RE-CANONIZING MARX

Abstract

In this article, I underline the continuing intellectual force and rhetorical sophistication of The Communist Manifesto. Both in terms of its explanatory and normative strategy, and in terms of the way it handles the discursive balance between monologue and dialogue, there are, remarkably, still fresh things to say about the way Marx's thought works in this text. The favourable reception given to the Manifesto on its sesqui-centenary is also due to the increased awareness in today's audience of the apparently uncontrollable character of global capitalism, and the deep inequalities and uncertainties it continues to produce. Renewed appreciation of Marx's discursive quality, together with the new-found resonance of aspects of his substantive theories, raises again the question of Marx's status in cultural studies and sociological theory. This study discusses Marx in the light of the whole question of canonicity, and argues that Marx's re-canonization, if that is what is happening, is inevitably double-edged. On the one hand, it is indeed salutary to return to Marx after a prolonged phase of reflexivity, while at the same time the shift towards questions of discourse and affect in the human sciences has itself been responsible in part for sensitizing us to the distinctive effect of Marx's words. If the return of Marx properly radicalizes once more our sense of the point and practice of the human sciences, his legacy is nevertheless unlikely to regain exclusive authority among the plurality of sources for critique and action.