D. Kawa Mahmoud
I. Introduction: The Imperative of Change
“This world is not a just world. Let us change it!” This declaration, attributed to the eminent conductor Nikolaus Harnoncourt, who successfully recorded all of Beethoven’s symphonies, serves as a rallying call for revolutionary consciousness. Reflecting on Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony, Harnoncourt argued that the work constitutes a political appeal of revolutionary character.
Contemporary events, both nationally and globally, underscore the enduring truth of this assertion: the world remains unjust, and the possibility of change is a persistent option for oppressed peoples. The rhythm of Beethoven’s symphony itself embodies the spirit of revolutionary struggle in a methodical form: the first movement begins with an overwhelming storm, unstoppable by any obstacle; the second movement conveys hesitation and doubt; the finale culminates in a resounding victory.[^1]
Beethoven, though not a political analyst, possessed a revolutionary sensibility that enabled him to grasp the essence of historical transformations. Initially, he believed that Napoleon Bonaparte would champion the values of the French Revolution, dedicating his Third Symphony to him. Yet, upon realizing Napoleon’s self-proclamation as an absolute ruler in 1802 and his concordat with the Pope, Beethoven tore Napoleon’s name from the original dedication page—a mark still visible on the score today—and replaced it with: “To the memory of a great man, not Bonaparte.”
II. Revolutionary Music and Historical Consciousness
Just as Beethoven did not succumb to personal disappointment, the peoples of France and Europe—especially the working class—persisted in struggle, culminating in the revolutions of 1848 and the Paris Commune of 1871, the first proletarian revolution in history.[^2] Historical lessons indicate that any uprising or revolutionary movement lacking a coherent political program or clear strategic vision will swiftly encounter intellectual counter-revolutions and political repression aimed at suppressing transformative initiatives.
The Kurdish people, like other oppressed nations, have struggled to secure fundamental rights through various forms of resistance. The resilience and continuity of this struggle, however, depend upon a clear ideological and political foundation, one that prioritizes liberation and transformation. National and social struggle, if not intellectually and programmatically renewed and if deprived of effective strategy and tactical practice, risks stagnation within structural crises.[^3]
The depth of the contemporary global crisis does not stem solely from residual colonial structures or the failures of contemporary capitalism, but from their intensification and renewal in increasingly complex forms. Consequently, revolutionary and social forces—including the Kurdish people—face only one path: continuous resistance, intellectual and political renewal, and the creation of artistic and cultural vehicles that express and nourish this struggle, making literature and art integral to the social struggle.[^4]
III. Marxist Perspectives on Literature and Art
The revolutionary and progressive literary tradition has profoundly influenced the development of writing, philosophy, sociology, and economics, becoming a source of inspiration for major intellectual and artistic works. Karl Marx was among the foremost thinkers to endow literature and art with economic and social significance, sometimes being described as the poet of dialectics.
In the preface to the German edition of Capital, Marx famously borrowed a line from the Roman poet Horace (65–8 BCE): “This story speaks of you.” He intended to communicate to the German working class: do not claim indifference; this work does not merely address English workers but examines the laws of capitalist production governing the entire world.[^5]
Within Capital, Marx frequently incorporated Shakespearean characters—Falstaff and the Widow Cockle from Henry IV, Shylock from The Merchant of Venice—as symbolic tools to analyze social and economic relations under capitalism.[^6] In correspondence with Friedrich Engels, Marx noted that his children used Shakespearean names to describe people’s social attitudes, demonstrating the profound penetration of literature into social consciousness.
British writer Francis Wheen observed that Marx in Capital was not merely an economic theorist but a dialectical poet. Writing in The Guardian (8 July 2006), Wheen noted that Capital is “not only an economic analysis but a literary masterpiece, combining elements of Victorian melodrama, Greek tragedy, and even Jonathan Swift-style satire.”[^7] The book exhibits a radical literary structure, a multi-layered textual collage, in which Marx presents his work as an integrated artistic composition.
