Lenin's Law
23rd February 2007, 16:04
Just finished devouring Zinn's one-man play: "Marx in Soho" I had been looking forward to reading it for awhile. It's basically about Marx coming back (from the "afterlife"; wherever he is supposed to be coming from is not made clear, intentionally I'm sure.) and instead of arriving in Soho in London he instead pops up in Soho in NYC because of a bureaucratic error.
It is humorous, entertaining and a good introduction to Marxism; what he stood for and what he didn't. It's main point: that Marxism (and socialism in general) did not die out with the fall of the Soviet Union, is of course, very well taken and a necessary point to drive home.
Nevertheless, I did have a few problems with it: Though I do understand the conversations are fictional for the most part, I don't see Marx' wife as combative as she is portrayed in the play (I've read several letters from Jenny to Marx and if anything she offers glowing praise of her husband, if someone can provide additional info on this let me know). Also, some of Marx' favorite words, such as "philistine" are removed entirely from the play, which is telling.
Then Zinn uses the sort of vague leftist language at the end where he makes Marx say "forget socialism and capitalism, let's just use the mighty wealth of this world for human needs" and that in socialism "The mass of the people would take over the state and govern in the interests of all"
This smacks of the kind of idealism and perhaps even utopianism that Marx fought against his whole life; Marx is very clear that the dictatorship of the proletariat is not designed to make "people" (ie, everybody) happy and not to the benefit of all (which is idealism), but rather for a specific class of people: the working class, the proletariat, who happen to make up a vast majority of the population to set up the "dictatorship of the proletariat" and work in the interests of the proletariat.
Originally posted by Marx
The proletariat (not "everybody") will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state, i.e. of the proletariat (again, not "everbody") organized as the ruling class.."
While I respect and even admire many of Zinn's works (People's History of the United States being one of them) I find that his solutions on what is to be done are rather dodgy: He's a supporter (or former supporter, I'm not sure which) of the Green Party, the Democratic Socialists (which is not really a party and just give support to the "progressive" Democrats) -and joined his friend Chomsky in backing Kerry in 2004 as the "lesser of two evils" blah blah blah
Nevertheless, I don't think this play was meant as a serious biography of Marx but just a rather light, entertaining introduction to Marx, his life, his struggles and making the fundamental point that Marx' ideas are not dead and many of his criticisms of capitalist society still hold true today. In this he succeeded, but Zinn's own idealism and vague leftism also come through in the play so it must be taken with a grain of salt. All in all, I'd say it's a good basic introduction to Marx and his life as long as one approaches the play for what it is; not a strict biography but a rather loose re-telling of his life, political struggles and the people surrounding it.
It is humorous, entertaining and a good introduction to Marxism; what he stood for and what he didn't. It's main point: that Marxism (and socialism in general) did not die out with the fall of the Soviet Union, is of course, very well taken and a necessary point to drive home.
Nevertheless, I did have a few problems with it: Though I do understand the conversations are fictional for the most part, I don't see Marx' wife as combative as she is portrayed in the play (I've read several letters from Jenny to Marx and if anything she offers glowing praise of her husband, if someone can provide additional info on this let me know). Also, some of Marx' favorite words, such as "philistine" are removed entirely from the play, which is telling.
Then Zinn uses the sort of vague leftist language at the end where he makes Marx say "forget socialism and capitalism, let's just use the mighty wealth of this world for human needs" and that in socialism "The mass of the people would take over the state and govern in the interests of all"
This smacks of the kind of idealism and perhaps even utopianism that Marx fought against his whole life; Marx is very clear that the dictatorship of the proletariat is not designed to make "people" (ie, everybody) happy and not to the benefit of all (which is idealism), but rather for a specific class of people: the working class, the proletariat, who happen to make up a vast majority of the population to set up the "dictatorship of the proletariat" and work in the interests of the proletariat.
Originally posted by Marx
The proletariat (not "everybody") will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state, i.e. of the proletariat (again, not "everbody") organized as the ruling class.."
While I respect and even admire many of Zinn's works (People's History of the United States being one of them) I find that his solutions on what is to be done are rather dodgy: He's a supporter (or former supporter, I'm not sure which) of the Green Party, the Democratic Socialists (which is not really a party and just give support to the "progressive" Democrats) -and joined his friend Chomsky in backing Kerry in 2004 as the "lesser of two evils" blah blah blah
Nevertheless, I don't think this play was meant as a serious biography of Marx but just a rather light, entertaining introduction to Marx, his life, his struggles and making the fundamental point that Marx' ideas are not dead and many of his criticisms of capitalist society still hold true today. In this he succeeded, but Zinn's own idealism and vague leftism also come through in the play so it must be taken with a grain of salt. All in all, I'd say it's a good basic introduction to Marx and his life as long as one approaches the play for what it is; not a strict biography but a rather loose re-telling of his life, political struggles and the people surrounding it.