Now Available

NEW FROM ROUTLEDGE 2026

'Capital' as Literature: Marx Against Himself



’CAPITAL’ AS LITERATURE: MARX AGAINST HIMSELF



Studies of Marx, particularly of his masterwork Capital (1867), are as a rule tutelary—they attempt to explain him. Even literary readers of Marx, from Raymond Williams to Fredric Jameson, seek to secure Marxist tenets by means of Marxian style. ‘Capital’ as Literature: Marx Against Himself departs from this tradition by reading Capital as literary in its own right rather than as political economy with style as its filigree rather than its focus. Here, Marx emerges in a different light. If literature is writing that calls whatever is settled into question, then Marx's writing is literature, not because of its revolutionary program, but because Marx's rhetoric, particularly its key trope of chiasmus, undoes the coherence of the notions it propounds, especially in Capital. Marx's chiasmatic style turns Capital into a mise en abyme and Marx's enterprise into an example of what it describes rather than its foil or antidote: the structure of capital itself. Capital, like capital, is a self-begetting production machine whose fungibility as a form is one and the same with the money economy it unravels. ‘Capital’ as Literature: Marx Against Himself shows how this irony unfolds and what the implications are for epistemology, cultural studies, and literary criticism.




ALSO FROM ROUTLEDGE 2022

Criticism After Theory from Shakespeare to Virginia Woolf



CRITICISM AFTER THEORY FROM SHAKESPEARE TO VIRIGINIA WOOLF

The argument of this book is a simple one: that criticism after theory is a single movement of thought defined by synthesis and continuity rather than by conflict and change. The most influential figures in criticism since Saussure—Bakhtin, Derrida, and Foucault—are wholly consistent with Saussure's foundational Course in General Linguistics (1916) no matter the traditions of complaint that have followed in Saussure's wake from Bakhtin forward. These complaints vitiate—despite themselves and often hilariously so—the misconceptions that have made cottage industries out of quarrels with Saussurean semiology that are based on notions of Saussure that are incorrect. The materialist criticism dominant today is actually dependent upon on the legacy of a presumably formalist structuralism rather than a step beyond it. New Historicism, postcolonialism, gender studies, environmental criticism, archive studies, even shared and surface reading are, like deconstruction, the by-products of Saussure's structuralism, not its foils. Saussure's sign is sensory and concrete. Language and materiality are not distinct but one and the same—history, society, the psychological subject, even the environment are systems of signs, material archives read and reread by futures that produce the past after the fact. Without Saussure, contemporary criticism would have no identifiable or effective source. The book begins with chapters on Saussure and Derrida, Bakhtin and Shakespeare, and Freud and Foucault followed by chapters on Victorian and American fiction, D.H. Lawrence and modern poetry, Virginia Woolf and Melanie Klein, and the historicist tropology of psychoanalysis. It concludes with a coda in life writing on the author's epileptic disability.




Portuguese translation of THE MYTH OF POPULAR CULTURE (Blackwell Manifestos, 2010) now available from Tinta Negra (Rio de Janeiro, 2015)



OS MITOS DA CULTURA POP: DE DANTE A DYLAN


O renomado crítico cultural americano Perry Meisel detona as noções convencionais sobre a divisão entre “alta” e “baixa” cultura.

O autor transita pela provocante teoria de que a cultura pop experimentou ritmos dialéticos. A hábil análise que o livro apresenta de três tradições culturais duradouras – o romance norte-americano, Hollywood, e o rock inglês e americano – nos leva a um ciclo histórico da cultura pop que tem Dante como ponto de partida e revisita ícones como Wahrol, Melville, Hemingway, Twain, Eisenstein, Benjamin, Scorsese e Sinatra.




THE MYTH OF POPULAR CULTURE: FROM DANTE TO DYLAN


The Myth of Popular Culture discusses the dialectic of "highbrow" and "lowbrow" in popular culture through an examination of literature, film, and popular music. With topics ranging from John Keats to John Ford, the book responds to Adorno's theory that popular culture is not dialectical by showing that it is.

