Marxist theory of the individual / subjectivity?

[spiltteeth]

Anyone know of any good resources on a marxist theory of subjectivity, particularly to combat psychology's tendency to individualize persons - abstract them out of material contexts as if they were independent of all that.

Has anyone done a study of a more...Althusserian psychology?

Thanks

[originofopinion]

I too wonder about Marxist Theory and Subjectivity.

[Belisarius]

for althusser on subjectivity: read "ideology and ideological state apparatuses" (Verso books publishes it in a book called "on ideology").

Althusser defines the subject in a double function: a subject is the "actor of his existence", but also someone "subjected" to something else. this something else is the Subject. a kind of transcendent being imbedded in ideological state apparatuses, like the Church.

the subject identifies with the Subject. this is called interpellation. this is the fact that an individual is "hallowed" to his own subjectiviy when someone poses an identity upon him. e.g. every official letter starts with "Sir," this means that the reader of this official text is called to himself as responsible for his actions, but it also forces him to accept the authority of the text written by the Subject. we can say for example that the text is a fine. the fine makes the reader responsible for his deeds, but also forces him to subject himself to the Subject. in this case the Subject is the Law.

[KC]

Edit

[Belisarius]

what does he then actually say in that book?

[Bilan]

Marx's theory of Man - Erich Fromm.

[ROBOTROT]

From my (admittedly basic) understanding, the problem with Althusserianism was that it offered little in the way of agency with which subjects can change the world. While it is true that as Subjects we are constituted largely by the institutions of our society, this is not static and as rational agents we are constantly transforming these institutions and Subjectivities, both consciously and unconsciously, through our actions. Furthermore, this constant change is bound up with the class struggle which may explain why now, when the class struggle is at an ebb, the collective revolutionary Subject (the proletariat) seems nowhere to be found and we are more likely to accept bourgeois common-sense notions of individuality. An increase in class struggle therefore will engender a deeper theoretical understanding and the re-emergence of a more collective, proletarian Subjectivity and open a space up for the construction of socialist hegemony. Good books on this sort of thing are Alex Callinicos' Making History and The Resources of Critique. They do a much better job of expressing these concepts than I possibly can.

[MalcolmX]

So far as I understand Althusser's approach is not dialectical so strictly speaking is not Marxist. However, Jacques Lacan's work is fundamentally Hegelian, materialist and is fully comaptible with the Marxst approach - finding 'beginners guides' can be a little difficult though: usually you can find it in an accessable form in guides to Literature theory, adding Zizek's work to this helped me.

[blake 3:17]

I found Althusser interesting but not all helpful. I just read his memoirs and he was pretty shattered person from the get go.

Take a look at Vygotsky. Link here: http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/index.htm He's been big in certain areas of educational theory -- his Marxism is often just not mentioned. There's a piece of his on Piaget that I found remarkable.

Other people you might be interested in are Raymond Williams (a very important Marxist literary critic, certainly the greatest English language one) and Joel Kovel who did practice as a psychoanalyst.

Edited to add: A pretty intro to Marxist theory on this stuff is Language and Materialism. It was one of the earlier attempts at explaining structuralism, semiotics and Lacan to readers of English. I've read it several times over the last bunch of years and am frequently lost in it, but get a little bit more each time.

[YKTMX]

So far as I understand Althusser's approach is not dialectical so strictly speaking is not Marxist. However, Jacques Lacan's work is fundamentally Hegelian, materialist and is fully comaptible with the Marxst approach - finding 'beginners guides' can be a little difficult though: usually you can find it in an accessable form in guides to Literature theory, adding Zizek's work to this helped me.


Well, if you're saying that you don't think it's dialectical, that is fine. Althusser certainly intended it to be dialectical. He did not like the Hegelian influence on Marxism, and so, yes, he is critical of a certain stand, an important strand, in dialectical thought.

Although, his position on Hegel is that since his metaphysic is basically idealist, he has a mechanistic interpretation of the dialectic. His position was that one cannot simply expropriate Hegel's methodological approach, keeping its basic structure, and then apply it to the new objects of Marxism.

A dialectical materialism presumes not only a new metaphysic (materialist not idealist), but a new dialectic. For Althusser, this involved replacing Hegel's "simple" dialectic, with its underdeveloped notion of contradiction, with a "complex" Marxist dialectic, in which each contradiction is itself determined ('overdetermined') by the other contradictions that form part of a complex whole ('structure').

Althusser's work, although it appears intimidating, is easy to read and he takes quite a pedagogical apporach to theory.

[Dermezel]

Essay on Dialectical Logic (http://www.marxists.org/archive/ilyenkov/works/essays/index.htm)

And Christopher Caudwell's Reality: a Study in Bourgeoisie Philosophy (http://www.marxists.org/archive/caudwell/1938/reality.htm):

Also: Liberty: A study in bourgeoisie illusion (http://www.marxists.org/archive/caudwell/1938/liberty.htm)

Simply put bourgeoisie philosophy swings between mechanistic materialism (which denies free will completely) and idealism/dualism which presents free will as an absolute. This is because the bourgeoisie philosopher cannot accept real, material contradictions, like the idea that the subjective exists within an objective world, and that consciousness seeks to contradict the rest of reality.

[vyborg]

Vygotsky and Lacan are both fundamental. By the way Althusser was an alumn and a patient of Lacan,.
Fromm is very good in his critical essays...
Reich is good in some early book