Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning and the New International [Paperback]

 

 

Create your own review

Derrida is definately "not a good Marxist." He is not trapped in the decaying dialectic model, but works his way around, examines the processes, and allows the readers to arrive at their own conclusions. This book is not about Marx, but rather about the specters, their attendant ideological implications, and historicity. If you are looking for a political Derrida, you will not find him here.

In typical Derridian fashion, Derrida circles the subject of Marx, peeking at it directly sometimes, but always speaking of it. "Of" instead of "to" as Politics of Friendship points out. Derrida is haunted, as we all should be. The question is whether or not this is an ethical treatment of the problems brought to bear (a list of 10 - the ten commandments?) in the section entitled "Wears and Tears (Tableau of an agless world)." This is a book about ghosts, about specters (and of course the specter of Marx). His insights are once again profound (yet maybe a bit expected) when he calls the specter that which is neither present nor absent. The specter's call, is of course, ethical, yet Derrida focuses less on this than would be expected. Instead, Derrida is focuses on naming a few of the ghosts that flitter by. This is less a book about politics than about the metaphor of the ghost, which I find unfortunate. However, I did find this a valuable read. Derrida has the ability to break questions wide open with his sharp deconstructive intellect, and this book holds no exceptions. The specter is a figure of the "to come", as well as that which is already here. This book is like the begginging of a spider's web which can be stretched in many directions politically, thus it is certainly applicable and even practical (so maybe he's more Marxist than i give him credit for). If one identifies the system as the ghost, then a large connection has been made which can span many political divides. I recommend this book to any Derrida fan (like myself) and anyone interested in the critique of current politics. The concepts worked out here are a great primer and beginning to the work which must come after, the work "to come". This book is the present of the "to come". Debt, Mouring, and Politics. Read it.

Derrida gets 2 stars for FINALLY coming around to writing about social and political issues. The book itself is interesting, but the fact of the matter is, it's not good Marxism. He's remained ambiguous even since the 1968 French University protests of 1968. His only discussions of Marx revolved around his critique of Hegel, and I believed he dropped Lenin's name a few times in "Positions". Still, Derrida's entry into Marxism is a disappointing one. While he never claims to be a Marxist, one would expect him to be aware of the basic tenents of Marxism. The problem with Derrida's book is it's fetishism of the spirit. The specter takes precedence over the material. Ultimately, Derrida misses the point of historical materialism completely. History is ALWAYS present...there is no specter. In Marx's view we are always creating our own history, as part of our nature as human beings. Furthermore, Derrida's dialectics in the book is far from dialectical materialism. Despite what he claims to be a thorough reading of the German Ideology, he falls into the same traps of the Young Hegelians Marx critiques. His dialectics posits an a priori state, beyond history, language, and everything. Derrida claims he doesnt but this "presence non-presence" of the specter applies something beyond both the material and memory. Regardless, neither of these options suit Marx. Consciousness (das Basswussein I believe?) is the life-blood of the human being, and her/his existence. It is material in and of itself. There is no to come, it is always in process, always becoming, it is in transition. It is not a state of being as "to" implies...it IS being. Anyone who wants a refutation of Derrida need merely read the "camera obscura" passage of the German Ideology. Furthermore, had Derrida read MORE early Marx, and paid attention to the seminal importance of the "Grundrisse" in linking humanism to the political critique and the economic critique, he might've been more clear on what dialecitcal and historical materialism entail. We see how historical materialism is a humanism. (If anyone notices a similarity to the Sartre essay "Existentialism is a Humanism", kudos...it has a purpose. I think Derrida (and even Marx himself) would've benefited from Sartre's reading of Marx. Anyone who would like a nice concise exposition of that reading that has some familiarity with Marx need only read Sartre's "Search for a Method"). Derrida's clear misreading of Marx will make the book a confusing and misleading read for anyone not already familair with Marx, so I recommend read the Econ./Phil. Manuscripts, Chapters 1, 5, 6, 7, 19, 25 of Capital, , the 1st 15 pages of the Ger. Ideo., and the intro to the Grundrisse and the intro to the Contribution to the Critique of Pol. Econ. or at least SOME of the above writings by Marx. (Another complaint not related to Derrida's reading of Marx is his statement that justice is undeconstructible. Why? The quasi-universal cop out is annoying. Thats a contradiction in terms...I think Derrida needs to stop with the Heideggerian wordplay and make up his mind about foundationalism and deconstruction.) Still, Derrida writes some startlingly beautiful passages about social justice (the part that talks about how "never even the histroy of the world have their been more people starved, killed, and disenfranchised at the hands of a government or should I say empire" or something like that. But flashy rhetoric and Derrida's impeccable, yet esoteric writing style cannot save him from the fact that ultimately his own lack of theoretical grounding, practicality, and activism prevents one from acheiving any praxis from this book. Its merely another interesting exposition of Derrida's thought (mental masturbation). It's a Coney island sideshow...seductive and alluring at first glance, but it looes its luster, interest and shock after repeated visits. Specters of Marx is more frustrating than it is fresh.

Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review

› See all 3 customer reviews on Amazon.ca

 

Search Customer Reviews
Only search this product's reviews

Search Listmania!