Available as eBooks

COURSE IN GENERAL LINGUISTICS. Trans. Wade Baskin. Co-ed. with Haun Saussy. By Ferdinand de Saussure (Columbia University Press, 2011)

THE MYTH OF POPULAR CULTURE: FROM DANTE TO DYLAN
(
Blackwell Manifestos, 2010)

THE LITERARY FREUD (Routledge, 2007)

THE COWBOY AND THE DANDY: CROSSING OVER FROM ROMANTICISM TO ROCK AND ROLL (Oxford University Press, 1998)

FREUD: A COLLECTION OF CRITICAL ESSAYS (Prentice-Hall, 1981)




6/28/10

Steve Miller Signifies

by Perry Meisel

Too often they burn out, grow senile, mutate, or learn jazz. But Steve Miller proved himself a healthy rock and roll survivor earlier this month at The Beacon Theatre, where a crush of skeptical old-time freaks started oohing and aahing three choruses into the first song. The swoons persisted for the rest of the night as an unusually relaxed Miller sang new heartbreak songs with a band of rocking Dallas boys culled from his grade-school past.
Steve still works the Presley anxiety for all it's worth, guitar hanging belly-high against an unexpected three-piece suit signifying his preppie interlude with Boz Scaggs at the St. Mark's School in Dallas. Colliding signifiers, though, are Steve's mode of vision. His music has become a pastiche - a bricolage - of rock-and-roll memories both personal and collective, a virtual definition of rock itself. His songs are pieced together from changes, motifs, and themes drawn from the rock lexicon - the sharpest new example is "The Window," constructed with a Zappa/Underwood figure at the start, followed by a chorus that resembles "Love Potion No. 9" and a bridge that evokes "All Along the Watchtower." In fact, the new album ("Fly Like an Eagle" on Capitol, Steve's first disc since "The Joker" two years ago) opens with a self-allusion to "My Dark Hour" (from "Brave New World"), succeeded by a tune that recalls War's "Slipping into Darkness" ("Fly Like an Eagle"). The concert also abounded with tunes based on stuff like Traffic licks, "Dear Prudence," and repetitions of the one-bar riff that made BS&T famous. Even the 13(!)-bar guitar opening to "Rock 'n Me" is (by name) a self-address to rock history which you can chart out as a series of eight-beat allusions from the intro of "I Want to Hold Your Hand" to Hendrix, the Who, and maybe even Zep
But this is not what your average moralist might call a rip-off. It's the generative principle of Steve's new music, and it signals the emergence of a sublimated rock imagination after its ritual cleansing at the bath of funk (the "Joker" period). Even more, this current psycho-aesthetic strategy of composition, singing, and playing (voice and ax, too, are obviously built from innumerable rock and roll resources) shows pastiche or bricolage to have been the organizing principle of Miller's work from the start. Even Steve's friendship with Nat and Cannonball Adderly or Paul McCartney's bass and production work on "My Dark Hour" suggests just how wide the range of his musical apprehension really is. Yes, it's the familiar story once again of how we failed to see that the best '60s rock was an interpretation - like all art histories - of the classics that lay behind it.
So the Presley anxiety is a playful and representative one, and Miller clearly accepts the inauthenticity it betokens. Not only is it the condition of his musical existence (as the new songs show) - it's also what makes him a real American hero, one of the pillars of American rock and roll. Miller's personal mythology - from the Gangster of Love to the Joker - still holds up next to the worn ideology of other old Bay Area bands because it grapples and hooks with styles of American identity as familiar as Emerson, Melville, and Fitzgerald (remember that Steve Miller majored in quality lit at Wisconsin and went to grad school at Austin before his decisive move West). So the preening rock-and-roll hero is like Gatsby after Ahab, a concise emblem for the unwilling fate of American consciousness: the hero demystified, the Wizard of Oz unveiled, the authentic deconstructed.
Miller, of course, played the innocent when quizzed about all this - what else would an American hero do? Like all those hayseed darlings - Jimmy Stewart, Jimmy Carter - Miller eschews any suggestion of cunning even while he balances oppositions more skillfully than self-touted Artistes like Bowie or Springsteen. But don't let him kid you. Heroes are called stars now, and they gorge themselves on cheeseburgers.

Originally published in The Village Voice, June 28, 1976

Sample view: