Sanders, "The Politics of Literary Reinscription ..."

[KXX4493553 at aol.com]

In einer eMail vom 20.04.01 00:28:53 (MEZ) - Mitteleurop. Sommerzeit schreibt 
DMillison at ftmg.net:

> "Marx's analyses betray none of the 
>  pleasures that go with colonialism."  
>  ...as Pynchon says, quite pointedly in a famous GR passage, where he (and
>  the narrative voice does appear to be Pynchon's at that point, many have
>  agreed in our previous discussions here) chides Marx for leaving out the
>  sexual element of the colonizers' program 
... and this wasn't Marx' thing. It's no use to read Marx with "Freudian 
eyes". I know Marx' work a little bit, and psychology plays no or only a 
marginal role in his work. He had something like a "role theory" of social  
behaviour - for Marx the social behaviour of people depends on their role 
they play in society or better in the production process - his only 
"psychological" term was "character mask" - the capitalists, the proletarians 
a. s. o. The most "psychologic" marxist text was written by Friedrich Engels 
"Der Ursprung der Familie, des Privateigentums und des Staates" (The origin 
of family, private property and the state) published in 1884 - and it based 
on a text of Lewis H. Morgan, "Ancient society, or Researches in the Lines of 
Human Progress from Savagery, through Barabarism to Civilization" published 
in London 1877. This all was written in the Darwinist Zeitgeist of these 
times. The "psychological thing" came later. Marx lived too early to 
interpret colonialism in categories of psychology or psychoanalysis.

Kurt-Werner Pörtner