What do you think?
Marcuse Em Quadrinhos
Poucos filósofos do século XX tiveram impacto tão evidente nos debates políticos que desabrocharam nos anos 1960 e que seguem vivos em nosso tempo. Perseguido por Ronald Reagan e pela direita norte-americana, ameaçado pela Ku Klux Klan e atacado até por figuras como o ator John Wayne, o alemão Herbert Marcuse tornou-se uma das principais referências da chamada Nova Esquerda. Um dos principais membros da Escola de Frankfurt, o erudito Marcuse (1898-1979) eletrizou multidões de jovens revolucionários com sua crítica radical ao capitalismo e tornou-se um herói da contracultura.
De armas na mão nas barricadas da fracassada revolução soviética na Berlim de 1919 ou carregando seu arsenal teórico para as barricadas de Paris de 1968, Marcuse sempre esteve na luta pela liberdade e por um mundo mais humano, contra a tecnocracia, o autoritarismo e a ditadura do Capital.
Com prefácio da filósofa Angela Davis, que foi aluna de Marcuse, esta biografia em quadrinhos de Nick Thorkelson descreve o desenvolvimento das teorias do filósofo alemão e as realidades políticas que moldaram sua obra.
De armas na mão nas barricadas da fracassada revolução soviética na Berlim de 1919 ou carregando seu arsenal teórico para as barricadas de Paris de 1968, Marcuse sempre esteve na luta pela liberdade e por um mundo mais humano, contra a tecnocracia, o autoritarismo e a ditadura do Capital.
Com prefácio da filósofa Angela Davis, que foi aluna de Marcuse, esta biografia em quadrinhos de Nick Thorkelson descreve o desenvolvimento das teorias do filósofo alemão e as realidades políticas que moldaram sua obra.
144 pages, Paperback
Published January 1, 2020
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
November 24, 2018
It is instructive to look back at Herbert Marcuse and his philosophy. At his peak in the 60s and 70s, he was revered by the counterculture, by the antiwar movement, by students, and by other philosophers. He is arguably best known for his connecting consumerism to repression, a concept that still needs explaining and recognition, and which is more valid than ever. He was also at the forefront of equality for women. These and similar insights define his position as someone fighting the good fight, from clear logical standpoints, without ulterior motives.
Nick Thorkelson is a good one to write this story. His own professor father was arrested at a sit-in, and Nick Thorkelson was immersed and imbued with the Marcuse ethos seemingly all his life. He seems totally at ease with Marcuse’s concepts, and can swing them around as needed to elaborate on his story. As a cartoonist, it is also natural that Herbert Marcuse, Philosopher of Utopia would be in comic book form. This might seem anti-intellectual, but with Thorkelson’s knowledge, there is plenty of challenge throughout the book. It’s a great use of the comic book format. I have reviewed another one focused on the works of Gaudi, and another on the story of a fruit juice company. It’s not all manga. Comics have the potential to transcend.
The book is biographical, following Marcuse through a bourgeois childhood, two world wars, escape from Nazi Germany to the USA, the politics of philosophy and academia, and the turmoil of the 60s and 70s. Thorkelson had access to the Marcuse children, and drops celebrities into crowd scenes, wearing their names on their chests or backs.
Marcuse lived in a microscope slide. Every pronouncement was examined and interpreted, translated and reanalyzed. As one of the major 60s unintentional counterculture gurus, and 70s protest movement inspirations, he had to be as careful as the chairman of the Federal Reserve in not taking a cornering, limiting stance. His lectures and writings were for inspiration and debate.
The prologue is written by a former student of his, Angela Davis, who took his words to heart. He encouraged her in everything, and her own story would clearly not have taken the same path without his direct influence.
There is an Afterword section, in which dozens have given their defining sentiment of Marcuse, beginning with “Marcuse the philosopher…” He meant so many different things to everyone. One that stands out comes from Slavoj Zizek, who says while dreamers can challenge the status quo, unless their dreams adjust to the result, the status quo will simply revert. There must always be struggle.
My own favorite Marcusism is: “I still believe that our cause . . . is better taken up by the rebellious students than by the police.”
David Wineberg
Nick Thorkelson is a good one to write this story. His own professor father was arrested at a sit-in, and Nick Thorkelson was immersed and imbued with the Marcuse ethos seemingly all his life. He seems totally at ease with Marcuse’s concepts, and can swing them around as needed to elaborate on his story. As a cartoonist, it is also natural that Herbert Marcuse, Philosopher of Utopia would be in comic book form. This might seem anti-intellectual, but with Thorkelson’s knowledge, there is plenty of challenge throughout the book. It’s a great use of the comic book format. I have reviewed another one focused on the works of Gaudi, and another on the story of a fruit juice company. It’s not all manga. Comics have the potential to transcend.
The book is biographical, following Marcuse through a bourgeois childhood, two world wars, escape from Nazi Germany to the USA, the politics of philosophy and academia, and the turmoil of the 60s and 70s. Thorkelson had access to the Marcuse children, and drops celebrities into crowd scenes, wearing their names on their chests or backs.
