Character mask

The character mask as a term of Marxist sociology is the name of the alienated people in capitalism, which only helps his character as a droppable mask or must carry.

Origin

Karl Marx took his hand, the concept of theatrical language of the 18th century, which already in the Italian comedy character type masks (eg il dottore ) from National masks (eg The Turk ) were distinguished.

Character masks set in the theater is a disguise, which purports to be a certain level or people; on the stage to the character mask roles represent a character in its complete development.

In his recent, ethically colored meaning the word appears already at Jean Paul.

Personifications of economic relations

As a " character masks " Marx characterizes the forms of interaction between individuals in a given society as a function of directly social forms of labor. In the first chapter of his major work, Das Kapital he leads the category of a character mask the comparison of modern capitalism with the medieval agrarian society.

At that time, serfs and landlords, vassals and Lehnsgeber, laymen and pastors came over in social production and the built-up on her life spheres. According to Marx, these relationships took already fetishized forms, but were determined to each other, unlike the situation in capitalism through the direct relationship of the individuals:

" The natural form of the work, its particularity, and not, as on the basis of commodity production, their generality, here is their immediate social form. Compulsory labor is just as properly measured by time as the goods -producing labor, but every serf knows that there is a definite quantity of his personal labor he expends in the service of his Lord. The the priests to be paid tithing is clearer than the blessing of the priest. As always, therefore, may judge the character masks, which men confront here, the social conditions of the people in their works appear at all events as their own mutual personal relations, and are not disguised in social relations between things, the products of labor. "

In capitalism, the owners of commodities confront when replacing. Their relationship is now determined by the ratio of the social values ​​of commodities:

" The goods can not even go to market and do not replace yourself. So we have to look about for their guardians, the goods owners. The goods are things and therefore resistance against man. If they are not willing, he can use force to take in Andren words, they. To beziehn these things as commodities to each other, the goods guardian must relate to one another as persons whose will dwells in those things, so that the one with the will of the other, you so everyone except by means of one, two common act of will, the foreign goods appropriates by the sold own. You must therefore recognize each other as private owners. This legal relationship, the form of the contract, whether legally developed or not, is a will- ratio, reflecting the economic relation. The content of this right or will the ratio is given by the economic relation itself. The persons exist only for each other as representatives of commodity and therefore as owners. We shall find, in the course of development, that the economic character masks of the people are just the personifications of economic relations, they confront as the carrier of which. "

Also, the output power is seen as a commodity exchanged between the workers and the capitalists for a wage. Both " capitalist " and " wage workers" as such character masks, ie Personifications of economic categories.

Importance

Formative was Marx's use of the term in the capital, where he refers to the structural determination of individual actors: " It is here to people only insofar as they are the personifications of economic categories, carrier of certain class relations and interests," for which there is no sense would " make the individual responsible [ to ] ".

The people in capitalism, according to Marx who have specific roles and functions, which are determined by the Company. Basically, however, they must always act as capitalists and proletarians, everything else ( eg, professional ethics) - also called " personal" characteristics (eg, generosity ) - are masks that fall when the going gets rough.

Ingo Elbe writes, for example:

" Marx's economic critique developed the activities of the actors consistently from the socialization conditions of work, from the ratios in which the individuals in the context of everyday re / production of their lives are set. This structural determination of the actors, the compulsion, the results from the givenness of conditions under which individuals against one another consist primarily about social things in relationship, he summarizes it in terms like ' character mask ' or ' personification '. "

Alex Demirović emphasized that the Marxian version of the personification of social relations is not only a Determinierungsprozess of economic structures on the actors, but also emphasizes also the reverse aspect that social structures must always be made and maintained by humans, and are thus also changed can.

"It's about understanding the logic of behavior of individuals. The social processes are not the result of individual voluntary decisions. But they are not just passive victims. The character mask is determined by Marx as a personification. This gives the idea an active accent: the individuals made ​​in and by the conditions under which they live, to certain individuals. In this way, they become carriers of conditions, but not by any circumstances, but of class relations. The people are actively ratios and reproduce it through their actions. Would the status of persons, not worn, it does not exist. But it is not the individual but ... the people as members of classes. They act according to certain collective aspects: they think and talk to each other, develop daily habits that form expectations about the course of social development or their rights and meet in these contexts collective decisions. They develop dispositions to exercise command of other people to provide reasons for why they exercise dominion and social wealth to acquire and may use in their defense force. All these are always collective practices, ie concrete conditions under which certain individuals live as a collective. This collective practice - a practice class - can be changed. "

Swell