Dancer in the Dark and Marx

Karl Marx says, "...in his work...he does not affirm himself but denies himself, does not feel content but unhappy, does not develop freely his physical and mental energy but mortifies his body and ruins his mind." (p.298)

What is the significance of this description in relation to Dancer in the Dark?

This is one question I really struggled with. Does Selma fit Marx's description of the worker's experience? Certainly, if Selma can be considered "at work" while she's daydreaming in the factory, she lives in contradiction to Marx. But whether or not her musical daydreams count as taking place while she's "at work" is a very arguable idea. I would take the side that they do in fact take place "at work"- she does not, for example, create such fantastical scenarios at home, where she should be more free to do so. Even worse, when she's free from any necessary work, at prison, she feels tortured by the lack of rhythm, sound, and motion which really fueled her imaginings at the factory.

If Selma's musical daydreams do indeed count as taking place while she's working, how does she disagree with Marx?

I believe that Selma almost 100% opposes Marx's description here. Where he would describe her, at work, as being unaffirmed, malcontent, and barred from developing freely her "physical and mental energy," she seems to experience the exact opposite. At work, lost in the sound of the machines, even when she's not dreaming, Selma seems peaceful and content. In her daydreams, dancing with her co-workers, she was graceful, surrounded by friends, and affirmed. She definitely developed mental energy while working, through her colorful imaginings. In fact, the only agreement I saw between Marx's description and Selma's experience was the idea of "mortifies his body," as she did injure her finger as a result of working the machines blindly.