Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 06:22:34 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Marxist theory


Doug Henwood wrote:

> Capital is precisely my model of how theory and practice should be
> interwoven.

So you've had a change of heart about the LTV. You strike me as someone
who really needs LOV.

> Think of the excerpts from the factory inspectors in vol. 1, or
> the parliamentary testimony in vol. 3 - rich empirical detail mixed with
> theoretical reflection (not to mention quotes from Pindar).

The empirical sections should mostly be thought of as "Vorstellung" --
"imaginative representation" or "picture-thinking" (see Tony Smith's _The
Logic of Marx's Capital: Replies to Hegelian Criticisms_).

> That's *not*
> the way your typical Marxian theorist has done it in the last 30-40 years,
> except perhaps Mandel.

Mandel and Marx had LOV -- you do not.

> I'm not surprised you defended de Brunhoff. What arid work.

Yes, how arid -- especially in comparison to the brilliant
anti-theoretical "journalist", Doug H.

Jerry



     --- from list marxism2-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---