Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 14:41:10 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: The "cognitariat" question


I don't think it is too advisable to "narrow" the definition of the
proletariat to those who perform manual labour while unnecessarily
identifying a cognitariat which has the distinction of "creat[ing]
capital out of mental labour". One of the reasons classism is so
pervasive and insidious, whatever the historical period, is because
there is always the presumption that those who perform manual labour,
or more manual labour, are not performing and therefore, by association,
not really capable of mental labour. Manual labourers of all kinds
are frequently called upon to study, solve and initiate all kinds of
mental labour which chemists, biologists, engineers, etc. do not
understand or have overlooked or misunderstand because of the more abstract
relationships to work processes and results. Ergo, throughout human history
many the proletarian has "creat[ed] capital out of mental labour".

I would suggest reading Carolyn Steedman's LANDSCAPE FOR A GOOD WOMAN for
some of the ways in which she unsettles such intraclass distinctions.

David


     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---