yes. Eileen publishes a ton in journals.
Peter was offered (and took) a position at Michigan State
(I think) when he wasn't even on the academic market.
Of course, it was in an IR department. Not "econ."
mbs
Does that work win the respect of "real" economists?
>
> I beg your pardon but our in
The thing I like about Marx's writing is the feeling of a combination of enormous
erudition combined with earthiness and common sense wit.
CB
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/11/00 12:17PM >>>
I'm amazed that the literary qualities of even chap. 1 of Capital are
being called into question. Section 4 i
_The Manifesto of the Communist Party_, _Value, Price and Profit_, et al are more
accessible to popular audiences.
CB
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/11/00 02:30PM >>>
Brad DeLong wrote:
>>I'm amazed that the literary qualities of even chap. 1 of Capital
>>are being called into question. Section 4
>Brad DeLong wrote:
>
>>>I'm amazed that the literary qualities of even chap. 1 of Capital
>>>are being called into question. Section 4 is one of Marx's most
>>>deservedly famous passages, the analysis of commodity fetishism,
>>>which blends political economy, pyschology, philosophy, and
>>>cu
>Jim D. wrote:
>
>>At 07:55 PM 9/10/00 -0700, you wrote:
>>>Dierdre McCloskey was claiming this morning that Marx had never
>>>visited either a farm or a factory. Does anyone know of documented
>>>counterexamples?
>>
>>maybe, but didn't his friend Fred manage a factory? If old Karlos
>>didn't h
Like lots of folks on pen-l, I worked in factories and such not to gain
enlightenment but to make money. True, I ended up learning some useful
lessons (some of which can't be found in books), but if I were independently
wealthy and had spent all that time reading instead, I probably would have
le
At 04:26 PM 9/11/00 -0700, you wrote:
>It would be interesting to get validation that Marx never had first-hand
experience with farms or factories. I
This reminded me of something that I forgot to bring up. It was mentioned
that the sociologist Buroway worked in a factory to get first-hand
info
It would be interesting to get validation that Marx never had first-hand experience
with farms or factories. I don't like his
writings on agriculture particularly, but Marx' work on the reorganization of
production during the industrial revolution is
truly top-notch -- some of the finest social
Well, this confuses plainness and accessibility with literary mastery, which is the
question I raised. Lenin' stuff is plain and accessible, but not beautiful. Marx's is
often difficult, but generally beautiful. It has what he said in his early letter to
his dad was true of Hegel, a "grotesque
Jim Devine wrote:
>But it's important to remember that the German working-class of his
>day had a relatively high level of literacy, partly or even largely
>due to their own efforts at self-education.
And according to Freeman and Schettkat (NBER WP 7611) today's German
workers are significant
Brad DeLong wrote:
>>I'm amazed that the literary qualities of even chap. 1 of Capital
>>are being called into question. Section 4 is one of Marx's most
>>deservedly famous passages, the analysis of commodity fetishism,
>>which blends political economy, pyschology, philosophy, and
>>cultural
aah, but you don't understand. In the eyes of the Profession, those are
mere sociologists. And as the one of the key Party Ideologists, Paul
Krugman, has noted, they work for an organization filled with nothing but
hacks.
At 01:32 PM 9/11/00 -0400, you wrote:
>I beg your pardon but our industr
Does that work win the respect of "real" economists?
>
> I beg your pardon but our industrial relations
> people -- Eileen Appelbaum and Peter Berg --
> have visited many factories, interviewing workers
> and collecting data, for their research on workplace
> organization.
>
> mbs
>
>
> Moder
There are numerous stories about groups of workers saving up money
together so that they could share a copy. The cigar makers used to have
Capital read to them when they worked.
In many case, I am sure that the workers understood it better than their
more educated superiors.
