What do you think?
Rate this book
Karl Marx
'McLellan...has skillfully edited an extremely useful, enlightening, and entertaining collection of sketches of Marx by colleagues, acquaintances, and interviewers. This volume successfully fills a real void...these recollections serve as a rewarding and pleasurable entree into Marx's personal world.'
110 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1975
5 people are currently reading
114 people want to read
About the author
David McLellan
51 books37 followersDavid McLellan (born 10 February 1940) is an English scholar of Karl Marx and Marxism. He was educated at Merchant Taylors' School and St. John's College, Oxford University.
McLellan is currently visiting Professor of Political Theory at Goldsmiths' College, University of London. He was previously Professor of Political Theory at the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Kent.
McLellan has also been Visiting Professor at the State University of New York, Guest Fellow in Politics at the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Simla, and has lectured widely in North America and Europe.
McLellan is currently visiting Professor of Political Theory at Goldsmiths' College, University of London. He was previously Professor of Political Theory at the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Kent.
McLellan has also been Visiting Professor at the State University of New York, Guest Fellow in Politics at the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Simla, and has lectured widely in North America and Europe.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
Read
November 13, 2019I recently returned to this very brief book after a long interruption. During that time I read Frances Wheen's book on Marx which seemed to concentrate primarily on his boils. Here they get a brief mention but the focus is on the thought. In fact everything that has recently come to light from the boils, to the idea of Marx as a writer along the lines of Mayhew or Dickens-because this reflects the tone and material of the opening of Das Kapital, to his illegitimate child produced courtesy of his maid is summed up briefly in addition to a survey of his thought in eighty odd pages. Which rather illustrates the value of these older books to the modern author. Yes, your old college books could be the making of you as a successful writer too, you just have to wait long enough for them to be forgotten.
There is a sense in this book of Marx's thought as dynamic and developing over time, and that this has been perceived as a problem. Plainly Marx was a hugely creative thinker, so much so that his creativity leapt on faster and further than his pen could write, leaving a legacy of sketches, uncompleted, or simply abandoned works. This meant that arguments over his meaning and legacy had been raging for decades before various writings came to light.
This is a short little essay that looks at his life, thought, and reputation, in turn. For me what stood out was the influence of Schiller and German Romanticism, so one can see Marx as the Classical Economists, plus Hegel, plus Schiller, or alternatively that Marx's humanistic engagement with the economists was powered by Romanticism - which wasn't the kind of creed to accept the impacts of Capitalism during an age of industrialisation on European society without passion.
There is a sense in this book of Marx's thought as dynamic and developing over time, and that this has been perceived as a problem. Plainly Marx was a hugely creative thinker, so much so that his creativity leapt on faster and further than his pen could write, leaving a legacy of sketches, uncompleted, or simply abandoned works. This meant that arguments over his meaning and legacy had been raging for decades before various writings came to light.
This is a short little essay that looks at his life, thought, and reputation, in turn. For me what stood out was the influence of Schiller and German Romanticism, so one can see Marx as the Classical Economists, plus Hegel, plus Schiller, or alternatively that Marx's humanistic engagement with the economists was powered by Romanticism - which wasn't the kind of creed to accept the impacts of Capitalism during an age of industrialisation on European society without passion.
June 5, 2018
The economy, efficiency, brevity, and richness of this book is unmatched. I read its 93 short pages in one sitting -- four hours or so. I have not ready anything so concise and so on target. Published in 1975, it is divided into three sections: "The Life" (19 pages); "The Thought" (56 pages); and, "The Reputation" (20 pages). There is also a short bibliography called "How to Read Marx "(8 pages).
Mclellan places Marx in his context, surveys his major contributions, and, most important, lays out the crucial ambiguities in his thought -- all while taking definitive positions of his own. It helped that I could hardly find anything with which to disagree. For example, he worries about the technical veracity of the labor theory of value, the tendency of the rate of profit to fall, the overconsumptionist thesis, and the notion of "crisis."