Marx also drew upon classical literature to reinforce his critiques of capitalism. In Capital, he references Shakespeare’s Timon of Athens: “Money is the root of corruption in human nature,” and Sophocles’ Antigone: “Money incites the hatred of men; nothing surpasses the hate of money.”[^8] Additionally, Marx alludes to a wide array of canonical authors, including Goethe, Milton, Voltaire, Homer, Balzac, Dante, Schiller, Plato, Zenon, Cervantes, and Thomas More, alongside references to romance novels, songs, melodrama, and comedic theater.[^9]
From a Marxist perspective, literary and artistic creativity is an essential aspect of human science: it is an inherent human trait in all societies. Humans, as creators, express emotions, ideas, sufferings, and joys through art. Literature and art are not merely aesthetic vehicles; they are instruments for self-understanding, sustaining social relations, and fostering active intercultural dialogue, especially in the age of globalization.
Historically, literature and art have embodied popular consciousness and its demands, serving as educational tools that empower individuals to understand their position in the world while continuously enabling social struggle for change. Works addressing people’s lives and struggles represent foundational milestones in human history, establishing a new existential philosophy grounded in reality. Even in Marx’s thought, when he argued that philosophers must not only interpret but change the world, literature and art emerge as philosophical tools for revolutionary transformation.
In 1867, prior to the publication of the first volume of Capital, Marx wrote to Engels recommending Balzac’s novel The Unknown Masterpiece. The story recounts the artist Frenhofer, who spent ten years creating a painting he believed would revolutionize art. Yet, when shown to his peers, it appeared meaningless—mere lines and colors. Realizing this, Frenhofer declared: “My painting is nothing!” before burning it and committing suicide.[^10] Marx, invoking this narrative, humorously reassured Engels: he hoped not to end like Frenhofer, his masterpiece consumed by fire. American critic Marshall Berman interprets this Balzacian tale as reflecting an early modernist spirit, with Frenhofer’s painting symbolizing an avant-garde abstract art, misunderstood in its time yet later forming a new artistic school.
IV. Art, Culture, and Social Responsibility
Throughout history, literature, art, and culture have consistently conveyed humanistic messages, reaching their peak in societies undergoing transitional phases prior to full liberation. The more acute the societal crises, the greater the responsibility of art and literature to communicate consciousness and change. Historical lessons demonstrate that music, poetry, theater, novels, and other art forms have always constituted integral components of revolutionary action against capitalism and struggles for social justice and national liberation.
Writers and artists must listen attentively to the pulse of the land and draw inspiration from the heart of Kurdistan, embodying in their works the spectrum of human emotion: joy and sorrow, progress and victory, failure and self-critique. They must faithfully express the hopes and sufferings of the people. Reviving the spirit of resistance within the Kurdish nation requires all forms of struggle—political, intellectual, cultural, and artistic—as they collectively constitute a single fabric in the battle for freedom and human liberation.[^11]
[^1]: Harnoncourt, N. (1993). The Musical Dialogue. Vienna: Philipp Reclam.
[^2]: Hobsbawm, E. J. (1962). The Age of Revolution: Europe 1789–1848. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
[^3]: Anderson, P. (1976). Lineages of the Absolutist State. London: Verso.
[^4]: Williams, R. (1977). Marxism and Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[^5]: Marx, K. (1867). Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, German Edition, Preface. Hamburg: Otto Meissner.
[^6]: Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1844). Correspondence.
[^7]: Wheen, F. (2006). “Capital as Literature,” The Guardian, 8 July.
[^8]: Marx, K. (1867). Capital, Vol. 1.
[^9]: Ibid.
[^10]: Balzac, H. (1831). Le Chef-d’œuvre inconnu. Paris: Charles Gosselin.
[^11]: Mahmoud, K. (2025). Art and Resistance: Kurdish Perspectives. Erbil: Kurdistan Cultural Institute.