Marcuse lived in a microscope slide. Every pronouncement was examined and interpreted, translated and reanalyzed. As one of the major 60s unintentional counterculture gurus, and 70s protest movement inspirations, he had to be as careful as the chairman of the Federal Reserve in not taking a cornering, limiting stance. His lectures and writings were for inspiration and debate.
The prologue is written by a former student of his, Angela Davis, who took his words to heart. He encouraged her in everything, and her own story would clearly not have taken the same path without his direct influence.
There is an Afterword section, in which dozens have given their defining sentiment of Marcuse, beginning with “Marcuse the philosopher…” He meant so many different things to everyone. One that stands out comes from Slavoj Zizek, who says while dreamers can challenge the status quo, unless their dreams adjust to the result, the status quo will simply revert. There must always be struggle.
My own favorite Marcusism is: “I still believe that our cause . . . is better taken up by the rebellious students than by the police.”
David Wineberg
December 28, 2019
Philosophy. I don't really understand it. But now, at least, I know who Marcuse was. I come out of this with more interest in Angela Y. Davis, who was one of his students, than I do with him.
October 14, 2019
Hmmm. I found this graphic novel somewhat tough to get into. And I’m not sure why. Yes, philosophy can be tough chewing, but I’ve done reasonably well with similar books in the past. Certainly the details of Marcuse’s life were interesting enough. And Nick Thorkelson has a pleasantly cartoony style.
I don't know. In the end, it may just be that I wasn't in a receptive mood when I read this. After reading this, I just feel that I don't understand Marcuse’s ideas well enough, or at least not to the point where I understand why he's considered such an important figure in 20th century philosophy.
I don't know. In the end, it may just be that I wasn't in a receptive mood when I read this. After reading this, I just feel that I don't understand Marcuse’s ideas well enough, or at least not to the point where I understand why he's considered such an important figure in 20th century philosophy.
October 31, 2020
1968’den 2018’e Eros ve Uygarlık
Evimdeki tozlu raflardan seçip aldığım bu kitabın 68 kuşağının klasiklerinden biri olduğunu bugün kaç kişi hatırlıyor? İkinci dünya savaşı sonrası yeşeren özgürlük döneminde sol düşünür Herbert Marcuse’ü yücelten ne Sovyet soluydu, ne de tek başına Amerika’nın komünal grupları. Geç dönem Frankfurt Okulu’nun Marcuse ve Reich gibi sosyalist düşünceye Freud’un ortaya koyduğu temellerle bakışı esas alan düşünürleri, temel olarak Avrupa’nın 68 kuşağı ile ses buldu. Tam yarım asır önce, 1968’de, Avrupa’da yer yerinden oynarken, Marcuse’ün Tek Boyutlu İnsan ve Eros ve Uygarlık adlı eserleri, Beatles’ı, Rolling Stones’u, Sartre, Camus ve Beauvoir’ı sahiplenen kuşağın felsefe tartışmalarının temel başucu kitapları olmuştu. İkinci dünya savaşının ölü toprağını üzerinden atmak isteyen, özellikle Fransa ve Almanya’daki devrimci hareketler, Marcuse’ün Freudyen açılımını sahiplenerek sol düşünceye yeni bir boyut katmıştı.
Ne anlatıyordu Eros ve Uygarlık‘ta Marcuse? Freud’un cinsellik alanından çok yaşamsal bir içgüdüye karşılık kullandığı Eros, uygarlığın gereksindirdiği normlara aykırı bir yaradılıştaydı. “Uygarlık insan içgüdülerinin sürekli boyun eğdirilişi üzerine kurulmuştur.” diyordu Freud, en önemli eserlerinden biri olan Uygarlığın Hoşnutsuzluğu‘nda (“Civilization and its Discontents”). İnsanlığın mutluluğu tam gün uğraşı olarak çalışmanın ve tek eşli üremenin sıkıdüzenine, yasalara ve düzenin kurallarına güdümlü kılınmıştı. Uygarlığın tarih boyunca oluşmasının altındaki psikolojik süreç, Freud’un tanımladığı en içgüdüsel kimlik merkezimiz olan “id”in dize getirilmesiyle mümkündü. Sosyal kimlik katmanı olan ve sosyal normların kimliğe yerleşmesini sağlayan üstbenin (süperego) baskısıyla, ana kimlik katmanı olan “ego”, içgüdüsel merkez olan “id” üzerinde egemenlik kuruyor, ona boyun eğdiriyordu.
*****
Bu alıntı Libido dergisinin 2018 yılında çıkan 33. sayısındaki yazımın ilk bölümünden. Yazının tamamını
https://yalingunduz.com/yazilarim/yaz...
adresinde bulabilirsiniz.
