exclusivel yonproletarians“as narrated, thought of, imagined, conceived”and
establish in what ways the“proletariat”functioned as an imaginary construct
from the beginning.
Fewofthe key terms identifiedwith Marxist theory are as distinctive and di-
visive as the terms“proletarian”and“proletariat.”An initial brief survey of their
etymologyhelps to untangle the“proletarian”(whether as noun or adjective)
from both the theoretical claims made in the history of Marxism and the political
claimsmade in the history of German socialism, communism, and the workers’
movement.Tobegin with, the structuraltension between universalist claimsto
human emancipation and particularclaims to social revolution must be consid-
ered central to anyanalysis of the proletariat as the focus of intense emotional
attachments. Thistension organizes the ways the proletariat acquires its discur-
sive function inrelation to the workingclass–namelyasits logical conclusion
and affective supplement.Inthe process, the moredescriptive“workingclass”
and the more agitational“proletariat”establishaclear division of labor as com-
plementary terms in theories of capitalism and class society.They become cru-
cial to the conceptualizationofthe relationship between class and party and
the later debatesbetween the proponents of revolution and reform. The unique
status of the proletarian as an affective supplement alreadyinMarxist thought
can subsequentlybeusedto make sense of the strong emotions projected
onto the workingclass or,touse the terminologyexamined in the previous chap-
ter,the modern masses, andto follow their reinsertion into the languages of
class through the aesthetic forms and conventionsavailable at the time.
To make one point clear: this is notachapter about Marxist theories of class.
The changingdefinitions of the proletariat fromKarl Marx andFriedrich Engels
to GeorgLukács andKarl Korsch are importantto party programs and theoretical
debates,and not forgetthe largerhistory of Marxism, but they cannot explain
the enduringpower of proletarian identifications throughout the earlytwentieth
century.Herethe conceptual realignment implied through the focus on political
emotionsrequires that Marxist theory be treated not asasuperior form of knowl-
edge butacoequal contribution to the kind of social imaginaries that are acces-
sible onlythrough images, narratives, symbols, and rituals. The fact that Marx’s
earlywritingswerenot even published before the 1930s or that manysocialist
leaders never read his works is immaterialto their significance as templates
for collective narrativesofclass struggle. Therefore, calls by historians for
more differentiated approachestothe culture of the workingclass or more de-
tailed attention to the existing social cleavagesand regional differences do not
invalidatethe heuristicvalue of the proletariat as an imagined emotional com-
munity.Eventhe lack of anyconsideration for the similarities with the rural un-
derclass and the petty bourgeoisie, thegendereddivision of labor,the influence
50 Chapter 2