--
Michael Perelm
Brad DeLong wrote:
> >I'm amazed that the literary qualities of even chap. 1 of Capital
> >are being called into question. Section 4 is one of Marx's most
> >deservedly famous passages, the analysis of commodity fetishism,
> >which blends political economy, pyschology, philosophy, and cultural
I beg your pardon but our industrial relations
people -- Eileen Appelbaum and Peter Berg --
have visited many factories, interviewing workers
and collecting data, for their research on workplace
organization.
mbs
Modern sociologists (like Michael Burawoy) visit factories. Economists
don't do so
>I'm amazed that the literary qualities of even chap. 1 of Capital
>are being called into question. Section 4 is one of Marx's most
>deservedly famous passages, the analysis of commodity fetishism,
>which blends political economy, pyschology, philosophy, and cultural
>analysis in dazzling ways
Jim D. wrote:
>At 07:55 PM 9/10/00 -0700, you wrote:
>>Dierdre McCloskey was claiming this morning that Marx had never
>>visited either a farm or a factory. Does anyone know of documented
>>counterexamples?
>
>maybe, but didn't his friend Fred manage a factory? If old Karlos
>didn't have the t
Doug Henwood wrote:
> I'm amazed that the literary qualities of even chap. 1 of Capital are
> being called into question. Section 4 is one of Marx's most
> deservedly famous passages, the analysis of commodity fetishism,
> which blends political economy, pyschology, philosophy, and cultural
> a
At 07:55 PM 9/10/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Dierdre McCloskey was claiming this morning that Marx had never visited
>either a farm or a factory. Does anyone know of documented counterexamples?
maybe, but didn't his friend Fred manage a factory? If old Karlos didn't
have the time or resources to visi
I'm amazed that the literary qualities of even chap. 1 of Capital are
being called into question. Section 4 is one of Marx's most
deservedly famous passages, the analysis of commodity fetishism,
which blends political economy, pyschology, philosophy, and cultural
analysis in dazzling ways. As
RE
>They are difficult, although there is some nice stuff in them. Hard as it
is, there is some pretty language in the cahpter on commodity fetishism.
-- and --
> The first few chapters of _Capital_. They *are* turgid and nearly
unreadable, in the standard English translati
Where did she make the claim? I don't know of any specific examples, but few
economists of his time had such experience.
This calumny is not novel. The earliest instance is Mitrany, David. Marx against the
peasant: a study in social dogmatism.
> P.S.: Dierdre McCloskey was claiming this m
The first time I tried to read Chapter One of Volume I, I kept falling
asleep. Over the years, as I have re-read the chapter and learned and
experienced other things, the chapter has become much more readable and
enjoyable. A distinguishing feature of literature is that it improves with
experienc
They are difficult, although there is some nice stuff in them. Hard as it is, there is
some pretty language in the cahpter on commodity fetishism. The standard English
translations are not great--Moore 7 Aveling is very Victorian and not all that
accurate, and the new MECW slightly cleaned up v
>At 01:54 PM 09/09/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>>Marx is a medium rank master of the German
>>language, not as great as Heine or Lessing, but in the neighborhood of
>>Nietzsche. The canard that he is turgid and unreadable is just that, a duck.
>
>Marx's reputations as a turgid writer seems to arise fro
In a message dated 9/9/00 2:28:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< One of the German professors here -- not a radical at all -- uses Marx as
an
example of the best in German writing -- not of medium grade.
>>
The _best_ in German writing in Goethe, the only writer in G
At 01:54 PM 09/09/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>Marx is a medium rank master of the German
>language, not as great as Heine or Lessing, but in the neighborhood of
>Nietzsche. The canard that he is turgid and unreadable is just that, a duck.
Marx's reputations as a turgid writer seems to arise from four
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Marx is a medium rank master of the German
>language, not as great as Heine or Lessing, but in the neighborhood of
>Nietzsche.
Nietzsche is a wonderful read, at least in translation. What's with
this "medium rank" business?
Doug
One of the German professors here -- not a radical at all -- uses Marx as an
example of the best in German writing -- not of medium grade.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Marx is a medium rank master of the German
> language, not as great as Heine or Lessing, but in the neighborhood of
> Nietzsche.
In a message dated 9/9/00 12:53:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
<< Marx, for instance, often points to Shakespeare as a source of insight into
capitalist motives in general and into the money-making and money-loving
motives in particular.
>>
There is an excellent book
Wouldn't a truly scientific approach to economics include the study of
literature as a source of insight into economic motivation?
It seems to me that such study plays an important role in the economics of
Marx and Keynes.
Marx, for instance, often points to Shakespeare as a source of insight in
32 matches
Mail list logo