Evimdeki tozlu raflardan seçip aldığım bu kitabın 68 kuşağının klasiklerinden biri olduğunu bugün kaç kişi hatırlıyor? İkinci dünya savaşı sonrası yeşeren özgürlük döneminde sol düşünür Herbert Marcuse’ü yücelten ne Sovyet soluydu, ne de tek başına Amerika’nın komünal grupları. Geç dönem Frankfurt Okulu’nun Marcuse ve Reich gibi sosyalist düşünceye Freud’un ortaya koyduğu temellerle bakışı esas alan düşünürleri, temel olarak Avrupa’nın 68 kuşağı ile ses buldu. Tam yarım asır önce, 1968’de, Avrupa’da yer yerinden oynarken, Marcuse’ün Tek Boyutlu İnsan ve Eros ve Uygarlık adlı eserleri, Beatles’ı, Rolling Stones’u, Sartre, Camus ve Beauvoir’ı sahiplenen kuşağın felsefe tartışmalarının temel başucu kitapları olmuştu. İkinci dünya savaşının ölü toprağını üzerinden atmak isteyen, özellikle Fransa ve Almanya’daki devrimci hareketler, Marcuse’ün Freudyen açılımını sahiplenerek sol düşünceye yeni bir boyut katmıştı.
Ne anlatıyordu Eros ve Uygarlık‘ta Marcuse? Freud’un cinsellik alanından çok yaşamsal bir içgüdüye karşılık kullandığı Eros, uygarlığın gereksindirdiği normlara aykırı bir yaradılıştaydı. “Uygarlık insan içgüdülerinin sürekli boyun eğdirilişi üzerine kurulmuştur.” diyordu Freud, en önemli eserlerinden biri olan Uygarlığın Hoşnutsuzluğu‘nda (“Civilization and its Discontents”). İnsanlığın mutluluğu tam gün uğraşı olarak çalışmanın ve tek eşli üremenin sıkıdüzenine, yasalara ve düzenin kurallarına güdümlü kılınmıştı. Uygarlığın tarih boyunca oluşmasının altındaki psikolojik süreç, Freud’un tanımladığı en içgüdüsel kimlik merkezimiz olan “id”in dize getirilmesiyle mümkündü. Sosyal kimlik katmanı olan ve sosyal normların kimliğe yerleşmesini sağlayan üstbenin (süperego) baskısıyla, ana kimlik katmanı olan “ego”, içgüdüsel merkez olan “id” üzerinde egemenlik kuruyor, ona boyun eğdiriyordu.
*****
Bu alıntı Libido dergisinin 2018 yılında çıkan 33. sayısındaki yazımın ilk bölümünden. Yazının tamamını
https://yalingunduz.com/yazilarim/yaz...
adresinde bulabilirsiniz.
June 14, 2021
OK, seria legal se o autor desse quadrinho já tivesse lido algum outro quadrinho. É possível escrever ótimas HQs sobre pessoas históricas + ideias, mas do jeito que está parece aqueles Guia Folha para entender X coisa em 90 minutos.
March 19, 2020
This is one of those novels that tells its stories in pictures, like the Supremes Man or the Man of the Bats. This picture book tells the story of Marcuse
Man. His power is... ummm this book don’t include his discovery of his powers so I guess we wait. He thinks a lot about utopia. To him utopia is possible we just haven’t imagined it hard enough. But then again the human mind created Dinotopia and put that down in a book so Marcuse Man should probably calm down a bit. John Lennon said Imagine it’s easy if you try but Marcuse Man says we are not trying hard enough. For the sake of dang I try so hard to imagine things and their possibilities but the means of producing such things keeps getting wrestled away from me by other supreme men who aren’t as nice as Marcuse Man. I say read this book and you will see the way that a man of Marcuse thinks. I give it a thumb up.
Man. His power is... ummm this book don’t include his discovery of his powers so I guess we wait. He thinks a lot about utopia. To him utopia is possible we just haven’t imagined it hard enough. But then again the human mind created Dinotopia and put that down in a book so Marcuse Man should probably calm down a bit. John Lennon said Imagine it’s easy if you try but Marcuse Man says we are not trying hard enough. For the sake of dang I try so hard to imagine things and their possibilities but the means of producing such things keeps getting wrestled away from me by other supreme men who aren’t as nice as Marcuse Man. I say read this book and you will see the way that a man of Marcuse thinks. I give it a thumb up.
June 25, 2024
Such a powerful way to learn philosophy!
The book takes you through Marcuse’s life and evolution as a philosopher and uses this to share his philosophy, linking together brilliantly the way the lived experiences shaped his ideas.
The medium of being a graphic novel, allows you to digest complicated ideas and provides an appetite to learn more. Such an incredible thinker who I am going to read more of after reading this!
The book takes you through Marcuse’s life and evolution as a philosopher and uses this to share his philosophy, linking together brilliantly the way the lived experiences shaped his ideas.
The medium of being a graphic novel, allows you to digest complicated ideas and provides an appetite to learn more. Such an incredible thinker who I am going to read more of after reading this!
August 24, 2026
I went into Herbert Marcuse, Philosopher of Utopia already suspicious of Marcuse, and I came out with a considerably better understanding of why I am suspicious of Marcuse.
That is, in fairness, a success.
This graphic biography is openly sympathetic to its subject. It is not trying to put Marcuse on trial. It wants to explain why he mattered, why he inspired the New Left, and why his critique of technological capitalism, repression, consumerism, and alienated labor continues to appeal to activists. Within those limits, it does its job reasonably well. I would have appreciated a little more cold water thrown on some of his grander assumptions, but cold water is not really what this book has come to sell.
The artwork is similarly uneven. Much of it struck me as merely serviceable, but there are moments when the graphic format genuinely works, especially when it translates Marcuse's dense abstractions into visual metaphors. I never found myself admiring the book primarily as a work of sequential art, but occasionally the pictures clarified things that several paragraphs of Frankfurt School prose probably would not have.
And Marcuse himself?
Well.
Marcuse's diagnosis is frequently more interesting than his cure.
His criticism of consumer society has aged better than I expected. The notion that technological capitalism does not merely satisfy human desires but actively manufactures them seems considerably less exotic after decades of algorithmic advertising, smartphones, social media, attention engineering, and entire industries devoted to keeping us clicking, purchasing, scrolling, and vaguely dissatisfied.
The man gets a point.
Then he starts building Utopia.
At the foundation of Marcuse's thought lies an extraordinary faith that modern technological abundance could progressively liberate human beings from necessary labor. Automation would reduce toil, material scarcity would recede, and humanity—freed from the brutal necessity of spending most of its waking life earning bread—could redirect itself toward beauty, play, erotic fulfillment, contemplation, artistic creation, community, and intellectual enrichment.
There is something genuinely beautiful about this vision.
There is also something hilariously optimistic about it.
We have subsequently placed devices containing something approaching the Library of Alexandria into billions of human hands.
Astonishingly, this did not result in billions of people reading Plato.
We invented technologies capable of giving ordinary people instantaneous access to nearly the whole history of art, music, literature, science, religion, philosophy, and human knowledge.
And then we invented TikTok.
The smartphone is simultaneously a university, library, printing press, movie studio, recording studio, encyclopedia, cartographic miracle, and slot machine.
The slot machine is winning.
Marcuse seems to have had tremendous confidence in the idea that once oppressive social conditions were removed, richer human capacities would emerge. I am considerably less convinced.
Most people are not suppressed Leonardos waiting for capitalism to stop scheduling them for Tuesday afternoon.
Most people are fairly thick and ordinary.
Human beings possess mixed motives, uneven talents, finite attention spans, strong appetites, competitive impulses, astonishing capacities for self-deception, and a formidable ability to convert almost any technological miracle into pornography, gambling, status competition, convenience food, celebrity gossip, and videos of people falling down.
And any political philosophy that requires unusually enlightened human beings in order to function should probably be inspected with the same suspicion we reserve for bridges that require unusually light automobiles.
Marcuse was not quite foolish enough simply to forget that unpleasant work exists. His answer was that automation would reduce necessary labor enormously and whatever remained could be distributed more equitably.
Fair enough.
But civilization continues to require sewage workers, nurses, miners, electricians, sanitation crews, roofers, farmers, truck drivers, caregivers, mechanics, construction workers, linemen, janitors, and innumerable other people performing tasks that very few of us would choose as our erotic self-actualization project.
Someone still has to crawl beneath the house.
Someone still has to clean the infected wound.
Someone still has to unclog the sewer.
Marcuse's underlying confidence seems to be that technology will eventually shrink this realm of necessity until it becomes nearly incidental.
Perhaps.
But I suspect he underestimated entropy.
Nature is not capitalism.
Winter is not bourgeois ideology.
The human body does not require calories because Madison Avenue imposed false consciousness upon it.
Civilization is an extraordinarily elaborate temporary victory over cold, hunger, disease, darkness, distance, and decay, and maintaining that victory requires continuous expenditure of human effort.
We can automate some of it.
We should automate as much miserable labor as reasonably possible.
But there is a considerable conceptual leap between "technology can reduce toil" and "necessity can cease to organize human life."
This is where Marcuse begins to look like a grandfather of what would later become Fully Automated Luxury Communism: robots do the ugly bits while liberated humans make art, cultivate relationships, contemplate beauty, and finally escape the tyranny of economically compelled labor.
Again: lovely.
But our recent technological experiment offers another possibility.
Perhaps once creation becomes effortless, we do not get universal artistic flourishing. Perhaps we get AI slop.
We have now begun automating not merely drudgery but creation itself. Machines can generate images, songs, prose, advertisements, voices, movies, and synthetic personalities by the million.
The result is not necessarily an explosion of meaning.
Frequently it is an explosion of stuff.
Abundance does not automatically produce value.
Sometimes scarcity, discipline, resistance, apprenticeship, obligation, and difficulty are precisely what give human activities their depth.
Learning the violin matters partly because it is difficult.
Writing a book changes the writer partly because it requires sustained effort.
Keeping a promise matters precisely when keeping it is inconvenient.
Raising a child at three in the morning is not playful self-expression.
Caring for a dying parent is not liberation from necessity.
Some of the things that make us human do not occur after obligation has been abolished.
