Henri Lefebvre and the Critical Theory of Society

Perspectives on Henri Lefebvre, 2018

Chris O'Kane

I provide a new perspective on Henri Lefebvre’s social theory

by examining his work in comparison to Adorno and Adornian critical social

theory, ultimately pointing to their contemporary relevance for the critical theory

of society. To do so, I first provide an overview of how Adorno’s critical social theory

utilizes Marx’s critique of fetishism to articulate a critique of the social constitution and constituent autonomous supraindividual social domination of contemporary capitalist society in his negative anthropological critique of the negative

totality of capitalist society. I then turn to reconstructing Lefebvre’s interpretation

of Marx and the role the former plays in his theory of social space. Here I argue

that Lefebvre mirrors Adorno’s critical theory of society; using his interpretation

of Marx’s critique of fetishism to critique the constitution and constituent domination of capitalist society. But as I also demonstrate, in contrast to Adorno’s

negative anthropology, Lefebvre’s critique of capitalist society proceeds from

the basis of a humanism that constantly opposes the extent of domination to its

inherently humane content. This leads me to show how Lefebvre’s interpretation

of Marx serves as the basis for his critique of social space, where I also focus on how Lefebvre ties his humanist interpretation of Marx to a romantic humanist

and expansive conception of alienation that problematically conflates a myriad

of quantitative types of domination whilst promoting an eclectic array of humane

types of resistance. Following this reconstruction, I draw on Alfred Schmidt and

Greig Charnock’s work on Lefebvre and Adornian critical theory, along with

my own comparative reconstruction, to point the contemporary relevance of a

Lefebvrian and Adornian infused critique of contemporary capitalist society.

Publication Date: 2018

Publication Name: Perspectives on Henri Lefebvre

Fetishism and Social Domination In Marx, Lukacs, Adorno and Lefebvre.

Chris O'Kane


This thesis presents a comparative account of the theory of fetishism and its role in the social constitution and constituent properties of Marx’s, Lukács’, Adorno’s and Lefebvre’s theories of social domination. It aims to bring this unduly neglected aspect of fetishism to the fore and to stress its relevance for contemporary critical theory.
The thesis begins with an introductory chapter that highlights the lack of a satisfactory theory of fetishism and social domination in contemporary critical theory. It also demonstrates how this notion of fetishism has been neglected in contemporary critical theory and in studies of Marxian theory.
This frames the ensuing comparative, historical and theoretical study in the substantive chapters of my thesis, which differentiates, reconstructs and critically evaluates how Marx, Lukács, Adorno and Lefebvre utilize the theory of fetishism to articulate their theories of the composition and characteristics of social domination. Chapter 1 examines Marx’s theory of fetish-characteristic forms of value as a theory of domination socially embedded in his account of the Trinity Formula. It also evaluates the theoretical and sociological shortcomings of Capital. Chapter 2 focuses on how Lukács’ double-faceted account of fetishism as reification articulates his Hegelian, Marxian, Simmelian and Weberian account of dominating social mystification. Chapter 3 turns to Adorno’s theory of the fetish form of the exchange abstraction and unpacks how it serves as a basis for his dialectical critical social theory of domination. Chapter 4 provides an account of how Lefebvre’s theory of fetishism as concrete abstraction serves as the basis for a number of theories that attempt to socially embody an account of domination that is not overly deterministic. The critical evaluations in chapters 2-4 interrogate each thinker’s conception of fetishism and its role in their accounts of the genesis and pervasiveness of social domination.
The conclusion of the thesis consists of three parts. In the first part, I
bring together and compare my analysis of Marx, Lukács, Adorno and Lefebvre. In part two, I consider whether their respective theories provide a coherent and cohesive critical social theory of fetishism and of the mode of constitution and the constituents of social domination. In part three, I move toward a contemporary critical theory of fetishism and social domination by synthesising elements of Lukács’, Adorno’s and Lefebvre’s theories with a model of social constitution, reproduction and domination modelled on Marx’s account of the Trinity Formula.