One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society (Routledge Classics) [Paperback]

This book is an absolute essential. Written before the outbreak of 1960s student radicalism, this book highlights the failings and controls of 'advanced industrial capitalism' comprehensively and manages to undermine opposition to his earlier theses of Freudian liberation, alienation and Marxist revisionism.

Although it's useful to read some of Marcuse's earlier texts such as 'Soviet Marxism', 'Eros and Civilisation' and the brilliant 'Reason and Revolution' they are not essential.

The premise of the book is a revisionist Marxist approach to why no revolution had occurred in society. It is staggering in it's response. It argues that the artificial production of false needs generates a false idea of freedom and liberation and this is reinforced by the technological apparatus of capitalism and social control and reinforcement. Whilst many Marxist books are fairly bland rhetoric, this book is superbly subtle, cutting and mind-expanding in it's arguments about the shaping of modern American and Western society as a totalitarian parallel. There's a phenomenal section where Marcuse argues along the lines of 'in Soviet Russia, the party controls all aspects of life, making it totalitarian, in captialist America, the capitalist system and hierarchy controls every aspect of life through artifical manufacturing of happiness and satisfaction through production and consumption of needs.' The book absolutely blew my mind when I first read it and opens up even more doors and inspiration the more I assess it.

In terms of radical or revolutionary politics, this book is beyond an essential, it is the BEST WRITTEN, ARGUED AND FORMULATED counter-culture revolutionary book of at least the last 50 years. Bitingly relevant then, it is even more so now as some of the criticisms over periodic fluctuations in the crisis of capitalism have been reverted and confirm Marcuse's arguments. To quote, '"totalitarian" is not only a terroristic political co-ordination of society, but also a non-terroristic economic-technical co-ordination which operates through the manipulation of needs by vested interests.' Genius.

Although a little clunky and sometimes drenched in complex terms, I read this book whilst quite young and managed to understand the premises and arguments without having read Freud or Hegel previously. Don't be put off, this book is absolutely seminal. I cannot recommend it enough!

I was surpised to see this volume to be still without comment. It has been a while since I read it but it is the kind of comprehensive leftist 'critique' of politics, culture and, yep, even 'existence', that should be read by anyone seeking a deep philisophical approach to these issues. Marcuse's persepctive is persuasive. He adopts a stance which involves a total critique of man's being in capitalist society - how liberation from the alienations of this system on a personal level is the precondition for any broader change. There follows from this alot of talk about "reification", "total estangement", "the great refusal" - all pretty extreme concepts which will challenge any complacency you might have with regard to your freedom.

It is difficult to know how to start a review of One-Dimensional Man. The book is such a superb intellectual tour de force that my immediate instinct is to be afraid of doing it a grave injustice - which may indeed happen. On the other hand, I enjoy reading the reviews others give to books that have engaged me, so I will assume the same is true of anyone who chooses to read this.

One-Dimensional Man reads like an academic text made accessible for the non-specialist, and it may prove difficult reading, in a few short sections, for those unfamiliar with the late drive theory of Freud - cf. the part on 'saved' libido and how it is used. Non-familiarity with Marx is probably less problematical for understanding the thrust of Marcuse's argument(s).

The core of the main argument is that the consciousness of human beings living under modern capitalism has been manipulated to secure the continuation of what is in fact the historically obsolescent domination of man by man. This manipulation has been greatly facilitated by a steep rise in living standards and the spectre of living in a Soviet society, which many erroneously believe to be the only historical alternative to capitalism (this belief too can be traced back to the general manipulation).

The manipulation is so pernicious because of its absolute character and appropriation of concepts such as 'freedom' and 'democracy'. Our needs and desires have become manufactured needs and desires, our thought manufactured thought, our behaviour manufactured behaviour. The scope and depth of the collective manipulation has been made possible by advances in technology, in particular the mass media, which violate private space (via television, radio, advertising, and other media) in an attempt to merge public and private existence and in their stead create a well-adapted and easily controllable societal individual.

The totality of the manipulation enables the current society to prop itself up with relative ease: it defines what are and what are not legitimate ways of speaking and thinking so that it becomes extremely difficult to conceive of anything other than the extant social structure; indeed, any 'alternatives' discussed are alternatives that move within the societal framework, and so pose no threat to it. Marcuse goes so far as to argue that science and philosophy too are suffused with the 'technological' way of thinking, which sees the entire universe as an infinite series of means to be experimented on so as to best improve efficiency.

He dedicates a lot of space to criticising what he labels the operational and behavioral modes of thought that he believes determine the practice of science and philosophy and gradually filter down to determine Joe Bloggs's way of reasoning too. Qualities of objects give way to mere quantities, and the multifaceted objects lose their particularity in the process; the ubiquitous practice of such abstractions leads to an imposition of a chimerical uniformity among objects in nature that provides a buttress for the political status quo. The enforcement of sameness in nature parallels the enforcement of sameness in society's individuals, and enables the turning of depersonalised objects into instrumentalities to proceed with good conscience. Anything which cannot be readily observed or comprehended using the already existing methods is disallowed from discussion : thus, the modern way of thinking is reactionary. All subversive elements - dialectical thought, for instance -are disregarded a priori. Marcuse's point is that, because of their internal structure, the operational and behavioral modes of thought are politically conservative and complicit with the established society. What a revolutionised science would look like, however, is only vaguely described.

This book is extremely ambitious and bold in its claims. Without wishing to take away from its intellectual force, there are parallels with The Matrix in its complete rejection of the world as it is known, arguing instead for a radically different, qualitatively different, mode of existence, which, although perhaps less comfortable, would be freer and free from illusions and deceptions. The main difference, though, is that whereas in the film the domination comes from a conscious force outside us, in Marcuse's view of things we are dominated by a non-conscious force of our own making; ultimately, the domination emanates from us.

Just a few things. I find myself frustrated that there is nobody with whom I can discuss some of my questions; frustrated because the book is so important as to merit some serious thought. I am not sure for instance whether Marcuse wants to say that science caused the technological mode of thinking or has been appropriated by the technological mode of thinking, or if he thinks a definitive answer to that conundrum impossible (or even unimportant). Also, there seems to be an ambiguity in the book: in places Marcuse speaks of man's continuing domination over man; in others, of man's being dominated by technology. Which is it? Or is it more that technology dominates all of us, but that some of those who are dominated in turn dominate yet others? Finally, how is it that Marcuse can be so sure that technology has reached a point at which any form of domination is obsolescent? Where does he get his assurance from?

The book is excellent and should be read by everyone. Even if you should completely disagree with what Marcuse has to say, he will make you think and will force you to refresh your way of viewing the world. I don't see what more you could want from a political book.