THEWORKOFMOURNING--JACQUESDERRIDAEDITED avPASCAl.E-ANNEBRAULT
AND MICHAEL NAASTil';0'"CHICACO PausCHICACOANDLONPONThe: are byK.:u
Saghafi..Jacques Dther things U.n be $.:Iill to he friends'- l'his
would mean that alltlwstlP4oI0If"Ipny, uatU.
Ric:hardHoward(NewYork:H,llandWang, '981). 16. Sec M.lIurice
BI"nc:hoI. Tit.- MIUhtas o/rk 0.,..Ir..nt. Lydia Davi. (Barryrown,
N.Y.:StationHdl Pta., 19111). 18.CHAPTERROLANDBARTHESNOVEMBERU.
19'j-MARCH:016, 19&0Acclaimed lilerary c.ritic and essayist
RolandBartheswas borninCherbourg, into what hedescribed as
a"bourgeois family," toa Protestanl mOlher, HenrietteBinger. and a
Catholic father, Louis &rthes.
BarthcsW.:l.Sscarcelyayearoldwhenhisfather, anaval lieutenant.died
incombat in the NorthSea. Muchof&rthcsschildhoodwasspent in
Bayonne, inthesouthwest ofFrance, until he moved to Paris in 1924,
where hismotherearnedamodestlivingasabookbinder. From1930 to 1934
Barthes attended the Lyctt5 Montaigne andLouis-Ie-Grand, obtaining
two baccalaureates. He thenstudiedclassicsandPrenchliterature at
theUniversityof Paris. Sorbonne. andfoundedthe Groupe de
(hfatreantique.Throughout hislifeBanhessufferedbouts of illhealth,
the most devastatingbeing anillnessinhisleftlung that first beganin
1934 andwould affect thenexttenyears of his life, dashing his hopes
of ever auendingthe Ecole Normale Supericure. In1937 he was
exemptedfrommilitary service after contraeting tUberculosis.
Despite his poor health, Barthes visited Hungary and Grec:cebefore
startingto teachat thelyc& of Biarritzin1939.j'CII"PTK.ON8JJHe
eventually obtained a fiana de feltres cfauiqueJin1939 and a
dip/orned'itlldl!Smpbiellrl!S(based on his work on Greek tragedy)
fromtheSorbonne in 1941. From '940 to '941 he taught intermittently
al the LyceesVoltaire: andCarnOl in P3ris. Arelapse of
hispulmonarytuberculosisin 1941: causedhimtoenter
theSanatoriumSaint Hilaireintheregion. He spent the next five years
in and out of various sanatoriums andconvalescinginParis. During
theseyears hereadMichelet voraciously,developedaninteresl
inexistentialism, andwroteforCamus's journal,Combat. Due to his ill
health, the future professor at the Franceandrenowned expert in
semiologywas never able10 take the ogrigotionexam and never held:II
degree higher than a nijiaude fiance in grammarand philology
(obtained in 1943),'With improved health, Barthes taught French at
the (nstitut Frallfllisin Bucharest, Romania (t948), and at the
University ofAlexandria in Egypt(1949-50), before returning to
France. Between1951: and1954 he wrote aregular columnforLeJ fmrl!S
and cofounded aradical journal,TM6tre poptflairl!. from1952 to 1959
he worked 3t the Cc:ntre National dela Recherche Scientifique,
doing research in lexicology and sociology. Hisfirst book,
Wn'tingDegrUro. :lppc:arcdin1953, followedby Michelet(1954)
andMythologies(1957), all of whichdisplayedinnovativeuses
ofSaussurean structwallinguistics.In1960he enteredtheEcolePratique
desHautesEtudes, where,in1!Jl>1:, he bec:llne director of
studies in the "sociology of signs, symbols,and represcma!ions."
Aycar after the publicationof hiscontroversialOn Racine
(1!Jl>3), Raymond Picard, a profc:ssor at theSorbonneandeditorof
thecditionofRacine's works, publishedapamphletcriticiZingBarthes.
Thc ensuing "war of the critics"
(BarthesrcsJXlndedinCn'ticismandTnlth in19(6)hadtheunintendedresult
of increasingBarthes's burgeoning reputation.Inthe early IgOOs
B:lrthes befriendedmembers of thejournal Qud (to which he 31so
often contributed), in particular Philippe Sollers andJuliaKristeva
(who became his student in15). In1966 he visited Japanforthe
firsttime and attendedthefamousconference :It Johns HopkinsI.
Geoffrey Benningwn ofTeN Ihe folloWing opbnation Oflhe:u/l'iga,irm:
i. 3 compet.iti.c u311lirnuion IhalqU2lific>; 5ucc(:Ssful
forhiRher !!tachinglJOSIS. Suctt inthiJ eDmil\lltiun guar:>ntca
we ('1\(li(1;11.( aSUIte: jQI, for life, .ndil highly prized. A
fiul suge of the eu.ninalionin wrim:nfDP""s; ,"chieving a high
cnotlJ!.h filIrl< inrnovc: on Il)ol'1tl c:u.minat'ioo atwhich
the finalrcsuh.t arc (Geoff"')'Bennlllgton and/lIc"luC$ DnntU.
,nr.ns. Gc.-olTrey Iknningtoo (Chic:lgo: Un;"",,si,y
ofChiclllO'9931.339).inBaltimore alongwitha number of other
leadingFrenchintellccrua!s,inc.ludingJacques Derrid3. From1969to
1970Bartheslecturedat theMohamedV University of R.1b.11inMorocco
and later taught rhctoric atthe University of Geneva.His famous
essay'TheDeathof theAuthor"appcared in 1 , varound the same rime he
began criticiZing structuralism in his seminars.Intheearly1970s
Barthespublishedanring of innovativebooks: S/Z(1970; areading of
Balzac'snovella"Sarrasine"), of Signs
SadelFourinlLo)'Q1a(1971),Cnticaf EsJays(1972.), andThe Tat (1973)
His interest in painting, in particular Giuseppe Arcim-boldo,andCy
Twombly, also datesfromthe same period. In1971:Banhes mctthe young
film director Andre T&hine, who would become:I lifelong friend.
(Banhes pl3yed a minor role, as William Thackeray, inT6:hine's Ln
SOl!tITS Bronte 11978J). In1974Barthcs accompanied SoUersand
Kristeva on their trip to China and became a championroman,
especially the work of and Sollers (Harmes's Sollers.Writer
appeared in1979).The 19]05sawBarthcs's increasing rise to
prominencewiththepublication ofan "autobiography,: Roland Bankby
RolandBortlwhOZ4. \/aftcr which he m:l.de several radio and
television appearances. Barthcs wasthen appointed to the chair of
"literary semiology" at the College de France(hi.sinaugural !rure,
deliveredinJanu;uy1977, was laterpublishedasLtron). He conducted a
number ofimporunt radio interviews during thistimc
withBernard-Henri Uvy and Benoistand, from1978to1979, contributed a
regular columnto 1..L ALot'usDiscourse, published in 1977, became a
best-seiter, :lnd B.1rthcsappeared onBernard Pivot's popular
television show Apostrophe. In1978 a colloquiumwas
devoredtoBarthes'swork at Cerisy-b-Salle (at th3t time,
anhonorUSlL1lty bestowed only uJXln the deceased).The dcath
ofBarthes's mother on October 25. 1mwas a devastating
Vblowfromwhich Banhes, accordingtohis own account, never
fullyrecovered. Hislast book. CammJ Lucida,
writtenpartlyinmemor.!.. ofhis mother, was publishedin1980.
OnFebruary 25,1980, after Icaving aorganized by J;'IckJ...1ng for
the presidential candidate F'ran\oisMiuerand, Bartheswashitby
atruckwhile crossing the rue desEcolesncar theCotlegede Prance.
Hewastaken tothe SalpetriercHospitalwherehewas
treatedfortr:wmaandlater devdopcd severc pulmonarycomplications.
Already handicapped by chronic respiratory problems,&nhcs died
on the afternoon of March:16, 1980.THEDEATHSOF ROLANDBARTHESHow to
roncile this plural? How to concede, grant, or accord it? And
towhom?How to make it agree or bring it into accord?And with
whom?'AndsuchquestionsmustalsoIX' heardwithanear tomusic.
Withaconfident obedience, with a certain abandon thai I fed here in
ii, the pluralSttms to follow: an order, after Ihe beginning ofan
inaudible se-ntence, likean interrupted silence. It follows an
order and, nOlice, it even obeys; illetsitselfbe dictated. It asks
(for) its4.":l( And as for myse-If, at the very momentI allowed
mysdftoorder a plural for these deaths, I tOO had to give
mysdfO\'e( to the lawofthe name, the lawoffoobjection could
resinit, not even the modesty immediatel) following an
uncompromising andpunctualdecision, :I decisionthat lakesplacein
the almost no time of a(camera's) dick: it will have bem like this,
uniquely, once and for all. Andyet I canscarcelybear the apparition
of a title inthis placeJ'rhe propername would have sufficed, for it
alone and by itselfsays death, all deaths inone. It says death even
while the bearer ofil is still living. While so manycodes and rites
work to take away thi.s privilege, because it is so terrifying,the
proper name alone andby itself forcefully declares the unique
disap-pearance of the unique-I mean the singularity of ao
unqualifiable death(and this word "unqualifiable already resonates
like a quot:lotion from oneof RolandB:mhcs's texts I will reread
laler).lXath inscribes itself right inthe name, bUI 10 tu
immediately 10 disperse itself there, so as to insinuate astrange
synlax-in the name of only one to answer (as) many/,J donot yet
know, and intheend il reallydoes not matter, if I willbeable
tomakeit dear why Imust leavethese thoughts for RolandReprinlCd,
w;lh from "The Duth$ of Rob.ndtnnd.llw by P.lKale-AnncBrault and
Michael NUl.;n C(1IItlnnJUf Plliloroplry1Republishcd1n PlukwpJty11M
NOtI_PlldGlvj>lty lill MfflCtlU,Pf}tlry. edit! by Hugh J,
Silverman (Evanston, Ill.: NonhwC$tc.rnI>rtn. 1997), 259'".
Copyright 019S8br Hugh J.S1Iverman. NOflhweRernUniversityPr",u
cdiJiOll publi$hw1997 by arrangement with HughJ. Silverman. All
rl/lhtsI'dCrved. F'im publication,mort$' de RobndBsrthc.s." Pohique
47 (Scpr.cmlxr1981): oa6?-9:a. Republldlw11'1by lacql,lC$ Dcrrida
(P;Iri" Galil.1987), 173-J04I. Dc:rr;c1a il ","ork1ng here w1th
sevenl dilTerel'lt meanings of theto bring1nlo harmony oraccord;10
C()(KWe. granl, admit, or avow:10 pul ingrammal;(alagrccm",nt: to
IUIler-T"III1.1. UIfofdO' /KIm(the law of the:namfk: Hill all,1
Wallg, IgSj), 9-10 (here..fler IVDZ).5
RllIandB:tnhes.RrjtiotrlfHIl'/wwgrtIpIo" 1'-"11$.
