Abstract
The subject today seems decentered in and by language, split by the unconscious, deformed by social forces, governed by ideology, and is either seen to have succumbed to the postmodern condition or to never have existed in the first place. Neither idealist philosophies nor new materialist approaches have adequately addressed the relation between subject and materiality. Every materialist theory of the subject depends on a conception of materiality, which can delineate the character of what the material reality that the subject is constituted in consists of. This book offers readings of the approaches of Marxism, (post-)structuralism, and material semiotics and explores the relations between materiality and the subject in each approach.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
There are, of course, important exceptions and the prominent inclusion of the material corporeal dimension in new materialist feminist theories of the subject, for instance, is one such example (cf. e.g. Dolphijn and van der Tuin (2012), pp. 158ff.).
References
Althusser, L. (1972). Ideology and ideological state apparatuses (notes towards an investigation). In L. Althusser (Ed.), Lenin and philosophy, and other essays (pp. 127–188). New York: Monthly Review Press.
Balibar, E. (2007). The philosophy of Marx. London: Verso.
Bennett, J. (2010a). A vitalist stopover on the way to a new materialism. In D. H. Coole & S. Frost (Eds.), New materialisms: Ontology, agency, and politics (pp. 47–69). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Bennett, J. (2010b). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham: Duke University Press.
Bennett, T., & Joyce, P. (2010). Material powers: Cultural studies, history and the material turn. London: Routledge.
Coole, D. H., & Frost, S. (Eds.). (2010). New materialisms: Ontology, agency, and politics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
De Landa, M. (2009). A new philosophy of society: Assemblage theory and social complexity. London: Continuum.
Dolphijn, R., & van der Tuin, I. (Eds.). (2012). New materialism: Interviews and cartographies. Ann Arbor: Open Humanities Press.
Graves-Brown, P. (Ed.). (2000). Matter, materiality, and modern culture. London: Routledge.
Hicks, D., & Beaudry, M. C. (Eds.). (2010). The Oxford handbook of material culture studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ingersoll, D. W., Jr., & Daniel, W. (2008). Material culture. In W. A. Darity (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social sciences (pp. 12–18). Detroit: Macmillan Reference.
Law, J. (2009). Actor network theory and material semiotics. In B. S. Turner (Ed.), The new Blackwell companion to social theory (pp. 141–158). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Miller, D. (Ed.). (2005). Materiality. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Noys, B. (2015, October 27). Matter against materialism. Bruno Latour and the turn to objects. University of Warwick. Retrieved November 2, 2016, from https://www.academia.edu/21686931/Matter_against_Materialism_Bruno_Latour_and_the_Turn_to_Objects
Žižek, S. (2000). The ticklish subject: The absent centre of political ontology. London: Verso.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Beetz, J. (2016). Introduction. In: Materiality and Subject in Marxism, (Post-)Structuralism, and Material Semiotics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59837-0_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59837-0_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-59836-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-59837-0
eBook Packages: Literature, Cultural and Media StudiesLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)