Mclellan's implicit criticism is coupled with an exposition of Marx's overall corpus. He demonstrates Marx's ability to bring together politics, economics, sociology, history, ethics, literature, aesthetics -- all with his dialectical method. Crucially, he gives to Marx's method and his disposition an openness and a creativity that he says is sometimes missed by his more doctrinaire interpreters. Nevertheless, Mclellan also present Marx's fury, passion, and humor. Especially important to me was his demonstration of how Marx was (because he had to be) simultaneously a intellect and a journalist.
This is perhaps the best introduction to Marx I have read. Beware though that while he quotes Marx often, he does not provide citations. Perhaps because this is an edited down version of a longer book.
Mclellan places Marx in his context, surveys his major contributions, and, most important, lays out the crucial ambiguities in his thought -- all while taking definitive positions of his own. It helped that I could hardly find anything with which to disagree. For example, he worries about the technical veracity of the labor theory of value, the tendency of the rate of profit to fall, the overconsumptionist thesis, and the notion of "crisis."
Mclellan's implicit criticism is coupled with an exposition of Marx's overall corpus. He demonstrates Marx's ability to bring together politics, economics, sociology, history, ethics, literature, aesthetics -- all with his dialectical method. Crucially, he gives to Marx's method and his disposition an openness and a creativity that he says is sometimes missed by his more doctrinaire interpreters. Nevertheless, Mclellan also present Marx's fury, passion, and humor. Especially important to me was his demonstration of how Marx was (because he had to be) simultaneously a intellect and a journalist.
This is perhaps the best introduction to Marx I have read. Beware though that while he quotes Marx often, he does not provide citations. Perhaps because this is an edited down version of a longer book.
July 12, 2012
Clear, tight, fascinating introduction to Marx. The best I have read. And I have read some terrible introductions to Marxism- see H.B. Acton's 'What Marx Really Said'. McLellan offers not only a concise entry into Marx's ideas but describes them in their ambiguity and gives a little of the history of Marxist theory and practice in the final section. A really useful book.
May 9, 2015
This 92 page book is in the Fontana Modern Masters series.
Though brief, and written 40 years ago, this review of Marx is very insightful. It covers Marx's biography, Marx's analysis of history, economics and politics, the aftermath, and it mentions the post war Marxist apologists, like Adorno, Harbermas, Marcuse and Althusser, who were prominent up to the 70s.
The book dispels many of the misconceptions about Marx. Marx's works were unfinished, and so were his ideas. Marx never mentioned dialectical materialism. Marx actually said "I am not a Marxist". Marx was ambiguous and open-minded. Marx had an appreciation of the successes, as well as the failures, of Capitalism - its ability to raise living standards and enlist technology in its service, as well as realizing how chaotic and inefficient it was, and still is.
This book is not a critique of Marx, but it is not partial or prejudiced. It doesn't try to deify Marx, and McLellan is aware of the limitations of Marx's thoughts. Marx was an all-embracing thinker on a grand scale, who tried to create a unified theory of how the socio-economic and political world functioned. Marx was not always right. How could he be?
Marx was not post-modern, nor was he scientific. But Marx was certainly an original, independent and superior mind. Marx came from a long line of rabbis on both sides of his family, and Marx felt very much at home giving his over-view on world events, and he enjoyed being listened to. Marx was held in awe. "Marx said it, therefore it must be right". Marx can be viewed almost as a pseudo-religious thinker, which is one of the criticisms of Marx that is heard, and maybe that is one of the reasons why Marxism became a substitute for religion for some, and a person reviled and hated by others.
McLellan places Marx as a product of his times, and many of Marx's ideas have been superseded by history, even proved wrong. Thus Capitalism has been far more resilient than Marx thought it would be. Marx firmly believed that inherent in Capitalism were the seeds of its own destruction. Capital would be squeezed, so that profits would inevitably decline. Workers (the proletariat) would be further debased. This hasn't proved to be true.
People - in the developed world, at least - have shared in the successes of Capitalism, although the bottom 10% or so have been largely forgotten, as have those in under-developed countries like Burkina Faso in Africa.
Capitalism has managed to utilize new advances in technology to maintain its profits. Globalization has allowed Capitalism to chase new and cheaper labor markets. Capitalism survives, still lurching from one crisis to another, as Marx predicted.
Marx's theory that the cost of labor is the prime factor that determines the market value of a product, is far too simplistic. Marx never fully appreciated the concept of consumer sovereignty. The market value of a product may be determined by how much people are willing to pay for it.
Marx would perhaps be amazed that people have managed to socialize their jobs, so that the repetitious soul-destroying monotony of the assembly line are mostly a thing of the past - at least, in developed countries. But Marx would have observed that many people all over the world still toil at jobs that have no meaning for them and that create "alienation". (Alienation is the feeling that the product that you have created does not represent a part of you, it is not a creative part of you, and that your time spent doing the job is not the real you. It turns yourself into the other.)
Marx was and still is highly influential, 132 years after his death, and whether you admire him him or you detest him, Marx needs to be read, and assimilated.
Though brief, and written 40 years ago, this review of Marx is very insightful. It covers Marx's biography, Marx's analysis of history, economics and politics, the aftermath, and it mentions the post war Marxist apologists, like Adorno, Harbermas, Marcuse and Althusser, who were prominent up to the 70s.
The book dispels many of the misconceptions about Marx. Marx's works were unfinished, and so were his ideas. Marx never mentioned dialectical materialism. Marx actually said "I am not a Marxist". Marx was ambiguous and open-minded. Marx had an appreciation of the successes, as well as the failures, of Capitalism - its ability to raise living standards and enlist technology in its service, as well as realizing how chaotic and inefficient it was, and still is.
This book is not a critique of Marx, but it is not partial or prejudiced. It doesn't try to deify Marx, and McLellan is aware of the limitations of Marx's thoughts. Marx was an all-embracing thinker on a grand scale, who tried to create a unified theory of how the socio-economic and political world functioned. Marx was not always right. How could he be?
Marx was not post-modern, nor was he scientific. But Marx was certainly an original, independent and superior mind. Marx came from a long line of rabbis on both sides of his family, and Marx felt very much at home giving his over-view on world events, and he enjoyed being listened to. Marx was held in awe. "Marx said it, therefore it must be right". Marx can be viewed almost as a pseudo-religious thinker, which is one of the criticisms of Marx that is heard, and maybe that is one of the reasons why Marxism became a substitute for religion for some, and a person reviled and hated by others.
McLellan places Marx as a product of his times, and many of Marx's ideas have been superseded by history, even proved wrong. Thus Capitalism has been far more resilient than Marx thought it would be. Marx firmly believed that inherent in Capitalism were the seeds of its own destruction. Capital would be squeezed, so that profits would inevitably decline. Workers (the proletariat) would be further debased. This hasn't proved to be true.
People - in the developed world, at least - have shared in the successes of Capitalism, although the bottom 10% or so have been largely forgotten, as have those in under-developed countries like Burkina Faso in Africa.
Capitalism has managed to utilize new advances in technology to maintain its profits. Globalization has allowed Capitalism to chase new and cheaper labor markets. Capitalism survives, still lurching from one crisis to another, as Marx predicted.
Marx's theory that the cost of labor is the prime factor that determines the market value of a product, is far too simplistic. Marx never fully appreciated the concept of consumer sovereignty. The market value of a product may be determined by how much people are willing to pay for it.
Marx would perhaps be amazed that people have managed to socialize their jobs, so that the repetitious soul-destroying monotony of the assembly line are mostly a thing of the past - at least, in developed countries. But Marx would have observed that many people all over the world still toil at jobs that have no meaning for them and that create "alienation". (Alienation is the feeling that the product that you have created does not represent a part of you, it is not a creative part of you, and that your time spent doing the job is not the real you. It turns yourself into the other.)
Marx was and still is highly influential, 132 years after his death, and whether you admire him him or you detest him, Marx needs to be read, and assimilated.
September 30, 2012
Super-concise introduction (just 93 pages) provides fluency in the titanic thought and achievements of Marx. This book really rocked my world, causing me once again to question what I've been taught in school, and the motives of those setting the curriculum. Marx is so misrepresented (demonized) in our society, and the book so dense with brilliance, that every page was a surreal experience. The wisdom contained therein has only increased in importance, as world history has followed the course Marx predicted. The book is available on Amazon for < $4. http://amzn.to/W3b3pb
December 30, 2014
For it's age this is a worthy introduction to some of the major works of Marx, while you do not need to know a lot about Marx's economic, political and social philosophy it does help. It also exploded a few theories that are often attributed to Marx but have been taken out of context
May 14, 2009
Good introduction to Marx - broken down into three sections: "The Life," "The Thought," and "The Reputation" and also includes a section called "How to Read Marx: A Short Bibliography."
August 19, 2019
Very good, concise introduction to Marx's thought. Miles better than Peter Singer's "Very Short Introduction" to Marx which is pitched at a comparable level and is of similar length but is atrocious. Highly recommended for absolute beginners - if one is not going to start with Marx himself or any of the classical Marxists - as it highlights and avoids some of the big misconceptions.
Particularly admirable is the treatment of Marx's "materialism" which McLellan very clearly establishes has little to do with the philosophical/scientific materialism of the Enlightenment. He points put that Marx never really mentions "matter" nor does he try to reduce everything to the movement of some fundamental substance. (Though he doesn't mention that Marx does talk of the the "substance" of value which takes on various "forms". But really this is quite a loose appropriation of Aristotelean terms that has little to do with metaphysics.) There is more on how the notion of "matter" is introduced into Marxist thought via Dietzgen and Engels in McLellan's even shorter intro to Engels in the same series. McLellan thinks Engels was spurred by the popularity of materialists like Büchner, Vogt, Haeckel etc. in the German Social Democratic party to try to one up them at their own game and turn Marxism into a monistic materialism. (This is something of an established narrative in Marxology by now. Engels as the vulgarizer who flirted with positivism and ultimately birthed Stalinist "dialectical materialism" and the idea of Marxist philosophy as a comprehensive system that explained both the natural and social world in a "scientific" manner. There are reasons to be skeptical about this - more on which below.)
Even less is Marx a simplistic "economic determinist" or someone who believed his thought to be "scientific" in the popular sense.
Issues: McLellan bears comparison to Moishe Postone or Michael Heinrich as a New Leftish figure who returns to Marx, esp. the Marx of the Grundrisse, and interprets the Marxism of the 2nd International in light of this reading. Cf. Postone's notion of "Traditional Marxism" or Heinrich's of "Worldview Marxism". McLellan is ambivalent about whether "vulgarization" is inevitable with the growth of Marxism into the creed of a mass movement. Ultimately it seems he thinks they couldn't have really "got it" as they didn't have access to the 1844 Manuscripts or the Grundrisse (the latter of which he sees as the cornerstone text of the Marxian ouvre). I think he takes them more seriously than Postone but he does make strong claims for the importance of the Grundrisse. (See: McLellan's intro to his edited collection of selections from the Grundrisse.)
McLellan does acknowledge the existence of figures like Lukács and Korsch who reintroduced a Hegelian Marx that looked a lot like the Marx of 1844 and the Grunfrisse without actually having access to those texts which complicates his story a bit. He also makes the point elsewhere that the themes of alienation and alienated labour themes are readily accessible to anyone who wishes to see them in the major works published during Marx's lifetime (a dig at Althusser and his assertion that Marx abandoned these concerns in his "mature, scientific" works.) I think he's right about this. McLellan is definitely an advocate of there existing a continuity between the "early" and "late" Marx.
Particularly admirable is the treatment of Marx's "materialism" which McLellan very clearly establishes has little to do with the philosophical/scientific materialism of the Enlightenment. He points put that Marx never really mentions "matter" nor does he try to reduce everything to the movement of some fundamental substance. (Though he doesn't mention that Marx does talk of the the "substance" of value which takes on various "forms". But really this is quite a loose appropriation of Aristotelean terms that has little to do with metaphysics.) There is more on how the notion of "matter" is introduced into Marxist thought via Dietzgen and Engels in McLellan's even shorter intro to Engels in the same series. McLellan thinks Engels was spurred by the popularity of materialists like Büchner, Vogt, Haeckel etc. in the German Social Democratic party to try to one up them at their own game and turn Marxism into a monistic materialism. (This is something of an established narrative in Marxology by now. Engels as the vulgarizer who flirted with positivism and ultimately birthed Stalinist "dialectical materialism" and the idea of Marxist philosophy as a comprehensive system that explained both the natural and social world in a "scientific" manner. There are reasons to be skeptical about this - more on which below.)
Even less is Marx a simplistic "economic determinist" or someone who believed his thought to be "scientific" in the popular sense.
Issues: McLellan bears comparison to Moishe Postone or Michael Heinrich as a New Leftish figure who returns to Marx, esp. the Marx of the Grundrisse, and interprets the Marxism of the 2nd International in light of this reading. Cf. Postone's notion of "Traditional Marxism" or Heinrich's of "Worldview Marxism". McLellan is ambivalent about whether "vulgarization" is inevitable with the growth of Marxism into the creed of a mass movement. Ultimately it seems he thinks they couldn't have really "got it" as they didn't have access to the 1844 Manuscripts or the Grundrisse (the latter of which he sees as the cornerstone text of the Marxian ouvre). I think he takes them more seriously than Postone but he does make strong claims for the importance of the Grundrisse. (See: McLellan's intro to his edited collection of selections from the Grundrisse.)
McLellan does acknowledge the existence of figures like Lukács and Korsch who reintroduced a Hegelian Marx that looked a lot like the Marx of 1844 and the Grunfrisse without actually having access to those texts which complicates his story a bit. He also makes the point elsewhere that the themes of alienation and alienated labour themes are readily accessible to anyone who wishes to see them in the major works published during Marx's lifetime (a dig at Althusser and his assertion that Marx abandoned these concerns in his "mature, scientific" works.) I think he's right about this. McLellan is definitely an advocate of there existing a continuity between the "early" and "late" Marx.
December 9, 2023
A compact and highly readable introductory biography on Marx, examining his personal life, thought, influence, and interpretation in the 100 odd years following his death. McLellan is even-handed, arguing against the economic deterministic reading of Marx that emerged out of the Second International, coldly embodied in Leninism and beyond. Well-seasoned scholars on Marx won't learn anything new here, but this is certainly a good introduction for anyone looking to dive into the man and his thought.
August 26, 2025
Good read…. enjoyed the critique and overall view on Marx’s politics. Everyone’s views change over time and even postmortem certain parts can be distorted. The third chapter resounded with me the most with the critical look at how his views had been taken and applied (many times incorrectly) around the world. Minus one start just because (personally) it was a little bit of a dry read from time to time…… but that does kind of come with the territory.
Read
December 15, 2023Uncertain if this is recommendable for those who wanted to get started with Karl Marx. It didn't work that much to me—still didn't understand dialectical materialism, and probably most of this apart from those that I might already know (and not): it was the State; the abolition of classes, private property, division of labor = cessation of alienation; surplus-value kind of; the inevitable but seemingly far ahead downfall of capitalism.
Kind of frustrating to be able to read and still not grasp everything. Ascribing this to the State, too.
Kind of frustrating to be able to read and still not grasp everything. Ascribing this to the State, too.
September 16, 2017
short and to the point but it contained a lot of jargon I wouldn't have otherwise understood if I didn't have a base understanding of Marxism and Marx
February 10, 2021
Really distilled the complexity, nuances, and above all changing nature of of Marx’s economic, political and historical thought, and put it into understandable language.
March 30, 2023
4 Stars.
Decent introduction/ broad coverage of the basics.
Decent introduction/ broad coverage of the basics.
June 27, 2018
McLellan's little book (< 100 pages long) renders Peter Singer's Marx: A Very Short Introduction superfluous, IMHO. For a great review on this book (which piqued my interest in it), please read Naem Inayatullah's post below.
March 1, 2012
This wasn't the most exciting book, but McLellan provides useful information about Marx and Engels and The Communist Manifesto.
August 3, 2015
Exteremely lucid and accessible intro to Marx. If you've read Singer's 'very short introduction' you'll wonder (as I did) how similar the biographical sections are...
January 22, 2016
For a concise and highly readable introduction to Marx's life, thought, works, and reception, look no further.
December 23, 2019
Probably the best basic introductory text on Marxs life for beginners.
January 13, 2023
A fantastic, clear, and concise summary of Marx and his thought. It's lacking in the section on Marx's reputation, but otherwise an easily digestible intro to Marx's writings.
March 8, 2017
Really tries to sell his own books.
Not a plus point.
Not a plus point.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews