What's a commodity? (Was: Hip-hop and theory)

[H. Curtiss Leung]

Ken writes:

>... The commodity functions 
>dynamically as a source of potential revolutionary activity and as a source of 
>domination.

Huh?  I think you're confusing a commodity, its use-value, and its actual
use in a particular context when you say this.  A material thing that's
a use-value isn't a commodity until it becomes offered for exchange.
If I make a weapon to defend myself and do not offer for exchange but
only use it for my defense, that weapon isn't a commodity.  If, on
the other hand, I make a weapon not to use to defend myself but
for its potential exchange value, then that weapon is a commodity.
When you consider that the manufacture of that weapon for exchange 
is necessarily imbedded in a specific political and economic system
where it is created not for its use-value, but for its exchange value,
I don't see how it's possible to write that a commodity is a "source
of potential revolutionary activity."  The use-value of a material
object -- not the object itself, mind you -- can be realized in the
service of liberation or domination.  But the object itself is a "source"
of neither, and the object as an article produced and offered for 
exchange by definition supports that system of exchange and therefore
domination.

>In a very real way the music industry and its detractors, whether 
>independent artists, media critics etc., retain an ambiguous character.

Whoa!  The music _industry_ has an ambiguous character?  That's like
saying the banking industry has an ambiguous character.  And the parallels
are significant: as I understand it, record companies don't assume
the costs of producing and distributing recorded music but instead 
only advance bands and musicians funds to record and distribute 
their music.  When you then consider the cost of promoting and
distributing recorded music...well, do you think the industry would
underwrite something directly threatened not merely its profitability
but its very existence?

>It seems to me that what has been found so offensive in music is 
>precisely the point at which the music sparks brightest and is in its most 
>revolutionary constellation (until, soonhereafter, it itself becomes cliche
- the 
>broken record).
>

What's this point?  Who's found it offensive?  In what sense is this point
the apex of its revolutionary constellation?  In sum, what are the situations
where the use-values of these things are revolutionary?  Don't misunderstand
me -- it isn't that I don't believe these opportunities exist, but that I want 
to know what they are -- but you're not telling me!

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Curtiss Leung                        Voice (212)267-7722 x 3033
hleung@prolifics.com                   Fax (212)608-6753 
-------------------------------------------------------------------