17-40

8/13/2019 17-40

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/17-40 1/25

The Majesty of the PresentAuthor(s): Jacques Derrida, Alessia Ricciardi and Christopher YuSource: New German Critique, No. 91, Special Issue on Paul Celan (Winter, 2004), pp. 17-40Published by: New German CritiqueStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3211120 .Accessed: 15/01/2014 10:33

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

New German Critique and Duke University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve andextend access to New German Critique.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194 .117.18.99 on Wed, 15 Jan 20 14 10:33:52 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ngc

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3211120?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp





http://www.jstor.org/stable/3211120?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ngc

8/13/2019 17-40


TheMajesty f thePresent1

Jacques errida

II have hadto choose between continuous eading f Celan's speech,

an interpretationhatwouldfollow he pparent rder nd inear ime f

the text, ts very equencing, nd another eading less diachronic,more ystematic thatwouldundertake, or hepurposes f demonstra-tion, omake pparent configurationf motifs, f words nd themes,of figures hat o not habitually ppearwithin his rder. t is this ec-ond course havetaken artly ecausewe would not have the time oread together, inearly, ll of the text rom to Z, and partly ecausethe ctively nterpretive,elective, nd directed eading hat am aboutto propose oyou requires t. Youwill understand hat take his nter-pretive eading either or he onlynor for hebestonepossible, ut tdoesnot trikeme as impossible, nd t s of mportanceo me from heperspective f his eminar.

Even before pproaching too quickly, o be sure - the motifs hatpropose oarticulate ogethereven f Celandoesnot xplicitly o so),that s to say the marionette, heMedusa'shead,heads n general nd

i. Translators' ote: his ssay s the ranslationf a fragment rom wo eminarsgiven y Jacques errida t the cole desHautes tudes n Sciences ociales n Paris ur-ing 001-2002with he itle The Beast nd he overeign." hefull rench ext ncludesfurther onsiderationsuggested y Celan'skey erms n the Meridian" peech,whichDerrida dentifiess majestyas hepoints ut,majestas eing heLatinword or sover-eignty") nd sovereignty, arionettes nd automata, he figure f the monkey dieAffengestalt],ndtheMedusa'shead.This ranslationncludes hose arts f the eminar,collated y Ulrich aer, nwhich errida xplicitly ngageswith elan's "Meridian,"text hat, s henotes elow, epreviously ad ncounterednShibboleth: or Paul Celan.Thetranslation asretained heparticulartyle f the eminar hroughout.

17

This content downloaded from 19 4.117.18.99 on Wed, 15 Jan 20 14 10:33:52 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions





8/13/2019 17-40


18 The Majesty f the Present

majesty, heStranger nd the Unheimliche, wopreliminary emarks.First preliminary emark. There is very much a question of dates in

the text, question that s also a sort of poetics of the date. Devoting alittle ookto it, Shibboleth, ome fifteen ears go, I made t a motiffor reflection nd analysis or for privileged interpretation, otablyaround a certain January 0" that returns egularly, t the very leastthree times, in the text (Btichner's Lenz who "went walking in themountains on the 20th of January" Felstiner, 07, see below], then"perhaps we may say that every poem has its '20th of January'inscribed?" 408], and then "I'd begun writing rom '20th of Janu-ary,' from my 20th of January'" 412]). I commentedwith nsistence nShibboleth on dates, on the question of anniversaries nd of the calen-dar, and on that example of the 20th of January. Thanks to JeanLaunay's recent French edition so invaluable and exemplary wouldsay), we are reminded of one more dimension to this "January 0."Referring o Celan's manuscript, aunay recalls n a note 107, note 50,see below) that the 20th of January s also the day that, n Berlin, the

conference alled the Wannsee Conference ook place, in the course ofwhich Hitler and his collaborators ettled upon the plans for the finalsolution.'" (Cf. Launay, 68 and the following manuscript assage ofCelan: "We always write, oday as well, January 0, this January 0[diesen 20 Janner] to which is added ever since then the writing f somany [days] of ice" [zu dem sich {seitdem}soviel Eisiges hinzuge-schrieben hat].) "January 0": anniversary f death, then, of the crimeagainst humanity, f the supremely, rbitrarily enocidal decision. "Jan-uary 20": the eve of the anniversary f the royal beheading of LouisXVI, of which there s also some question between the "Long live theKings " of Lucile and of Lenz, of which we will speak again.

