4. Production
Marx sets out a number of points that might otherwise be forgotten.
- War develops certain features faster than peace. For example, in armies, wage labour is developed, as is the use of machinery, and, to pay wages, money is used more extensively. In WWII, many of the features already apparent within social-democracy, such as increased role of the state, planning and regulation, standardisation and so on, were accelerated.
- “The relation of the hitherto existing idealistic historiography to realistic historiography. In particular what is known as history of civilisation, the old history of religion and states. (The various kinds of historiography hitherto existing could also be discussed in this context; the so-called objective, subjective (moral and others), philosophical [historiography].)” (p 215)
Third is a discussion of secondary and tertiary phenomenon, such as discussed earlier, with the continuation of small, private production, domestic production, continuation of slavery, peasant production and so on. Marx also notes the “influence of international relations.” (p 215)
He also notes the need to deal with criticism of this materialist method in analysing social evolution, a requirement highlighted, later, by Lenin, in responding to the attack on Marx's method by Mikhailovsky, and other Narodniks. Marx also notes the dialectical nature of concepts such as “means of production”, and “relations of production”. Marx never gives a fixed definition of these categories, precisely because to do so would be contrary to his materialist and dialectical method. In other words, these categories are merely constructs in the mind, as reflections of the real world, and as the real world was in constant flux, so these categories and their reflection also changes. It would not be scientific to identify the means of production and relations of production of the 1850's, with those of the 2020's.
A further area for discussion was the relation between production and art, along with a consideration of the role of chance, existence of freedom etc., and the role of communication.
In this respect, Marx begins with the objective and subjective factors. Natural and geographical factors play a key role. Agriculture begins in Mesopotamia and the Nile Valley, and the conducive conditions allow surplus production, enabling labour to engage in other activities. The requirement for irrigation etc. gives rise to the role of an administrative apparatus that consolidates into a ruling caste, and state, as foundation of the Asiatic Mode of Production. In Northern Europe, more adverse conditions delay agricultural development, but also encourage other development to enhance labour productivity. In North America, vast plains and ample, freely available food, encourages a continuation of hunting and gathering.
In terms of art, Greek art was a function of its mythology.
“Is the conception of nature and of social relations which underlies Greek imagination and therefore Greek (art) possible when there are self-acting mules, railways, locomotives and electric telegraphs? What is a Vulcan compared with Roberts and Co., Jupiter compared with the lightning conductor, and Hermes compared with the Credit Mobilier? All mythology subdues, controls and fashions the forces of nature in the imagination and through imagination; it disappears therefore when real control over these forces is established.” (p 216)
Today, Star Wars, like a lot of science fiction, has to try to combine as yet non-existing technologies with societies compatible with the dawn rather than the zenith of civilisation. Superman is the modern equivalent of a Greek god, but, either he is a god, and invincible, or else he is not, and has vulnerability. The vulnerability is either itself derived from magic and mysticism, and so requires a temporary suspension of disbelief, in an age of science, or is itself a consequence of the use of technology.
“The difficulty we are confronted with is not, however, that of understanding how Greek art and epic poetry are associated with certain forms of social development. The difficulty is that they still give us aesthetic pleasure and are in certain respects regarded as a standard and unattainable ideal.
An adult cannot become a child again, or he becomes childish. But does the naivete of the child not give him pleasure, and does not he himself endeavour to reproduce the child's veracity on a higher level? Does not the child in every epoch represent the character of the period in its natural veracity? Why should not the historical childhood of humanity, where it attained its most beautiful form, exert an eternal charm because it is a stage that will never recur? There are rude children and precocious children. Many of the ancient peoples belong to this category. The Greeks were normal children. The charm their art has for us does not conflict with the immature stage of the society in which it originated. On the contrary its charm is a consequence of this and is inseparably linked with the fact that the immature social conditions which gave rise, and which alone could give rise, to this art cannot recur.” (p 217)
No comments:
Post a Comment