Rieh.1rdI-Iowml(New York: Hill 1911'), 9'! (hereafter
abbreviatedCL). Thetill"is u rltumbrr rl#;"Sellil, 1980).11.0.....
"037I JUSt capitalizedN:nureandHistory, Heu.sed todoit almost all
theorne. Hedidit frequc:ntly in WritingZero, and
fromtheverybeginning: - 0one an without form:ll)itics pretend 10
insert his rrcuJomas 3. writerintotheresist3nt mediumof
languagebecause, behindthelauer, thewhole of History
standsunifiedandcomplete inIhe mannerof aNatural
AndagaininCornallLucida:"thiscouplewhoIknowlovedeachother, I
realiu: it is love-as-treasurethat isgoingtodisappear forever;
foronceI amgone, no onewill anylongerbeableto testify to
this:nothingwillremainbul anindifferentNature. This is alaceration
so intense, so intolerable, that, alone against his century,
Micheletconceived of History as lovc's Protest."f These
capicalletters that Imyselfused out of mimetism, hetOO playedwith,
in order to mime and, already,10 qUOte,
Theyarequotationmarks("thisishowyousay"), which, farfrom indicating
an hypostatization, actually lift up and lighten,
c.xpressingdisillusionmc.nt and incredulity. I believe, in the end.
that hedid not believeinthis opposition (NaturclHistory), or in any
others. He woulduse themonly for the time of a passage.
Later,lwould like to show that the conceptsthai seemedthe most
squarely opposed, or opposahle, were put inplay byhim, the onefor
the other, in a metonymic composition. This light way ofmobilizing
concepts by playing themagainst one another couldfrustratea
cert.... inlogicwhile at thesame timeresisting itwiththe greatest
force,the greatest force of play.For the first time, then, I read
the firsl and last Barthes, wilh the welcomednai'vett ofa
dcsire,a..r if by reading the first and last without stopping,
backto back, as3. single volumewithwhichIwouldhave secludedmyself
onan island, I were finally going to see andknow everything.Life
was going10 continue (therewasstill somUGhtoread), but
ahistorywasgoingto come together,;l historyboundto
itself,Historyhaving becomeNature through this collection, as if .
..C""i>T1l1l t)t'll ,6QWall'" Bc:n}3min. 1'1>crs, inbooks,
albums, archives.... And the person or thing photographed is
the:target, thereferent, akindof littlesimulacrum, anyemittedbythe
object. whichIshouldliketo call theSpt'ctrtlmof
thePhQtograph.because: thiswordretains, throughitsroot, trelationto
'spectacle'andaddstoit that rather terriblethingthat is there
Ineveryphotogra h:the return0 t e ea .. 9. As soon as p"m;l"m
ceases to the Itud;um, ..11 thewhileremainingheterogeneoustoii,
assoonas wecannolongerdistinguishherebetweentwoplaces, Contents,
orthings,it is not entirdysubjugated toaconcepr, ifby "concept" we
meanaprcdieativedetermination that is distinct andopposable.
Thisconceptof aghost isasscarcelygrasp.1ble initsself
lenpt'r..-otmt'l as theghostof a concept. Neitherlifenor death,but
thehaunting of the onebytheother. The"versus" of the conce tual 0
positionis asunsubstantial as:acamera's click. YLifrIDeat1r: the
paradigm is r uce (0 a simple die' I theone separatiog tbe initial
pose (mm tb,.6031 printM(C'-92). Ghas-IS: thcCIlAl'TlTt QNIIconcept
ofthe other in the same,thepunclum in theswdium,
the:comple:tdyother, depiml wouldbe that of
adriveduality(power/pleasure) thatis 4vithout p,.i"ciplt:,90
CIIAI'TUTlltlllIs not what Freud was looking for, under the names
"death drive"and "repetition compulsion," that wbich, comingthe
principle (ofpleasure or reality), would remainforever
heterogeneous to the principleof principle?It is spirit ofthis
spirol that keeps one in suspense, holding one'sbreath-and, thus,
kps one alive.The question would thus once again be given a new
impetus:is notthe duality in question, this spiraled duality.
precisely what Freud tried tooppose to all monisms by speaking of a
dual drive and of a death drive, ofa death drive thal was no doubt
not alien [0 the drive for mastery?And,thus, to what is most alive
in life, to its very living on lsurvivance)?I am still trying to
imagine Foucault's response. I can't quite do it. Iwould have so
much liked for him to take it on himselfBut inthis placewherenoone
nowcananswer for him, intheabsolute silence where we remain
nonetheless turned toward him. I wouldventure to wager that, in a
sentence that I will not construct for him, hewould ha\eassociated
and yet also dissociated, he would have placed backto back. mastery
and death, that is, the same-deathand the master, deathas the
master.CHAPTER 4MAXLOREAUjUNF. 7. '928-jANU.1RY7. '990Belgianpoet,
writer, aesthete. and philosopher MaxLoreau was born in Brussels in
1928 and spent mostofhischildhood and adolescence in Wemmel, on the
outskirtsof Brussels. He attended sc.hoob in Laeken and Koekel-berg
before studyingc1assical philology and philO5Ophy atthe Pr
University inBrussels. Roger Goosens, writer,poet, professor of
Greek, andreader of Nietzsche. wasLoreau's most inAuential leacher
during this period.Althoughmost of
Loreau'sownworkfocusesontemporarypoets, painters andwriters, he
always felt anaffinityforclassicalauthorssuchas Homer,
Lucretius,Virgil, and Dante. whom he studied at the university.In
thecarly 1950$ Loreau married and helped raiseafamily of three
children. From 1951 to 1955 he performedhis military service,
taught brieRy ina high school, andcontinued his philosophical
studies at the Free Universityin Brussels. He there earned his
doctorate in philosophyin196' witha thesis
entitled"L'humanismerhttoriquede Lorenzo V;llla et la formation de
la pensee bourgeoiseenlulie."His doctoral researchledhimtoFlorence,
acity that wouldlater inspire his book of poemsnun (1986),.'91
CIl""TU. FOt:. hisstudies. Loreau became a memlx-r of Lc
fondsNational de laRecherche Scientifique (thc Belgianof
France'sCentreNational la RechercheScicntifiquc)andlatcr aprofcssor
ofmodernphilosophyandaesthetics at theFreeUniversity(196-+-69),
Hewas married a second time, in1(;67. to Francine Loreau. Acti\'e
in sluclcmga!.hcrings at the Frce Uni"crsity inBrussels in1968,
LorC3U abandonedhis 3cadc:micthc following ye.'lr todevOle
himselfcntirely to writing.Throughout the 1950S and
losLoreaupursuedhisinterestsinart, photography, andpoetrywriting.
In 1963he mel thepaintcr JeanDubuffet, withwhom he would develop a
e10se friendship andto whomhe woulddevore numerousstudies,
including et Ie lJO)'ogf> au de 10 pacf>ption (1966), the
philosophical commcnt3ry "Art, Cultureel Subversion," published in
May1C}68 and latcr collected in La
/WintuTf>QI'oeuvret'll'brigmedurorps Lareau alSQ edited !.he
firstvolumes ofDubuffet's Cota/ogue des trotJaux.Lore.1u's interest
inHenri Michaux's "mescaline drawings" \cd himto make the
acquaintance of thepoet in 19-+. Hisfirst work of poetry,CN"CeOIIX
illustrated by DubufTet, appearc::din1967. in1973 hepublished Cri:
&Iot et p),tUeS-bis Iwre-ckf-a book in which
philosophyandpoeticwritingarcintimatelywovenLoreaualsobc=ganalongcorrespondence
duringthispc=riodwithChristi:lIl founder of the group Cobra, to
whom Loreau a textentitledi...eI /ogogrnmme/ dt' ChriIr;ulJ(1975).
Inthelate19705Loreauwith short stories (NQuwl/es dt'/ errn et dn
pas, 19'76)andpublishedChunu ik pnpbud/t' t-entu'(1978). Hc became
afr\uentconlributor to Ihejournal andlaterjoinedits editorial
board; hisbook on the poetMic:hel Dnd laha andthe Question ofthe
Book: firSt published in .964 in eri''''.... (zo,99"'-'
thenrCI)llbli,hed in1961 in Wntj",il"l! iranI. Abn Bass (Chicago;
University ofChiCllgo'9781, 6.t..,-8,.nd MElli",i"M me last eay in
W,.,jjltgtllUl (29-\-Joo).--TnfN.lOMONO JAlb 12jwith Gabriel
Bounoure (a great friendship for which I have Edmond Jabesto
thank).-Whenfriendshipbeginsbeforefriendship, it
touchesupondeath,indeed, it is born in mourning.But it is also
doubly affirmed, twice scaled;this recognition, this gr3titude
before all knowledge, is, I believe, destinedto survive, And
already fromits birth: in allthe books of questions, thosethat bear
andthosethat keeptheirname silent, beyondbooks andtheirtitles,
beyond blind words.Edmond Jabes knew that books are here to
noaV3il, no more Ihan questions are, nO[ to mention answers.If I
have the desire, if il is, in truth, so easy for me to feeJ so dose
toyou this Apri.l 16, allthe way fromthe P3cific Coast, it is not
only becausethe readers, admirers. and friends of Edmond JalXs are
gathered in a placethat is so dose and dear to me.It is also the
best witnesses of thisinvisible sharing-out wherein thought and the
poem intersect remain, forme, other friends, Michel Deguy, and
especially you yoursdf, dar Didier,along withthosewhom)ou've
allowedme to 3ddress inthisway.Pleaseexpress my enduring affection
and fiddity to Arlene JalXs.Your friend, atTectionatdy,Jacques:l.
Gabriel Bounoure wu an important liter.ry eritic both befort .nd
.fler thewar and acklse: friend of Jabb. Dcrrid. dediatlhiJ to
him,...-TID1U.CHAPTER8JOSEPHN. RIDDELSF.PTMHERII, '9J,-SPTMBF.R7.
'99'DistinguishedAmericanliterarycriticandtheoristJoseph Riddd was
born in Grantsville, West Virginia, in1931. He auended Glenville
College:, where he receivedhisB.A. in 1953. After servingintheU.S.
Armyfrom1953 to1955, he went on to the University of
Wisconsin,receiving an M.S. in1956 and a Ph.D. in English
in1960.Helookup 3 positionintht=fall ofIgOO as an
assistantprofessor of English at Duke University. In Aprill3
hemarried VirginiaLee: Johnson, with whom he had thrlXchildren,
Kevin, Valerie, andVant=ssa. Ridddtaught 3tDuke until 1965, when he
moved to the State Universityof New Yorkat Buffalo, where he
remaineduntil 1972.Fim a visiting professor at the University of
California,Los Angeles, in1971, Riddel joinedthat university
per-manently 35 a professor of English in1973.Riddd's first book,
The Clairvoyant Eye, publishedin 1965, is
areadingofWallaceStevens's poemsandtheoryof imagination. His
secondbook, C. Day uwis(1971), examinesthe poetry:lndthought
ofEng13nd'spoet laureate. In 1974 he publishedThe
/ntJn-udBell,bymOSt accoul1ts the firslsignificalll full-lengthwork
ofAmerican "deconstructi"e criticism." This book, a radical"51:16
CHAPTEt !lIGHTreinterpretation ofWillia01 Carlos Williams's
poetics, is an explonuion ofthe question of origins, a question
that wouLd occupy Riddd for most ofhis life. ThroughoUl the Riddel
contributed important :trtides,many published in journals such as
Diacritics and bQfmdary 2,to the debatesurrounding the
inAuenceofContinental philosophy (especially Nierz.sche,Heideggcr,
andDerrida) on American literary criticism. In1979 he
joinedtheeditorial boardof boU1Ulory 2. Fromthelate
19705onwardRiddelturned his attention to the relationship between
pbilosophy and literature,inparticular to the problem of defining a
uniquely "American'" literatureand idiom.Much of Ridders work in
theIgSoS was devoted toa sustained studyof the relationshipbetween
Frenchthought, especiallydeconstruction,andnineteenth-
andtwentieth-century Americanletters (Emerson, Poe,MdviUe,
Hawthorne, James, Pound, Olson). Many of these
essayswerecollectedandpublishedposthumouslyin Purloined urrers.
TheTUN/ingWord, published in1996, contains essays chosen for
publication by Riddelhimselfbefore his death. This book a number of
writers and thinkers(HildaDoolittle :lOdFreud, Hart Crane andHegel,
Gertrude Stein andBergson) inarigorous analysis of the naNre of
poeticperformance andthe function of metaphor in philosophical
language.Riddel became director of the Center for CriticalStudies
andtheHuman Sciences at UCLA in1988. He held vi.siting
professorships at theUniversities of Rhode Island and Californb at
Riverside and at the Centerfor Twentieth Century Studies at the
University ofWisconsin-Milwaukee.In1990 he was Longstreet Professor
at Emory University.Riddel diedfromcomplications of pulmonary
disease onSeptem-ber 7, 1991.A OEMI-MOTIwould have 50 muchwished to
be there today, here that is, among you,friends (colleagues,
students) ofJoe Riddel. AHow me to say that to you assimply
aspossible. InLos Angeles and
athisuniversity,where,withthegenerosity that wc allknew, he more
than once welcomed me, helped andguided me. 1would have liked to be
able myself to express, here and now,both my S:Idness andhow muchI
loved and admiredJoe. And also to tellyou why 1will do so forever,
why it isa greal friend to whom 1bid farewell,andwhy Iwill still
need him in the future, why to me he is irreplaceable.Everything
happenedtoo quickly: like ar:lceto deaththat left usonly
enoughrimetopliSS andwaveto each other, fromone automobileto
3110ther, before thefatal accident. Ourmeetings
wererare,toorareIhadbegunto think. and allwere dedicated to that
unbelieving hope thathaunts just our most intense friendships:
thepromise thatwewould seeeach other more often later on, that in
the end we would spe'dk without endandbe together, interminably.
This promise now interrupted, broken allof a sudden, andyet still
indestructible, I take to Ix: infinitely renewedbydeath itself.
AndI willremainturnedtowardhim, towardthe so vibrantmemory of
himthat I have., turnedtoward the glimpse that I was grantedof him
so rapidly, too rapidly, andturnedtowardwhat he leaves us with,to
re:td andto think.Neverhas thisdesper:uebut radiant
certaintybeenmore aliveinme: whatwe call "being together," whatwe
e.:tll getting together"withthose whom we love-the physical
pro.ximity, thesh3red joys of me day (adinner with Joe and other
friends in Los Angeles or in Irvine, forexample,a complicitous
burst oflaughter in the middle ofa colloquium, right here,less than
two years ago, a walk one summer evening in Paris)-we knowthat the
unforgettable singularity of such moments will never be repl3cedby
anything else, not C\'cn by that which they promise or keep in
reKrVe.They are irrepl3ceable. and that is precisely the reason for
despairing. Butwealsoknowthat theywouldbenothing, or not verymuch.
withouttherichintensity of thisveryreserve. Blessedwere
themomentsthat IlivedinJoe's vicinity, inIrvine, Los Angeles,
Paris, in the university andComposed Cktobcr '7, 199'. anddelivered
onbehalf of the: author October.24,1991, at arneffil>rial sqvice
heldnas" "refan 10Michel Sc:rvie.e'. Lc luirl tk r"n_Editorl not.
/() Lc suiel de I'"rt.CHAPTER10LOUISMARINFor manyye:trsdirector of
studiesat theEcoledesHautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales in Paris,
Louis Marinwas a noted semiotician, philosopher, and historian
ofartandarenownedeXfKrl inseve.ntttnth-centurystudiesin France.
Bornin 193' inGrenoble, MarinattendedtheLyceeGrenoble (194-47)and
then the Lycees IePareinLyonandLouis-Ie-GrandinParis. He studiedat
the Ecole NormaleSU(Krieure from1950to '954,wherehe I)assed
theogr!ga/ion(placingsecondinthenationalexam) andwas awardeda
J0ctn4r alettres. Atthe beginning of his career, he wiUoUilChttk
T""ches atthe Centre National de13 Recherche Sciemifique
(1954-55)andtaught at theLycces Saint QuentinandHocheof
Versailles(195M8). Marinspentthenext sixyearsabrood, as the French
cullural counselor in Turkey :lndat the fnstitut Franlfais
inLondon.From1967 to1972 Marin held variousPOStS at theUniversities
of ParisI, Nanterre, andthe Sorbonne, aswell as at theEcoleNormale
SUpCrieure andtheEcolePra,ique desHautesEtudes. From1972to1978
Marinspent much of his time in the United Stales, holding posuat
the University of California at San Diego and then at"9Johns
Hopkins 2nd Columbia. He his position 2S dirUurd'ltudnin
ofandLanguage" at the Ecoledes Hautes Etudes in 1978. Marin
rem2inedthroughout his careeraregularvisitortomeUnitedStatcS,
teaching attheUniversity of California atIrvine, the State
University of New Yorkat Buffalo(3S Jones Professor), Cornell,
Princeton, and the Universityof Chicago. Hebecameapermanent
fellowof theHumanitiesCenterat JohnsHopkinsin 1(}83' Hewasalso
ontheeditorial board of manyjournals, including Glyph, Wort/and
Image, and ModernlAnguage Nota.Marin's arly work wastoan analysis
ofthe proper name andits to the pictorialIn &miotiao/the Ptw;on
NafTllt;wJ(1971), Marin conducted a "toponymic" study ofEucharist
inrelationto signs andlanguage,broaching topics such as force,
narrative, andthebody that would be L'lken up in several subsequent
works. Utopia (1973)continuedhis analysisofproper namesand"the
neutral" throughanexamination of utopicplaces andpractices.
Thebookrevolves around aclosereading of ThomasMore'sUtopiabut
alsoincludes discussions ofDisneyland25autopic
spaceandlannisXenakis'swritingsasapoeticpractice of "utopia."In IA
voix arommuni (1979) Marin examines theidea of
autobiography,reading texts by Stendhal, Rousseau, andPerraultin an
attempt to understand the paradoxes encountered when one tries
towrite about onesdf.Throughout hiscarecr Marin devoted3.m3jor
portion of his work toPascal. He was the editor of Pascal's Pn/JJ
(published by Didier in1969>and wrote the introduction to the
Logico/Port-Royal (1970); his La critiquedu diJa)lm (1975) is a
semiotic analysis of this logic. InThe Portrait oftheKing (lgSl),
M2rin pursued Pascal's insights regarding re:pre:.scntation
andpowe:r in an analysis of the portrait of the: king as the
realpresence: of theking.PlUCal et Port-Royal. a col.lc:ction of
writtc=n onrdatedtopics,was published posthumously in1997. other
great lovewas art, and some of hismost peneu3tingstudies, such as
To Demoy Painting.!Mn-Chark$ Blais. Opacitl de'" pt:in-lure, DeJ
poulJQin/'image. DeiJJ repranuation. Philippe: de
Champaigne,andSublimePQtm;n, exploretherelationship painting
anddis-course. Moving across an extraordinary range: ofgenres,
Marin undertook3rigorous analysis of modern representation in
rdation to such notions asthe: portrait, theof the image, force,
autobiography, memory, andnarrative. His stated aim in these:
slUdies was to "transform painting intOdiscourse anddivertimages
intQ language." To Dutroy Painting (1m)isan exploration of
si:lllccnth- and seventeenth-, itis because this concept plays, it
sec:msto me, a decisiveroleassoonas it isprotected
orwithdrawnfromthe traditional ontologythatgenerally dominates it.
We will later Stt th:n this dynamu here links in amost original way
both the ideas it has always .associ3ted-namely, force,power, and
lIirtu-and the ideas of the possible or the virtual as SIKh,
th'ltis to say, a virtual that has no vocation to go into action,
or rather, whosegoing into action or whose enactment does nOt
destroy its virtual power.With what docs this have to do (if one
can say this, since the logic ofthe act and of acting, ofdoing,is
precisely what is at stake here)? It wouldhave to do with a
possible that is in potential of being only on the conditionof
remaining possible as possible, and of marking within itsdf--{he
scar ofa wound 3nd the potentialization of force--{he interruption
of this goinginto action, this enactment, anabsolute
interruptionthat bearsno otherseal herethanth3t of death: whence
athought of thevirtuaf wor-t onemight also say of a virtual space,
of an opus. an opusopatum, thaI wouldaccomplishthe possible as
stichwithout effacingit or even enactingit inrC3Jity. Thethought of
a spectral powerof thevirtual work. Onethatenvelops or develops
within itselfa thought ofdeath. Only death, which isnOl, or r:nher
mourning, which takes its place in advance, eaD open up thisspace
ofabsolutedynamu: force. virtue, the possible as such, without
whichone understands nothing ofthe power of the image. And this
"understandsnothing," this ontological denial, would be nothing
other than philosophyitself, which thus cannot he considered to be
one conjuring practice amongothers. For trying to reduce, weaken,
and wear out a power ofthe image.50as to subjecl it to itself, this
philosophica.l exorcismof such powerful scopewould-and this would
be my hypothesis--in some way regartl death.It would regard that
which should not beSttJl, and so denied, namelydeath.
Thisdandestine war ofdenial would thus be waged in the
shadows,inthat twilight spaceof what is called mourning: the
mourningthatfollows death but also the mourning that is prepared
and that we expectfromthe very beginning to follow upon the death
of those we love. Loveor friendship would be nothing other than the
passion, the endurance, andtheof this work.Whence this paradox:
whenMarinpUlS a questionmarkafterthebeing of the image ("The being
of the imager' IP, 101) and later answers:WlllI JoI ..... IN
141"The being of the image. in a word, would beilS force: but how
are weto thinkthis 'force'?" andwhenhe once againputs the
wordforceintoquotation marks--this would 3mount to substituting
force: for being. Butthelogic of
thissubstitution-andthisisthereasonfor the conditional{"woufJ
1Mitsforce")-itself c:.lIsforthe quotationmarks. For tnu forceowes
it to ;mf[nos to1M. It owes it to itself not to be a being. Itmust
thusnow be on intimate terms with what is not force, with its
opposite, with the"without.force," a domestic and paradoxically
necessary commerce beingestablished betweenthem. The
greatestforceis to beSttRin the infiniterenunciation afforce, in
the absolute interruption offorce by the force. Death, or rather
mourning, the mourning of the absolute of force:that is the name,
or one of the names, of this affect that unites force to
thewithout.force, thereby relating the manifestation of force, as
image, to thebeing without force of that whichit manifests or lets
be seen, right beforeour very eyes and according to our
mourning.For what appearsmost strikingfromthe very opening of this
lastbook, Dn /'OIIVO;rsis that it brings about in an irresistible
wayadoubleconversion, I darenotsaya doublereversal. Thereisfirst
ofall the turn or move bywhichMarinprotects the question of the
imagefromthe authority of ontology, and this is already a question
offorce andof power. Then thereis the other turn or move
wherebythisfirstmovefinds itstruthor itslaw in-if we
annowpuritinanODontologicalway-what Iwouldbe: temptedtocall,
usingacodethat wouldhavepreciselynothingHeideggerianabout it, theof
theOr, let us sayto avoidambiguity, theof animagethatItastheforce,
thatis nothing osller thanthe force, toso comisl.and to autindeath,
preciselytherewhereit docsnot insist inbeing orin the presence: of
being. ThislNing.to-deathwould oblige us to think theimage not as
the weakenedreproduction of what it would imita(, not as.a mimbne.
a simple image, idol, or icon, at least as they art:
conventionallyunderstood (for it is a question of moving away from
this convention), butas the increase of power, the origin, in
truth, of authority. the image itselfbecoming the author, the
author and the augmentation of the aunoritasinsofar as it findsits
paradigm, whichis also its marge;a, in the image ofthe dead.In
other words, we would not haveimage.s. a
typologyofimagt'samongwhich a particular class representing thedead
or death might be. identified.For it wouldbe. from death. fromwhat
mightbe called the poins ofviewofdeath. or more precisely, of the
dead, the dead man or woman, or preciselystill. from(hepoint of
\'iew of the of thedeadintheirportraiture, that an image would give
seeing. that is, not only would giveim:1[ tobe seenbut
wouldgiveinsofar as it sees, asif it were sedng asmuch as seen.A
displacement of the point of view, therefore, which quite
obviouslyinscribesall the essays of thisbookintotheongoingtradition
of workundertaken by Marin for many years concerning that which
foundsthefoundationandinstitutestheinstitution of power ina
certainlogicof representation. Andthis work, aswcall know,
allowedhiminthecourse of so many innovative, fertile, and brilliant
analyses to articulate athought of the theologico-political and a
certain icono-semiological theoryof representation.Yet it seems to
me (and thisis a reading hypothesis that regards, ifI maysaythi.s,
onlyme, andindicates only amoment of mymournfulreading) that in
these important developments of earlier research aninflection or
break comes to inscribe a paradox. This paradox complicatesand in
turn illuminates, it seems tome, thec.arlier trajectory. It
concerns themourning of force or the force of mourning, th:n is to
say, a law accordingto whichthe greatestforce does not consist in
continually expanding adinfinitum but develops its maximal
intensity, so to speak, only at the madmoment of dision, 211 the
point of its absolute interruption, there wheredynamiJremains
virtuality, namdy, a virtual workas such. A moment
ofinfiniterenunci:nionas the potcntialization of the virtual work.
ButIhevirtual workis not one category of workor imageamongothers;it
isthe essc.nce of the work, a nonessential essena, since itis an
essence thatremains possible as such. And this is death (or at
least that's what this wordhere signifies-and there where there is
no death in itsdf that would everbe possible as such there is only
the experience ofmourning without death:mourningisthephenomenon of
deathandit istheonlyphenomenonbehind which thereis noming; the
phaincsrhai of this phenomenonis theonly possible access10 an
original thought of the image, and so on). Hereis death, then,
therewhere the image annulsitsrepresentative presence,there where,
more prisely, the nonrcproductive intensity of the re
ofrepresentation gains inpower what the present that it
represents\O$s inpresence. And this point, which also punctuates an
entire way of thinkingthe temporalization of time, is evidently the
point, not of death itself, butof mourning, llnd of the mourning of
me absolute of force.If, therefore, the first examples Marin
proposes in order to make thispower ofthe image visible and
energetic, in order toillwrrate it, are in1agcsof the dead, one
should notste here a simply fortuitous occurrence. IIis inthe
re.pre5Cntation of the dead that the power of the imageis
exemplary.WhcnMarin asks about this rt: of rcpresentation, about
thc substitutivevalue that this rt:- indicates at the moment when
that which was present isLOUI$M....IN 1ha (BarrytOWn, N.Y.: Station
HillPrca.1981), T- MMrn .....nt 10daPCdeath, Mr:onge bclDg5 that
they And.some: olthcm oy out '0.." d",'bcn...,., theywapt tofrom
hfe. 'What a lire. I'll kill m)'Klf.l1ll1,ve in.' Thill5
bfMnt:oblc: andmange: it15 Im,stak". Yet I have met people who have
never Wlid10 lore, 'Qu,etl,' whohave ne:ver Wlid tn dnlh, 'Co
away!' AIUlO$l :l1w..,.. women, beautiful crcalu'd.M188
eltAPTI..IH.KVIINlaughter. Nothing is given in advance for an
actofforgiveness, no rule, nocriterion, no norm. It is the chaos.at
the origin oftht': world. The .abyss ofthis nonanswer or
nonresponse would be the condition of responsibility-decision
andforgivcness, the decisionto forgivewithout any concept, ifthere
ever is any. And always (in) the name of the other.(LaSt vertigo,
last sigh: to forgive lin] the name of the other-is thisonly to
forgive in their place, for the other, in substitution? Or is it to
forgivethe other their name, to forgive what is in their name, what
survives therorpH, to forgive the name of the other as their first
wrongdoing?)The answer must each time be invented, Singular,
signed, .and eachtime only one time like Ihe gifl ofa work,a giving
ofart and of life, uniqueand. right up until the end of the world,
pl.a)'ed back.Given back. To the impossible, I mean right up to the
impossible.This is what SarahKofman gi\'cs me[0 thinkabout t was
thefirst fruit of Dcleuu's collaborationwith Cuattari. ThetWO wrote
fourmore books together: Kaf1r!1(1975), Rhizome (1976),ATlJollkl"d
PJaualls(1980), andWhat Is PhiIQSop;'y? (1991). (Guattari died on
August 29, '992,at the age of 62.)During most of the
197SDeleuzespent his time leachingandwriting,
travelingrarelyandmaking ...cryfewmediaappearances. Heparticipated
in the'972 Ce.risy collCXJuium on Nietzsche, alongside jean-
L)'Otard, Klossowski, andDcrrida, and oversaw, withthe helpof
Foucault, lhc cranslation of the Colli-Montinari edition of
Nietzschc'sworks into French. In a book ofinte.rviews with Ci:lire
Pamet, Dialogua(19n), Dcleuuspeaksof hislovefor
AngloAmericanliterature (in particular, Mdville., Fitzgerald. and
Lewis Carroll).Inthe Deleuzewroteanumber of important books
onmevisual arts, among,hemFrancis Bacon: Logiqtlede Josensation
(19S1)and twovolumesoncinema, Vimage-moutJemfflt (1983) and
L'image-tm/pi(1985). A great admire.r of thc filmsof Godard,
Deleuuwas alsoassociatedwith the Cahin-s du einlma. In1986 hewrOte
a bookdevotedto, andinmemoryof, Foucault.
AbookonLeibniz:mdthebarCXJue,The Fold, appeared two yearsl31er,
followedby a collection of interviews,Negotiations(1990). His last
book, Critique etc/inique, as,eries of essayson phiJosophy and
literature,W3S published in1993' His inRue.nce on thehistory of
philosophy (with works on the Stoics, SpinoZ.:l, Leibniz,
Humc,Kant, Nictzsche, andBergson, among others), art andliterary
criticism(his 1964bookon Proustanauthoritativetcxt in
thefield),psychoanalysis, andfilmstudies continuesto grow
incountries, where the majority of his works have been
mlnslate.d.By1993 Deleuzc: sufferedso badlyfromthepulmonary
conditionthat hadplaguedhimfor manyyearsthat il becamedifficult for
himtowriteandeven tosocializewith friends. Hetook
hisownlifeonNovember 4,1995.,j'MGOINGTOHAVETOWANDERALLALONESo
muchto say, and' don't have theheart for it today.So muchto
sayabout what has happened to us, about what has to me too, withthe
de:lth of GillesDelc:uz.e; somuchto say about what h.. ppens with
adeathth..t W:1Sundoubtedlyfeared-weknewhewasveryilI--but
yetsomuchtoS.1Yabout what happenswiththis death,
thisunimaginableimage, which, if it were possible, wouldhollow out
wirninthe t:vent thesadinfinity of yt:t anotht:r event.
Morernananything dse, Deleuzcthethinker is the thinker of the event
and always of this event in particular.Frombeginningtoend,
heremainedathinker of thisevent. Irereadwhat he $:lid concerning
the event, already in1969, in ant: of his greatestbooks,Logic of
Sn!H. He quotesJoeBousquet, who says, "For myinclination [Oward
death, which was a failureofme will, I shall substitutealongingfor
dyingwhichistheapotheosis of thewill."Deleu7.cthenadds, "From this
inclination to this longing thereis, in a certainrespect,no change
except a change of the will, .. sort of leap in place by the
wholebody, whichexchanges its organicwill for a spiritual will.
Itwillsnownot exactly what occurs, but something in whatoccurt,
something to comethat conforms to what occurs, in accordance with
the laws of an obscure.humorous conformity:theEvent. It isinthis
sense that Amor fati is onewith the struggle of free men.'" (One
could go on quoting endlessly.)Somuchto say, yes, about the time
that wasallottedtome, astoso manyotht:rs of my"gcnt:ration,"to
share withDdeuzc, somuchtosayabout thechancetothink. thankstohim,
bythink,ingabout him.Fromtheverybeginning, all of hisbooks
(butfirst of all Niet'=iChe andPhilorophy, Diffiunce and TNLogic of
Sente) havebeenformenoconly, ofstrongprovocations
10thinkbuteachtimetheAust'ering, reallyflustering, experience of a
closeness or of anCdrlyto(31affinityconcerningthe"theses," ifwecan
usc this word, across veryobviousdistances, inwhat I
wouldcall-lackinganybetterterm-the"gesture," the the "manner" of
writing, of of readingperhaps. Asregardsthese"thcscs"--but
theworddoesn't fit-n0t3blythe one concerning anirreducible
difference in oppositionto dialecticalReprunl, Wllh choingn.
fromMrmGoong toH;lI\c10 W:lnck, All AJ.onc.M uaJUbtcd by La,,'k
p",1oIopItr Todq 41., no. I (..prin,lWS): J-s. Rut F.-md\
pu.bliation.Milmef..udr:> crrcr lOUt IlCUI.MLM'1II0", ;. 'mI.
Gilla Dekuu.u.Iot!"I''''O'uiJ.: Minu;t, '969). I,.: Engl;lh
translnion, TMf..og>rof$nlr. rd. Connanlin V. t ..Marie Lc,.ter
wllh Cha,le\ Sf.iv.k:(NewYork: CQlumbi;. UniversilYP,a.s. 19')0).
1'J9.opposition, a difference "morc profound" than a
contradictionand
adifferenceinthejoyouslyrepeatedaffirmation("yes,yes"), atakinginto
account of the simulacrum-Deleuuundoub13.blystill remains, despite
so many dissimilarities, the one among all those ofmy "generation"
to whomI have always considered closest. 1havenever felt
theslightest "objection"arisinginme, not evenpotentially,against
any of hisworks, even if I happenedto grumble a bit about oneor
another of the propositions foundin Ami-OeJipus (I toldhim this
onedaywhilewe were drivingbacktogether fromNanterre, after
athtsisdefense on Spinoza), or perhaps about the idea that
philosophy consists in"creating" concepu, One day, , wouldlike to
tryto provide anaccountof such an agreement in rcgard to
philosophic "content," when this sameagreement never
doesawaywithall those devi2tionsthat I, still today,do not know how
to name or situate. (DeIeuze had agreedto publish atsomepoint
along, improviseddiscussionbetweenusonthistopic, butthen we had to
wait, to wait too long.) I only know that these differencesnever
left room for anything between us but friendship. There: was
neverany shadow, any sign, as faras I know, that might indicate the
contrary.Thisisratherrareinourmilieu, sorarethat I wamit to go
onrordright here. Thisfriendshipwasnot
basedmerelyonthef.1ct-;mdthisisnot insignifieant-thatwehadthe 53me
enemies. It'strue, we didn'tsee each othervery often. espiallyinthe
last years. But( still hearthelaughter of his voice, which
wasalitderaspy, sayingtomesomanythings (like to recall exactly as
he said them. He whispered to me, "Bestwishes, all mybest
wishes,"withasweetironyb:lckinthe summer of1955 in the courtyard of
the Sorbonne as I was in the process offailing theexaminationsfor
the agrlgation. Or with a concernlike that of an olderbrother: "II
pains me to sec you put so much time into this institution (the
International de Philosophiel,' would prefer that you write." AndI
r"all so many other moments, among them the memorable ten d:lys
attheNiettsc.he conference at Cerisyin 1972, whichmakeme alongwith
Lyotard, no doubt (who was also there at Cerisy),
soalone.surYiving:lOd so melancholy uxby in what we call with that
terribleand somewhat misleading word a "generation." Each deathis
unique, ofcourse, andthereforeunusual. Butwhat c:tnbe saidabout the
unusualwhen, fromBarthcs to Ahhusscr, fromFoucault to Deleuz.e, it
multiplies,asina series. all theseuncommon ends inthe same
"generation"?AndDeleuu was also the philosopher of serial
singularity.Yes, wewill haveall lovedphilosophy, who can
denyit?But, i[istruc-hesaidit-Dcleuzewastheoneamong all of
this"generation"who "was doing" philosophy the most gaily, the most
innocently. 'don't194 CH... .,..... TWELVlthink he would have liked
me using Ihe word Mthinker" earlier. He
wouldhavepreferred"philosopher."Inthisregard. he once
describedhimsdfas "the mOSl innocent (thcone who fclt theleasl
guilt about 'doing Undoubtedly. this wasthe
neccssaryconditioninordertoleaveonthephilosophy of
thiscenturythedeepandincomparablemarkthat will always be his. The
mark of a great philosopher andof agreat professor. Thishistorian
of philosophy, who conductedakindofconfigural election of his own
genealogy (the Stoics, Lucretiw, Spinoza,Humc:, Kant, lietzsehe.
Bergson. etc,), was also an inventor of philosophywho never
endosedhimself withinsomephilosophic"field"-hewroteon painting,
cinema, and literature. Bacon. Lewis Carroll, Proust,
Kafka,Melville. and .so on.I also want to say nght herr
[inLibtrarionl that I loved and admiredthe way-whichwas alwaysjust
right-he treatedimages, newspapers,tele... ision.
thewholepublicsphereandthetransformationsit hasundergonein recent
decades. All witheconomyanda ...igilant retreat. Ifelt
incompleteagreement withwhat hewas doing andsaying inthisregard.
for example. in aninterview for Libbarion (October:13, 19&>
onthe occasion of the publication of AThousona(in the vein of
his197'1He said: "his necessaryto come to understand what isreally
going on in the field ofbooks. We've been going through a period
ofreaction in all fieldsfor seveul years. There's no reasonfor il
not to ha,eaffectedbooks. People are setting up a literary space.
along with a legalspace. and an economic andpolitical space, that's
completely reacbon:try,artificial, and crippling. I think it's a
systematic process. which Libbationshould have investigated." It is
"far worse than censorship," he added; but"this sterile phase won'l
necess.'trily go on indefinitely.". Perhaps.
perhaps.LikeNietzscheandlikeArtaud, likeBlanchot,others
wbomwebothadmired, Deleuze nevcr lost sight of this connection of
ncc:cssity with tbealeatory, chaos. and the untimely. When I was
writing on Marx. at the veryworst moment, in 1992, I was somewhat
reassured to find out that Deleuuintended to do the same thing.
And' reread this evening WMt he said in19900n this subjcct: "'think
Felix Guattari and I have remained z. Ocrridaisreferring toDclwu
mackin l!f}rlf}90 (Poanl'Minuh, '990), In; English lI'anslallon.
N'f'INMl/IOlU, lranJ. Marlin loughlQ(New York: CoIumboaUnivenity
Prbf, '995),89--Towou.J. Gil\QDc:kuu and Cbi/ePunet, lMlopn(pans;
Fbmmarioo, '977);; Engllih'ransb,ioo,lJw,1opn. lrans. Hugh TamhMOn
andBuba/aHabb.:rjam (Nnoo York:CoIumbu. UnlversilyP,t". '987).+
Dd"uu, PoMrpo,Un. 4';a6-a7.CILL..DllLlun '95intwodifferent ways,
perhaps, but 00th of w. Yousec. wethinkanypolitical philosophy
mUSlturn on the analysis of capitalism and the waysit has
developed. What we findmost interesting in Marx is his analysis
ofcapitalism as animmanent systcmthatis constantly overcoming its
ownlimitations, andthencomingupagainst themoncemoreinabroaderform.
because its fundamental limit is Capital itself.'"I am going to
continue-Sitionat theEcole Normale Israelite Orientale (ENIO) and
settled in the SeventeenthArrondissement of Paris, He
attendedJ..eon Brunsdwicg's andAlexandreKojeve's lectures at the
Ecole des Hautes Etudes, where he also met Sartreand jean
Hyppolite.Ouringthis sameperiodLevinasbeganworkonabookonHeidegge:r,
which he later abandoned, though some of this work appeared
inEndkoullTllnt I'aistena all Husser/ and
Heidegge:r(publishedin1949),Levinas's 1932essay"Martin Heidegger et
('ontologie"wasone of theveryfirst
essayswritteninFrenchonHeidegger. In 1939Levinaswasdraftedinto
theFrencharmy :u aninterpreter of RussianandGerman.Thefollowingyear
hebecame:I militaryprisonerof war innorthernGermany (Stal::lg II
B). His wife and d:mghter were hidden and protectedby Maurice
B1anchot, who later arranged for theirrefugein a convent oflhe
sisters ofSaint Vincent de Paul in Prelfort. Many
membersofLevinas'sfamily in Lithuania (including his father,
mother, and two brothers) werekilled by the azis during the war.At
the end of thewar Le\'inasbecamedirector of the ENJO,
aninstitutionwithwhichhewouldremainassociatedfor most of his
Ijfe,whether as its director (1945-01) or in other teaching and
administrativepositions. In 1947 he published Ift/'emtellced
I'eristant. much ofwhich waswritten during his captivity, alongwith
four lectures given at jean Wahl's Philosophique in 19i6-.J7under
the title andOtMr.Levinas also began studying lhe Talmud atthistime
underthe: directionof M, Chouchani and, from1957 onward,
gavetalmudiclessonsat theannual Colloquium of Jewish IntelleCluals
of French Expression. Severalof thesetalmudicreadings
were:publishc:din Qrmtre kctures talmudiques(1968), Du sacrtau
saini (1977), and /'Au.JeW JulIt::rKt (198:1).It was not until
after thepublicationof TotalityandInfinily(hismainthesisfor the
doctoratallar) in 1961 that thetruc: significance ofLevinas's
philosophical work began to emerge. In 1963 he was appointed
aprofessor of philosophy at the University of Poitiers, where his
colleaguesincluded Mikel Dufrenne and Jeanne Ddhomme,
whoaccompaniedhimin1967 whenhemovedtotheUniversity of Paris,
Nanterre. Thisuniversitybecame one of the centers of student
political activity duringthe uprisings of IS, Beginningin the late
los Levinas frequentlytaught at the Universityof Fribourgin
Switurland, and in 1972hevisited the United States. teaching a
course on I:k:sc.artes at Johns HopkinsUni\'ersity.Levinas left
Namerrc: in 19731.Ojoin Henri Birault, Pierre Aubenque,and
Ferdinand Alquie at the University of Paris IV, Sorbonne, His
secondmajor work, Otherwisethan Being. was published the following
year,Levinas officiallyretired fromthe Sorbanne in19'76, but stayed
onthreemore years asProfeS$Or Emeritus. In1980heleft his official
post at theENIO but still gave regular Saturday lessons there.With
the widespread translation of his work, Levinas's
internationalstature andimportancecontinuedto grow duringthe
I!)80Sand 199QS.Several significant collectionsofhis papers and
talks were publishedduring mese )'ears, notably OfGod Who Comes to
Mind (198:1), Outside rheSubject (t987) and Entre NOlls (l99t), and
a number of major internationalcolloquiawere devotedto his work, at
Cerisy-Ia-SalleUniversityof Essex (1987), and Loyola University of
Chicago (1993), among olhers.Levinaswas therecipient of
numerousawardsandprizesduringhis lifetime, amongthemthe Albert
Schweit:ter award (in 1971, forinternational philosophy), Officier
de l'OrdreNational du Medte (1974),Chevalierde: laUgion d'honneur
(19]6), thejaspers Prize (1983), Commandeur des Aru et Leures
(1985), and Officie:r de la Legion d'honneur('99')Emmanuel
Levinasdied in the early hours of December 25, 1995. Anhomage
waspaid to him al theRichelieuAmphitheate:r of the Sorbonneon
Dc:ce:mber 7, 1996.ADIEUFor a long time. for avery long time, I've
fearedhavingto.say AdieutoEmmanuel uvinas.I knewthat
myvoicewouldtrembleat memoment of sayingit,andespeciallysayingit
aloud, right here, beforehim, soclosetohim,pronouncingthiswordof
adit:u, this wordwhich, inacertainsense, I gel fromhim,:t
wordthathe will havetaughtmeto think or topronounce otherwise.By
meditating upon what Emmanuel Levinas wrote about
theFrenchwordadieu-whichI will recall inafewmomcnu-I hopetofind a
son ofencouragement to speak here. AndI would like to do so
withunadorned. nakedwords, words as childlike and disarmed as my
sorrow.Whomis onc addressingat suchamoment?AndinWh05Cnamewould onc
allowonesdfto do so? Often those who come forward to speak,to speak
publicly, thcrc:by interrupting the animated whispering, the sretor
imimate exchangc that alwa)'s linksone,deep inside, to a dead
friend ormaster, those: who make themselves heard in a cemctery,end
up addressingdirt/y, JlrrJiglu on, the one who. asW(' say, is no
longer, is no longer living,no longerthere,whowill nolongerrespond.
Withtearsintheir voices,they sometimes speak familiarly to the
other who keeps silent, calling uponhim without detour or
mediation, apoSltophizing him, even greeting himor confiding inhim.
Thisisnotnecessarily out of respect for convention,not
alwayssimplypart ofthe rhetoric of oration. 11 is rather 50as
totraverse speech at theverypointwherewordsfail us,since all
languagethat would returntotheself, 10us, wouldseemindecent, a
reAexi\'ediscoursethat
wouldendupcomingbacktothestrickencommunity,toiLSconsol:llionoritsmourning,
towhat iscalled, inaandterrible expression, '"the work of
mourning." Concerned only withitself.suchspeechwould,inthisreturn,
riskturningawayfromwhat ishereour law-the law as
nraightfol'wardn('jS orIdroiluI'el;to speakstraight on, 10
addressoneself directly10the other, andto speak lortheother whom
one loves and admires, before speakingol him. To say to himThis
lexl W2S ddivell'd allhe: l'unelal OUIKtn forErnnlanud Levinai' on
lXcembet 25. 1995,Il.qnimcd, "'uh fromIramblcU by Pascale.Anne.
Brauh and Naas,Crint-r:.II""..,,,, aj. 00, I (auromn1996):.,
Cocucicnoa: and lhe: Ilk'lWnbie. 'n FilatI/J FII limA um....ed..
Rochald A. Cohen (Alban)'. N. Y.: SUNY Pteu..9&6). j8. Thl'
aP)'is ind..dcd.lIO.ll CH... PTr;1l THIIlTU.NI C;:iInnot, nor would
Ic:\'en tryto, measureinafewwords theoeu\'re ofEmmanud Levinas.lt
is 50 large that one an no longer glimpseiuedges. Andonewouldhave:
tobeginbylearningonceagainfromhimandfromTotality andInfinity,
forexample, howtothinkwhatan"oeuvre" or"work"-aswell
asfecundity-might be. One canpredictwith confidencethat centuries
of readingswill set this astheirtask. Wealready see innumerable
signs, well beyond France: and Europe, in.so manyworks and so
manylanguages, inall thetranslations. courses,
seminars,conferences, and so on, that the re\erberations of this
thought will havechangedthecourse of philosophical reRectioninour
time, andof ourrefleniononphilosophy, onwhatordersitaccordingto
ethics, anotherthought of ethics, responsibility, justice,
IheState, andso on, accordingtoanother Ihought of the other,
athought that is newerthansomanynovelties because it is ordered
according to the absolute anteriority of theface of the Other.Yes,
ethics before and beyond ontology, the State. or politics, but
alsoethics beyond ethics. One day, on the rue Michel Ange, during
one ofthose:conversationswhosememoryI holdso dear, one of those
conversationsilluminatedbythe radianceof his thought, thegoodness
of hissmile,the gracioushumor of his ellipses, he saidto
me:"Youknow, onc oftenspeaks of ethics to describe: what I do, but
what really interests me in theendis not ethics, nOI ethics alone,
but the holy, the holiness of the holy."AndIthenthought of
asingularseparation, theuniqueseparation ofthe curtain or\'eil that
is given, orderedand ordainedIdonne. ardonn/l,byGod, theveil
entrustedbyMosesto aninventororanartist ratherthantoanembroiderer,
theveil that would separautheholy of holiesinthesanctuary, And I
alsothought of ho..... other Talmudic sharpen the necessary
distinction between sacredness and holiness, that is,the holiness
of the other, the holiness of the person, who is, 3S
EmmanuelLevinas said elsewhere, '"more holy than a land, e\'en when
that landis3hoi)'land. Next to a person who has been alTronted,
this land-holy andpromised-is but nakedness and desert, a heap of
wood and Thismeditationonethics, onthetranscendenceof
theholywithregard to the sacred, thaIis, with rel,rard to the
p3ganism of roots and theasthe, "lUI tn:tion ronKimcx In En," _:
Emt,lll" k __(p:&fiJ:'9')1) (twrc.lO(tel:lbbrO',nfd 2S BC).J.
See prd:lQr co MJlrlb>cHt,*""n(PanI.; Von.1986).
';l-'j..ISee.abo tbt1n1UYX'W WIth Schlomopubli.ned In Ln
__....nJucn IS (19l!:a.-$3): ;'. '-&l12nsl:llcd by
JonadunRum1M:)' in T""'-IMItd.Scin Hand (Cambndg".
M:l1$..:Blxln,/e11, 1989), idolatry of place, was. of COUtSC,
indissociable from an incessant reflectionuponthe destiny
andthought of Israd: yesterday, today, andtomorrow,Such reRection
consisted of requestioning and reaffirming the legacies notonI)' of
the biblicalandtalmudic tradition but of the terrifyingmcmoryof our
time. This memory dictates each of these sentences, whether
fromnearby or afar, evenif Levinaswouldsometimes prOtest against
certainself-justifying to whichsuchamemory
andthereferencetotheHolocaust might give rise.But
refrainingfromcommentaries andquestions, I
wouldsimpl)'liketogivethanks tosomeonewhosethought, friendship,
trUSt, and"goodness" (and I ascribe to this word "goodness" all the
significance itisgiveninthe final pages of Totality and Infinity)
will have been forme,asfor so many others, a living source,.so
living, so constant, that I am unableto think what is happening to
him or happening to me today, namely, thisinterruption or a certain
non-response in a response that will never cometo an e:nd for me as
long as I live.The non-re:sponse: )'ouwill no doubt recall that in
the remarkablecourseEmmanuel Levinasgavein
1975-';6(ex3ct.lyIWe:ntyyears:ago),"Lamort et Ietemps"'Death
andtime!,4where he defines death as thep.'uience of time, and
engages in a grand and noble critical encounter withPlato as much
as with Hegel, but especially with Hcidegger, death is
oftendefined-the deaththat"we mttt""intheface of thc
Othe:r"-:&s non-l'af'OnH; "itis the without-responsc" (DAIT.
20), he sa)'s. And elsewhere:"There is here an end that always h:as
the ambiguity of:& departure withoutreturn, of a passing awa)'
but also ofa scandal ('is it really possible that he'sdead?') of
non-response and of m)' responsibility' (DAIT. 47)Death:not, first
of all, annihilation, non-being, or nothingness, buta certain
experienceforthe survivor of the "without-response. M
AlreadyTota/ilyund Infinity called into question the traditional
"philosophical andreligious" interpretation of death as either
"apassage to nothingness" or'"apassage10 some othe:r existence."s
It is the murdererwho wouldliketoidentify deathwilhnothingness;
Cain, for example, sa)'sEmmanueluvinas, "must have possessed .such
a knowledge of death." But even thisnothingness presents itself as
a "sort of impossibility" or, more precisely,4" '"hil i. one of two
courlCl Lc.. itw l:Iughl :lllhe Sorbon"" (Pui, IV) during
'm-?6-11won fir$! published in1991uDlk.!he utlcufI\Ott Ie
lCmp'wII> "0_,._1..,,,,-.Parl$ de: I'Hernc. no. 60. and !hen
,n1993 (wilh !he otha counc (romtbt Qffi" )'Uro.a,CI
l'onto-Ibto-Iogk'"l in Lev,on, Dvw. r.-, ak IntIJI1 {PUll:
199Yabbr""ufW u DMT).50 Emnanud Lui","". T_J.ry_.