Second preliminary emark. The apparently urprising ontiguitybetween our lectures on Paul Valery's Monsieur Teste and Celan's"Meridian" speech, such particularly ifferent exts, o distanced fromone another by so many traits, nd whose dates - exactly this contigu-ity or this proximity f two texts pparently o anachronistic n relationto one another s justified beyond all other manners f uxtaposition by

the fact that both treat, ach in its manner, marionettes nd everythingthat is fastened hereupon. t will be found that Valery s not simplyabsent from he "Meridian" speech. Celan asks himself t a particularmoment, n the ubject f a radical utting nto uestion f art, f t s






8/13/2019 17-40


Jacques Derrida 19

not necessary o "think f Mallarmn p to his last consequences" [Mal-larme konsequent u Ende denken]? There again one of Launay's longnotes 105, note 43) leads us on the trail of a manuscript f Celan thatrefers o a passage of Valdry n Variktis.2 alery here cites a word ofMallarm6 responding o poor Degas who complained of not finishinghis own little poem even though he was "full of ideas." Mallarm6,reports Valery, esponded o him thus: "But Degas, it's not with ideasthatwe make verses, utwithwords."AndValdry oncludes: There sthere great esson."

Let us now attempt, round r through heannounced onfiguration(art, hemarionette, heMedusa'sheador the utomaton, eads n gen-eral and majesty, heStranger nd the Unheimliche),odecipher cer-tain poetic ignature, do not ay a poetics r a poetic rt, nor evenapoetry, rather ould ay a certain oetic ignature, heunique igna-ture f a uniquepoem, lwaysunique, hat ttempts in order not tospeakof the essence, hepresence n which he poem s, but of wherethepoem omes ndgoes to set tself ree hroughrt, rom rt.

What ine ought o be pursued oapproach heunique ncounter ithunique oem? You know hat he oncept f encounter,he secret f theencounter" Geheimnis er Begegnung], s the secret f the poem, of thepresence or the admitting nto presence r the presentation f the poem,the secret of the encounter s the secret f the poem in the double senseof this expression the secret of": first, n the one hand, n the sense ofwho makes a poem, in the sense of its fashioning, f its fashion, f itspossibility f taking orm f not f ts rt nd ts avoir aire, prefer osay ts ignaturethis s the ecret s the poem'sgenesis, ts ondition fpossibility, s whenwe say"this ne,he has the ecret," eaning he rtof, etc., but here t s not essentially rt hatkeeps the secret f this ct orrather f this event, t is the encounter) nd then, double sense of thesecret, ence, econd, n the other hand, s that which ven in thepresent, n the very presentation f the poem, in this present now upon

2. Jean aunay's ranslationf Celan nLeMvridient autres roses Paris: euil,2002).Werely n John elstiner's elected oems nd Prose ofPaul Celan NewYork:

Norton, 001)for nglish ranslationsfCelan's ext. ereafter ll pagereferenceso Fel-stiner's ranslation illbegiven nthe ext. hroughouthe wo eminars, errida uotesLaunay's ranslationnd reverts s necessary othe riginal erman.We will substituteFelstiner or aunay, xcept or nstanceshat ecessitatettention o specific ording nthe French ranslation,nwhich ase we will ranslate aunay nto nglish hile onsult-ing he riginal erman, iving elstiner's nglish ersionna footnote.






8/13/2019 17-40


20 TheMajesty f he resent

which elanso much nsists, n the xperience f the ncounter, emainsoncemore ecret, undamentallys a present hat oes not present tself,a phenomenon hatdoes not manifest tself. othing hows tself, henothing, heabsurd hows tself n not manifesting nything. e willcome o this, osuch manifestations non-manifestation.

