Key Arguments

• Marx begins by noting that commodities first appear as ordinary material goods—"iron, linen, corn, etc."—which is their "plain, homely, natural form", but insists that they are commodities only because they are "at the same time objects of utility and bearers of value".
• He argues that commodities "only appear as commodities, or have the form of commodities, in so far as they possess a double form, i.e. natural form and value form", tying the status of being a commodity to this duality.
• He emphasizes that "not an atom of matter enters into the objectivity of commodities as values" and that this value-objectivity is the "direct opposite" of their "coarsely sensuous objectivity" as physical things, thereby separating value from any physical or natural property.
• Marx grounds this value-objectivity in labour: commodities possess an objective character as values "only in so far as they are all expressions of an identical social substance, human labour", therefore "their objective character as values is therefore purely social".
• From this he concludes that value can only appear in relations between commodities: "it can only appear in the social relation between commodity and commodity"; this is why he returns from value to "exchange-value, or the exchange relation of commodities" as the "form of appearance of value".
• He underlines that all commodities share a "common value-form"—"the money-form"—which stands in sharp contrast to "the motley natural forms of their use-values", indicating that the value-form is a distinct social form overlaying heterogeneous natural forms.

Source Quotes

3. THE VALUE-FORM, OR EXCHANGE-VALUE Commodities come into the world in the form of use-values or material goods, such as iron, linen, corn, etc. This is their plain, homely, natural form. However, they are only commodities because they have a dual nature, because they are at the same time objects of utility and bearers of value.

THE VALUE-FORM, OR EXCHANGE-VALUE Commodities come into the world in the form of use-values or material goods, such as iron, linen, corn, etc. This is their plain, homely, natural form. However, they are only commodities because they have a dual nature, because they are at the same time objects of utility and bearers of value. Therefore they only appear as commodities, or have the form of commodities, in so far as they possess a double form, i.e. natural form and value form.

However, they are only commodities because they have a dual nature, because they are at the same time objects of utility and bearers of value. Therefore they only appear as commodities, or have the form of commodities, in so far as they possess a double form, i.e. natural form and value form. The objectivity of commodities as values differs from Dame Quickly in the sense that ‘a man knows not where to have it’.

The objectivity of commodities as values differs from Dame Quickly in the sense that ‘a man knows not where to have it’. Not an atom of matter enters into the objectivity of commodities as values; in this it is the direct opposite of the coarsely sensuous objectivity of commodities as physical objects. We may twist and turn a single commodity as we wish; it remains impossible to grasp it as a thing possessing value.

We may twist and turn a single commodity as we wish; it remains impossible to grasp it as a thing possessing value. However, let us remember that commodities possess an objective character as values only in so far as they are all expressions of an identical social substance, human labour, that their objective character as values is therefore purely social. From this it follows self-evidently that it can only appear in the social relation between commodity and commodity.

However, let us remember that commodities possess an objective character as values only in so far as they are all expressions of an identical social substance, human labour, that their objective character as values is therefore purely social. From this it follows self-evidently that it can only appear in the social relation between commodity and commodity. In fact we started from exchange-value, or the exchange relation of commodities, in order to track down the value that lay hidden within it.

We must now return to this form of appearance of value. Everyone knows, if nothing else, that commodities have a common value-form which contrasts in the most striking manner with the motley natural forms of their use-values. I refer to the money-form. Now, however, we have to perform a task never even attempted by bourgeois economics.

Key Concepts

• Commodities come into the world in the form of use-values or material goods, such as iron, linen, corn, etc. This is their plain, homely, natural form.
• However, they are only commodities because they have a dual nature, because they are at the same time objects of utility and bearers of value.
• Therefore they only appear as commodities, or have the form of commodities, in so far as they possess a double form, i.e. natural form and value form.
• Not an atom of matter enters into the objectivity of commodities as values; in this it is the direct opposite of the coarsely sensuous objectivity of commodities as physical objects.
• commodities possess an objective character as values only in so far as they are all expressions of an identical social substance, human labour, that their objective character as values is therefore purely social.
• From this it follows self-evidently that it can only appear in the social relation between commodity and commodity.
• Everyone knows, if nothing else, that commodities have a common value-form which contrasts in the most striking manner with the motley natural forms of their use-values. I refer to the money-form.

Context

Opening of section 3, where Marx introduces the value-form and reasserts the dual nature of the commodity while preparing to derive the money-form from simple value relations.