,,,jutrly:,A,,Ir:IIN- A.IJl1-uo ungos(Pinlburgh: Duqunnc: UnivcU,ty
Pr",,, 1969).1j3 (herc;a(I"r :lbbr"""'led:l'
Tn.aninterdictiOll.Theface of the Otherforbidsmetokill; it
saystome,"thOli shall not kill,"even if
thispossibilityremainspresupposedbytheinterdiction thar makes it
impossible. This question without response, thisquestion of the
without-response, wouldthus be underivable, primordial,like the
interdiction against killing, more originary than the
altern:l.liveof"to be ornOt to be."whichisthusneitherthefirst
northelast question."To be or not to be," another essay condudes,
"is probably not the questionpar excellence" (BC, 40).Today, I
drawfromallthis that our infinite sadness must shy
awayfromeverything inmourning thatwouldturntowardnothingness,
thatis, towardWh:ll slill, even potentially, would link guilt to
murder. Levinasinddspeaks of the survivor's guilt, but it isa guilt
without f.1ult andwithout debt; it is, in truth, an
rt'spo1l5ibiliry, entrusted in amoment of unparalleledelllotion, at
dlemoment whendeath remainsthe absohlle ex-cepnon. To express this
unprecedented emotion, the one Ifcel here and share with you, the
one that our sense of propriety forbids usto exhibit, so as to make
clear without personal avowal or exhibition howthis singular
emotionisrelatedto this entrustedresponsibility, entrusted3S
legacy, allow me once again to let Emm:muel Levinas speak, him
whosevoiceI wouldso muchlovetohear todaywhenit saysth:1t the
"deathof the other" isthe "first death: andthat ;1 amresponsible
for the otherinsofar asheismortal." Or elsethefollowing, fromthis
s:une course of'975-76,The death of sor,neone is not, despite what
it might h:lve :Ippe;.lred10 be at first glance. an empiric:ll
facticity (de:lth35 an empiricalfact whose induction alone could
suggest its universality); it is notc.xluusted in such an
appearance.Somc:one who expresses himself in his n;tke.dneu-the
face--is in fact one to the extent that he calls upon me, tb the
extem thathe places himself under my responsibility: I must already
answerfor him. be responsible for him.Every gesture of the Other
was aaddressed to me. To return to the classification sketched
outabove: to showone$Clf, to e}tpress oneself, to associate
oneself, 10be I!l1lntSlt:d Jf)The Other who expresses himself is
entrustedto me (and there is no debt with tegardto the Other-for
what isdue cannOt be paid: one will ne\'cr be even). fFunheron it
will bea question of a 'duty beyond all debl' for the 1who is what
it is,singular and identifiable. only through fhe impossibility of
beingreplaced. even though it is precisely here that the
"re.sPQnsihilityfor the Other," the "responsibility of the
hostage," is ao experienceofsubstitution and 5;lcrifi('e.1 The
Other individuates me in myresponsibiliry for him. The death of thc
Other affects me in my veryidentity as a rcsponsible I ... made up
of unspe.1kable bility. This is how I am affected by the death of
me Other. this ismy relation to his dcath. It is, in my rchltion,
my defcrencc towardsomeone who no longer rcsponds, already a guilt
of the survivor.(DAfT, 21; quot3tlOnS in brackets. 31, (99)And a
bit further on:TIle relation10 death in its e}t.ception-and,
regardless of its sig-nification inrelation w hcing and
nothingness. it is an c.xception-while conferring upon demh its
deplh. is neither a seeing nor evenan ;limin!; toward (neither a
sec:ing of being as inPllltO nor anaiming toward nothingness 3S
inHeidegger),a purely emotionalrelation. moving with an
emotionth::tl is not made upofthe reper-cussionsof:l prior
knowledge upon our sensibility and our imellecLIt is an emotion, a
movement, all uneasiness with reb"::lrd to theunknown. (DM1;
25-26)The"unknown" isemphasizedhere. The"unknown"is nOf
thenegativelimit of aknowledge. Thisis theelement offriendship or
hospit.1lity for the transcendence of the stranger, the
infinitedistance of theother. "Unknown" is
alsothewordchosenbyMauriceBlanchot forthetitle of anessay,
"Knowledge of theUnknown,"whichhe devoredto the one whohadbeen,
fromthetime of theirmeeting inStrasoourg inf923, a fricnd, the very
friendship of the friend.Formanyamongus, nodoubt.cert.1inlyfor
myself, theabsolutefidelity, the exemplary friendship of thought,
thefrietltuhip between rice Blanchot andEmmanuel Levinas,
wasagrace, agift; it remainsabenediction of our time and, for
morereasons thanone, a goodfortunethatis also a blessing for those
who havehadthe greatprivilege of beingthe friend ofeither of
them.In order to hear once again today, right here,Blanchot
speakforLevinas, andwithLevinas, asI hadthe goodfortuneto do when
intheir company one day in1968, I will cite a couple
oflincs.Afterhaving namedwhatinthe other "ravishcs" us, after
having spokenof a certain "rapture" (the word often used by Levinas
to speak of death),Bl:mchot says:But we must nol despair of
philosophy. In Emmanuel Levinas'shookITo/ality and InfinityJ-where,
it seems to me. philosophy in206 CHAPTI1II TIl'l\TtRNour dnle has
never spoken in a more sober manner, pUlling bAckimoque:ition, as
we must, our ways of thinking and even our facilereverence for arc
called upon to become responsiblefor wh3t philosophy essentially
is, by welcoming, in all the radianceand infinite exigency proper
to it, the idea of the Other, thatis tosay, the rel:uion with
Qllrrui. It is as though there were here a newdeparture in
philosophy and a leap that it, and we ourselltes, wereurged to
accomplish.'If therelationtothe mher
presupposesaninfiniteseparation,
aninfiniteinterruptionwherethefaceappears, what happens,
whereandtowhomdoesit h3ppen, whenanotherinterruptioncomes at
deathtohollowout even more infinitely this hrnseparation,:I rending
interruptionat the heart of interruption itself?I cannot speak of
interruption withoutrecalling, likemany among you, no doubt, the
anxiety of interruption1couldfeel inEmmanuel Levinaswhen,
onthetelephone, for example,he seemedat eachmoment tofear being
cutoff, tofear thesilenceOrdisappearance, the"without response,' of
the other, towhomhe calledout and held on with an "allo, allo"
between sentences, sometimes even inmidsentence.What happens
whenagreat thinker becomes silem, one whomweknewliving,
whomwereadand reread, andalsoheard, onefromwhomwe werestill
awaitinga response, asif sucha responsewouldhelpusnot
onlytothinkOtherwisebutalso10readwhat wethoughtwe had already read
under his signature, a response that held everythingin reserve,
andsomuchmOrethanwhat wethought we hadalreadyrecognizedthere?
Thisis anexperiencethat, as Ihavelearned, wouldremain for me
interminable with Emmanuel Levinas, as with all thoughtsthat
aresources, for I will
neverstopbeginningorbeginninganewtothinkwiththem onthe oosis of
rhenew beginningthey giveme, andIwill begin again and againto
rediscover them onjust about any subject.EachtimeI read or
rereadEmmanuel Levinas, I am overwhelmed
withgratitudeandadmiration, overwhelmedbythisnecessity, whichis
nota constraint butavery gentleforcethat obligates,
andobligatesusnottobendorcurveotherwisethespace of thought inits
respect for theother, but toyielel tothis olher, heteronomous
curvaturethat relates us6. 15 l\l:Iurice Blanehol:'$ lellt
MKMwledge of the UnkMwn.Mfim in uJW.. 00. ,OB (tI): loBl-9S, then
3gain in l.'fflm,ino ;nft,,; (P"ri$:G"Uim"rd, 1i9), 70-83.JCl')\;1l
of moft keyLyourdian tenns ret:linc:d. For example. Ihe Frenchis
tUlUlatedhere:uralher than Sn:Vall l:knAbbcck'ljUMific:at;oa of
misthoe(lQ1?4.-T_.1I wouldhavefollowedthis1:lS[ recommendation, let
myself be ledbysuchan"obligation," had thephrase"thereshall
benomourning"determinable as a constative. normative,
orprescriptivephrase, ornhadbeenpossible, by eitherinternalor
external means, toidentifyIts addressee. Yet not onlyis this not
the cast:, but this phrast:, unlike anyother example ofnormative or
prescriptive phrases given byLyotard, contains no personal pronoun.
"There shall be no isan impersonal phrase, without anI or a you.
whether singular or plural,without awe, he, she, orthey. This
grammarsetsitapanfromall theOther examples giveninDiffercuiinthe
course of the analysisjwtmentioned.I thus didnot know how to take
this phrase, this phrase without aIruly personal pronoun, when.
