I have found myself, today, writing about marx's theories on capitalism in a sympathtic way. Although, I, personally, have absolutely no problem with this, in fact I think Marx is brill, I have heard that in academic circles, this kind of thinking is very old fashioned. I've even heard somebody saying 'boring marxist perspective' What do you think? Am I, in academic terms, wearing last season's trends, am I on the crest of a revival, or is marxist theory - like a classic trench coat or a black polo neck - an old perennial that never fades?

======= Date Modified 16 Aug 2010 08:58:18 =======
======= Date Modified 15 Aug 2010 19:52:01 =======
I see exactly what you mean. I think one of the main reasons that Marx's theories have become too 'old-fashioned' is that they have been used so much, coupled with the fact that they aren't wholly applicable anymore in the post-industrial age. However, I do think that the basic critical aspects of his theories are still useful and inform philosophical debates such as those surrounding issues like structure and agency.

I personally thing that marxist theory is one of the classics. Maybe its not as cutting edge as the latest catwalk designs but I think its something that simply never goes away :-) I've always loved Marx since the first year of Sociology A level lol - fantastic to read, can't say I agree with him lol, always comes across as a bit on the paranoid side to me but cracking all the same :-)

Marx is a rock, as long as you're aware of the limitations of his thinking. For instance, by implication (lots of people have argued) his idea of proletariat implies a kind of binary, worker vs. bourgeoisie, thinking. Maybe worth reading him across 90s writers whose post-Marxist thought favours more fragmented, complex relations (I like bell hooks, Soja, Deutsche, Groys...)? Ultimately, his ideas have been so influential, I hardly think anyone can accuse them of being boring. Surely they're just another tool - depends how you use them.

Incidentally, if the recent conference at Birkbeck and upcoming show at the ICA is anything to go by, Marx is, as you suggest, seeing a bit of a revival. Something to do with the credit (capitalist) crisis, perhaps?

======= Date Modified 16 Aug 2010 01:42:51 =======
Not all academic circles. Even non-Marxists will still have to admit that Marx's critique of capitalism is pretty accurrate. One may not agree with his proposed alternative (Marxism) but that's another story. I don't think you're old-fashioned at all, and come to think about it, trench coats and polo necks aren't either ;-)

Thank you everyone, for the PGF style barometer re: Karl Marx's theory. I think it must be an old perennial, a classic that never dates, that's my personal view anyhow, and I guess in many ways it's up to us to decide its fate on furture academic editorials.

======= Date Modified 17 Aug 2010 00:53:11 =======
I just clicked all your helpful user buttons, but for some reason, Kilhatron, your didn't work it told me I've already voted for you when I clearly haven't because you don't have a star -Oh it's just appeared, all is ok then.

I too am using Marx,  what particular aspect are you looking at? If you are looking at the effect of capitalism on workers, you might find Braverman's book 'Labor and Monopoly Capital' is worth a read, along with Edwards 'Contested Terrain' Wolff's 'Why read Marx Today' may be of use too. There are lots of things going for Marx, but there are also many opponents, some of whom I think are opposing the theories because they are a bit to close to home. Look at the stuff by Rikowski online for some more ideas on Marx in the modern world. I must admit to finding Marx very hard going at times, sometimes i just want to say, 'for heaven's sake just get on with it':$. (As I have said before though, once when I was reading 'Capital' someone asked me which capital was he writing about, was it London :-)) I don't think he will go away though, some ideas are still valid now -although it is probably better for the capitalists to suggest that the ideas are behind the times

Have you seen David Harvey's Reading Capital lectures? He's posted them online: http://davidharvey.org/

======= Date Modified 17 Aug 2010 11:47:25 =======
======= Date Modified 17 Aug 2010 11:46:11 =======
Thank you again all, I will defo look up the link in a few days, am having day off because I finished a chapter half yesterday - 8500 words! So some revision needed there, I think.

@ Joyce: I didn't know Marx used London as his example, that's really intersting because I'm looking at Englishness, and London features in what I'm looking at, especially in the chapter half I've just finished quite a lot. I've started to consider English capitalism - the relationships between English culture, capitalism, imperialism/general domination of the rest of Britain and places beyond, and the way that that's refered to as the British empire, but actually it's more of an English thing.

I haven't really looked at any Marx for my research yet, just a smidgen of Weber, but I am starting to think it will be important, so thanks for all the feedback. A lot of this is the result of fireworks going off in my head after finishing the last bit of wrting I've done.

Actually Eska what they thought it was was a book about London, a sort of travel guide thing. :$ :-).

Capitalism is a complicated thing. I've started with a look at the historical angle from the craftsmen to the beginnings of capitalism via medieval merchants, not forgetting the feudal society, and how the society differed in England from the society of the continent (Marc Blotch is good on this area). For classes I've used the place of the merchant and the needs of the Victorian factory owner as starting points and considered why classes are still so important for capitalism. It is only the scene setting chapter but is very important for the understanding of the rest of the thesis.

@Eska - am also writing on English culture and how its affects organisations. what are your sources on English culture?

I'll PM you Jojo