian Angus and Sut Jhally (Eds.), CULTURAL POLITICS IN CONTEMPORARY AMERICA (pp. 65-81). New York: Routledge. This is a good essay, although limited in scope and perhaps most useful for undergrads. I like it though because he introduces the idea of real subsumption of the culture industries as marking a shift in their place in marxist cultural critique. As for fetishization, I would also point to those passages in CAPITAL vol. I where Marx talks about the fetishization of capital (cf. pp. 482f, 548f, in Viking/Penguin ed.). Marx says that not only are commodities fetishized, but so to is capital itself (as it appears as a "thing" to the workers in the form of machinery rather than as the capitalist relation). Which Bourdieu are you relying on here? I'd like those cites.... Tom Schumacher
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005