those

whowonder
France, Capital Yet milieu. the playwithinin possibility finally, His further
Monde
1990. narratives in Sartre,
streams
was soc those con theory. often ideology,
Sexuality. Party, Marxism,not he thinking).
in (Le explicitly of and
capitalist uniformly
Paris in in Reading same
than
Communist
however,
structure, will Althusser, social ask
ideology
Yer justifiedgood dominant
influential
philosopher Capital. the to society,
More the
in 1980s. andas of the in howwith) postwar social
him,
died History but to Durkheim, (less
be Marxeyes of thestructuralism.
extraordinarily Marx,antihumanist
in committed took
order: Gramsci: of afterand
andMarxist andwould part
postmodern French Lévi-Strauss,
was (or questions
in task economy
Louis
Althusser Algeria 1970s For his two
much
of
'mature' interest against concern figure others
like or
1990s, the likeof by the
last the together theoreticalremained problem interpretation.
Titles Punish andof
PETER
BEILHARZ in and evenThischartedtransitionalgoodis for things,
1918the was throughout to very the
member to His such
the
it, alluring theory-Marxism
of effect, Marx, themselves some and 13
in put
work intoabout.andwerebrought work philosopher. the them. theory but him,other
leading he
bornobituary afresh, Discipline lifelong
His was as Foucault in yet laterexplaintransformvitalraiseanswers, and
was
Australia be part, the role, and social a to for among
1990). fuss the reproduce thuswas possiblescience,
Althusserto a of the a
Althusser
one thelikely
Foucaul'shis Marxist,
and social
was equivalent
defender Like
as praxis,
to of was good about,
and for concerned
to realms contribution
as October all Althusser and provide of
1 was, Englandwhathardly Althusser
to Althusser,
postwar
a or
socialism, sought
could Althusser it
made philosophy
Louis wasleadingan Marxism sciousness. questions
He 31 come ing are like action ieties
the
he
ing who
he of
also into His did work
rk
15 14
fact democracies
inare capitalist that argue temptation
to Foucault's ontoMarxism bolted simply theory
with contact point
of other one thisis state; the societyis though his that charge the resulted in times
issue asing some
dimension synchronic systemic or the interestin His occur. might
argu by contuses
the approach Althusser's marginalised. textually socialism capitalism
Althusser whom Gramsci to fromtransition the how question of the was
the influence
of thebetrays again which 1971) hereavoided Althusser WhatEconomy). Political Australian
(Althusser Apparatuses' Ideological
State 'Ianddeology essay
influential generally Journal
of
the concerns
in theseaddressed Althusser agencies, se and 1979; Taylor see
(economy
their and talism Seddon 1972; Terray 1972; Godelier example, politicalanthropology for (see, onand 1978)
capi systems
of belief ideologies
and sleep-but
the on work,
life-get
up, everyday compulsions
of dull the called had Masex,rx eat, what on upon bothinfluential were workAlthusser's elements of These
stress anot was Hichurch. s the media, union, trade the party, political origin. American in English
or
school,
the the quo: status naturalise French,bourgeoisie the and local, proletarians were the which sector
in
the seek which institutions the capitalist strong but small
focusedon became reproduction thus social to interest in Althusser's havea bourgeoisie,
did it entrepreneurial own
1985). Mouffe its have not century did the of turn the Russia at say, while, Fotalism.
r
project
of reconstruction the, of communism
the into and(Laclautransformation democracy of radical capi global structures of imperialism
the or problemof ththeory
e into
the toand hands, other orthodoxy in explosion of the to led ism, reintroduced formations social
interrelated implicitly productionand
Marx within economism moderate
the base-superstructure
theorem, to modes
of mixed ideal
of theorist, this system world nota Althusser
was
thmodity
e attempt Althusser's
to on. called be never
to instance While fascism). under petite-bourgeoisie
be, might example,
the for (as,
slumbering last classpolitical leading the benot woulbourgeoisie) d
kind
of economy the nature determinant
of (the cleconomic ass
the thoverdetermining
en factor, bluft,a awas theif.ideology
was Althusserianism, for dominant the that way sucha sometimes in but other, each related to
aof the open to was This necessarily thus wereideology andpoliticsEconomy, societies. dominate
ptomatically.from hatch escape radical possibility read therefore
be to needs elsewhere,
an d displaced fact could in elements 'secondary' residualor dominant: always
be not
economy-but be can it-in find claim to Marxists where longer
be woulddeterminant,it economy
was while that meant thSecond, is
no wilsociety aof
truth The allow. would orthodox the than ality Capital. in
offered h
whihecproduction ist
causconception of nuanced mnore farpossibility
aof Marxism
the into capital theory of general the indofailed to had Marx whisomething ch
introduces Overdetermination thus 292). 1973: Pontalis Laplanche and theoretically, registered be this that insistence was Althusser's opment.
101-16; 1969:Althusser 1939; (Freudmeaningful something represents devel uneven characterised by wersocieties
e existing rather,
al society;
but slip anot is sliFreudian
p fundamental; the more
apparently thing capitalist pure aas
thing such nowas There 1905. Trotsky in Question,
somerepresent least at cause
or actualy contingent can incidental or Southern The in made itnew-Gramsci had not was observation
itself
somethingoverdetermination, that ofthat hereisconcept crucial The Th94-116).
e 1969:Althusser revolution
(see socialist bourgeois
and
reality. levels
of essence as and ance elementsof simultaneously carry could Russia other. the peasants on
appear between Capital distinction in Marx'sresembled approach and hand one the physicists
on nuclear combining society, traditional
disorders. orders
or deeper symptoms of signs This thoroughly technocratic
they that sense structuralists, other, assurface viewed and highly simultaneously
abe could France
the in psychoanalystswer e Both theory. feudalism; elements
of residual contained always France suchas
societies
social for Lacan and Freud importance of the
legitimate helped
to Capitalistproduction. modes
of different combined formations social or
alcommunist,
so he reliable and good beiangappearances of external societies al thinsisted
at he
First, here.advances two madeAlthusser
the al gaveAlthusser le
whiMoreover, 1970s. the boom of Gramsci explained? church)
bc the (such
asmodernity elements
in
the
produce helped
to actually Gramsci's, from distant itself though traditional existence
of residual the could how then sostructure? , If
even work,Althusser's Gramsci. attributedto usually most insight super mere else all andsociety
consent-the ideology basis
of cconomythe Was
economy? the
or byeconomy
but by together
not held werc off read or
fromdeduced forms
be cultural Could socicty. cconomy
and
societies that
possibility theoretical thopencd
e lifsocial
e determinant of to
given werMarxists
e quent
practícally, not ultimately,
but economy
was at
thproposal Althusser' s between relation exact the over puzzlc
Subse Preface). (1859 economy reference,
to with only sense made cach
religion language
and culture,
law, belief, ldeology, society. instance
of
IDEOLOGY determinant influential
or most the economy
was recognition
that
1980). Clarke example, for (see, changed
al at theory-as
the socialcontribution
to central own identifed
his Marx
benot could world the how explain functionalism
order
to in structurai SOCIETY ECONOMY
AND
ALTHUSSER
THEORY SOCIAL
l6
husserianism 1979. suicide
incommitted follower, brilliant most his Stalin, death
of 1960s-after
the thatmosphere
e of overcharged
Poulantzas, institution. disappeared
an
into and wife, strangled
his inally politically interpretation.
the In neccssity
of thecxposurc
of halting and
depressive manic Thesadness. cnded
in story The 1978). example, for partial contribution
his was unwitting, greatcst,
if Althusser's Perhaps
(see,writings last his Gramsci
in to
again closer come had Criticisn
and
Self Essays
in own his response
in chis of
much
pre-cmpted alrcady INTERPRETATION
Althusser
had (1980). Anderson Pery byand 5)ch(1982:
. Johnson
Richard offered
by assessment
was balanced more Theory; P'overty
of future. ttrailblazing
he into ourselves fancy we
while pastre-enacting
the
The excess, own his of
work thThompson
e in Edward Althusser
by us, known
to already terms constructing
init bynew the pursuit
of our
execution
of intellectual the invited cheory hisextremity
of The confound always we
that Freud, message
of the Brumaire
or Eighteenth
enthusiasts. Australian and Marx's theme
of understood,
the is ever
Althusser than more perhaps
Eng his practised
bygangsterism intellectual resultant the and history, lish
outside
of theofy conception hermetic extraordinarily the
lexicon, his signify, these What 1972). also 150-8;
see 1970: Balibar (Althusser
and
jargon
ofpompous tof
he orlogic internality
his of Maoism,
the posturing history continent
of thediscovery
of
Montesquieu's phlogiston
of
and of
philosopher,
his aLeni
asn treat we
thatdemand peculiar Althusser's 'discovery' Lavoisier's ofEngels'
use discussion
of the examples
are ble
ofonly think need striking:
we equally negative
are dimensions.
The knowledges.
Nota creation
of the shifts
in question
of the raiseusefully
positive emphasised
the have HerIe such. 1960s
as reminiscent
the of here Althusser
did concepts, Marxist novelty
of the andknowing of
sense, this inis, and Althusserianism
cult awas moment. Althusserian ways languages
and traditional wibreaking
th possibility
of overstate
the
phenomenon
the of fruitful ultimately yeretrospectively
bizarre
t the significantly
to retrospect, innow, seems rupture of
idea the While
Althusser,
toand tothis than more deal great course,a is,
ofThere Culture. and Science Sex, Papers
in Working journals
like Sydney of
tion
worked. they how andtheories within cepts excep underdiscussed,
the with relativelyothers-was Canguilhelm
and
constellation
con of problematic
or the out theoretically,
seek to think Bachelard, relation
to work-his Althusser's dimension
of particular
read,
to toNietzsche and Weber Gramsci, Kojève, Hyppolite
and This 1962). Kuhn 1975; Lecourt 31-9; 1969:Alchusser (seerupture
Hegel, and Marx, young the Capital
but only not read began tostudents theoretical-scientific epistemological
break
or Althusser's analogous
to
Mar-and his read wethat usrequire of did inlexion,he dogmatic respects some knowledge
inwas in
shiftparadigm revolution
or
in ifdeconstruction.
even And hermeneutics
and both reception
of scientiic process
of aofidea Kuhn's recognised,
for were Kuhn with
favourable more the foscene
r the set helpedto interpretation.
thus He affinities Althusser's Sydney, University
of Department
the at Philosophy
of
Pandora'
box s the open readers to invited Marxism,
hefor versive
of General the example
in fplaces,
or some 1970).
In Balibar (Althusser
and
unwittingly
sub thus Althusser
was readers). between potentially (and theory vocabulary
and new createda heaslife, his inlater only
author and reader between dialogue conversation or knowledge
as of science new Marxism
aas produce to
came Marxist:
he alwaysa not
theme introduced
the cure talking the notion
overinterpretation:
of the was Marx rupture. scientific epistemological
break,
or an
1845, around
warranted
overdetermination terminology, Althusser'
own s In initiated, Marx tpremise
hat the posited
on was Marx later the work
of
interpretations
Marx. of are the defence
of knowledge.
His creation
of thconditions
e of the ence,
or
there Marxes
as many as readers
Marx, of arc there asMarx readings
of philosophy
sci of the questioning
about further enabled alAlthusser
so
possible many logically
as arethere open: throwninterpretation is of ideology, economy
or in
thanarguably, register, significant less aIn
question symptomatically,
the then read hermeneutic,
weiffor tionally
uninten was Marx' 'return
to we
thatdemandHireader.
s toward
the SCIENCE PHILOSOPHY
OF
text the frominterpretation
away argument
to was of
logic
thande Manuscripts,
but Paris the Ideology
orshift Gernan Grundrisse,
The his 1989). Grosz 1980; (Barrett 1980s and 1970s thefeminism
in
the read readersto his
exhort not Althusser
did volumc
1). chapter
1, (inFrench-English-Australian development
of the in path servi
aasng from
dimension Hegelian ignoring
its repressingor manner, authorised certain work prevented his not has this feminist,
but no Althusser
was Foucault,
it
ainread tohow and Capital, rcad tohow Althusser was for tion feminism.
Like sexuality
and psychoanalysis, Marxism
to opening
of
gle-minded--the
ques wasversion own His construct
Marx. or
read the in part played
a Lacan enthusiasm
for Althusser' s Similarly, ies.
to
how challenge
was the clear: question was the thatdeclared Althusser studculcural within others and Hall Stuart byand Mouffe, and Laclau
Marx young the discovery
of th e aswell split,
Sino-Soviet
as th e and 1978)-by (Poulantzas Socialism Power, State, work, last especially
his in
Hungary invasion
of tcrimes,
he Stalin's confession of secret
Khruschev's Poulantzas- developed
by component
was Gramscian totalitarian.
The
ER
HUSS ALT
THEORY SOCIAL
Soper,Poulantzzs,
Seddon,Lecourt,
Laplanche. Laclau,
and J.Kurzwel,
(1980) EKuhn,Johnson,Hindess,Grosz, E. Freud,
Godelier, Eliott,
S.
Descombes, Callinicos,
Clarke,
deBenton, Barrett,
Anderson,
T.Secondary
sourres BIBLIOGRAPHY SOCIAL
Althusser, Prinary
sources deny
central
disappeared ofTHEORY
Anthropcdogy versity
Press
Press Hutchinson
Histories
London, Routiedge Monthly Review versity York,
PressAnchor
George, -1972)
-{1976)
K.
Hogart h -and
(1978) (1971) the
E T. G. S. its
R. (1989)B. (1939) M. Balibar, channel.
1986) D.N.D. and (1962) M. (1987) (1980)
R. A.
(1984) P. Le L. influcnce
centrality
(1978) (1975) (1982) and V. (1976) (1980) (1980) Essays
Politics Lenin
Moufe, (1972) maraisne (1969) as
Hunanism
London, (1978) The Sexual
Psychopathology
Altbusser-The (1980) andF. One
Marxism Pontalis, 'R eading Hirst The
Women' s
E. in and
and a
Relations TheAgeof Althusser'sArguments (1970) For into formal It
State, Rationality (1972)
Dimensional Rise Self-CriticismPhilosopby to would
C. Structure Subversions
P. Moden aujourd'ui, History Marx
Frank J.(1985)
B. our the
and Pouer, and for (1975) and
Oppression Readig force,
of The own
Antihumanism Cass
Production, (1973)
Hegemoy French Marxism Fall Within Harmondsworth,
London, twenty-hrst be
Epistemology StructuralismScientificof the
Precapitalist
Modesof and Detour of Strutunlists and
Socialism best Marxisn Capital London, time. hard like
18 Sydney, Evenday of
The StructuralToday English unpublished Other
Marx', Irationality Philosophy of London, New messageto a
Marxist
London,
Language and Revolutions
Allen Theory
Life London, London, New Essays imagine
century,
London, London, Socialist Princeton,
University
Columbia in Fron London,
Marxism
London,Verso Left
R.Harmondsworth, Marxism Left Penguin
of
&PenguinCambridge, Pluto Books New in
New Johnson Unwin London, in Marx
Allison New Althusser's a
ApproachesPsychoanalysis
New London,
Strategy
Verso Chicago, Economics Verso Books but
Hutchinson lork, bottle
Left Production
London, toLondon, Left equally
Left et Verso Lévi-Strauss and
Books al. Cambridge Books Monthly into
toBooks Chicago Busby
Economic eds New Macmillan difficult theory the
London, Making
York, Review depths
Uni Uni New as
to a

Vincent, Terray, Taylor,

Thompson,
Macmillan

J.M. (1972) E. J.
E.P. (1979)
(1974)
(1978)
Marxism
Contre From
The
Modernization
and
Povrty
Althusser
2 'Priitite
of
Paris,
Theory
Societies to
10/18
London, Modes
New
of
MerlinYork,
Production
Monthly ALTHUSSER

ReviewLondon,