about tm years ago, in an issue of fA"tIW!phi/osop}'iqt,pretended
to be addressing me by pretendingnot toaddre$S me--or anyone. As
iftherealready had to be $Orne mourningof Ihe address of this
phrase that says "there shall be no mourning." Themust
alreadygothroughmourningJOn MU;/] inhis vc.rydesire to knowto whom
this phrase is destined or addressed, and aboveall, withrespect to
the possibility of being. he or she, or us, its
addressee.Readability bears this mourning: a phrase canbe:
readable, it must be ableto become readable, up to a cemin point,
without the reader, he or she, orany other place of reading,
occupying the ultimate position of
address.Thismourningprovidesthefirst chanceandthe terriblecondition
ofall reading.Today, I do not know any lx:tter, I still do not
know. how to read thisphrase, which I nevertheless cannot set
aside. I cannot Stop looking at it. Itholds me, It will not let me
go, even while it docs not need me as addresseeor inheritor,even
while it is designed to pass right by me more quickly thanit is to
pass through me. I will thus turn round, turn back to these five
words[seveninFrench} whose imbrication simply cannotbelinkedup,
whosechain cannot be moored or fastenedOntO any constraining
COntext, as if itrisked-ariskcalculated bygiven over
forevertodispcrsion,dissipation,oreven toan undecidability such
that the mourningit speaks of immediately turns oock to the mute
mumbling of thosefivelor sevenI words, This phrase gets carried
away allby itself. It holds itselfb3ck or withdraws; ont can
neither understand it nor be deaf to il, neitherdecipher il nor
understand nothing of it, neither kcep it nor lose it,
neitherinoneself nor Outside oneself. It is this phraseitse.lf, the
phrasing of thisundassifiablephrase, driftingfar fromthecategories
analyzedevenbyits author, thai one feels driven to go
throughmourning (fit;"SOli precisely at the point where this
phrasing says to us: over me, there shallbenomourning. OVer me,
thephrasesays, oral least thephrasingofthephrasesays, youwill not
gointomourning. Youwill especiallynOIorganize mourning, andeVenless
what is calledthe work of mourning.And of coursethe "no
mourning,"left to itself, canmeanthe perpc:tualimpossibility
ofmourning, an incon$Olability or irreparability that no workof
mourning shall ever come to mend.But the "no mourning" ean also, by
the same token, oppose testimony,attestation, protestation, or
contestation, to theveryidea of a testament,tothehypothesis of
amourningthat alwayshas, unfortunately, asweknow, anegativeside, at
oncelaborious, guilt riddenandnarcissistic,reactive and turned
toward melancholy, if not: envy. And when it borderson celebration,
or U-'l2kt-. one risks the worst.Despite aliihave just said,
andwouldwishto reaffirm, about theabsence ofa definite addrcss for
a phrase that was above alJ not addressedtome, inacontext in
whichit maynevertheless baveseemedtobe.I couldnot
completelyavoidatemptation. Thetemptationtoimagineone dayin '990,
betting that the phrase "there shall be nomourning," whichhe wrote
ashereadit, andwhichI myst:lf thenreadin a particularfashionin1990,
wouldone day, whenthe time came, berereadby one of thetWO of us(but
whichone?) bothinthesamewayand differently, for oneselfand in
public.. For this phrase was published. Itremains public even if it
is uncenain whether its public character exhaustsit andwhether
theremight not beacrypt forever buriedandhiddenwithinit. Asif,
published. it still remained absolutely secret. private,
orclandestine-three values (secret, private, clandestine) that I
would wishto distinguish carefully. I do not meanthat this phraseis
testamentary. Itake all phrasesto
haveavinuallytestamentarycharacter, bUI I wouldnot rush to give
this one,just becau.scit says something about the deathof the
author, any specificity as a last will, as the instructions of a
mortallx:ing, even less of someone dying. Rather, it tells us
something about thetestamentary-perhaps that what the most faithful
inheritance demandsisthe absence of anytestament. Inthisrespect. it
says again or dictateSanother "there shallbe no mourning." One
would owe it10 the loved oneor the friendnot to go through or even
into mourning for them.I am goingt'O put aside, thoughjust for a
time, this strange phrase.It willlhus keep all of ils reserve. I
set it aside for a moment with the oddfeeling that it will have
been, one day, entrustedto me, intensely,
directly,immediatelyaddressedtome, whileleavingmewithnoright over
it,especially nOt thai of the addressee. He whQ signed it is still
looking at mewith an attention at once watchful and distracted.111
CHAPTllal'ovaTlIltNRC:lding Jean-Fr:lOS"ois Lyotard, r/:r/:ading
him so intenscly today, I thinkI can discerna
quationthatwouldretain a une:lnny, quality forhim, a power that
some mightrushto call organizing, aforcethatI
alsoht:lievetoht:radicallydisruptive. If I wereto call it
subvrnive, it wouldht: not so astotakeadV3ntage of afacilewordbut
so as lOdCK"riht: inits tropic literality (tropic. mcaning turning,
like the spiraling of a turn ora tormun) and sketch out inits
figurallener amovement that revoha,evolves, rc:volutionius,
overturns from the bottom up--as an)' sub"crsionshould. The effect
of this questionis not toradiate out infinitelyfromacenter of
thought bUI wouldinsteadht:, if one insists on kttping dose toa
center, like awhirlwind, like a chasm open as a silent eye, like a
muteglance, as Jc:an-Fliked to say about musicl an C)'C ofsilence,
cvcn asit summons speech and commands somanywordsthaicrowd about
theopening of the mouth.Like the eye of a hurricane.This question
of suchvertiginous force, thisIhought likethe "eyeof ahurricane,"
wouldnot bethequestion of evil, nOI evenof radicale.vil. Worsc,
itwould bethe question of the worst. A questionth3t somemaydeemnot
onlyapocalypticbut altogetherinfern31. Andtheeye ofthehurricane,
thehyperbole of theworst, isprobablynot forl:ign. initsexcessive
motion, in its blustery violence, to what sucks down from
below,making it turnupon iuelf, the phrase "'there shall be no
mourning." Thatthere beno mourning-isthatbad?Good?Bener?Orisit
evenworsethanmourning, like thl: mourning withom mourning of
mourning?In at least tWO instances the thought of the worst is
mentioned, bothtimesquickly, inTileDiffer-md. First,
throughaquotation of Adorno: the Glmps deathhasanO"eI horror; since
Auschwitz, fearing deathmeans fearing something worse than(D, 88).
I emphasize me ",-orda romparati"c that can so easily turn into a
hyperbolic superlati,e.There is worse man radical evil, but mere is
nothing worS/: than the worst.There would thus be something worse
than death. or at least an experie:ncethat, in going furtherthan
death and doing more harmthanit, wouJdbedisproportionatctowhat is
tooeasilygranted just after death, namely.mourning. Alittle
further, theworsl: appearsasecondtime, once againinrelationtothe
survivors of Auschwitz,to theimpossibility of bearingwitness,of
saying"we;'of speakinginthe"first personpluraL"Jean-
Lyotardwonders: "-Wouldthisbe acase of a dispersionworsethanthe
diaspora, the dispersion of phrases!" (D. 98). Thiswould
seemtoimply thatthe dispersion of thl: diasporais onlyhalfb:ld:
infacl., it isbarely a dispersion-and dispcnion in itselfis not
absolute evil. As soon asit receives a proper nam/:, indl:ed a
national naml:, this historical naml:, thedjaspoTU, interrupts
absolute dispersion. The Jews of the diaspora form, oratleast
thinktheyform, a communit}' of the diaspora; they are
gatheredtogether bythisprinciple of dispersion, origin3ty exile.
thepromise, thl:idea of areturn, Jerusalem, ifnOl !srad,andso on.
The dispersionofphrases, however, would bean evil worse than evil
sinee what these phrasesforever lack-and this is the
pointDiffer-rod-is the very horizon ofa consensual meaning. ora
translatability, of a possible "to translate" (IuS/:the infinitive
formhcre forreasons thatwill become clear in a moment).What is
lacking in this dispersion of phrases, in this e"jl "orse than
evil, isthe horizon, or even me hope, oftheir very dispersion ever
reiving a com-mon meaning. What is inscribed in this worse,
apparentJy, is the differendas e,'erlasting difference betwn the
wrong and the litigation, for example.But, as we wiJl see, there
may be somcthing worse yet than this worse.It isnot certain thaithe
"worsc"is actually some thing, thatit everappears, is e,'er
presently present, essentially, substantially, like somcthingthat
"'is." It is thus uncertain whether;t can be approached by ml:ans
of anontological question, Nl:vertheless, I shallnot refrain from
asking, 50 as topretendto begin: What isthe worsc, the worst?Is
there an essence of theworst?And does ir ml:an anything else, and
worse, than evil?'I would fim like., for reasonsI sh311 give later,
to surroundthis oldword "mourning," with a few phrases.As if I
wl:re citing it-but I just citedit andI will cite it
again.Therecomemoments when, asmourningdemands Db/jgd,one feels
oblig:m:d to declare one's debts. We feel itour duty to duty to
saywhat we owe to the(riend. Yl:t being conscious of such a duty
may seemunbearableandinadmissible. Unbearablefor me,
:lSIbc:.lieveit wouldha"e also been for Lyourd. Unbearable, no
doubt, because:unworthyof thc verythingit
meanstogiveitselftounconditionally,theunconditional
perhapsalwayshavingto cndurethetrial of death.JInadmissibll:, not
becauseonewouldhave problems recognizingone's:l. I OO(e heard my
friendMugd :uk:l $imibr qunlion. bul in thtroruat oranothersJYU of
thin.king andSCI of .c:fe....lW:l'S.. s.-c: hi, auy orphiquede:
bsu...ivan: l:krncb la qUOlion duin L'II";",,,l ilHlOinogruplllqW,
w.Mane-Louiloe Mallei (P1f;l: Galil&:, (999),441...(,8.j.
Outline:of theargumenl [w:lSnot able to ,pellWI during the
coofc.ralce: ck;llhobliplel: il ..'oultllhullX' lhe ocher original
name of ab.iolule OOligation. Unronditionalengagemenlonlyto the one
whorather than-Wh.:1I8). fromthe placeof death, become a\ onceIhe::
abwlt originand dalinalion or thealolute::.UDCOrldilional,
unnc:gotiabk: ob/iption, beyond any (",IUOloCliotI. withoul
rc!Urnwoulll thus open ootoUncon..Jltion.aJ. TerrifyIng. Terror.
Thi' would be the: mc.amnttof-God i, the anociation of tht name
ofCod, :1$ the pbc:e of the: UncondlUooul,....ith dconh. A
dapt"r.llC rondusiOfl., perhaps:thc: unrondiliorul (whichI
diwngu,:lhhere fromlhe fOVCmttn, 0'", if !he diltinclion KrlUiM
improb.o.bkl 'igninel thc:dnthdebts or one's dUly as indebted, but
simply because: in de:daring these debtsinsuch amanner,
panicularlywhenlimeis limited, one might seemtobe putting an endto
them, calculating what they amQunt to, pretendingthento be able to
re trans. MartinJoughin. NewYork:Pre5s, 1995.Qu'ul-aqlle la
phikMophit? Wilh Felix Guattari. Paris: Minuit. Englishlranslation.
Whol IsPhilosqphy?trans. HughTomlinliOnandGr.lhamBurchell. New
York: Columbi.3 Uni\'ersity Press.1994."LcpuisC." poslfacetoSamuel
Beckett, Quizdet aUlrtS piku pourIssIllhtLrion. Paris:
MinuiLEnglish transilition in Essays
Crilialltl11dCli11iazl,tt:l.ns. Daniel W. Smilh and Michael A.
Greco. Minneapolis; UniversilYof Minnesota
Press,1997.Critiquuldi/lique. Paris: Minuit. English translation.
Essays eriliall tlndCli"ical. tr:II1$. Daniel W. SmithandMichael A.
Greeo. Minneapolis:Univc:rsity of Minnesota
Press.1997.Nt'immanenee: Une vie ...M(scplembre I):
3-'7.PAULDEMANBlmd11us andIIISlghr: Ess4ys mtht Rktom: of
COnl""poruryCnllCISm.NewYork;OxfordUnivc.rsityPrC$$.. ld
I".cd.wilhIi"eadditional1977'993199''995'971'99'197'
L'orOredudisa:mrs. Paris: Callim3.rd. English lransl:llion. "'Thc
Discourseon L3.nguagc," Ir:l.ns. Rupert Swycr,:u an appendix to
Tlte ArcltarolDflYofKnowledge. Also lransl;lIcd by Ian McLeod as
"The Order ofOiscoursc.In UnlyinK lite Tm: APOSN'nl
