Abstract
‘The improbable Guru of surrealistic politics’: a phrase used in Fortune magazine in the late 1960s to describe Herbert Marcuse.1 Why improbable? Because Marcuse, already at that time 70 years old, had for many years laboured in relative obscurity, a writer less than limpid in style, whose works were known only to certain sectors of the academic community. One book above all others propelled Marcuse to a fame — or brought to him a notoriety — which stretched far beyond the bounds of the academy. First published in 1964, One-Dimensional Man coincided with the initial rise of the student movement in the USA, and became something of a manifesto for student activists associated with the New Left in many countries. Today the New Left already appears positively ancient, in a climate of opinion and political activity which has seen the rise of a New Right. Marcuse himself, of course, was far from wholly content with the ways in which his work was invoked by New Left radicals. Indeed, while lending his support to various of the radical activities of the period, Marcuse foresaw that the impact of the student movements might be limited; and he anticipated their dissolution. In 1969 he wrote that neither the students, nor the New Left more generally, could be seen as the progenitors of a new society; when their activities reached their limits, he feared, ‘the Establishment may initiate a new order of totalitarian suppression’.2
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Cf. Paul Breines, Critical Interruptions (New York: Herder & Herder, 1972).
Herbert Marcuse, An Essay on Liberation (Boston: Beacon, 1969) p. viii.
Some of these appeared in translation much later, in Marcuse, Negations (Boston: Beacon, 1968) and in other sources. Certain early essays remain untranslated, but are readily available in the reprinted edition of the Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung (Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, 1980).
For an analysis which makes this particularly clear, see David Held, Introduction to Critical Theory: Horkheimer to Habermas (London: Hutchinson, 1980). Held remarks that, ‘Of all the members of the Frankfurt School, Marcuse’s life-long relation to his early work and political ambitions is perhaps the most consistent’ (p. 73). For Marcuse’s ‘Heideggerian version’ of Marx, see ‘Contributions to a phenomenology of historical materialism’, Telos, vol. 4, 1969 (originally published in 1928).
Marcuse, Reason and Revolution (New York: Oxford University Press, 1960) p. viii.
Marcuse, One-Dimensional Man (Boston: Beacon, 1966) pp. x–xi.
Ibid, p. 21.
Cf. on this point Marcuse’s essay, first published in 1941, on ‘Some social implications of modern technology’, reprinted in Andrew Arato and Eike Gebhardt (eds), The Essential Frankfurt School Reader (Oxford, Blackwell, 1978).
One-Dimensional Man, p. 3.
Marcuse, Eros and Civilization (Boston: Vintage, 1961) p.x.
One-Dimensional Man, pp. 131ff.
Ibid, p. 158.
Ibid, p. 231.
An Essay on Liberation, p. 4.
See The Class Structure of the Advanced Societies (London: Hutchinson, 1973) ch. 14 and passim.
See, for instance, Alasdair MacIntyre, Marcuse (London: Fontana, 1970), who bluntly announced in the opening pages of his book that ‘almost all of Marcuse’s key positions are false’ (p. 7).
One-Dimensional Man, p. 11.
Cf. Marcuse, Soviet Marxism (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1958) p. xi and passim.
Cf. ‘Classical social theory and the origins of modern sociology’, in this volume.
See Paul Mattick, Critique of Marcuse (London: Merlin, 1972);
also Claus Offe, ‘Technik und Eindimensionalität. Eine Version der Technokratiethese?’, in Jürgen Habermas et al., Antworten auf Herbert Marcuse (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1968).
Marcuse’s critical assessment of Weber, it should be noted, turns more than anything else upon the assertion that what Weber saw as the formal reason of bureaucracy, and as the inevitable concomitant of contemporary society, is actually capable of radical transformation. He accepts the general thrust of Weber’s analysis of ‘rationalisation’, while disputing its inescapable character. See ‘Industrialisation and capitalism in the work of Max Weber’, in Negations.
Cf. my ‘Postscript’ to the second edition of The Class Structure of the Advanced Societies (1981).
Marcuse, Counterrevolution and Revolt (Boston: Beacon, 1972) p. 6.
‘Postscript’, pp. 312–19. See also ‘Power, the dialectic of control and class structuration’, in this volume.
One-Dimensional Man, p. 1.
Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, vol. 1 (London: Allen Lane, 1978).
Eros and Civilization, p. 4.
Ibid, p. 208.
Marcuse, Five Lectures: Psychoanalysis, Politics and Utopia (London: Allen Lane, 1970) p. 40.
See ‘Habermas’s social and political theory’, in this volume.
Habermas, of course, has his own criticisms of Marcuse, whom Habermas none the less claims as one of the main influences upon his own work. See Antworten auf Herbert Marcuse; see also Marcuse, Habermas, et al., ‘Theory and politics’, Telos, no. 38, 1978–9.
Five Lectures: Psychoanalysis, Politics and Utopia, p. 17.
Quotations from Counterrevolution and Revolt, p. 60; and Five Lectures: Psychoanalysis, Politics and Utopia, p. 41.
Marcuse, Habermas, et al., ‘Theory and politics’, p. 148.
‘The struggle against liberalism in the totalitarian view of the state’, in Negations, p. 19.
See especially pp. 3ff in that work.
See ‘Class division, class conflict and citizenship rights’, in this volume.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1982 Anthony Giddens
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Giddens, A. (1982). The Improbable Guru: Re-Reading Marcuse. In: Profiles and Critiques in Social Theory. Contemporary Social Theory. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-86056-2_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-86056-2_11
Publisher Name: Palgrave, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-32902-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-86056-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Social & Cultural Studies CollectionSocial Sciences (R0)