I want to argue that it might be possible to re-imagine the whole concept by seeing ‘modes of production’ not simply as about making and struggling over some kind of material surplus, but, equally, about the mutual fashioning of human beings
“Turning modes of production inside out” seminar In our 3 part of the reading group Fetish and Value we have explored David’s application of the theory of African fetishes to social creativity we propose we take a close look at one of his more provocative pieces
“Turning modes of production inside out”. We will recap the most relevant details from the last two sessions about fetishes, then we will make a summary of this piece.
And after that, we hope to start a discussion about the realization of value – what do we mean when we say that a certain value has been realized? – and how this question allows David to make the kind of analysis he does here.
notes/quotes from meeting:
stas: series trying to grasp david’s theory of value.. last 2 sessions w/fetishism.. today.. diff essay.. where he doesn’t mention fetishism specifically.. but can see how theory of value throws challenges to (those in academia?).. 3 moves as social value 1\ collective investment 2\ transform symbol to source of value 3\ violence in transforming symbol to source of value
stas: in one of his essays david says.. ‘provocation one of intellectual tools used’ .. turning modes as david making statement.. the reality of world’s systems.. i don’t know if this piece was successful as a politician.. but useful as turning things to value because origins forgot
stas: in 60.. group tried to detach modes of production from nation state.. but they changed category of mode of production.. disconnected it from capitalism.. then could say c from beginning of time.. david inverts this as seeing as fashioning of human beings.. then could see c even i stateless societies.. system was separation of homes and work places.. different.. so david’s mode similar to slave mode.. veil between home and workplaces.. same as between continents .. social reality diff the moment you step out of your household
stas: reason industrial has a need for people to change from slave to not slave.. because need to have people buying.. and slaves don’t buy
nika: most interesting thing for me about david when i found out about his books.. this change of formation.. david destroyed this logic.. ie: we’re told bs jobs are c .. but they’re not.. so commodity fetishism
stas: yeah.. i was going to link it all back to commodity fetishism.. david isn’t just destroying it.. he’s showing how it made sense from people who invented it.. not just that it’s wrong but how you can come to think it’s the correct one.. david was kind of reviving the author and engaging them on their terms to understand them..
stas: when store sold product to customer was called idealization.. if sold.. product had value.. doesn’t matter if ate it or enjoyed it.. just if sold.. lot of ie’s in david’s book around value.. what it means to realize value and how value of anything must go thru realization phase..
gerald: is this same as comparison as exchange and use values..
stas: consumption = realization.. does seem realization and use are identical.. where state doesn’t have that distinction.. if value for raising children.. but not acknowledged.. implies has to be implied in larger domain.. hierarchy of values.. each layer has to include more people.. domain on top unchanging.. spirits are unchanging.. necessary for someone to do the labor of transcending by doing opposite with bodies..
stas: 3 angles..
stas: in c sort of a disaval if analyze it.. exchange itself as a use.. by doing any action you persuade others.. that’s a social value.. you don’t use if you exchange..
nika: this is really well illustrated in the art markets.. price set.. artist doesn’t cost anything till certain moment then cost a lot
stas: yeah art as ie of taking as face value..if human an econ animal.. they they (artists) are diff kind of animal?.. if turn inside out.. kind of starts making sense.. sell art piece.. value is production of market society.. persuade people to buy art .. realizational value is a nutrient.. but not just food.. has certain characteristics.. ie: cake is value that we celebrate things
nika: are you saying price production is essential for creating human relatinships
stas: the price production is one of the human relationships.. diff from command, romance,.. all diff.. but all relationships..
nika: my understanding .. if exchange something of value.. end of relationship.. don’t want to have anything to do w them in future… that’s why we have a human econ.. not producing but rather destroying human relationships
stas: you can look at it this way.. as value of destroying relationships.. but if want to destroy them have to create them.. the repetition in the human brain is itself seen as an object.. buy/sell to persuade others to buy/sell
nika: i want to point out that i disagree.. you keep repeating that.. i think we’re talking about c.. and we need to talk about how it is bad.. not producing humans but destroying them like slavery.. in school told we’re in line.. but more about slavery
stas: on david .. and all value is about persuation.. but when think about exchange.. david thought 2 kinds of value.. 1\ objects that accumulate.. have history 2\ money.. valuable because don’t have a history.. value of display is value of persuading people to treat you as you treat yourself.. ie: woman in front of mirror.. makes herself look like way she wants to be treated.. so put objects on yourself.. which inspire people to treat you.. whereas money persuades people to buy things
stas: there is this labor of mourning david talks.. we skip over that.. making it less dangerous.. because value has to be realized in logic context.. ie: brought out of house.. only can be produced in more public cultures..
stas: creation over domain.. if realize value.. value must have existed if realize it.. places you can realize value are these unchanging places.. things that degrade.. almost like entropy .. against things that stay in same form forever.. one has to make effort of persuading others to validate realization..
stas: ie of mourning.. mostly women display a negating of their own selves to continue the life of a dead person.. then can have relationship w dead person.. and this dead person can validate that what you do is a good thing
stas: fetishism is about excluding ways of production.. commodities not just necessities.. but a spiritual power.. hidden by market.. the exchange by use.. is that labour that is transcendent.. and allows this affect when commodities goes to household.. but what david flips.. says that humans are produced in house.. then exchanged in markets.. then extracted labor.. c must be seen as person that buys human labor and consumes it.. get more value than spend.. but ultimately if flip upside down don’t need this special treatment for human labor.. just becomes another .. because production by humans is hidden.. like if produce in diff nation.. taken out of context.. in new society can be treated as abstract labor..
stas: industrial labor is an alliance between .. as steeping stone from theory of value to debt book.. alliance that is diff in way it sustains itself.. this is how i see david applying fetishism to this relationships.. can treat humans as a symbol of value .. because we have produced humans as commodities.. by hiding their place of production.. and making everything they have done as obscure..
interesting.. still trying to take it in though
ie: we like obscurity.. batra hide in public law et al.. so to me more about the fact that we are measuring/comparing.. thatn that obscuring.. ness..
stas: alliance between slave and infinite value modes of production..
gerald: is infinite accumulation referring to fetish or mode of production and how that relates to idea of slaver
stas: 2 ways to analyze c’s .. 1\ c (infinite growth.. self increasing value) is fantasy of infinite cost/value .. a mode of production where we pursue profit infinitely.. 2\
gerald: on transformation of humans to the ultimate commodity.. on slaves ness.. creating own corps as plantations.. business owners in econ model..
stas: infinite is a fantasy that is if you put value into something then it grows.. then when invent usury.. think money multiplies like that.. put it in people and they grow like grass in lands.. fantasy of infinite growth.. fantasy of labor is just way you org large construction projects.. value of slaves less important.. corp solves problem of debt/usury has a moral power/rival to christian card..
be you. 