They occur because we have obligations.
And there is another Marcusean tendency that worries me considerably more than the erotic utopianism: once a philosophy concludes that existing society manufactures false desires and false consciousness, disagreement becomes remarkably easy to explain away.
You think you are happy?
Your desires were manufactured.
You disagree with the revolutionary critique?
That demonstrates how thoroughly ideology has colonized your consciousness.
You want competing political views tolerated?
Perhaps your tolerance merely protects oppression.
At that point the philosophy acquires a dangerous epistemological immune system. Contrary evidence no longer falsifies the theory. Contrary evidence confirms how desperately liberation is needed.
That is the point at which activist philosophy can become intellectual masturbation: an exquisitely self-contained system in which the philosopher discovers that humanity needs precisely the liberation that the philosopher has uniquely learned to recognize.
The graphic biography does not spend much time interrogating these problems. But again, that isn't really its purpose. It wants to introduce Marcuse, not defeat him.
And on that score, it largely succeeded with me.
Before reading this, Marcuse existed in my head mostly as one of the patron saints of a political and intellectual tradition I already distrusted.
After reading it, I understand considerably better what he was attempting to do.
I can see why his criticism of consumer capitalism appealed to people.
I can see why the promise of liberation from meaningless labor is intoxicating.
I can even see something noble in his refusal to accept that civilization must forever remain organized around drudgery.
But I remain unconvinced by the anthropology underneath the dream.
Marx thought the working class would take over.
Marcuse seems to have hoped that liberated humanity would become something richer, more aesthetic, more playful, more intellectually alive.
I suspect human beings will remain approximately what they have always been:
magnificent occasionally,
decent fairly often,
idiotic with considerable regularity,
and perpetually in need of somebody willing to take out the garbage.
The book helped me understand Marcuse.
Unfortunately for Marcuse, understanding him did not improve his case.
That is, in fairness, a success.
This graphic biography is openly sympathetic to its subject. It is not trying to put Marcuse on trial. It wants to explain why he mattered, why he inspired the New Left, and why his critique of technological capitalism, repression, consumerism, and alienated labor continues to appeal to activists. Within those limits, it does its job reasonably well. I would have appreciated a little more cold water thrown on some of his grander assumptions, but cold water is not really what this book has come to sell.
The artwork is similarly uneven. Much of it struck me as merely serviceable, but there are moments when the graphic format genuinely works, especially when it translates Marcuse's dense abstractions into visual metaphors. I never found myself admiring the book primarily as a work of sequential art, but occasionally the pictures clarified things that several paragraphs of Frankfurt School prose probably would not have.
And Marcuse himself?
Well.
Marcuse's diagnosis is frequently more interesting than his cure.
His criticism of consumer society has aged better than I expected. The notion that technological capitalism does not merely satisfy human desires but actively manufactures them seems considerably less exotic after decades of algorithmic advertising, smartphones, social media, attention engineering, and entire industries devoted to keeping us clicking, purchasing, scrolling, and vaguely dissatisfied.
The man gets a point.
Then he starts building Utopia.
At the foundation of Marcuse's thought lies an extraordinary faith that modern technological abundance could progressively liberate human beings from necessary labor. Automation would reduce toil, material scarcity would recede, and humanity—freed from the brutal necessity of spending most of its waking life earning bread—could redirect itself toward beauty, play, erotic fulfillment, contemplation, artistic creation, community, and intellectual enrichment.
There is something genuinely beautiful about this vision.
There is also something hilariously optimistic about it.
We have subsequently placed devices containing something approaching the Library of Alexandria into billions of human hands.
Astonishingly, this did not result in billions of people reading Plato.
We invented technologies capable of giving ordinary people instantaneous access to nearly the whole history of art, music, literature, science, religion, philosophy, and human knowledge.
And then we invented TikTok.
The smartphone is simultaneously a university, library, printing press, movie studio, recording studio, encyclopedia, cartographic miracle, and slot machine.
The slot machine is winning.
Marcuse seems to have had tremendous confidence in the idea that once oppressive social conditions were removed, richer human capacities would emerge. I am considerably less convinced.
Most people are not suppressed Leonardos waiting for capitalism to stop scheduling them for Tuesday afternoon.
Most people are fairly thick and ordinary.
Human beings possess mixed motives, uneven talents, finite attention spans, strong appetites, competitive impulses, astonishing capacities for self-deception, and a formidable ability to convert almost any technological miracle into pornography, gambling, status competition, convenience food, celebrity gossip, and videos of people falling down.
And any political philosophy that requires unusually enlightened human beings in order to function should probably be inspected with the same suspicion we reserve for bridges that require unusually light automobiles.
Marcuse was not quite foolish enough simply to forget that unpleasant work exists. His answer was that automation would reduce necessary labor enormously and whatever remained could be distributed more equitably.
Fair enough.
But civilization continues to require sewage workers, nurses, miners, electricians, sanitation crews, roofers, farmers, truck drivers, caregivers, mechanics, construction workers, linemen, janitors, and innumerable other people performing tasks that very few of us would choose as our erotic self-actualization project.
Someone still has to crawl beneath the house.
Someone still has to clean the infected wound.
Someone still has to unclog the sewer.
Marcuse's underlying confidence seems to be that technology will eventually shrink this realm of necessity until it becomes nearly incidental.
Perhaps.
But I suspect he underestimated entropy.
Nature is not capitalism.
Winter is not bourgeois ideology.
The human body does not require calories because Madison Avenue imposed false consciousness upon it.
Civilization is an extraordinarily elaborate temporary victory over cold, hunger, disease, darkness, distance, and decay, and maintaining that victory requires continuous expenditure of human effort.
We can automate some of it.
We should automate as much miserable labor as reasonably possible.
But there is a considerable conceptual leap between "technology can reduce toil" and "necessity can cease to organize human life."
This is where Marcuse begins to look like a grandfather of what would later become Fully Automated Luxury Communism: robots do the ugly bits while liberated humans make art, cultivate relationships, contemplate beauty, and finally escape the tyranny of economically compelled labor.
Again: lovely.
But our recent technological experiment offers another possibility.
Perhaps once creation becomes effortless, we do not get universal artistic flourishing. Perhaps we get AI slop.
We have now begun automating not merely drudgery but creation itself. Machines can generate images, songs, prose, advertisements, voices, movies, and synthetic personalities by the million.
The result is not necessarily an explosion of meaning.
Frequently it is an explosion of stuff.
Abundance does not automatically produce value.
Sometimes scarcity, discipline, resistance, apprenticeship, obligation, and difficulty are precisely what give human activities their depth.
Learning the violin matters partly because it is difficult.
Writing a book changes the writer partly because it requires sustained effort.
Keeping a promise matters precisely when keeping it is inconvenient.
Raising a child at three in the morning is not playful self-expression.
Caring for a dying parent is not liberation from necessity.
Some of the things that make us human do not occur after obligation has been abolished.
They occur because we have obligations.
And there is another Marcusean tendency that worries me considerably more than the erotic utopianism: once a philosophy concludes that existing society manufactures false desires and false consciousness, disagreement becomes remarkably easy to explain away.
You think you are happy?
Your desires were manufactured.
You disagree with the revolutionary critique?
That demonstrates how thoroughly ideology has colonized your consciousness.
You want competing political views tolerated?
Perhaps your tolerance merely protects oppression.
At that point the philosophy acquires a dangerous epistemological immune system. Contrary evidence no longer falsifies the theory. Contrary evidence confirms how desperately liberation is needed.
That is the point at which activist philosophy can become intellectual masturbation: an exquisitely self-contained system in which the philosopher discovers that humanity needs precisely the liberation that the philosopher has uniquely learned to recognize.
The graphic biography does not spend much time interrogating these problems. But again, that isn't really its purpose. It wants to introduce Marcuse, not defeat him.
And on that score, it largely succeeded with me.
Before reading this, Marcuse existed in my head mostly as one of the patron saints of a political and intellectual tradition I already distrusted.
After reading it, I understand considerably better what he was attempting to do.
I can see why his criticism of consumer capitalism appealed to people.
I can see why the promise of liberation from meaningless labor is intoxicating.
I can even see something noble in his refusal to accept that civilization must forever remain organized around drudgery.
But I remain unconvinced by the anthropology underneath the dream.
Marx thought the working class would take over.
Marcuse seems to have hoped that liberated humanity would become something richer, more aesthetic, more playful, more intellectually alive.
I suspect human beings will remain approximately what they have always been:
magnificent occasionally,
decent fairly often,
idiotic with considerable regularity,
and perpetually in need of somebody willing to take out the garbage.
The book helped me understand Marcuse.
Unfortunately for Marcuse, understanding him did not improve his case.
April 26, 2020
And thus we come to Marcuse. Well, a graphic novel is a lot easier to understand than Hegel's Phenomenology. This book is great! So thank you, Nick Thorkelson. Now perhaps I'll go back and revisit the books I've got by Marcuse in my basement. And maybe I'll be inspired to go out and foment revolution!
This was a clear, entertaining exposition of the life, and some of the ideas, of Herbert Marcuse. When I was younger, I read both One-Dimensional Man and Eros and Civilization. I also read lots of stuff by Marx and Hegel's Phenomenology of Mind (in the translation I had). I was previously exposed to the graphic novel treatment of Marxist ideas in a biography of Rosa Luxembourg (Red Rosa: A Graphic Biography of Rosa Luxemburg), which I also enjoyed.
Marcuse was in a lot of interesting places and events. I never knew, even during the late 1960's and early 1970's when I was reading his stuff! Marcuse was drafted into the German army in World War I, and fought with the socialists in the uprising after the war ended. Rosa Luxembourg and Georg Lukacs make cameo appearances; it suggests, but doesn't spell out, that Marcuse may have known both of them. Two more of my early Marxist heroes. Marcuse left Germany for Switzerland in 1933, when Hitler took over, and then came to America. After World War II, he runs into Martin Heidegger (but totally disagrees with him). And then he winds up in Paris in 1968! And then is a professor advising Angela Davis! Compare that to my totally introverted existence in which the most famous Marxist I ever (briefly) met was Linda Jenness (whom you've never heard of).
