ABSTRACT

In the Foreword to An Essay on Marxian Economics (1942), Joan Robinson points to ‘the developments of economic life [which] have shattered the structure of orthodox doctrine…In my belief [orthodox economists] have much to learn from Marx’ (1942:v). Shove (1944), in his review article on her Essay concludes, ‘Mrs Robinson’s commentary on Marx succeeds, as far as commentaries on this author do, in being sympathetic without becoming uncritical’ (Shove 1944:50) but adds, by contrast, that in her ‘onslaught on “orthodox economics”…she has allowed her moral sentiments to run away with her’ (ibid.: 60). The present review suggests that neither was Marx spared her vitriolic judgement. But in making this judgement she errs on two major accounts, revealing her lack of understanding, and so leaving little of significance in Marx’s analysis to be developed. First of all, her dismissal of the labour theory of value as ‘awkward’ and indeed ‘obscure’ creates superficial and often misdirected criticism in her account of Marx’s capitalist dynamics. It also leads her to overlook the implications of the distinction between constant and variable capital. Furthermore, she identifies his theory of crises with his ‘law’ of the falling tendency of the rate ofprofits, and in subsequently rejecting this ‘law’ as a ‘tautology’ she rejects also his theory of crises. Her appraisal fails to understand the complexity of Marx’s understanding of the critical features of

capitalism. The Essay presents a view of Marx which pervaded her later ideas and which is still prevalent.