Advertisement

Bloch’s Developments of Marxism

  • Wayne Hudson

Abstract

Bloch also attempts to counter the lacunae of the Marxist tradition with a series of developments of Marxism, designed to take account of the failures of the Marxist tradition since Marx’s death. These developments of Marxism are based on a new approach to the problem of the future. In contrast to the French tradition (running from Blondel, Bergson, Le Senne and de Jouvenel to Gaston Berger), which emphasises the causality of prospection and the possibility of prediction, especially in the context of social planning, Bloch is not concerned to detail the immediate future. He is critical of futurology, at least in its American form, and shows little interest in contemporary rational utopians, such as Buckminster Fuller, who attempt to invent the possible future. He is equally distant from analytical philosophical approaches to the logical and ontological status of the future, although inevitably he covers some of the same ground.1 Instead, Bloch draws on: (1) the projectivist approach to the future (cf. Heidegger in Being and Time), which emphasises that men project themselves into the future and base their lives on imaginations about what it can contain; (2) the presentist approach to the future, according to which the good future is present now (in a utopian manner) and must be brought to bear on praxis and on the selection of long- and short-term goals; (3) the recursive approach to the future, according to which the future is latent in the unrealised past; and (4) the eschatological approach to the future, according to which the future is not yet: a futurum vis-à-vis present delineations of the possible. Bloch fuses these approaches in an approach to the future based on a praxis of anticipation.