So Marcuse has known, or been in close contact with, practically a "who's who" of 20th century Marxism in the West. Well, intelligent Marxism. Marxists have been late-comers to the environmental problem. They tend to explain environmental problems as a consequence of capitalism, which they are, but socialism seems to promote "economic growth" just as much as capitalism. I don't see a lot of difference between destroying the earth in the name of profit and destroying the earth in the name of the people. Lately I've seen some "eco-socialists" trying to remedy this problem, which I'm following as closely as I can. (I read "The Enemy of Nature" The Enemy of Nature: The End of Capitalism or the End of the World?which is also reviewed here.)
One characteristic of Marxists is that they often get wound up in long polemical arguments about seemingly minor points. As I am now exemplifying! Take that, revisionist dogs! :-)
Marcuse is the one guy who might, just MIGHT, get me to reconsider Hegel. But I doubt it: I have to believe my own eyes and ears. In the 1970's I eventually decided that Hegel was a bunch of nonsense, and I suddenly couldn't understand why Marx and Marxists would become enchanted with Hegel. Hegel was functional gibberish. O. K., it MIGHT mean something, but anyone who writes so obtusely obviously isn't interested in communication, and I'm not inclined to try to force them. Please explain it to me in plain, or even not-so-plain, English. I could relate to the political and social demands, though (and still do).
So, I'm still waiting patiently for the revolutionary movement, or moment. I suppose I could write a book myself, but who's paying attention? There are no smart competent Marxists any more that I can find. And none of them are vegans, anyway (well except Angela Davis). At the same time, all the classic objections of Marxism are manifesting, in spades, in the United States and the world. The rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer. There's "false consciousness" in the working class who are following poor pitiful trump, while the elites play out their power games with each other. Meanwhile, the planet's ecology collapses along with the economy, fueled by mindless animal agriculture and delight in the destruction of nature. Where are the communists now that we need them?
This was a clear, entertaining exposition of the life, and some of the ideas, of Herbert Marcuse. When I was younger, I read both One-Dimensional Man and Eros and Civilization. I also read lots of stuff by Marx and Hegel's Phenomenology of Mind (in the translation I had). I was previously exposed to the graphic novel treatment of Marxist ideas in a biography of Rosa Luxembourg (Red Rosa: A Graphic Biography of Rosa Luxemburg), which I also enjoyed.
Marcuse was in a lot of interesting places and events. I never knew, even during the late 1960's and early 1970's when I was reading his stuff! Marcuse was drafted into the German army in World War I, and fought with the socialists in the uprising after the war ended. Rosa Luxembourg and Georg Lukacs make cameo appearances; it suggests, but doesn't spell out, that Marcuse may have known both of them. Two more of my early Marxist heroes. Marcuse left Germany for Switzerland in 1933, when Hitler took over, and then came to America. After World War II, he runs into Martin Heidegger (but totally disagrees with him). And then he winds up in Paris in 1968! And then is a professor advising Angela Davis! Compare that to my totally introverted existence in which the most famous Marxist I ever (briefly) met was Linda Jenness (whom you've never heard of).
So Marcuse has known, or been in close contact with, practically a "who's who" of 20th century Marxism in the West. Well, intelligent Marxism. Marxists have been late-comers to the environmental problem. They tend to explain environmental problems as a consequence of capitalism, which they are, but socialism seems to promote "economic growth" just as much as capitalism. I don't see a lot of difference between destroying the earth in the name of profit and destroying the earth in the name of the people. Lately I've seen some "eco-socialists" trying to remedy this problem, which I'm following as closely as I can. (I read "The Enemy of Nature" The Enemy of Nature: The End of Capitalism or the End of the World?which is also reviewed here.)
One characteristic of Marxists is that they often get wound up in long polemical arguments about seemingly minor points. As I am now exemplifying! Take that, revisionist dogs! :-)
Marcuse is the one guy who might, just MIGHT, get me to reconsider Hegel. But I doubt it: I have to believe my own eyes and ears. In the 1970's I eventually decided that Hegel was a bunch of nonsense, and I suddenly couldn't understand why Marx and Marxists would become enchanted with Hegel. Hegel was functional gibberish. O. K., it MIGHT mean something, but anyone who writes so obtusely obviously isn't interested in communication, and I'm not inclined to try to force them. Please explain it to me in plain, or even not-so-plain, English. I could relate to the political and social demands, though (and still do).
So, I'm still waiting patiently for the revolutionary movement, or moment. I suppose I could write a book myself, but who's paying attention? There are no smart competent Marxists any more that I can find. And none of them are vegans, anyway (well except Angela Davis). At the same time, all the classic objections of Marxism are manifesting, in spades, in the United States and the world. The rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer. There's "false consciousness" in the working class who are following poor pitiful trump, while the elites play out their power games with each other. Meanwhile, the planet's ecology collapses along with the economy, fueled by mindless animal agriculture and delight in the destruction of nature. Where are the communists now that we need them?
August 1, 2019
I've read about him in Angela Davis' autobiography. I've read about him and his work in the writings of Martin Jay. I've read quotes and passages of his work. But I have never sat down and read a full piece of Herbert Marcuse's writing. That all changes now. I've got a few of his books on my shelf. I pulled down One-Dimensional Man, after reading the graphic biography of Herbert Marcuse by Nick Thorkelson, and LOVE it. My love of Marcuse and my desire to read his work increased a lot since reading Nick's book. I appreciated the narrative, the images, the chronology of this heavy hitter from the Frankfurt School. I am so very happy I read Nick's book. Thank you! (PS. you should read it too!)
February 28, 2020
I went into this graphic biography knowing zero about Marcuse. After reading it, I am not sure what I understand about Marcus and his philosophy but I know I'm slightly intrigued. While I feel a smidge compelled to read more about/by him (maybe I'll start with his Wikipedia page), learning that Angela Davis was one of his students and seeing her influence on him is making me want to read her work. The problem with this book is the art work is too crowded and there's some haphazard panel work going on. It is too text heavy in small spaces and so it is hard to appreciate the images and text working together to create meaning.
August 13, 2020
This book expresses Nick Thorkelson’s quirky insights and his sly sense of how history repeats itself in syncopated rhythm. At the same time, it is indeed a highly sympathetic biography of Marcuse, which connects his life and loves with his philosophy and activism. I am not sure it is a good introduction for those who have never read Marcuse, or his colleagues in the Frankfurt School, or his famous student Angela Davis. But it might be enjoyable enough and intriguing enough to make the reader want to know more.
April 29, 2020
The introduction by Angela Davis is worth picking up the book alone. She shares her experience learning from Marcuse and off we dive into the web of his life. From a soldier in WWI, early disappointing democratic socialism in Germany, Heidegger, the Frankfurt School, Nazi rise to power, WWII and his work with the precursor to the CIA, to his famous philosophic works and leading voice inspiring May 68 and various liberation movements. We must demand the impossible.
February 4, 2020
DNF. Wall-to-wall text that assumes you have a solid knowledge of philosophy, 20th century European history, and Marcuse himself. Not for the beginner - and probably not for the student of philosophy either. Even if I understood what I was reading about, I would have had a troubling time following the word bubbles and voiceovers across the page.
February 29, 2024
Lu il y a deux ans déjà, en parallèle de la lecture de L'homme unidimensionnel : comme complément pour illustrer et situer, c'était impeccable (je précise car je me demande si c'est vraiment compréhensible comme porte d'entrée chez Marcuse sans l'avoir déjà un peu lu par ailleurs). J'avais vraiment beaucoup aimé.
September 5, 2026
Muito bom reencontrar o Marcuse após tantos anos. A produção teórica dele é realmente incrível. Me lembrou que é extremamente necessário manter uma esperança revolucionária na mente. Tentar criar uma vida vivível no agora.
O livro é denso, apesar de ser uma HQ. Só acompanhei por ser formada em filosofia kkkk
A representação do Adorno é bem enhraçada, quase um vilão cartunesco.
O livro é denso, apesar de ser uma HQ. Só acompanhei por ser formada em filosofia kkkk
A representação do Adorno é bem enhraçada, quase um vilão cartunesco.
August 3, 2020
I love reading graphic novels for their ability to represent a story in a more multi-faceted way. This graphic novel, while interesting and bringing forward the story of a somewhat lesser-known (at least now) historical figure, does not illuminate in this way.
January 2, 2021
So informative. A hell of a lot of ideas crammed into one graphic novel. Marcuse also had a slightly insane life - the lives he touched ranging from John Wayne to Angela Davis, to Ronald Regan to Walter Benjamin.
December 27, 2024
I've always been intrigued by Marcuse's ideas as a radical and Frankfurt School thinker. This was a great introduction to his inspiring thought, actions and life. You can feel Thorkelson doing his best to do justice to a seemingly hopeful, yet not dreamy philosopher.
June 23, 2019
A lovely introduction to and visual exploration of Marcuse’s life, thought, and influence.
April 6, 2020
Really amusing, wonderfully drawn and it makes you want to read his books and make him as relevant again today as he was then.
August 5, 2020
Cornfusing
February 28, 2021
Criticas sociais absolutamente atuais e abrangentes habilmente sintetizadas com a dose certa de contexto e humor, um aproveitamento exímio do formato.
Want to Read
March 28, 2021Note: I accessed a digital review copy of this book through Edelweiss.
June 30, 2022
Dense with other philosophers and ideas.
June 2, 2025
Read it a couple years ago. Can't remember how good it was.
October 1, 2019
A bit text-heavy for a graphic novel-style memoir, but very informative.
April 15, 2023
this book was so engaging that i did not even realize i had forgotten to put on sunblock and nearly burnt to a crisp sitting outside while reading this. thumbs up.
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews