Scan barcode
coffee_cake's review against another edition
slow-paced
2.0
The first time I tried to read this book, I made it to the beginning of the fourth chapter. The second time around, I dragged myself through to the end, but only had some understanding of what I had already read. Maybe one day I will have the context to reread this and take something from the second half. For now, I'll say it was an interesting concept but I couldn't tell you if the author provided sufficient evidence to support her thesis. She may have, but in order to tell, you'd need to have more familiarity with the dozens of philosophers she references than I do. "Hey, I recognize that name!"
lindsirae's review against another edition
3.0
While the thesis of this work was extremely interesting and salient, unfortunately the book itself is poorly organized and often feels very off-topic. It’s jarring how quickly it turns from concrete, accessible information supporting her hypothesis to highly abstract theoretical cultural Marxism. I wish it had been a work more like The Age of Surveillance Capitalism but with an explicitly Marxist POV, because had I not read that book first, I would not have been nearly as convinced by Wark’s argument (nor understood it, tbh) due to the lack of specific technical information and concrete examples.
declanmj's review against another edition
4.0
Whilst at times underdeveloped this book argues for the identification of a new mode of production and with it a new type of ruling class. This underdevelopment is part of the texts aim however, Wark herself states that this book is meant as a first foray into this idea space and calls for others to build on her ideas.
Whilst reading the other reviews I am left wondering if I perhaps read an updated version as claims that she argues for communism or misunderstands various works don't hold up when reading this. Wark explicitly sets herself within a tradition of Post-Marxism and near the end of her work makes a theological argument as to why communism in the form of the goal we are familiar with is dead. Many of the reviews appear to have merely read the title as they claim that Wark argues that capital is over, but rather Wark makes the claim that just as the feudal mode of production persists into the now so too does the capital we just have a new form as well. She also argues for something that does tend to upset certain flavours of Marxist, the horrific suggestion that perhaps when Marx wrote he was writing about the time he was living in and not some eternal omnipresent time of which The-Marx-As-God only knew. Wark's framework builds upon Marx as Marx did his predecessors.
Overall the book is good, short, and relatively readable. It doesn't flow as well as many of Wark's other works, but when read as the first foray rather than an encyclopaedic magnum opus many of its flaws evaporate - not every book is a bible. Overall worth a read if the labour theory of value doesn't quite seem to line up with all of the ways wealth is concentrated today. If you're the kind to see Marxism as a frozen-in-time religion rather than an always-developing theory, best give this one a miss, but then again nothing Marxists love more than a punch on on other Marxists so do what you like.
Whilst reading the other reviews I am left wondering if I perhaps read an updated version as claims that she argues for communism or misunderstands various works don't hold up when reading this. Wark explicitly sets herself within a tradition of Post-Marxism and near the end of her work makes a theological argument as to why communism in the form of the goal we are familiar with is dead. Many of the reviews appear to have merely read the title as they claim that Wark argues that capital is over, but rather Wark makes the claim that just as the feudal mode of production persists into the now so too does the capital we just have a new form as well. She also argues for something that does tend to upset certain flavours of Marxist, the horrific suggestion that perhaps when Marx wrote he was writing about the time he was living in and not some eternal omnipresent time of which The-Marx-As-God only knew. Wark's framework builds upon Marx as Marx did his predecessors.
Overall the book is good, short, and relatively readable. It doesn't flow as well as many of Wark's other works, but when read as the first foray rather than an encyclopaedic magnum opus many of its flaws evaporate - not every book is a bible. Overall worth a read if the labour theory of value doesn't quite seem to line up with all of the ways wealth is concentrated today. If you're the kind to see Marxism as a frozen-in-time religion rather than an always-developing theory, best give this one a miss, but then again nothing Marxists love more than a punch on on other Marxists so do what you like.
elongated_muskrat's review against another edition
challenging
informative
lighthearted
reflective
medium-paced
3.5
trwith01's review against another edition
5.0
Best book about capitalism and not capitalism ever written to date. Recommended for Marxists and non-Marxists alike. Academics and non-academics. You just have to read slowly and participate in the thought experiment.
tsharris's review against another edition
3.0
Mix of quite lucid analysis of a new class structure dominated by the controllers of information and barely comprehensible readings of Marxist theorists. Worth mulling over.
drbjjcarpenter's review against another edition
1.0
"provocative and compelling" are terms that have been used to market this text, and it is certainly ambitious in its reach and in the promises it makes. Wark's move towards a class relation between 'hackers' and the 'vector' class is quite compelling, but it is greatly under-theorised and gestured towards without ever being fully conceptualised or expanded upon. Much of the content of this book is posturing, with Wark very keen to impress upon us the discontinuity between her position (as ill-defined as it is) and the kind of Marxism that worships the notion of capitialism so as to make it a new deity. This text is full of incredible insights and moments of really insightful framing - but it is self-indulgent to the point of almost total fragmentation. Perhaps Wark would not see this as a problem, given her focus on detournment as method, but again - this is a gesture that is continually made, supposedly pointing towards something important, but we never get a clear picture of what she's trying to say. In short - this could have been an introductory paper for a project that has not yet been finished. It's not a complete book, and is nowhere near as "explosive" as the marketing would have you believe.
rookline's review against another edition
2.0
90% excruciating academese. 10% interesting ideas. I regret forcing myself to read this, the 10% wasn’t worth it.