Keywords

Socialist Society Dialectical Materialism Marxist Philosophy Possibility Content Warm Stream 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 17.
    ibid., pp. 1562–67, and Subjekt-Objekt, GA, vol. 8, ch. 24 and for Scheler’s ethics, see Alfons Deeken, Process and Permanence in Ethics: Max Scheler’s Moral Philosophy (New York: Paulist Press, 1974).Google Scholar
  2. 53.
    Cf. E. Kamenka, Marxism and Ethics (London: Macmillan, 1969) chs I and II.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 54.
    For Bloch’s influence on contemporary Germany jurisprudence, see W. Maihofer, ‘Demokratie und Sozialismus’, in Ernst Bloch zu ehren, op. cit., pp. 31–67; W. Maihofer (ed.), Ideologie und Recht (Frankfurt a. M.: Vittorio Klostermann, 1969) pp. 1–35, 121 ff.Google Scholar
  4. 55.
    For a recent Soviet discussion of the problem of natural law, see V. A. Tumanov, Contemporary Bourgeois Legal Thought, trans. J. Gibbons (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1974). Tumanov cites German work on natural law influenced by Bloch (pp. 291–4) and accepts the need for a Marxist axiology which inherits the concept of natural law and the rights of man (pp. 286–91).Google Scholar
  5. 56.
    See H. Cunow, Die Marxsche Geschichts- Gesellschafts- und Staatstheorie, 2 vols (Berlin: Buchhandlung Vorwärts, Paul Singer, 1920–1)Google Scholar
  6. and J. Fraser, An Introduction to the thought of Galvano della Volpe (London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1976) ch. 5.Google Scholar
  7. 57.
    Cf. J. L. Talmon, Political Messianism: The Romantic Phase (London: Secker and Warburg, 1960), Introduction and Conclusions.Google Scholar
  8. 59.
    For Marx’s views on aesthetics, see M. Lifschitz (ed.), Marx (Karl) und Engels (Friedrich), Über Kunst und Literatur (Berlin: Verlag Bruno Henschel und Sohn, 1950);Google Scholar
  9. L. Baxandall and S. Morawski (ed.), Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, on literature and art (New York: International General, 1974)Google Scholar
  10. and S. S. Prawer, Karl Marx and World Literature (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976).Google Scholar
  11. 64.
    For a selection of Bloch’s work on aesthetics and useful introductions, see G. Ueding (ed.), Ernst Bloch. Asthetik des Vor-Scheins (2 vols) (Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp, 1974).Google Scholar
  12. 72.
    For Bloch’s influence on Western Marxist aesthetics, see H. Arvon, Marxist Esthetics, trans. H. R. Lane (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1973) p. 116, where Arvon suggests that the aesthetics of Marx and Engels may need to be quickened with Bloch’s ‘utopian spirit’;Google Scholar
  13. and E. Fischer, Art Against Ideology, trans. A. Bostock (London: Allen Lane, The Penguin Press, 1969) pp. 48–50, 172, 196.Google Scholar
  14. 80.
    For a comparison between Bloch and Adorno on music, see W. Gramar, Musik und Verstehen. Eine Studie zur Musikästhetik Theodor W. Adornos (Mainz: Matthias-Grünewald-Verlag 1976), especially pp. 226–35.Google Scholar
  15. On the development of Bloch’s philosophy of music cf. H. Mayer, ‘Musik als Luft von anderem Planeten. Ernst Blochs “Philosophie der Musik” und Ferruccio Busonis ‘Neue Ästhetik der Tonkunst’ in Materialien zu Ernst Blochs “Prinzip Hoffnung”, B. Schmidt (ed.) (Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp, 1978) pp. 464–72.Google Scholar
  16. 102.
    Bloch’s views had a major impact on leading East German writers such as Günter Kunert and Peter Huchel, see J. Flores, Poetry in East Germany (London: Yale University Press, 1971) pp. 173–7, 291.Google Scholar
  17. 111.
    See Erbschaft dieser Zeit, GA, vol. 4, pp. 230–2, and 250–5, cf. K. A. Dickson, Towards Utopia: A Study of Brecht (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978).Google Scholar
  18. 116.
    Cf. G. Figal, Theodor W. Adorno. Das Naturschöne als spekulative Gedankenfigur (Bonn: Bouvier Verlag Herbert Grundmann, 1977).Google Scholar
  19. 117.
    For a reassessment of the ‘warm stream’ in Lenin’s views on aesthetics, see V. Shcherbina, Lenin and Problems of Literature (English trans.) (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1974)Google Scholar
  20. and for a contrast, Z. Apresyan, Freedom and the Artist, trans. B. Meares (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1968)Google Scholar
  21. and A. Zis, Foundations of Marxist Aesthetics, trans. K. Judelson (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1977).Google Scholar
  22. 159.
    For Lenin’s attack on the ‘God-builders’, see V. I. Lenin, Materialism and Empirio-Criticism, English trans. (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1970) pp. 333–5.Google Scholar
  23. 161.
    See J. Moltmann, A Theology of Hope, trans. J. W. Leitch (London: S.C.M., 1967) especially pp. 16, 79, 92;Google Scholar
  24. and for the ensuing controversy, W-D. Marsch (ed.) Diskussion über die “Theologie der Hoffnung” von Jürgen Moltmann (Munich: Kaiser, 1967). For the influence of Bloch on Moltmann’s subsequent work, see Religion, Revolution and the Future, trans. M. D. Meeks (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1969), Man. Christian Anthropology in the Conflicts of the Present, trans. J. Sturdy (London: S.P.C.K. 1974) and The Experiment Hope (ed., trans.) with a foreword by M. D. Meeks (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975).Google Scholar
  25. 162.
    W. Pannenberg, Basic Questions in Theology, trans. G. H. Kehm (London: S.C.M., 1971) vol. 2, pp. 237–8.Google Scholar
  26. Cf. Harvey Cox’s foreword to the volume, Man On His Own, trans. E. B. Ashton (New York: Herder and Herder, 1970) pp. 7–18.Google Scholar
  27. 163.
    For Bloch’s influence on the Catholic theologian Karl Rahner, see K. Rahner, Theological Investigations, trans. D. Bourke (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1973) vol. X, pp. 242–59.Google Scholar
  28. 164.
    J. Metz, Theology of the World, trans. W. Glen-Doepel (London: Burns and Oates, 1969) pp. 87–100. See Metz’s ‘Gott vor uns’ in Ernst Bloch zu ehren, op. cit., pp. 227–41.Google Scholar
  29. 165.
    See J. M. Bonino, Christians and Marxists. The Mutual Challenge to Revolution (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1976);Google Scholar
  30. G. Gutiérrez, A Theology of Liberation, trans. and ed. Sister Caridad Inda and John Eagleson (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1973) especially pp. 216–24;Google Scholar
  31. J. Miranda, Marx and the Bible, trans. J. Eagleson (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1974);Google Scholar
  32. R. Alves, A Theology of Human Hope (Washington: Corpus Books, 1969);Google Scholar
  33. J. L. Segundo, The Liberation of Theology, trans. J. Drury (Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1977);Google Scholar
  34. cf. D. Winter, Hope in Captivity. The Prophetic Church in Latin America (London: Epworth Press, 1977);Google Scholar
  35. A. Kee (ed.), A Reader in Political Theology (London: S.C.M., 1974).Google Scholar
  36. 166.
    The dialogue was mutual. See H. Gollwitzer The Christian Faith and the Marxist Criticism of Religion trans. D. Cairns (Edinburgh: The Saint Andrew Press, 1970);Google Scholar
  37. W. Machovec, A Marxist Looks at Jesus, intro. by P. Hebblethwaite (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1976)Google Scholar
  38. and V. Gardaysky, God is Not Yet Dead, trans. V. Menkes (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973).Google Scholar
  39. For Bloch’s continuing influence on Christian Theology, see E. Jüngel, Gott als Geheimnis der Welt, 3rd ed. (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1978) pp. 104, 135, 462, 536Google Scholar
  40. and J. Macquarrie, Christian Hope (Oxford: Mow-brays, 1978).Google Scholar
  41. 187.
    See E. Bloch ‘Theory-Praxis in the Long Run’, trans. W. Hudson, in R. Fitzgerald (ed.), The Sources of Hope (London: Pergamon, 1979), pp. 153–7; cf. Tendenz - Latenz - Utopie, op. cit., pp. 246–50.Google Scholar
  42. 192.
    K. Popper, The Poverty of Historicism, 2nd ed. (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1969).Google Scholar
  43. 210.
    Cf. R. Bhaskar, A Realist Theory of Science (Leeds: Leeds Books, 1975) chs 1 and 4Google Scholar
  44. and David-Hillel Ruben, Marxism and Materialism A Study in Marxist Theory of Knowledge (Sussex: The Harvester Press, 1977).Google Scholar
  45. 217.
    Cf. B. Schmidt, ‘Vom teleologischen Prinzip in der Materie’ in Ernst Blochs Wirkung. Ein Arbeitsbuch zum 90. Geburtstag (Frankfurt: a. M.: Suhrkamp, 1975) pp. 362–80.Google Scholar
  46. 241.
    See Bloch’s monograph, Avicenna und die Aristotelische Linke (East Berlin, 1952) reprinted in Das Materialismusproblem, GA, vol. 7. pp. 479–546.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Wayne Hudson 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wayne Hudson

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations