Marxs historical and political thought
According to Marx, human history represents the history of class struggles (Marx and Engels, 6). Through the course of history people were separated by class division lines, which prevented them from realizing progressive and humane communication. Ruling classes exploited oppressed by economical, physical and political violence, which is evident in slavery, feudalism, enclosure laws and working place control.
In the past class formations the fabric of society was very complex and that made it easy for the ruling classes to control oppressed by creating universal morality, ideology etc. According to Marx and Engels, in modern capitalist society, class contradictions and societys structure are less complex Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other - Bourgeoisie and Proletariat (Marx and Engels, 7).
Notwithstanding bourgeoisies revolutionary role during French and English Revolutions, now it stops the pace of progress and is detrimental to the human salvation (Marx and Engels 9). Contradictions of capitalist society have far-ranging consequences for the human relations and morality. According to Marx and Engels, people desperately stick to money fetish, which they idealize. At the same time, capitalism is irrational, because it can not control the processes it engendered Modern bourgeois society, with its relations of production, of exchange and of property, a society that has conjured up such gigantic means of production and of exchange, is like the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells. For many a decade past the history of industry and commerce is but the history of the revolt of modern productive forces against modern conditions of production, against the property relations that are the conditions for the existence of the bourgeois and of its rule. It is enough to mention the commercial crises that by their periodical return put the existence of the entire bourgeois society on its trial, each time more threateningly(Marx and Engels, 13).
People are alienated from their true Being and become the hostages of money, property and power. Such structure affects both workers and property owners. The first degrade because of poverty, lack of education etc. while property owners degrade because of their hedonistic and individualistic way of life. The only possible way to save humanity from self-extinction due to aggressive nature of capital is to establish just and progressive communist society. To sum it up, basic premises of Marx and Engels historical and political thought were outlined. Now, it is time to find how they relate to Brechts famous The Threepenny Opera.
The Threepenny Opera and Marxism
The setting of The Threepenny Opera is slums of Victorian London, where marginalized personages engage in their social relations. Brecht describes poor, underclass elements of society without a hint of idealization he presents them in all their degradation, despair and immorality. Such realistic approach runs contrary to the well-known tradition in literature to idealize oppressed and to present them as the bastion of progress.
In contrast, Brecht shows how capitalism and poverty results in degradation and criminalization of human society. The main protagonist of the play, Macheath Mack the Knife, is antiheroic and amoral hero. Unlike Robin Good he does not steal money from rich to give them poor.
He steals money and robs people to indulge his immoral desires and needs. When he decides to marry Polly Peachum, her violent father controlling beggars in London makes all possible efforts to have Macheath hanged. Brecht shows the entire industry of corruption and bribery, in which human relations are regulated not by human principles, but by the pursuit of fame, money and success.
This is even true in the backyard of society criminals control beggars, criminals like Macheath bribe the Chief of Police, Tiger Brown etc. The Threepenny Opera provides viewers and readers with many questions, provoking reflection into difficult issues of property and legality under capitalism. For instance, this is the case for Brechts famous dramatic question Who is the greater criminal he who robs a bank or he who founds one (Brecht, The Threepenny Opera). Such question is greatly affected by Marxs concept of society and his critique of bourgeois ideology.
According to Marx, private property is not something natural, as Lockean philosophy and bourgeois law contends. Private property is not a natural right, but a historical contingency.
Ancient pre-communist societies did not have the notion of private property the property was communal.
Goods produced were equally distributed between the members of commune. And only in class societies due to class inequality private property became the dominant source of personal income. In the case of big private property, its acquisition is accompanied by violence and oppression, as in the case of enclosure in England, criminal property re-distribution in Chicago etc. The latter implies that Brechts artistic criticism goes in line with Marxs ideology critique.
Peachums business of capitalizing on beggars is also exemplary in terms of Brechts criticism of capitalism, which goes in line with Marxs analysis. Peachum takes 50 of money earned by beggars and hires criminals to beat those beggars, who do not work for him. In this way, Brecht depicts capitalist exploitation, in which even beggars have to pay money for protection.
Notwithstanding the inhumane character of his business, Peachum still wears the clothes of humanist, talking about how much money and efforts he spends on protecting the poor, on charity and social progress. Such sarcastic paradox is emphasized by Brecht to show the harsh non-coincidence between capitalist ideology and reality, described by Marx in his famous political treatise German Ideology. The Peachums cynicism in relation to poor is evident in his description of poverty and misery in terms of money and interest These are the five basic best adapted to touching the human heart. The sight of them induces that unnatural state of mind in which a man is actually willing to give money away (Brecht, 9).
The relations between Polly and her father Peachum also reveal much about the effect of capitalist society on family. As Marx and Engels say in Communist Manifesto, The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation to a mere money relation (Marx and Engels, 9). Such situation in the family is similar to that described by Brecht in The Threepenny Opera.
Peachum wants her daughter to marry a rich man not a criminal like Macheath. Pollys attempts to persuade her father that he may use Browns connections to Macheath to his own advantage are vain. Peachum is not disturbed by the fact that his daughter loves Macheath. In contrast, he makes all possible to throw him into jail.
Peachum can do all possible to stop Macheath. For instance, he blackmails Brown, telling him that he is going to unleash his beggars during Queen Victorias coronation, which would cost Brown his job in the police.
Neither his friends, nor his beloved do anything effective to release Macheath from prison. Brown being afraid of beggars revenge opts not to arrest Peachum and save his friend. The whole world is against Macheath and he prepares to dies. But suddenly, in a comical way, consciously designed by Brecht, Macheath is been pardoned by queen and granted a castle, a pension and a title. Such comic turn vividly demonstrates that capitalist society functions not by laws, but by egoistic interest and contingency. The finale plea of the musical tells us that wrongdoing is not punished too harshly, because the life is harsh itself.
Conclusion
To sum it up, in the present analysis of relationship of Marxs historical and political thought to Brechts The Threepenny Opera, we have found many similarities. This implies that Brechts musical is a reflection of Marx ideas about society and progress at the level of artistic drama and musical. Several basic ideas peculiar to Marxism may be found in Brechts drama.
The first is that capitalism negatively affects morality and humanness not only of the ruling classes, but oppressed as well. This is particularly evident in Brechts presenting his main protagonists as marginal and underclass elements with no progressive system of values.
Brechts similarity with Marx may be found in his critique of abstract humanness and virtue, which may be found in dominant bourgeois ideology of Peachum. This personage manages at the same time to exploit the bunch of beggars, while professing the values of progress, charity and liberation. Such schizophrenic consciousness is mocked and parodied in Brechts musical. Brecht after Marx also tries to show how radically does ideology contradicts objective reality.
Such effort is evident in the dramatic questions Macheath asks Who is the greater criminal he who robs a bank or he who founds one. It demonstrates that the notion of private property is artificial and is designed to protect the interests of minority. Moreover, Brecht vividly shows that capitalist relations disintegrate family and transform its members (especially sons and daughters) in the source of fame and income for their parents. Therefore, it is evident that Brechts work of art has many crucial similarities with Marx and Engels ideas in Communist Manifesto, German Ideology and other works.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment