Marxist theory, in its most widely recognized forms, has traditionally centered its analysis on the economic structures of society and the resultant class struggles.1 The foundational concept of historical materialism posits that the mode of production—the economic base—determines the social, political, and intellectual life processes, the superstructure.5 Consciousness, in this framework, is understood not as determining social being, but as being determined by it.1 This emphasis on material conditions and economic relations has often led to interpretations of Marxism as primarily economistic, potentially overlooking or downplaying the significance of subjective experience, emotion, and individual psychology.
马克思主义理论，在其最广为人知的形态中，传统上将其分析中心放在社会的经济结构及由此产生的阶级斗争上。1 历史唯物主义的基础概念认为，生产方式——经济基础——决定了社会、政治和智识生活的进程，即上层建筑。5 在这一框架中，意识被理解为不是决定社会存在的因素，而是被社会存在所决定的。1 这种对物质条件和经济关系的强调常常导致对马克思主义的解释主要是经济主义的，可能忽视或低估了主观经验、情感和个体心理的重要性。
However, recent decades have witnessed what can be termed an "emotional turn" within, alongside, and sometimes in critical dialogue with, Marxist thought. This turn does not represent a monolithic movement but rather a confluence of diverse theoretical currents seeking to integrate the analysis of emotion, affect, and subjectivity into the critique of capitalism and power relations. It challenges the notion that emotions are merely private, individual phenomena or epiphenomenal byproducts of economic structures. Instead, it foregrounds emotions and affects as socially constructed, historically specific, politically significant forces that are deeply intertwined with economic processes, ideology, and lived experience.10 This involves a shift from viewing affect as peripheral to recognizing its centrality in shaping social bonds, political alignments, resistance, and the very reproduction of capitalist society itself. The "emotional turn" thus seeks to provide a more comprehensive understanding of how power operates not just through coercion and economic exploitation, but also through the shaping of desires, feelings, and subjective realities.
然而，近几十年见证了马克思主义思想内部、旁侧，有时甚至在批判性对话中出现的一种可以称为“情感转向”的现象。这一转向并非代表一个单一的运动，而是多种理论潮流的汇合，这些潮流试图将情感、影响和主体性的分析融入对资本主义和权力关系的批判中。它挑战了情感仅仅是私人、个体现象或经济结构的附带产物的观念。相反，它强调情感和影响是社会构建的、历史特定的、政治上重要的力量，与经济过程、意识形态和生活经验深深交织在一起。这一转向涉及从将情感视为边缘转向认识到其在塑造社会联系、政治立场、抵抗以及资本主义社会本身再生产中的核心地位。因此，“情感转向”试图提供一种更全面的理解，即权力不仅通过强制和经济剥削运作，还通过塑造欲望、感受和主观现实来运作。
This development is less a radical departure from Marx's own work and more an explication and elaboration of dimensions already present, albeit often implicitly, within his foundational critique. Marx himself included "passions" and "emotions" as integral aspects of his conception of human nature 10, and his analyses of alienation are replete with affective descriptions of misery and dehumanization under capitalism.16 He saw human feelings and senses developing through social practice and interaction with a humanized world.17 Later thinkers, such as Arlie Hochschild, explicitly drew upon Marx's concept of alienation to understand emotional labor 10, while contemporary theorists like John McMahon reread Marx's concepts of "vital forces" through the lens of affect theory.18 Therefore, the "emotional turn" involves making explicit, theoretically developing, and applying these foundational insights to contemporary conditions, rather than importing an entirely alien framework. This challenges overly simplistic, economistic interpretations of Marxism and opens avenues for richer, more nuanced analyses of capitalism's impact on the full spectrum of human experience.
这一发展与其说是对马克思自身工作的彻底背离，不如说是对其已有维度的阐释和扩展，尽管这些维度在他的基础性批判中往往是隐含的。马克思本人将“激情”和“情感”作为其人性观的重要方面，10 并且他对异化的分析充满了对资本主义下苦难和非人化的情感描述。16 他认为人类的情感和感官通过社会实践以及与人性化世界的互动而发展。17 后来的思想家，如 Arlie Hochschild，明确借鉴了马克思的异化概念来理解情感劳动，10 而当代理论家如 John McMahon 则通过情感理论的视角重新解读了马克思的“生命力”概念。18 因此，“情感转向”涉及将这些基础性洞见明确化、理论化发展，并将其应用于当代情境，而不是引入一个完全陌生的框架。这挑战了对马克思主义过于简单化、经济主义的解释，并为更丰富、更细致的分析开辟了道路，以探讨资本主义对人类经验全谱的影响。
The trajectory of this emotional turn can be traced through several key theoretical shifts and influences. It begins with a renewed attention to Marx's own writings, particularly the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, uncovering the implicit affective content within his theories of human nature, needs, and alienation.10 Early critical engagements, most notably by the Frankfurt School, began to bridge Marxist analysis with psychoanalysis and cultural critique, examining how the "culture industry" and instrumental reason shaped consciousness and manipulated desires under advanced capitalism.20
这一情感转向的轨迹可以通过几个关键的理论转变和影响来追溯。它始于对马克思本人著作的重新关注，特别是《1844 年经济学哲学手稿》，揭示了其关于人性、需求和异化理论中隐含的情感内容。10 早期的批判性参与，最显著的是由法兰克福学派发起的，开始将马克思主义分析与精神分析和文化批判相结合，探讨“文化工业”和工具理性如何在发达资本主义下塑造意识并操纵欲望。20
Sociological applications emerged, directly linking Marxist concepts to emotional experience in specific social contexts, exemplified by Arlie Hochschild's work on emotional labor and its connection to alienation.10 Concurrently, cultural materialists like Raymond Williams sought concepts, such as "structures of feeling," capable of grasping the lived, felt quality of social experience within historical moments, moving beyond static notions of ideology.23
社会学应用逐渐显现，直接将马克思主义概念与特定社会语境中的情感体验联系起来，例如 Arlie Hochschild 关于情感劳动及其与异化关系的研究。10 与此同时，像 Raymond Williams 这样的文化唯物主义者寻求一些概念，如“感觉结构”，能够捕捉历史时刻中社会体验的鲜活、感受特质，超越静态的意识形态观念。23
More recently, there has been an explicit and extensive engagement with affect theory, drawing on diverse lineages including Silvan Tomkins, Gilles Deleuze, and Baruch Spinoza.18 Thinkers like Sara Ahmed and Lauren Berlant have developed influential frameworks—affective economies and cruel optimism, respectively—to analyze how affects circulate, attach to objects and subjects, and sustain political and economic formations, particularly under neoliberalism.11 Alongside these developments, Marxist perspectives have continued to inform critiques of mainstream psychology and psychiatry, challenging the medicalization of distress and developing alternative materialist accounts of subjectivity.27 The influence of thinkers operating outside or adjacent to traditional Marxism, such as Spinoza, Freud, and Foucault, has also been crucial in shaping these theoretical integrations.18
最近，情感理论得到了明确而广泛的关注，借鉴了包括西尔万·汤姆金斯、吉尔·德勒兹和巴鲁赫·斯宾诺莎在内的多种思想传统。18 像萨拉·艾哈迈德和劳伦·伯兰特这样的思想家分别发展了有影响力的框架——情感经济和残酷乐观主义——用以分析情感如何流通、依附于客体和主体，以及如何维持政治和经济形态，特别是在新自由主义下。11 与这些发展并行，马克思主义视角继续为对主流心理学和精神病学的批判提供信息，挑战苦难的医疗化，并发展出替代的唯物主义主体性解释。27 那些在传统马克思主义之外或与之相邻的思想家，如斯宾诺莎、弗洛伊德和福柯的影响，也在塑造这些理论整合中发挥了关键作用。18
This report will navigate the complex terrain of the emotional turn in Marxism by examining its key stages and theoretical components. Section 2 revisits the foundational concepts in Marx's own work, focusing on his views on human nature, alienation, and ideology, highlighting their inherent affective dimensions. Section 3 explores early theoretical bridges developed by the Frankfurt School, Arlie Hochschild, and Raymond Williams, which began to explicitly link structural analysis with culture, emotion, and lived experience. Section 4 delves into the more recent encounter between Marxism and affect theory, examining core concepts of affect theory and analyzing the contributions of key thinkers like John McMahon, Sara Ahmed, and Lauren Berlant. Section 5 investigates the relationship between Marxism, subjectivity, and psychology, including critiques of psychologism and alternative materialist accounts of the subject. Section 6 briefly considers the role of Cultural Studies as a field facilitating the analysis of affect and lived experience within broadly Marxist frameworks. Section 7 provides a critical assessment, evaluating the strengths and limitations of this emotional turn, addressing key critiques concerning depoliticization, theoretical ambiguity, and the structure-affect relationship. Finally, Section 8 offers a conclusion, synthesizing the analysis and suggesting potential directions for future research aimed at integrating political economy with the study of emotion and subjectivity.
本报告将通过考察马克思主义中情感转向的关键阶段和理论组成部分，探索其复杂的领域。第二部分重新审视马克思自身作品中的基础概念，重点关注他对人性、异化和意识形态的看法，强调其内在的情感维度。第三部分探讨了法兰克福学派、Arlie Hochschild 和 Raymond Williams 所建立的早期理论桥梁，这些桥梁开始明确地将结构分析与文化、情感和生活经验联系起来。第四部分深入探讨马克思主义与情感理论之间较近期的交汇，考察情感理论的核心概念，并分析 John McMahon、Sara Ahmed 和 Lauren Berlant 等关键思想家的贡献。第五部分研究马克思主义、主观性和心理学之间的关系，包括对心理主义的批判和对主体的替代性唯物主义解释。第六部分简要考虑了文化研究作为一个领域在广泛的马克思主义框架内促进情感和生活经验分析的作用。 第 7 节提供了批判性评估，评价了这一情感转向的优势和局限性，讨论了关于去政治化、理论模糊性以及结构-情感关系的关键批评。最后，第 8 节给出了结论，综合了分析并提出了未来研究可能的方向，旨在将政治经济学与情感和主观性研究相结合。
Central to understanding the potential for an emotional dimension within Marxism is a careful examination of Karl Marx's conception of human nature, often referred to by the term Gattungswesen or "species-being".16 Contrary to interpretations that reduce Marxism to economic determinism, Marx viewed human beings as fundamentally social, conscious, and productive creatures whose essence is realized through free, creative activity in community with others and in interaction with nature.10 This conception explicitly includes human "passions" and "emotions" not as secondary phenomena, but as fundamental, integrative aspects of this social nature and the human capacity for "free conscious activity".10 Marx saw the development of human senses and feelings as a historical process, shaped by social practice and the progressive humanization of nature through labor.17 As he put it, "The eye became a human eye precisely when its object became a social, human object, made by man for man. For this reason the feelings directly in their working became theorists".17 This suggests that emotions are not static biological givens but are educated and transformed through social history.
理解马克思主义中情感维度的潜力，核心在于仔细审视卡尔·马克思对人性的构想，这一构想常被称为 Gattungswesen 或“类存在”。16 与将马克思主义简化为经济决定论的解释相反，马克思认为人类本质上是社会性的、有意识的和生产性的生物，其本质通过与他人在共同体中以及与自然互动中的自由、创造性活动得以实现。10 这一构想明确包括人类的“激情”和“情感”，它们并非次要现象，而是社会本质以及人类“自由自觉活动”能力的基本、整合性方面。10 马克思认为人类感官和情感的发展是一个历史过程，由社会实践和通过劳动逐步实现自然的“人性化”所塑造。17 正如他所说：“眼睛之所以成为人的眼睛，正是因为它的对象成为了一个社会的、人的对象，由人为了人而创造。因此，情感在其直接运作中成为了理论家。”17 这表明情感并非静态的生物学既定事实，而是通过社会历史被教育和转变的。
This understanding of human nature is inextricably linked to Marx's concept of needs. Humans are productive beings because they must produce their means of subsistence to satisfy basic material needs.6 However, Marx's conception of needs extends far beyond mere survival. Human flourishing, implicitly outlined in his critique of alienation, requires the satisfaction of a broader range of needs: for creative and fulfilling work, for community, for intellectual and artistic expression, for emotional satisfaction, and for the development of distinctly human senses and capacities.19 Capitalism, in Marx's view, systematically frustrates these deeper human needs, reducing labor to a mere means of survival and stunting human potential.4
这种对人性的理解与马克思的需求概念密不可分。人类是生产性存在，因为他们必须生产自己的生存资料以满足基本的物质需求。6 然而，马克思对需求的构想远远超出了单纯的生存。在他对异化的批判中隐含的人类繁荣，需要满足更广泛的需求：对创造性和有意义的工作的需求，对社区的需求，对智力和艺术表达的需求，对情感满足的需求，以及对发展独特的人类感官和能力的需求。19 在马克思看来，资本主义系统性地挫败了这些更深层次的人类需求，将劳动简化为单纯的生存手段，并阻碍了人类潜能的发展。4
Marx's materialist conception contrasts sharply with the idealism of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, who saw history as the unfolding of an abstract Spirit.8 While influenced by Hegel's dialectical method, Marx inverted his philosophy, grounding consciousness and social relations in the material world.8 Marx was also significantly influenced by Ludwig Feuerbach's critique of religion, particularly the idea that humanity projects its own essential powers onto a divine being, thereby alienating itself from its true nature.16 Marx extended this critique of alienation from the religious sphere to the material conditions of labor under capitalism. Furthermore, Marx's discussion in the 1844 Manuscripts of "essential powers" (Wesenskräfte)—the inherent capacities of human beings actualized through interaction with the objective world—has been seen by some contemporary scholars as resonating with Baruch Spinoza's concept of potentia, the power or capacity of a body to act and be affected, suggesting an early philosophical grounding for later affect-theoretical readings.18
马克思的唯物主义观念与格奥尔格·威廉·弗里德里希·黑格尔的唯心主义形成鲜明对比，黑格尔认为历史是抽象精神的发展过程。8 尽管受到黑格尔辩证法的影响，马克思颠倒了他的哲学，将意识和社会关系根植于物质世界。8 马克思还深受路德维希·费尔巴哈对宗教批判的影响，特别是人类将其本质力量投射到神圣存在上，从而与自身真实本性疏离的观点。16 马克思将这种异化批判从宗教领域扩展到资本主义下的劳动物质条件。此外，马克思在 1844 年手稿中讨论的“本质力量”（Wesenskräfte）——人类通过与客观世界的互动而实现的固有能力——被一些当代学者认为与巴鲁赫·斯宾诺莎的 potentia 概念相呼应，即身体行动和受影响的能力或力量，暗示了后期情感理论解读的早期哲学基础。18
Marx's theory of alienation, or estrangement (Entfremdung), provides the most explicit site for understanding the affective consequences of capitalism in his work.16 Alienation signifies a dysfunctional separation between entities that properly belong together—the worker and their product, the worker and their activity, the worker and their own human nature, and workers from each other.16 This separation is not merely a structural or abstract condition; it is lived experience saturated with negative affect.
马克思的异化理论，或称疏远（Entfremdung），为其作品中理解资本主义情感后果提供了最明确的场所。异化意味着本应属于一起的实体之间出现了功能失调的分离——工人与其产品、工人与其活动、工人与自身的人性，以及工人彼此之间的分离。这种分离不仅仅是一种结构性的或抽象的状况；它是一种充满负面情感的真实体验。
Marx vividly describes the emotional toll of alienated labor. Workers are alienated from the product of their labor because it confronts them as an alien object, owned and controlled by the capitalist, embodying their expended life-energy yet standing opposed to them.16 This lack of control and ownership leads to feelings of detachment and powerlessness.7 Alienation from the act of working itself means that labor is not a fulfilling expression of human creativity but forced, external activity undertaken merely for survival.16 During work, the worker feels "miserable, unhappy and drained of their energy"; work "mortifies his body and ruins his mind".16 This results in profound unhappiness and a sense of being coerced.10 Alienation from species-being signifies the frustration of fundamental human capacities for free, conscious, creative activity and communal connection.16 The reduction of the worker to a mere cog in the capitalist machine leads to feelings of dehumanization.16 Finally, alienation from other workers occurs as capitalism pits individuals against each other in competition for wages and jobs, transforming potentially cooperative social relations into antagonistic ones, fostering resentment and undermining solidarity.4
马克思生动地描述了异化劳动对情感的损害。 工人与他们劳动的产品相疏远，因为这些产品作为异化的对象与他们对立，被资本家拥有和控制，体现了他们耗费的生命能量，却与他们对立。16 这种缺乏控制和所有权导致了疏离感和无力感。7 与劳动行为本身的疏远意味着劳动不是人类创造力的充实表达，而是被迫的、外部的活动，仅为了生存而进行。16 在工作期间，工人感到“痛苦、不快乐且精力耗尽”；工作“摧残他的身体，毁坏他的心智”。16 这导致了深刻的痛苦和被强迫的感觉。10 与类存在的疏远意味着人类自由、意识、创造性活动以及共同体联系的基本能力的受挫。16 工人被简化为资本主义机器中的一个齿轮，导致了非人化的感觉。16 最后，与其他工人的疏远发生在资本主义使个体在工资和工作的竞争中相互对立，将潜在的合作社会关系转变为敌对关系，滋生怨恨并破坏团结。4
Alienation, therefore, represents a violation of a normative baseline of potential human flourishing, a state where work could be creative and fulfilling.19 The gap between this potential and the reality of capitalist production generates a range of negative emotions. This condition has been conceptualized by later commentators, drawing on Marx, as a "systematized experience of 'disappointment'" inherent in capitalist production and consumption, where the expected satisfaction or happiness from work, products, or social relations is consistently undermined.31 Marx's framework thus inherently contains a theory of the suffering subject under capitalism. Alienation is not just a structural problem but an affective state characterized by misery, resentment, and the frustration of essential human needs and potentials, directly linked to the capitalist mode of production.
因此，异化代表了对潜在人类繁荣的规范性基线的违背，在这种基线下，工作本可以是创造性和令人满足的。19 这种潜力与资本主义生产的现实之间的差距产生了一系列负面情绪。后来评论家借鉴马克思的观点，将这种状况概念化为资本主义生产和消费中固有的“系统化的‘失望’体验”，在这种体验中，来自工作、产品或社会关系的预期满足或幸福感不断被削弱。31 因此，马克思的框架内在地包含了一种关于资本主义下受苦主体的理论。异化不仅仅是一个结构性问题，而是一种情感状态，其特征是痛苦、怨恨以及基本人类需求和潜能的受挫，这些都直接与资本主义生产方式相关联。
Marx's analysis extends beyond the immediate labor process to the realm of ideology and consciousness, which also possess significant affective dimensions. In Marxist theory, ideology typically refers to the system of beliefs, values, and norms promulgated by the ruling class to maintain its dominance.5 These ruling ideas shape individuals' consciousness, influence their perception of reality, and serve to legitimize the existing social order, such as the capitalist mode of production.5 Ideological apparatuses like media, education, and religion disseminate these ideas, aiming to naturalize and normalize exploitative relations.5
马克思的分析不仅局限于直接的劳动过程，还延伸到意识形态和意识领域，这些领域也具有重要的情感维度。在马克思主义理论中，意识形态通常指统治阶级为维持其统治地位而推广的信仰、价值观和规范体系。5 这些统治思想塑造了个人的意识，影响他们对现实的感知，并有助于使现有的社会秩序合法化，例如资本主义生产方式。5 媒体、教育和宗教等意识形态工具传播这些思想，旨在使剥削关系自然化和正常化。5
This relates closely to the concept of "false consciousness," where the working class internalizes the dominant ideology and is misled about its true conditions and interests, thus preventing recognition of exploitation and collective challenge to the system.5 The base-superstructure model posits that the economic base (means and relations of production) largely determines the superstructure (cultural, political, ideological institutions), meaning social being determines consciousness.1 However, this relationship is often understood dialectically, allowing for the superstructure, including cultural and political movements, to exert influence back upon the base.5
这与“虚假意识”的概念密切相关，在这种情况下，工人阶级内化了主导意识形态，并对其真实状况和利益产生误解，从而无法认识到剥削和对体系的集体挑战。5 基础-上层建筑模型认为，经济基础（生产方式和生产关系）在很大程度上决定了上层建筑（文化、政治、意识形态机构），意味着社会存在决定意识。1 然而，这种关系往往被辩证地理解，允许上层建筑，包括文化和政治运动，反过来对基础产生影响。5
The Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci significantly developed this line of thought with his concept of cultural hegemony.5 Hegemony refers to the process by which the ruling class maintains control not just through force or economic dominance, but through securing the active consent of subordinate groups via cultural leadership.5 The ruling class's worldview becomes the accepted "common sense," making its power appear natural and inevitable.5
意大利马克思主义者安东尼奥·葛兰西（Antonio Gramsci）通过他的文化霸权概念显著发展了这一思想路线。霸权指的是统治阶级不仅通过武力或经济支配来维持控制，还通过文化领导获得从属群体的积极同意的过程。统治阶级的世界观成为被接受的“常识”，使其权力显得自然且不可避免。
These concepts point towards the affective mechanisms through which power operates. Ideology is not just about abstract beliefs but also about shaping values, norms, and perceptions—all of which have affective components. Hegemony relies on generating consent, which involves not just rational agreement but also affective alignment with the dominant order, making existing power relations feel natural, acceptable, or even desirable. False consciousness implies an affective or perceptual distortion, where the lived reality of exploitation is masked or misrecognized. The development of class consciousness, conversely, involves not only a cognitive understanding of one's position within the class structure but also an affective shift—perhaps involving feelings of solidarity, anger, or resentment directed towards the system rather than internalized as personal failure.1 Marx viewed consciousness itself as arising from social activity and interaction within the material world 17, suggesting that subjective experience, including its affective dimensions, is fundamentally shaped by social being. Thus, a critique of ideology must extend beyond the analysis of ideas to encompass the ways power shapes the affective landscape, normalizing certain feelings and delegitimizing others to maintain social control.
这些概念指向了权力运作的情感机制。意识形态不仅仅是关于抽象的信念，还涉及塑造价值观、规范和感知——所有这些都具有情感成分。霸权依赖于生成同意，这不仅涉及理性的认同，还包括与主导秩序的情感一致，使现有的权力关系感觉自然、可接受，甚至是令人向往的。虚假意识意味着一种情感或感知的扭曲，其中剥削的现实生活被掩盖或误认。相反，阶级意识的发展不仅涉及对自身在阶级结构中位置的认知理解，还包括情感转变——可能涉及团结、愤怒或怨恨的情感，这些情感指向系统，而不是内化为个人失败。马克思认为意识本身源于物质世界中的社会活动和互动，表明主观体验，包括其情感维度，从根本上是由社会存在塑造的。 因此，对意识形态的批判必须超越对观念的分析，涵盖权力如何塑造情感景观，使某些情感正常化并使其他情感失去合法性以维持社会控制。
While Marx laid the groundwork, subsequent thinkers within or adjacent to the Marxist tradition developed more explicit frameworks for analyzing culture, consciousness, and subjective experience, including its emotional dimensions. These "early departures" represent crucial attempts to bridge the analysis of economic structures with the complexities of lived reality under capitalism.
虽然马克思奠定了基础，但随后在马克思主义传统内部或与之相邻的思想家们发展出了更明确的框架，用于分析文化、意识和主观体验，包括其情感维度。这些“早期背离”代表了将经济结构分析与资本主义下生活现实的复杂性相结合的重要尝试。
The Frankfurt School, associated with thinkers like Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno, and Herbert Marcuse, pioneered Critical Theory by integrating Marxist analysis with insights from psychoanalysis, sociology, and philosophy, particularly Hegelian thought.20 Deeply affected by the rise of fascism and the perceived failures of traditional Marxism to explain it, they turned their attention to the role of culture, ideology, and psychology in maintaining social domination in advanced capitalist societies.
法兰克福学派，与马克斯·霍克海默、西奥多·W·阿多诺和赫伯特·马尔库塞等思想家相关，通过将马克思主义分析与精神分析学、社会学和哲学（尤其是黑格尔思想）的见解相结合，开创了批判理论。深受法西斯主义崛起和传统马克思主义无法解释其失败的影响，他们将注意力转向文化、意识形态和心理学在先进资本主义社会中维持社会统治的作用。
A central concept developed by Horkheimer and Adorno, particularly in their seminal work Dialectic of Enlightenment (1944/1947), is the "culture industry".20 This term refers to the industrialization and commodification of culture under capitalism, where cultural products (film, music, media) become standardized commodities designed for mass consumption.20 Far from being a sphere of genuine creativity or critical reflection, the culture industry functions, in their view, as a powerful tool of social control. It produces predictable, formulaic entertainment that lulls the masses into conformity, generates false needs, stifles critical thinking, and reinforces the dominant ideology.20 It creates a "false sense of freedom and choice," manipulating individuals' thoughts, emotions, and desires to ensure their passive acceptance of the status quo.20
霍克海默和阿多诺在其 seminal 著作《启蒙辩证法》（1944/1947）中特别发展了一个核心概念，即“文化工业”。20 这个术语指的是资本主义下文化的工业化和商品化，其中文化产品（电影、音乐、媒体）成为为大众消费而设计的标准化商品。20 在他们看来，文化工业远非真正的创造力或批判性反思的领域，而是作为一种强大的社会控制工具发挥作用。它生产出可预测的、公式化的娱乐，诱导大众顺从，制造虚假需求，扼杀批判性思维，并强化主导意识形态。20 它创造了一种“虚假的自由和选择感”，操纵个人的思想、情感和欲望，以确保他们被动接受现状。20
Their critique extended to the nature of reason itself. In Dialectic of Enlightenment, they argued that the Enlightenment project, initially aimed at liberating humanity from myth and superstition through reason, had dialectically turned into its opposite.40 Reason became "instrumental reason"—a calculating, objectifying logic focused solely on efficiency, control, and domination over both external nature and human nature.40 This instrumental rationality, detached from ethical considerations, ultimately led to societal irrationality, exemplified by the bureaucratic horrors of fascism and the Holocaust.40 Antisemitism, for instance, was analyzed as a projection of repressed fears and anxieties generated by modern society onto a scapegoated group.41
他们的批评延伸到了理性本身的本质。在《启蒙辩证法》中，他们认为启蒙计划最初旨在通过理性将人类从神话和迷信中解放出来，但辩证地转变成了其对立面。理性变成了“工具理性”——一种计算性的、对象化的逻辑，仅关注效率、控制和对外部自然及人性的支配。这种脱离伦理考量的工具理性，最终导致了社会非理性，例如法西斯主义和犹太人大屠杀的官僚恐怖。反犹主义被分析为现代社会产生的被压抑的恐惧和焦虑投射到一个替罪羊群体上的表现。
The Frankfurt School theorists held a generally pessimistic view of the potential for resistance within mass culture, seeing it as deeply integrated into the system of domination.21 Herbert Marcuse further developed this critique with his concept of "repressive tolerance," arguing that the apparent tolerance of dissent within liberal capitalist societies actually served to neutralize radical opposition by incorporating it into the system, thereby preventing fundamental change.20 Their integration of Freudian psychoanalysis was crucial for understanding the subjective mechanisms through which individuals internalized social control and how mass culture appealed to unconscious desires and anxieties.20 By focusing on the cultural and psychological dimensions of capitalist domination, the Frankfurt School significantly expanded the scope of Marxist critique, highlighting how power operates through the manipulation of consciousness, emotion, and desire.
法兰克福学派理论家对大众文化中抵抗的可能性普遍持悲观态度，认为它深深地融入了支配体系。21 赫伯特·马尔克塞进一步发展了这一批判，提出了“压抑性宽容”的概念，指出自由资本主义社会中对异见的表面宽容实际上通过将其纳入体系来中和激进反对，从而阻止根本性变革。20 他们对弗洛伊德精神分析的整合对于理解个体如何内化社会控制的主观机制，以及大众文化如何诉诸无意识的欲望和焦虑至关重要。20 通过关注资本主义支配的文化和心理维度，法兰克福学派显著扩展了马克思主义批判的范围，突显了权力如何通过操纵意识、情感和欲望来运作。
Sociologist Arlie Russell Hochschild provided a crucial link between Marxist theory and the micro-level analysis of emotional experience in the workplace. In her influential work, particularly The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling (1983), she introduced the concept of "emotional labor".10 Emotional labor refers to the process of managing one's feelings and expressions to fulfill the emotional requirements of a job; it involves inducing or suppressing feeling in order to sustain an outward countenance that produces the proper state of mind in others.10 This form of labor, where emotion itself becomes a commodity sold for a wage and managed according to employer demands ("feeling rules"), is particularly prevalent in service industries (e.g., flight attendants, customer service representatives).
社会学家 Arlie Russell Hochschild 为马克思主义理论与工作场所情感体验的微观层面分析提供了关键联系。在她具有影响力的著作中，特别是《被管理的心：人类情感的商业化》（1983 年），她引入了“情感劳动”的概念。情感劳动指的是管理个人情感和表情以满足工作情感要求的过程；它涉及诱导或抑制情感，以维持一种外在表情，从而在他人心中产生适当的心态。这种劳动形式，其中情感本身成为一种商品，以工资形式出售，并根据雇主的要求（“情感规则”）进行管理，特别是在服务行业中尤为普遍（例如，空乘人员、客户服务代表）。
Crucially, Hochschild explicitly drew upon Marx's theory of alienation to analyze the consequences of emotional labor.10 Just as Marx described workers being alienated from their products and their labor activity, Hochschild argued that service workers can become estranged from their own feelings and sense of self when required to perform emotions that are not genuine or to suppress authentic feelings.10 This commodification of emotion, managed for the purpose of maximizing corporate profit, connects the subjective, micro-level experience of the worker to the macro-level processes of capitalist exploitation.10 Hochschild's analysis highlighted the potential negative social and psychological consequences for workers engaged in emotional labor, including increased stress, role tension, burnout, and a diminished sense of authenticity.10 While acknowledging that not all forms of emotion management are inherently alienating or harmful 10, her work powerfully demonstrated how capitalist labor processes extend into the intimate realm of human feeling, applying a Marxist lens to understand the subjective costs of emotional commodification in the contemporary service economy.
至关重要的是，霍赫希尔德明确借鉴了马克思的异化理论来分析情感劳动的后果。10 正如马克思描述工人与其产品和劳动活动相异化一样，霍赫希尔德认为服务行业工作者在被迫表现出不真实的情感或压抑真实感受时，可能会与自己的情感和自我意识疏远。10 这种情感的商品化，为了最大化企业利润而被管理，将工人的主观、微观层面的体验与资本主义剥削的宏观层面过程联系起来。10 霍赫希尔德的分析突出了从事情感劳动的工人可能面临的负面社会和心理后果，包括压力增加、角色紧张、职业倦怠以及真实感减弱。10 虽然她承认并非所有形式的情感管理都必然具有异化或有害性 10，但她的工作有力地展示了资本主义劳动过程如何延伸到人类情感的亲密领域，运用马克思主义视角来理解当代服务经济中情感商品化的主观成本。
Raymond Williams, a key figure in British Cultural Studies and cultural materialism, developed the concept of "structure of feeling" as a way to grasp the lived quality of social experience in a particular historical period, especially aspects that are emergent, still forming, or not yet fully articulated in dominant ideologies or formal institutions.23 First introduced in the mid-1950s and elaborated in works like The Long Revolution (1961) and Marxism and Literature (1977), the term seeks to capture a specific "quality of social experience and relationship" 47, a shared sensibility, atmosphere, or practical consciousness characteristic of a time and place.23
雷蒙德·威廉斯（Raymond Williams），英国文化研究和文化唯物主义的关键人物，提出了“感觉结构”（structure of feeling）的概念，作为一种理解特定历史时期社会经验生活特质的方式，特别是那些新兴的、仍在形成中或尚未在主导意识形态或正式机构中充分表达的方面。23 该术语最早于 1950 年代中期提出，并在《漫长的革命》（The Long Revolution, 1961）和《马克思主义与文学》（Marxism and Literature, 1977）等著作中得到详细阐述，旨在捕捉一种特定的“社会经验和关系的特质”47，一种共享的感受、氛围或特定时间和地点的实践意识。23
The concept holds two key terms in tension: "structure" suggests shared patterns, sociality, and definite forms, while "feeling" emphasizes lived experience, affect, attitudes, and elements that may be pre-discursive or "in solution," not yet precipitated into fixed concepts or ideologies.23 Williams intended the concept to move beyond static analyses of "world-view" or "ideology," which he felt often reduced complex lived realities to finished products of the past.44 Instead, "structure of feeling" aims to access the presentness of the past, the "social experiences in solution" 49, identifying emergent meanings, values, and ways of living as they are being formed.44 Williams saw these structures as particularly evident in cultural forms like literature and drama, where tensions between received forms and practical experience become manifest.48 Shifts in language use or the affective charge of certain symbols could indicate a changing structure of feeling.52 Within his broader cultural materialist project, the concept served to analyze culture as an active process, deeply embedded in material life and social relations, existing in the dynamic interplay between dominant cultural forms and the complexities of lived experience.44
这个概念包含两个关键术语的张力：“结构”暗示了共享的模式、社会性和确定的形式，而“感觉”则强调了生活经验、情感、态度以及可能是前话语或“处于溶液中”的元素，尚未沉淀为固定的概念或意识形态。23 威廉姆斯希望这个概念超越对“世界观”或“意识形态”的静态分析，他认为这些分析往往将复杂的生活现实简化为过去的成品。44 相反，“感觉结构”旨在触及过去的当下性，即“处于溶液中的社会经验”49，识别正在形成的 emergent 意义、价值和生活方式。44 威廉姆斯认为这些结构在文学和戏剧等文化形式中尤为明显，在这些形式中，接受的形式与实践经验之间的张力变得显现。48 语言使用的变化或某些符号的情感负荷可能表明感觉结构正在发生变化。52 在他更广泛的文化唯物主义项目中，这个概念用于分析文化作为一个活跃的过程，深深嵌入物质生活和社会关系中，存在于主导文化之间的动态互动中。 形式与生活经验的复杂性。44
Despite its influence, Williams's concept of "structure of feeling" has faced persistent criticism regarding its theoretical and methodological challenges. It is frequently described as "notoriously difficult," "slippery," vague, and ambiguous.24 This ambiguity stems partly from Williams using the term in slightly different ways across his work 45 and the inherent difficulty of defining something intended to capture the pre-articulate or "in solution".49
尽管其影响力，Williams 的“感觉结构”概念一直面临关于其理论和方法论挑战的持续批评。它经常被描述为“臭名昭著地难以理解”、“ slippery”、“模糊”和“模棱两可”。24 这种模糊性部分源于 Williams 在其作品中以略微不同的方式使用该术语 45，以及定义某种旨在捕捉前语言或“溶解中”事物的固有困难。49
Methodologically, identifying and analyzing these emergent structures presents significant hurdles. How does one empirically access or analyze feelings and experiences that are, by definition, not yet fully formed or articulated, without reducing them to the very "finished products" Williams sought to avoid?47 Critics questioned whether texts alone could reveal these structures or if they were too autonomous.54
方法论上，识别和分析这些新兴结构面临重大障碍。如何以实证方式获取或分析那些根据定义尚未完全形成或表达的感受和经验，而不将它们简化为威廉姆斯试图避免的“成品”？47 批评者质疑仅靠文本是否能揭示这些结构，或者它们是否过于自主。54
There is also a potential theoretical tension within the concept itself: how to reconcile the emphasis on subjective, lived "feeling" with the notion of objective social "structure"?47 There is a risk, as Williams himself acknowledged, of performing the very abstractions one seeks to avoid when moving from specific experiences to identifying a shared structure.47 Furthermore, while Williams intended the concept to support a democratic vision of culture, some critics argue that its reliance on the interpretations of artistic and intellectual arbiters (like the literary critic) to identify these structures might inadvertently maintain a privileged role for cultural elites, constraining its democratic potential.45 Finally, distinguishing genuinely emergent, potentially counter-hegemonic structures of feeling from those already shaped or incorporated by dominant ideology remains a challenge.52
概念本身内部也存在潜在的理论张力：如何调和对主观、亲历“感觉”的强调与客观社会“结构”的概念？47 正如威廉姆斯自己所承认的，从具体经验转向识别共享结构时，存在一种风险，即执行自己试图避免的抽象化。47 此外，尽管威廉姆斯希望这一概念支持文化的民主愿景，但一些批评者认为，其依赖于艺术和知识仲裁者（如文学评论家）的解释来识别这些结构，可能会无意中维持文化精英的特权角色，限制其民主潜力。45 最后，区分真正新兴的、可能具有反霸权性质的感觉结构与那些已被主导意识形态塑造或纳入的感觉结构仍然是一个挑战。52
These early departures, including the work of the Frankfurt School, Hochschild, and Williams, represent significant attempts within or alongside the Marxist tradition to grapple with the complexities of subjectivity, culture, and emotion under capitalism. They moved the analysis beyond purely economic structures to consider how power shapes consciousness, feeling, and everyday life. However, the limitations encountered, particularly the methodological and theoretical ambiguities surrounding concepts like "structure of feeling," highlight persistent challenges in rigorously integrating affect and subjectivity into a materialist framework. These challenges foreshadow debates that continue in the more recent encounter between Marxism and affect theory.
这些早期的探索，包括法兰克福学派、霍赫希尔德和威廉姆斯的工作，代表了在马克思主义传统内部或与其并行的重大尝试，试图应对资本主义下主体性、文化和情感的复杂性。他们将分析超越了纯粹的经济结构，考虑权力如何塑造意识、情感和日常生活。然而，所遇到的局限性，尤其是围绕“情感结构”等概念的方法论和理论模糊性，凸显了将情感和主体性严谨地整合进唯物主义框架中的持续挑战。这些挑战预示了马克思主义与情感理论在近期交汇中继续存在的争论。
The late 20th and early 21st centuries saw a more explicit and sustained engagement between Marxist and critical theory and the burgeoning interdisciplinary field of affect theory. This encounter introduced new conceptual tools and frameworks for analyzing the role of emotions, feelings, and embodied intensities in shaping social, political, and economic life.
20 世纪末和 21 世纪初，马克思主义和批判理论与新兴的跨学科情感理论领域之间出现了更为明确和持续的互动。这一交汇引入了新的概念工具和框架，用于分析情感、感觉和身体强度在塑造社会、政治和经济生活中的作用。
Affect theory is not a single unified doctrine but encompasses diverse theoretical lineages.55 One influential strand originates with psychologist Silvan Tomkins, whose work in the 1960s focused on identifying a set of innate, biologically based primary affects (such as enjoyment/joy, interest/excitement, distress/anguish, fear/terror, anger/rage, shame/humiliation, disgust).25 Tomkins viewed these affects as "hard-wired" mechanisms triggering specific physiological responses, forming the biological core of emotion.25
情感理论并非单一统一的学说，而是包含了多种理论谱系。55 其中一个有影响力的分支源于心理学家 Silvan Tomkins，他于 1960 年代的研究专注于识别一组天生的、基于生物学的基本情感（如享受/喜悦、兴趣/兴奋、痛苦/苦恼、恐惧/恐怖、愤怒/暴怒、羞耻/屈辱、厌恶）。25 Tomkins 认为这些情感是“硬编码”的机制，会触发特定的生理反应，构成情感的生物学核心。25
Another major trajectory, particularly influential in critical theory, draws inspiration from the philosophy of Baruch Spinoza, often mediated through the work of Gilles Deleuze.18 In this framework, affect (affectus) refers fundamentally to a body's capacity to affect other bodies and to be affected by them.18 Bodies (which can be human, animal, or even social) are defined less by their form or essence and more by their relational capacities and the intensities they can experience.18 An affection (affectio) is the modification of this capacity, the actual change or intensity experienced in an encounter between bodies.18 Affect, in this Spinozan-Deleuzean sense, is often conceptualized as pre-personal, pre-cognitive, and operating at the level of bodily intensity and force, distinct from named, socially coded emotions.18 It emphasizes relationality, becoming, and the continuous modulation of capacities through interaction.18 While the distinction between affect (as intensity or capacity) and emotion (as qualified, named feeling) is theoretically significant for many, some theorists, like Sara Ahmed, use the terms more interchangeably, focusing on their social circulation and effects.11
另一个主要轨迹，特别是在批判理论中具有重要影响，受到巴鲁赫·斯宾诺莎（Baruch Spinoza）哲学的启发，通常通过吉尔·德勒兹（Gilles Deleuze）的作品进行中介。在这一框架中，情感（affectus）基本上指的是一种身体影响其他身体以及被其他身体影响的能力。身体（可以是人类的、动物的，甚至是社会的）更多地由其关系能力和所能体验的强度来定义，而非其形式或本质。一种情感变化（affectio）是这种能力的改变，是身体之间相遇时所经历的实际变化或强度。在这种斯宾诺莎-德勒兹的意义上，情感常常被概念化为前个人的、前认知的，并在身体强度和力量的层面上运作，区别于被命名的、被社会编码的情绪。它强调关系性、生成以及通过互动不断调整能力。尽管情感（作为强度或能力）与情绪（作为被限定、被命名的感觉）之间的区别在理论上对许多人来说很重要，但一些理论家，如萨拉·艾哈迈德（Sara Ahmed），则更倾向于交替使用这些术语，关注它们的社会流通和 效果.11
John McMahon offers a prominent example of explicitly reading Marx through the lens of affect theory, particularly the Deleuzean-Spinozan tradition.18 He argues that Marx can be understood as a "proto-affect theorist," whose critique of capitalism extends beyond economic exploitation to encompass the manipulation and appropriation of human affective capacities.18
约翰·麦克马洪提供了一个突出的例子，明确通过情感理论的视角，特别是德勒兹-斯宾诺莎传统，来解读马克思。18 他认为马克思可以被理解为一位“原初情感理论家”，其对资本主义的批判不仅限于经济剥削，还包括对人类情感能力的操纵和挪用。18
McMahon introduces the concept of the "tension of capitalist affect".18 This refers to a core contradiction within capitalism: on one hand, the development of productive forces under capitalism (technology, organization of labor) amplifies the potential affective capacities of human bodies—their power to act, create, interact, and experience (what Marx sometimes referred to as "vital forces" or "essential powers").18 On the other hand, capitalism simultaneously captures this increased affective capacity, channeling it towards the production of surplus value, the enrichment of the capitalist class, and the reproduction of the system itself, often while damaging or depleting the very bodies whose capacities are being exploited.18
麦克马洪引入了“资本主义情感张力”的概念。18 这指的是资本主义内部的一个核心矛盾：一方面，资本主义下的生产力发展（技术、劳动组织）增强了人体潜在的情感能力——他们行动、创造、互动和体验的能力（马克思有时称之为“生命力”或“本质力量”）。18 另一方面，资本主义同时捕捉这种增强的情感能力，将其引导向剩余价值的生产、资本家阶级的致富以及系统自身的再生产，通常在损害或耗尽那些被剥削能力的人体的同时进行。18
This affective reading reinterprets core Marxist concepts. Alienation is seen not only as separation from product or activity but as estrangement from one's own affective potential. Labor power is understood not just as physical energy but as encompassing the capacity to affect and be affected. Species-being relates to the potential for communal flourishing through the free development and expression of these capacities.18 McMahon suggests that this perspective enhances Marx's critique by revealing how capitalism exploits not just labor-time but the very "vital forces" and affective potential of human beings.18 Correspondingly, a communist society is envisioned not merely as collective ownership of the means of production, but as a social formation where the amplified affective capacities of individuals contribute to mutual development and cooperative flourishing, rather than being appropriated.30
这种情感性解读重新诠释了马克思主义的核心概念。异化不仅被视为与产品或活动的分离，而且被视为与自身情感潜能的疏远。劳动力不仅被理解为体力能量，还包括影响和被影响的能力。类存在（Species-being）与通过这些能力的自由发展和表达实现共同体繁荣的潜力有关。McMahon 认为，这种观点通过揭示资本主义不仅剥削劳动时间，而且剥削人类的“生命力”和情感潜能，从而增强了马克思的批判。相应地，共产主义社会不仅被设想为生产资料的集体所有制，而是一个社会形态，在那里，个体的情感能力得到增强， способствует 相互发展和合作繁荣，而不是被占有。
Sara Ahmed has become a highly influential figure in affect studies, developing concepts that bridge phenomenological description with critiques of social power, often drawing implicitly or explicitly on Marxist and feminist frameworks 11-.18 Central to her work is the concept of "affective economies".11 Ahmed argues that emotions are not static psychological states residing within individuals, but rather circulate between bodies, signs, and objects, much like capital in an economy.11 Emotions "do things"; they align subjects with some communities and against others, shape social spaces, and mediate the relationship between the individual and the collective.11
Sara Ahmed 已成为情感研究领域极具影响力的学者，她发展了一些概念，将现象学描述与对社会权力的批判相结合，常常隐性或显性地借鉴马克思主义和女权主义框架。她的核心概念是“情感经济”。Ahmed 认为，情感并非个体内部的静态心理状态，而是在身体、符号和物体之间循环，类似于经济中的资本。情感“有所作为”；它们使主体与某些群体结盟而与另一些群体对立，塑造社会空间，并调节个体与集体之间的关系。
A key mechanism in these affective economies is "stickiness".12 Through repeated association and circulation, affects become "stuck" to particular signs, objects, or bodies. For example, fear becomes stuck to the figure of the immigrant or terrorist; hate to racialized others; happiness to certain consumer goods or lifestyles.12 This stickiness is not inherent in the object or person but is an effect of social histories and ongoing circulation.60 Affective economies thus work to assign value and shape social reality by directing how we feel about certain things and people. Ahmed analyzes how specific emotions like hate, fear, disgust, love, and shame function politically to construct collective identities (like the nation, or the "ordinary" white subject), define boundaries, and justify social hierarchies and violence.12 Her work demonstrates how intimate feelings are profoundly social and political, shaped by and reproducing structures of power like racism, sexism, and nationalism. While her writing style is sometimes criticized as convoluted 62, her framework provides powerful tools for analyzing the affective dimensions of ideology and social conflict.
这些情感经济中的一个关键机制是“粘性”。12 通过反复的关联和流通，情感变得“粘附”于特定的符号、物体或身体上。例如，恐惧粘附于移民或恐怖分子的形象；仇恨粘附于种族化的他者；幸福粘附于某些消费品或生活方式。12 这种粘性并非物体或人固有的，而是社会历史和持续流通的结果。60 情感经济因此通过引导我们对某些事物和人的感受来分配价值并塑造社会现实。Ahmed 分析了像仇恨、恐惧、厌恶、爱和羞耻等特定情感如何在政治上发挥作用，构建集体身份（如国家或“普通”的白人主体），定义界限，并为社会等级和暴力辩护。12 她的工作展示了亲密感受是如何深刻地具有社会性和政治性，被权力结构如种族主义、性别歧视和民族主义所塑造并再生产。尽管她的写作风格有时被批评为晦涩 62，但她的框架为分析意识形态和社会冲突的情感维度提供了有力的工具。
Lauren Berlant's work, particularly the concept of "cruel optimism," offers a critical lens for understanding affective life under contemporary neoliberal capitalism 25-.18 Cruel optimism describes a specific kind of attachment: "a relation of cruel optimism exists when something you desire is actually an obstacle to your flourishing".26 This desired object might be a romantic relationship, a career path, a political project, or, most centrally for Berlant, the fantasy of "the good life" promised by capitalist society (e.g., upward mobility, job security, stable family life, meritocracy).26
Lauren Berlant 的工作，特别是“残酷乐观主义”的概念，为理解当代新自由资本主义下的情感生活提供了一个批判性视角。残酷乐观主义描述了一种特定的依附关系：“当你所渴望的东西实际上是你繁荣的障碍时，就存在一种残酷乐观主义的关系。”这种渴望的对象可能是一段浪漫关系、职业道路、政治项目，或者对 Berlant 来说最核心的，是资本主义社会所承诺的“美好生活”的幻想（例如，向上流动、职业保障、稳定的家庭生活、精英制度）。
The cruelty lies in the fact that the very object or fantasy that draws one's optimistic attachment actively impedes the realization of the desired flourishing.26 Under conditions of neoliberal precarity, economic instability, and systemic inequality, these conventional "good life" fantasies become increasingly fragile and unattainable for many, yet people remain affectively bound to them.26 Berlant analyzes why it is so hard to detach from these damaging attachments, even when their failure is evident.65 The optimism itself, the feeling of possibility generated by the attachment, becomes sustaining, regardless of the outcome.26
残酷之处在于，吸引一个人乐观依恋的对象或幻想恰恰积极地阻碍了所期望的繁荣的实现。26 在新自由主义不稳定、经济不稳定和系统性不平等的条件下，这些传统的“美好生活”幻想对许多人来说变得越来越脆弱和遥不可及，然而人们仍然在情感上与之紧密相连。26 Berlant 分析了为什么即使这些有害的依恋明显失败，人们也很难与之脱离。65 乐观本身，由依恋产生的可能性感觉，无论结果如何，都变得具有持续性。26
Berlant's analysis connects intimate, personal feelings—hope, desire, disappointment, exhaustion ("slow death" 67)—to broader socio-economic conditions and political structures.65 Cruel optimism becomes a way to diagnose the affective atmosphere of the present, characterized by crisis, impasse, and the fraying of traditional life narratives.26 Berlant draws on affect theory, psychoanalysis, and cultural critique, acknowledging the influence of Marxist thought in understanding how fantasy, desire, and the senses are shaped within capitalist relations.65 Her work highlights how neoliberalism operates not just through economic policies but through shaping affective attachments and managing expectations, often leaving individuals feeling worn out and stuck, "dogpaddling" in obscure circumstances.66
Berlant 的分析将亲密的、个人的情感——希望、欲望、失望、疲惫（“缓慢死亡” 67）——与更广泛的社会经济条件和政治结构联系起来。65 残酷的乐观主义成为一种诊断当前情感氛围的方式，其特点是危机、僵局以及传统生活叙事的破裂。26 Berlant 借鉴了情感理论、精神分析和文化批评，承认马克思主义思想在理解幻想、欲望和感官如何在资本主义关系中被塑造方面的影响。65 她的工作强调了新自由主义不仅通过经济政策运作，还通过塑造情感依附和管理期望来运作，常常让个体感到疲惫不堪和陷入困境，在模糊的情境中“狗刨式挣扎”。66
The encounter between Marxism and affect theory, exemplified by thinkers like McMahon, Ahmed, and Berlant, provides new conceptual resources for analyzing capitalism's operation beyond purely structural or ideological terms. Affect theory offers tools—such as capacity, circulation, stickiness, and cruel optimism—to investigate how power relations are lived, felt, embodied, and reproduced through desires, attachments, and intensities. This pushes Marxist analysis to engage more deeply with embodiment, the pre-cognitive, and the micro-politics of feeling.
马克思主义与情感理论的交汇，以 McMahon、Ahmed 和 Berlant 等思想家为代表，为分析资本主义运作提供了新的概念资源，超越了纯粹的结构或意识形态术语。情感理论提供了工具——如能力、循环、粘性以及残酷的乐观主义——来探究权力关系是如何被体验、感受、体现，并通过欲望、依恋和强度再生产的。这推动了马克思主义分析更深入地关注身体性、前认知以及感觉的微观政治。
However, this integration is not without tensions. Different strands of affect theory (e.g., Tomkins' biological focus vs. Deleuze/Spinoza's emphasis on fluid capacities) carry different implications for understanding history, structure, and agency, complicating their straightforward adoption into a Marxist framework. Furthermore, much of this work focuses specifically on critiquing contemporary neoliberal capitalism—its modes of affective labor, its generation of precarity, its reliance on consumerism and mood management. This suggests a particular relevance for understanding current societal dynamics, but also raises questions about the broader applicability of these affective frameworks to other historical forms of capitalism or other modes of production. Ultimately, integrating affect theory enriches Marxist analysis but requires careful attention to theoretical compatibility and the enduring principles of historical materialism and the critique of political economy.
然而，这种整合并非没有张力。情感理论的不同分支（例如，Tomkins 的生物学焦点与 Deleuze/Spinoza 强调流动能力的观点）对于理解历史、结构和能动性具有不同的含义，这使得它们直接融入马克思主义框架变得复杂。此外，这项工作的很大一部分专门集中于批判当代新自由主义资本主义——其情感劳动模式、其不稳定性的产生、其对消费主义和情绪管理的依赖。这表明其对于理解当前社会动态具有特别的相关性，但也引发了关于这些情感框架对其他历史形式的资本主义或其他生产模式的更广泛适用性的问题。最终，整合情感理论丰富了马克思主义分析，但需要仔细关注理论兼容性以及历史唯物主义和政治经济学批判的持久原则。
Table 1: Key Thinkers and Concepts in the Emotional Turn of Marxism
表 1：马克思主义情感转向中的关键思想家和概念
Thinker(s)/School 思想家/学派 | Key Concept(s) 关键概念 | Core Argument re: Emotion/Affect | Relation to Marxism 与马克思主义的关系 | Key Sources (Examples) 主要来源（示例） |
Karl Marx 卡尔·马克思 | Alienation, Species-Being, Needs, Passions | Capitalism frustrates human nature/needs, leading to alienated labor characterized by misery, unhappiness, dehumanization. | Foundational critique of capitalism's impact on human potential and subjective experience. | 10 |
Frankfurt School (Adorno, Horkheimer, Marcuse) | Culture Industry, Instrumental Reason, Repressive Tolerance | Mass culture under capitalism manipulates consciousness, shapes desires/emotions, pacifies dissent, instrumental reason leads to domination. | Critical Theory expanding Marxist critique to culture, ideology, psychology; linking structure to subjective manipulation. | 20 |
Arlie Hochschild 阿莉·霍赫希尔德 | Emotional Labor 情感劳动 | Commodification of feeling in service work leads to alienation from one's own emotions for profit. | Direct application of Marx's alienation concept to the realm of emotion management in labor. | 10 |
Raymond Williams 雷蒙德·威廉斯 | Structure of Feeling 感觉结构 | Captures emergent, lived social experience/sensibility ("feeling") within a specific historical context ("structure"). | Cultural Materialism seeking to grasp lived reality beyond fixed ideology within a historical materialist framework. | 23 |
John McMahon (via Spinoza/Deleuze) | Capitalist Affect, Tension of Affect, Vital Forces | Capitalism amplifies but appropriates bodies' affective capacities (to affect/be affected) for profit, enhancing alienation. | Re-reading Marx's critique through affect theory; exploitation includes appropriation of affective potential. | 18 |
Sara Ahmed 萨拉·艾哈迈德 | Affective Economies, Stickiness | Emotions circulate like capital, "sticking" to objects/bodies, shaping social alignments, collective identities, and power. | Affective analysis of ideology, social division, and how power operates through circulated feelings. | 11 |
Lauren Berlant 劳伦·贝兰特 | Cruel Optimism 残酷的乐观主义 | Attachment to desired objects/fantasies (e.g., "good life") that impede flourishing persists affectively under neoliberalism. | Affective critique of neoliberal capitalism and its failing promises; analysis of attachment to damaging norms. | 26 |
The "emotional turn" intersects significantly with long-standing Marxist debates concerning subjectivity, consciousness, and the critique of mainstream psychological thought. While often wary of psychological reductionism, various Marxist traditions have engaged deeply with the question of the subject within historical materialism.
“情感转向”与长期存在的马克思主义关于主体性、意识以及对主流心理学思想批判的辩论有显著交集。尽管常常警惕心理学还原论，各种马克思主义传统在历史唯物主义框架内深入探讨了主体的问题。
A consistent theme within Marxist thought is the critique of "psychologism"—the tendency to explain complex social, political, and economic phenomena primarily in terms of individual psychology or inherent human nature.28 From a Marxist perspective, such approaches obscure the determining role of material conditions, social structures, and class relations. Mainstream psychology and psychiatry, particularly as practiced under capitalism, are often viewed as potentially ideological disciplines.28 They risk reinforcing bourgeois individualism, naturalizing social inequalities, and diverting attention from systemic problems by locating the source of distress within the individual psyche or biology.27
马克思主义思想中的一个一致主题是对“心理主义”的批判——即倾向于主要从个体心理学或固有的人性来解释复杂的社会、政治和经济现象。28 从马克思主义的观点来看，这种方法掩盖了物质条件、社会结构和阶级关系的关键决定作用。主流心理学和精神病学，特别是在资本主义制度下的实践，常常被视为潜在的意识形态学科。28 它们有强化资产阶级个人主义、将社会不平等自然化以及通过将痛苦的根源定位于个体心理或生物学来转移对系统性问题的注意的风险。27
This critique is particularly sharp regarding the medicalization of social problems. Marxist analyses highlight how various forms of suffering and social deviance rooted in capitalist conditions—such as poverty, alienation, resistance to authority, or the stresses imposed by exploitative work or oppressive gender roles—are frequently reframed as individual mental illnesses.10 For example, the public mental health system has been analyzed as evolving alongside capitalism to manage populations whose behavior was deemed too disruptive or inefficient for the labor market, effectively obscuring the social origins of their problems.27 The rise in diagnoses like Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in children has been linked to the increasing demands of neoliberal capitalism for compliant, self-disciplined future workers and the pressures placed on educational institutions.28 Similarly, the historical pathologization of women's emotions and experiences by psychiatric institutions has been shown to reinforce traditional gender roles and patriarchal power structures.28
这种批评对于社会问题的医疗化尤为尖锐。马克思主义分析强调，源于资本主义条件的各种痛苦和社会偏差形式——如贫困、异化、对权威的抵制，或剥削性工作和压迫性性别角色所带来的压力——常常被重新定义为个体的精神疾病。10 例如，公共心理健康系统被分析为与资本主义一同发展，以管理那些行为被认为对劳动力市场过于破坏性或低效的人群，有效地掩盖了他们问题的社会根源。27 儿童中注意力缺陷/多动障碍（ADHD）诊断的增加与新自由资本主义对顺从、自律的未来工人日益增长的需求以及对教育机构施加的压力有关。28 同样，精神病机构对女性情感和经历的历史性病理化被证明加强了传统性别角色和父权权力结构。28
By diagnosing socially generated problems as individual deficits (cognitive, biological, or characterological), psychiatry can function to "blame the victim," depoliticize suffering, and maintain the existing social order by preventing collective challenges.27 This medicalization renders contentious social issues morally and politically neutral, shielding them from critique.27 Even psychoanalysis, despite its potential insights into the unconscious, has been critiqued from some Marxist perspectives as potentially serving conformist ends by focusing on individual adaptation rather than social transformation 70, although attempts to synthesize Marx and Freud have also been a recurring theme in critical theory.22 This critical stance towards psychologism and medicalization underscores the Marxist insistence on analyzing individual distress within its broader socio-historical context and recognizing the ideological functions of psychological discourse.
通过将社会产生的问题诊断为个体缺陷（认知、生物或性格上的），精神病学可能起到“责备受害者”的作用，使苦难去政治化，并通过阻止集体挑战来维持现有社会秩序。27 这种医疗化使有争议的社会问题在道德和政治上变得中立，免受批评。27 甚至精神分析，尽管它对无意识有潜在的洞察，也从一些马克思主义视角中被批评为可能服务于顺从目的，因为它关注个体适应而非社会变革。70 尽管如此，尝试综合马克思和弗洛伊德的观点也是批判理论中反复出现的主题。22 这种对心理主义和医疗化的批判立场凸显了马克思主义坚持在更广泛的社会历史背景下分析个体痛苦，并认识到心理话语的意识形态功能。
The relationship between social structures and individual subjectivity poses a central question for historical materialism. The foundational idea that social existence determines consciousness 1 can seem to leave little room for individual agency or the complexities of subjective experience. However, many interpretations emphasize the dialectical nature of this relationship, acknowledging that while individuals are shaped by their material conditions and social relations, they are also active agents who interpret, respond to, and potentially transform those conditions.5
社会结构与个体主观性之间的关系是历史唯物主义的一个核心问题。社会存在决定意识这一基本观点似乎为个体能动性或主观体验的复杂性留下了很少的空间。然而，许多解释强调这种关系的辩证性质，承认虽然个体受到其物质条件和社会关系的塑造，但他们也是积极的行动者，能够解释、回应并可能改变这些条件。
Historian E.P. Thompson, for instance, strongly advocated for a historical materialism centered on the agency and self-activity of the working class.72 In The Making of the English Working Class, he countered mechanistic interpretations of Marxism by emphasizing how class is not just an economic category but also a cultural and historical formation, actively made through the lived experiences, struggles, ideas, and traditions of working people.72 This perspective restores the subject—the conscious, feeling, acting human being—to the center of the historical process, viewing class consciousness and struggle as products of human agency within specific structural constraints.71 Marx himself, particularly in his historical writings like The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, depicted history not as an abstract economic process but as a drama filled with the beliefs, emotions, actions, and conflicts of various classes and class fractions.36 While acknowledging the powerful influence of material circumstances ("Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please..."), this view recognizes the role of human consciousness and will in shaping historical outcomes. Some contemporary theorists, like Moishe Postone, differentiate between the individual, conscious subject and the abstract, structural "Subject" of Capital itself, suggesting another way to conceptualize agency within the constraints of the capitalist mode of production.36
例如，历史学家 E.P. Thompson 强烈倡导一种以工人阶级的能动性和自我活动为中心的历史唯物主义。72 在《英国工人阶级的形成》一书中，他通过强调阶级不仅仅是一个经济范畴，而是一种文化和历史形成，反驳了对马克思主义的机械解释，指出阶级是通过劳动人民的亲身经历、斗争、思想和传统积极构建的。72 这种观点将主体——有意识、有情感、能行动的人——重新置于历史过程的中心，将阶级意识和斗争视为在特定结构约束下的人类能动性的产物。71 马克思本人在其历史著作中，如《路易·波拿巴的雾月十八日》，也将历史描绘成一场充满各种阶级和阶级派别的信仰、情感、行动和冲突的戏剧，而非抽象的经济过程。36 虽然承认物质条件的强大影响（“人们自己创造自己的历史，但他们并不是随心所欲地创造……”），这种观点也认识到人类意识和意志在塑造历史结果中的作用。 一些当代理论家，如 Moishe Postone，区分了个体、有意识的主体与资本本身抽象的、结构性的“主体”（Subject），提出了另一种在资本主义生产方式限制下概念化能动性的方式。36
Marxist humanism represents a significant intellectual trend that explicitly foregrounds human agency, subjectivity, ethics, and the experience of alienation, often drawing heavily on Marx's earlier philosophical writings, particularly the 1844 Manuscripts.16 Arising partly in opposition to the more deterministic and scientistic interpretations of Marxism prevalent in Soviet dialectical materialism ("diamat") 73, Marxist humanism emphasizes the Hegelian and Feuerbachian roots of Marx's thought.16
马克思主义人本主义代表了一种重要的思想潮流，明确强调人的能动性、主体性、伦理以及异化的体验，常常大量借鉴马克思早期的哲学著作，特别是 1844 年手稿。马克思主义人本主义部分地是对苏联辩证唯物主义（"diamat"）中更为决定论和科学主义解释的反对，强调马克思思想的黑格尔和费尔巴哈根源。
This perspective rejects the idea that Marxism is primarily a natural science of society aiming to discover immutable laws. Instead, it views Marxism as a critical philosophy centered on human beings as active, conscious subjects who create their own history through social practice.73 It highlights the importance of understanding human intentionality, values, and the lived experience of oppression and alienation.16 Thinkers associated with this current, such as Jean-Paul Sartre (in his later work attempting to synthesize existentialism and Marxism), Maurice Merleau-Ponty, the early Georg Lukács, and Raya Dunayevskaya, stressed the open-ended nature of history and the centrality of human freedom and self-actualization.16 They argued for interpretive or hermeneutic approaches alongside causal explanation, recognizing that understanding social reality requires grasping the meanings and purposes embedded in human action.73 Marxist humanism seeks to restore a focus on the "whole person," including their ethical concerns and desire for a non-alienated existence, providing a philosophical basis for critiquing capitalism not only for its economic exploitation but also for its dehumanizing effects on the individual spirit.73
这种观点反对将马克思主义主要视为一种旨在发现不变法则的社会自然科学的想法。 相反，它将马克思主义视为一种以人为中心的批判哲学，强调人类作为积极的、有意识的主体，通过社会实践创造自己的历史。73 它突出了理解人类意向性、价值观以及压迫和异化生活经历的重要性。16 与这一思潮相关的思想家，如让-保罗·萨特（在他后期试图综合存在主义和马克思主义的作品中）、莫里斯·梅洛-庞蒂、早期的格奥尔格·卢卡奇和拉娅·杜娜耶夫斯卡娅，强调历史的开放性以及人类自由和自我实现的核心地位。16 他们主张在因果解释之外采用解释性或诠释性的方法，认识到理解社会现实需要把握人类行动中蕴含的意义和目的。73 马克思主义人本主义寻求恢复对“完整的人”的关注，包括他们的伦理关切和对非异化存在的渴望，为批判资本主义提供了哲学基础，不仅针对其经济剥削，也针对其对个体精神的人性化影响。73
Another significant engagement with subjectivity from within a Marxist framework comes from the Soviet school of cultural-historical psychology, primarily associated with Lev Vygotsky and Alexei Leontiev.15 Grounded explicitly in historical materialism, this school proposed a radically social theory of psychological development.15 Its core tenet is that uniquely human, higher mental functions—including complex thought, voluntary memory, and arguably higher emotions—are not innate biological capacities but are formed through social interaction and mediated by cultural tools, primarily language.15 Consciousness, in this view, arises from the internalization of social relations and cultural practices.15
另一个从马克思主义框架内部对主体性的重要探讨来自苏联的文化-历史心理学学派，主要与列夫·维果茨基和阿列克谢·列昂季耶夫相关联。15 该学派明确以历史唯物主义为基础，提出了一种彻底社会化的心理发展理论。15 其核心观点是，独特的人类高级心理功能——包括复杂思维、自愿记忆，以及可以说的高级情感——并非天生的生物能力，而是通过社会互动形成，并由文化工具（主要是语言）所中介。15 在这种观点中，意识源于社会关系和文化实践的内化。15
Vygotsky sought to overcome the Cartesian dualism that plagued contemporary psychology, aiming for an integrated understanding of thought and emotion.15 He argued that emotions, like cognitive functions, undergo cultural and historical development; "lower," more biologically based feelings are transformed into complex, culturally mediated "higher" emotions through social life.15 He emphasized the unity of intellect and affect, suggesting that our relationship to the world is simultaneously cognitive and emotional, shaped by our personal sense (smysl) derived from collective activity and language.15 Leontiev further developed Activity Theory, linking consciousness, personality, and motivation to the structure of objective, practical activity undertaken to satisfy needs.15 This approach offers a materialist psychology that grounds subjectivity and even emotional development firmly in social practice and historical context, viewing the human personality as a dynamic product of social activity rather than a fixed entity.15
维果茨基试图克服困扰当代心理学的笛卡尔二元论，旨在实现思想与情感的整合理解。15 他认为，情感与认知功能一样，经历了文化和历史的发展；“较低”的、更多基于生物学的情感通过社会生活转变为复杂的、受文化介导的“较高”情感。15 他强调智力和情感的统一，提出我们与世界的关系同时是认知和情感的，受我们从集体活动和语言中获得的个人意义（smysl）所塑造。15 列昂季耶夫进一步发展了活动理论，将意识、人格和动机与满足需求的客观、实践活动的结构联系起来。15 这种方法提供了一种唯物主义心理学，将主观性乃至情感发展牢牢扎根于社会实践和历史背景中，将人类人格视为社会活动的动态产物，而非固定实体。15
In summary, Marxism's relationship with psychology and subjectivity is multifaceted. It involves a strong critique of psychological theories that individualize social problems and serve ideological functions under capitalism. Simultaneously, various Marxist traditions—from historical interpretations emphasizing agency, to Marxist humanism, to cultural-historical psychology—have actively sought to develop non-reductive, materialist accounts of consciousness, agency, and even emotion, grounding these phenomena in social relations and historical processes. The critique of medicalization remains potent, reframing mental health as a political issue intertwined with social control, while the development of Marxist theories of the subject underscores the ongoing effort to understand the human experience within, and potentially beyond, capitalist society.
总之，马克思主义与心理学和主观性的关系是多方面的。它包括对将社会问题个体化并在资本主义下服务于意识形态功能的心理学理论的强烈批判。同时，从强调能动性的历史解释、马克思主义人本主义到文化历史心理学等各种马克思主义传统，积极寻求发展非还原论的、唯物主义的意识、能动性乃至情感的解释，将这些现象根植于社会关系和历史进程中。对医疗化的批判仍然有力，将心理健康重新定义为与社会控制交织的政治问题，而马克思主义主体理论的发展则凸显了在资本主义社会内部乃至可能超越其界限理解人类经验的持续努力。
Cultural Studies, as an interdisciplinary field emerging significantly in Britain in the mid-20th century, has played a crucial role in mediating and developing Marxist ideas in relation to lived experience, identity, and the affective dimensions of culture. Figures like Raymond Williams and Stuart Hall, while sometimes distancing themselves from orthodox Marxism, drew heavily on Marxist concepts to analyze contemporary culture.32
文化研究作为一个跨学科领域，在 20 世纪中叶的英国显著兴起，在调和和发展马克思主义思想与生活经验、身份认同以及文化的感情维度方面发挥了关键作用。像 Raymond Williams 和 Stuart Hall 这样的人物，虽然有时与正统马克思主义保持距离，但大量借鉴了马克思主义概念来分析当代文化。
Cultural Studies fundamentally shifted the focus from 'high culture' to the analysis of 'popular culture' and the entirety of social signifying practices—the ways meaning is produced and circulated in society through language, images, and practices.32 It examines representation not as a simple reflection of reality, but as a process of constructing meaning within specific social contexts.77 Central to its project is understanding how culture shapes subjectivity and identity, viewing these not as essential or fixed, but as constructed through social and cultural processes (anti-essentialism).77
文化研究从根本上将关注点从“高雅文化”转向了对“流行文化”及社会全部符号实践的分析——即通过语言、图像和实践在社会中产生和传播意义的方式。32 它将表征视为一种在特定社会语境中构建意义的过程，而非对现实的简单反映。77 其核心项目在于理解文化如何塑造主体性和身份，将这些视为通过社会和文化过程构建的，而非本质或固定的（反本质主义）。77
While often critiquing the economic determinism of some Marxist interpretations, Cultural Studies retains a commitment to materialism, exploring who controls cultural production and how this shapes cultural meanings, while insisting on non-reductionism—that culture cannot be simply reduced to the economic base.33 It makes extensive use of Gramsci's concept of hegemony to understand how power operates subtly through culture, ideology, and the manufacturing of consent, making dominant values seem like 'common sense'.5 Cultural Studies analyzes texts (broadly defined to include media, fashion, music, everyday practices) and their reception by audiences ("readers") to understand how meanings are negotiated and how power relations are reinforced or contested in everyday life.77
虽然经常批评某些马克思主义解释的经济决定论，文化研究仍然坚持唯物主义，探索谁控制文化生产以及这如何塑造文化意义，同时坚持非还原论——文化不能简单地被归结为经济基础。33 它广泛使用葛兰西的霸权概念来理解权力如何通过文化、意识形态和制造同意而微妙地运作，使主导价值观看起来像是“常识”。5 文化研究分析文本（广义上包括媒体、时尚、音乐、日常实践）及其受众（“读者”）的接受情况，以理解意义是如何协商的，以及权力关系在日常生活中是如何被强化或挑战的。77
This focus on lived experience, popular culture, representation, and the construction of identity provides fertile ground for analyzing affect and emotion. Cultural texts and practices are key sites where feelings are shaped, expressed, and circulated. The analysis of how ideologies become 'common sense' inherently involves understanding the affective dimensions of belief and belonging. Investigating how identities related to class, race, gender, sexuality, and nation are lived necessarily involves exploring the associated emotions, sensibilities, and affective attachments.33 Williams's "structure of feeling" is a prime example of a concept developed within Cultural Studies to capture precisely this intersection of social structure and lived, affective experience.10 Furthermore, Cultural Studies often carries an explicit political commitment to understanding and empowering marginalized groups, making the analysis of the affective dimensions of oppression and resistance particularly salient.34 While its relationship with post-Marxism is complex and sometimes contested 81, Cultural Studies has undeniably served as a crucial bridge, adapting and applying Marxist analytical tools to the terrain of culture and subjectivity, thereby paving the way for more explicit considerations of affect and emotion within critical social analysis. (It is crucial to distinguish this academic field from the antisemitic conspiracy theory misusing the term "Cultural Marxism" 82).
这种对生活经验、流行文化、表征以及身份构建的关注为分析情感和情绪提供了肥沃的土壤。文化文本和实践是塑造、表达和传播情感的关键场所。分析意识形态如何成为“常识”本质上涉及理解信仰和归属的情感维度。 研究与阶级、种族、性别、性取向和国家相关的身份如何被体验，必然涉及探索与之相关的情感、感性和情感依附。33 Williams 的“感觉结构”是一个在文化研究中发展起来的概念的典型例子，旨在准确捕捉社会结构与活生生的、情感体验的交叉点。10 此外，文化研究往往带有明确的政治承诺，致力于理解和赋权边缘化群体，使得对压迫和抵抗的情感维度的分析尤为突出。34 虽然它与后马克思主义的关系复杂且有时存在争议 81，但文化研究无疑充当了一个关键的桥梁，适应并应用马克思主义的分析工具到文化和主体性的领域，从而为在批判性社会分析中更明确地考虑情感和情绪铺平了道路。（必须将这一学术领域与滥用“文化马克思主义”一词的反犹阴谋论区分开来 82）。
The integration of emotion and affect into Marxist analysis represents a significant, albeit contested, development. Evaluating its contributions requires weighing its potential to deepen the critique of capitalism against concerns about theoretical ambiguity and potential depoliticization.
将情感和情绪融入马克思主义分析代表了一种重要的、尽管有争议的发展。评估其贡献需要权衡其深化资本主义批判的潜力与对理论模糊性和潜在去政治化的担忧。
The primary strength of the "emotional turn" lies in its potential to offer a richer, more comprehensive critique of capitalism. By moving beyond purely economic exploitation, it allows for an analysis of how capitalism impacts the full range of human experience, including subjective well-being, emotional life, and the potential for flourishing.10 Concepts like alienation gain deeper resonance when their affective dimensions—misery, resentment, dehumanization—are foregrounded.10
“情感转向”的主要优势在于其潜力，能够对资本主义提供更丰富、更全面的批判。通过超越纯粹的经济剥削，它允许分析资本主义如何影响人类的全面体验，包括主观幸福感、情感生活以及繁荣的可能性。10 像异化这样的概念，当其情感维度——痛苦、怨恨、非人化——被突出时，会获得更深的共鸣。10
Theories developed within this turn provide specific tools for analyzing contemporary capitalism. Hochschild's emotional labor illuminates the commodification of feeling in the service economy.10 Ahmed's affective economies offer a framework for understanding how ideologies like racism and nationalism operate through the circulation and "stickiness" of emotions like hate and fear.12 Berlant's cruel optimism diagnoses the affective attachments that bind people to precarious and damaging life paths under neoliberalism.26 McMahon's reading of Marx suggests capitalism appropriates not just labor-power but affective capacity itself.18 These frameworks help explain the subjective experience of phenomena like precarity, the politics of identity, and the power of consumer culture.12
在这一转向中发展出的理论为分析当代资本主义提供了具体工具。Hochschild 的情感劳动揭示了服务经济中情感的商品化。10 Ahmed 的情感经济提供了一个框架，用于理解种族主义和民族主义等意识形态如何通过仇恨和恐惧等情感的流通和“粘性”运作。12 Berlant 的残酷乐观主义诊断了在新自由主义下将人们束缚于不稳定和有害生活路径的情感依附。26 McMahon 对马克思的解读表明，资本主义不仅占有劳动能力，还占有情感能力本身。18 这些框架有助于解释不稳定性、身份政治和消费文化力量等现象的主观体验。12
Furthermore, focusing on affect can enhance the critique of ideology by revealing its often non-rational, embodied mechanisms. Hegemony and consent are maintained not just through belief systems but through the normalization of feelings and the cultivation of specific affective attachments.5 This perspective may also help explain the persistence of capitalist relations despite their inherent contradictions and crises; affective investments in certain objects, lifestyles, or fantasies can override rational critique or awareness of exploitation.26 By engaging with contemporary concerns about subjectivity, identity, mental health, and well-being, the emotional turn can potentially revitalize Marxist theory, making it more relevant to current social struggles and lived realities.83
此外，关注情感可以增强对意识形态的批判，揭示其往往非理性的、身体化的机制。霸权和同意不仅通过信仰体系维持，还通过情感的常态化和特定情感依附的培养来实现。5 这一视角可能还有助于解释资本主义关系尽管存在固有的矛盾和危机却依然持续的原因；对某些对象、生活方式或幻想的情感投入可以压倒理性批判或对剥削的意识。26 通过参与对主体性、身份、心理健康和福祉的当代关注，情感转向有可能重振马克思主义理论，使其与当前的社会斗争和生活现实更加相关。83
Despite these potential contributions, the emotional turn faces significant criticisms. A major concern revolves around the risk of depoliticization. Some critics worry that an excessive focus on individual feelings, subjective experience, or pre-personal affect might divert attention from the analysis of objective social structures, class relations, and political economy—the traditional core of Marxist critique.29 There is a danger that affect theory, particularly strands emphasizing affirmation or resilience, could become compatible with neoliberal ideologies that individualize responsibility and pathologize dissent.86 Critiques like Ruth Leys' challenge whether affect theory offers genuine critical insight or merely describes pre-cognitive responses lacking political purchase.25 The debate between Adorno's negative dialectics and Massumi's affirmative affect highlights this tension regarding whether critique requires negativity or can operate through affirmation.85 Concerns about insufficient materialism also arise, questioning whether some affective analyses adequately connect feelings back to concrete social and economic conditions.30
尽管有这些潜在的贡献，情感转向面临着显著的批评。一个主要的担忧围绕着去政治化的风险。一些批评者担心，过度关注个人感受、主观体验或前个人情感可能会将注意力从客观社会结构、阶级关系和政治经济学的分析上转移开——这些是马克思主义批判的传统核心。29 存在一种危险，即情感理论，特别是强调肯定或韧性的分支，可能与新自由主义意识形态相兼容，这些意识形态将责任个体化并将异议病态化。86 像 Ruth Leys 这样的批评质疑情感理论是否提供了真正的批判性洞见，还是仅仅描述了缺乏政治影响的前认知反应。25 Adorno 的否定辩证法与 Massumi 的肯定情感之间的争论凸显了这种张力，即批判是否需要否定性，还是可以通过肯定性来运作。85 关于物质主义不足的担忧也随之而来，质疑某些情感分析是否充分将情感与具体的社会和经济条件联系起来。30
Another significant challenge lies in theoretical ambiguity and methodological difficulty. As noted with Williams's "structure of feeling," concepts central to the emotional turn can be vague, slippery, and difficult to define precisely.45 "Affect" itself remains a contested term with multiple definitions.25 This ambiguity poses methodological problems: how can subjective, fluid, or pre-articulate phenomena be rigorously studied within a materialist framework without resorting to subjective interpretation or abandoning empirical grounding?47 The reliance on textual analysis or phenomenological description can sometimes lack the structural grounding expected in Marxist analysis.
另一个重大挑战在于理论的模糊性和方法论的难度。正如 Williams 的“感觉结构”所指出的，情感转向中的核心概念可能模糊、难以捉摸，且难以精确定义。45 “情感”（Affect）本身仍是一个有争议的术语，具有多种定义。25 这种模糊性带来了方法论问题：如何在唯物主义框架内严谨地研究主观的、流动的或前语言现象，而不诉诸主观解释或放弃经验基础？47 对文本分析或现象学描述的依赖有时可能缺乏马克思主义分析中所期望的结构基础。
Finally, the fundamental challenge of reconciling structure and affect/agency persists. How can Marxist theory adequately account for both the powerful shaping influence of social and economic structures on emotional life and the potential for affect and emotion to fuel resistance, shape agency, and contribute to social change?10 Achieving a truly dialectical understanding that avoids both structural determinism (where affect is merely an effect) and affective voluntarism (where feelings float free from material constraints) remains a complex theoretical task. How affect circulates within, reinforces, but also potentially disrupts social structures requires further elaboration.
最后，调和结构与情感/能动性的根本挑战依然存在。马克思主义理论如何能够充分解释社会和经济结构对情感生活的强大塑造影响，以及情感和情绪激发抵抗、塑造能动性并促进社会变革的潜力？10 实现一种真正的辩证理解，既避免结构决定论（其中情感仅仅是一种结果），也避免情感唯意志论（其中感觉脱离物质约束而自由浮动），仍然是一项复杂的理论任务。情感如何在社会结构内循环、强化但也可能破坏社会结构，需要进一步阐述。
Ultimately, the debates surrounding the emotional turn reflect a long-standing, perhaps inherent, tension within Marxism itself: the relationship between its analysis of objective economic structures and its understanding of subjective consciousness, experience, culture, and agency.9 Is the focus on emotion and affect a necessary corrective to the dangers of economic reductionism, enriching Marxism by providing a more holistic account of human life under capitalism? Or does it represent a dilution of Marxism's core political-economic critique, potentially blunting its revolutionary edge by shifting focus towards the cultural or psychological?
最终，围绕情感转向的争论反映了马克思主义内部长期存在、或许是固有的紧张关系：其对客观经济结构的分析与其对主观意识、经验、文化和能动性的理解之间的关系。9 关注情感和情感效应是否是对经济还原论危险的必要纠正，通过提供对资本主义下人类生活的更全面描述来丰富马克思主义？还是说这代表了对马克思主义核心政治经济批判的稀释，通过将焦点转向文化或心理层面，可能削弱其革命锋芒？
Achieving a truly integrated analysis that gives due weight to both the "objective" factors of political economy (class, labor, accumulation, exploitation) and the "subjective" factors of lived experience (consciousness, ideology, emotion, affect, desire) without collapsing one into the other remains a central theoretical and political challenge. The emotional turn forces this tension into sharper relief, demanding frameworks capable of navigating the complex interplay between material conditions and the affective lives of individuals and collectives. The critiques leveled against it often mirror broader debates within critical theory concerning structure versus agency, materialism versus idealism, and the relative importance of economic versus cultural factors in driving historical change. The specific focus on affect adds layers of complexity related to embodiment, non-discursive experience, and the often-unconscious forces shaping human behavior.
实现一种真正综合的分析，既充分重视政治经济学的“客观”因素（阶级、劳动、积累、剥削），又重视生活经验的“主观”因素（意识、意识形态、情感、影响、欲望），而不将两者混为一谈，仍然是一个核心的理论和政治挑战。情感转向使这种张力更加凸显，要求建立能够驾驭物质条件与个人及集体情感生活之间复杂相互作用的框架。对其提出的批评往往反映了批判理论中更广泛的争论，涉及结构与能动性、唯物主义与唯心主义，以及经济因素与文化因素在推动历史变革中的相对重要性。对情感的具体关注增加了与身体化、非话语经验以及常常无意识地塑造人类行为的因素相关的复杂性。
Therefore, the "emotional turn" should be viewed not as a completed paradigm or a definitive solution, but as an ongoing, contested field of inquiry. Its value lies in pushing Marxist theory to grapple more profoundly with the subjective dimensions of capitalist domination and resistance. However, its proponents must continually address challenges related to theoretical clarity, methodological rigor, and the imperative to maintain a critical focus on political economy, ensuring that the analysis of affect serves to deepen, rather than displace, the fundamental critique of capital.
因此，“情感转向”不应被视为一个完成的范式或确定的解决方案，而是一个持续的、有争议的探究领域。其价值在于推动马克思主义理论更深入地处理资本主义支配与抵抗的主观维度。然而，其倡导者必须不断应对与理论清晰度、方法论严谨性以及保持对政治经济批判性关注的迫切需要相关的挑战，确保对情感的分析有助于深化而非取代对资本的基本批判。
This report has traced the complex and evolving relationship between Marxism and the analysis of emotion and affect. Starting from the implicit affective dimensions within Marx's foundational concepts of human nature, needs, and alienation, the analysis moved through key theoretical developments. The Frankfurt School initiated a critical engagement with culture and psychology, analyzing the manipulation of consciousness and desire by the culture industry. Sociological applications, exemplified by Hochschild's work on emotional labor, directly linked Marxist alienation to the commodification of feeling in the workplace. Cultural materialists like Raymond Williams sought concepts like "structures of feeling" to capture the lived, affective quality of historical moments, bridging structure and experience.
本报告追溯了马克思主义与情感和影响分析之间复杂且不断演变的关系。从马克思关于人性、需求和异化的基础概念中隐含的情感维度开始，分析经历了关键的理论发展。法兰克福学派开启了对文化和心理学的批判性探讨，分析了文化工业对意识和欲望的操纵。以霍赫希尔德关于情感劳动的研究为代表的社会学应用，直接将马克思主义的异化与工作场所中情感的商品化联系起来。像雷蒙德·威廉斯这样的文化唯物主义者寻求“情感结构”等概念，以捕捉历史时刻的真实、情感特质，弥合结构与经验之间的差距。
The more recent, explicit encounter with affect theory has introduced new conceptual tools—affective economies, stickiness, cruel optimism, capitalist affect—developed by thinkers such as Ahmed, Berlant, and McMahon, offering nuanced ways to understand how power operates through the circulation and attachment of feelings, particularly under neoliberalism. Concurrently, Marxist critiques of psychologism and the medicalization of distress have continued, challenging the individualization of social problems while alternative materialist accounts of subjectivity, such as cultural-historical psychology, have been developed.
最近与情感理论的明确接触引入了新的概念工具——情感经济、粘性、残酷乐观主义、资本主义情感——这些是由 Ahmed、Berlant 和 McMahon 等思想家提出的，为理解权力如何通过情感的流通和依附运作提供了细致入微的方式，特别是在新自由主义下。同时，马克思主义对心理主义和苦难医疗化的批判仍在继续，挑战社会问题的个体化，而其他唯物主义的主体性解释，如文化-历史心理学，也得到了发展。
The significance of this "emotional turn" lies in its potential to provide a more comprehensive and compelling critique of capitalism. It moves beyond purely economistic interpretations to encompass the system's impact on subjective experience, desire, embodiment, and psychological well-being. It offers enhanced tools for analyzing ideology, understanding the persistence of damaging social relations through affective investments, and engaging with contemporary phenomena where emotion and affect are visibly central. It challenges Marxism to develop a richer understanding of the human subject within historical materialism.
这一“情感转向”的重要性在于其潜力，为资本主义提供更全面、更具说服力的批判。它超越了纯粹的经济主义解释，涵盖了该体系对主观体验、欲望、身体化和心理健康的影响。它为分析意识形态提供了增强的工具，帮助理解通过情感投入持续存在的有害社会关系，并参与到情感和影响明显为核心的当代现象中。它挑战马克思主义在历史唯物主义中发展对人类主体更丰富的理解。
The integration of emotion and affect into Marxist analysis remains an ongoing project, requiring further theoretical synthesis and methodological innovation. Future research should focus on several key areas:
将情感和情绪融入马克思主义分析仍是一个持续的项目，需要进一步的理论综合和方法创新。未来的研究应集中于几个关键领域：
In pursuing these directions, it is crucial to maintain the critical edge of Marxist analysis. Incorporating insights about emotion and affect should serve to sharpen the critique of capital and inform struggles for social transformation, rather than leading to a depoliticized focus on individual feelings. The challenge remains to develop a Marxism that is fully attuned to the complexities of subjective and emotional life without losing sight of the fundamental importance of material conditions and economic structures in shaping that life. The "emotional turn," understood as an ongoing project rather than a finished doctrine, holds significant promise for achieving this richer, more comprehensive critical understanding of our contemporary world.
在追求这些方向时，保持马克思主义分析的批判锋芒至关重要。纳入关于情感和影响的见解应有助于 sharpening 对资本的批判并为社会转型的斗争提供信息，而不是导致对个人感受的去政治化关注。挑战仍然是发展一种马克思主义，这种马克思主义充分适应主观和情感生活的复杂性，同时不忽视物质条件和经济结构在塑造这种生活中的根本重要性。“情感转向”被理解为一个持续的项目而非完成的教条，为实现对我们当代世界更丰富、更全面的批判性理解提供了重要的希望。