Yet believe know, rom aving ead t so many imes, hat he ra-jectory f this poemfollows line that efies ny reconstitutionn theshapeof logicalor narrative xposition. ome of the nitial ketches revasions hat offer ou today ometherefore nly s an invitation osee it yourself, ograsp t withyour yesand hands, oencounter re-cisely hepoem.The ine I retain heword line," ut twillbe neces-sary o say link n an instant, incethe ine s a link, erbinden thelineas link hat inks o the other, o the Youof the ncounter. he lineas link hat seek odesign r to reconstitutesmoreover hat ndeed ssought, hatCelanprofesses o have sought uring his oyage, nd onthe path hat n the ndhe qualifies nd from hich will depart, hat sto say from heend, by the end, hatCelanqualifies herefore s "the

impossible ath" r "the path f the mpossible." oreover, the mpos-sible path" nd "the path of the mpossible" re not exactly he samething.Wecan magine hat hepath f he mpossible emainstself os-sible, n so far s it s a path, s the progress f a path,what s a resultrenders he mpossible ath possible n its turn; nd it is doubtless npurpose, nd n view of the nextricable not olding hem ogether ndyet keeping hem istinct, hat elan says, uxtaposing nd crossing hetwo, "the mpossible ath" nd "the path of the mpossible": Ladiesand Gentlemen, find omething hat omforts e a little t havingtaken, n your resence... [in hrerGegenwart]." his n ihrer Gegen-wart which ooks ikea conventional anality, polite ormalityuitedto the ddressing f an auditorium n the dayof an award, his n ihrerGegenwart s of a gravity ll the morediscernible ince he whole extwill revolve round he enigma f the now,"Gegenwart, nd of pres-ence. "Ladies and Gentlemen, find omething hat omforts ea littleat having aken, n your resence in hrerGegenwart], his mpossiblepath, hispath of the mpossible in ihrer Gegenwart iesenunmogli-chenWeg, iesenWeg esUnmiglichen egangen usein;413]."Now this mpossible ath f the mpossible onstitutes s a link heline that he believeshe has found, ventouched habe ch ihn oebenwieder u beriihren eglaubt re the very astwords], nd that s going






8/13/2019 17-40


Jacques errida 21

to be calledthe "Meridian" peech. his ine s a link hat eadsto theencounterBegegnung],oyour ncounter,o the ncounter f you, othenomination f You,bywhich he oem nd hepresent f thepoemmorethan nce willbe named. etbefore ursuing his uotation hrougho tsend, would ike through hree ackward urns o show you why inyour resence" in hrer egenwart] as not concession oconvention(there re none n this xtraordinaryext).This "in your presence" inihrer Gegenwart] as invested eforehand,harged, ggravated y thequestion f the poem n tsdifficult nd tumultuous xplication ith rt,the question hathinges n art nd the question hathinges n poetry[Fragenach der Kunst ndnach der Dichtung], elan saysearlier n,adding: with his uestion must ave goneto Bitchner f my own ifnot my free)will aus eigenen, enn uch nicht reien tiicken],o seekout his question" 405).Now,this uestion ecomes hat f the poem,defined yCelan s present nd s presence,s now nd s presence.

First urn. owardwhat heword majesty" recisely mplies n thevery ssence, r rather heevent nd the chance of poetry. fter he

manymanifestationsf art o whichwe willreturn art s a marionette,art s a monkey, tc.),here s Lucilefrom anton Death, he who isprecisely blind to art" [die Kunstblinde], urprising s by crying,"Long ive the King " Yousee,need even ay, hatwith his cene ofthe FrenchRevolution nd of the putting o death f the King, t theedgeof the caffold, ut lso with his vocation f marionettes nd ofthe monkey, e are closest, n fact, o our seminar's] reat uestion,"the east nd he overeign."

Lucilecries, Long ive the King ," nd Celanstresses ith n excla-mationmark o what xtent his cream urprises,o close to the bloodyscaffold nd after e had recalled thewords f great rt" kunstreicheWorte] y Danton, amille, tc. Lucile,who is blind o art, creams,"Long live the King " Celan calls this a counter-word Gegenwort]:"After ll those words ttered n the ostrum it's the caffold es istdasBlutgeriist])- hat word welch in Wort ]. t s a counter-wordEsistdas Gegenwort], word hat napsthe wire,' a word hatno longerbowsto history's oiterers nd parade-horses,'t s an act of freedom. t

is a step. Esist inAkt erFreiheit. s ist inSchritt]"403).Toupholdthis roposal, hat s to saythis Long ivetheKing"from ucile who sblind oart s a "step" nd an "act of freedom," manifestation ithoutmanifestation, counter-manifestation.elanmust istance his cream,






8/13/2019 17-40


8/13/2019 17-40


Jacques errida 23

restore tsmost ignified eaning. here s the overeign ajesty f thesovereign, f the King, nd there s, even more majestic r otherwisemajestic,more overeignndotherwise overeign,hemajesty f poetry,or the majesty f the bsurd n so far s it witnesses hepresence f thehuman. his hyperbolic rumping nd bidding-ups inscribed n whatwill call the dynamic f majesty r of sovereignty:n its dynamic,because t s a matter f a movement hose precipitations ineluctable,and of a dynamic I choose hisworddeliberately),ecause t s a mat-ter of the sovereign, xactly, f power, f force dynamis], f thedeployment f the potentiality f the dynast nd of the dynasty. hatmeans there s greater ajesty" han he majesty f the king.As it hasbeen said, you will remember, hat Monsieur este was superior osuperiormen, r as the Nietzschean uperman s higher han hesupe-rior man.As in Bataille, overeignty,n the ense hat he means t andthat he means o give to it, goes beyond lassicsovereignty,hat s tosaymastery, hegentry, bsolute ower, tc.

But henwhy etain heword?

What matters most here with Celan is that his hyper-majesty fpoetry, eyond r outside hemajesty f the king, he overeign, r themonarch, his uprememajesty f the bsurd, s the majesty f Dich-tung, inds tself o be determined y four quallygravevalues. t isnonetheless ecessary, believe, o privilege ne among hose nd torecognize n particular heprivilege f the valueof the present Gegen-wart].Thesefour ravevaluesor significationsre those f testimony:certainly, hevalueof majesty n so far s it gives estimonyzeugendenMajestat], he value of the human orwhich t gives testimony, utwouldsay most f all, because t does not cease afterward oconfirmandto repeat tself, hevalueof thepresent Gehuldigt ird ier derflirdie Gegenwart es MenschlicheneugendenMajestit des Absurden].Heremajesty s majestic: t s poetry, n so far s it givestestimony othe present, othe now, o the presence," s it has been translated, fthe human. ince to give testimony lways mplies n act of presenceby meansof a word ddressed o the other n attesting o a presence,what ountshere nd what ignifies s a presence ttesting o a pres-ence, r rather o a present n so far s it s human.I wouldnotprivilege hepresent o such degree, hepresence f thispresent, f besides all the other easons hat you can easily imagineCelan himself ad not returned o it with n evident nd, believe,undeniablensistence.






8/13/2019 17-40



I willbe briefer nmy wo ther romised xamples r turns.Secondturn. ome six pages ater n the "Meridian" peech, fter

crossing cannot econstruct ut whose essential tageswill be fol-lowed he next ime, elansaysthis n the ubject f whathe calls an"actualized anguage" aktualisierteprache] nder he ignof "a radi-cal individuation" he says this n adding hepresent o the now, naggravating egenwart ymeans f Prasenz: Then poemwouldbe -even more learly hanbefore the anguage-become-formf a singleperson nd, following ts inmost nature, resentness nd presence"[Dann ware das Gedicht - deutlicher noch als bisher - gestaltge-wordene prache inesEinzelnen, und einem nnersten esen achGegenwart nd rasenz] 409).

Third urn. urther n in the Meridian" peech, elan clarifies ome-thing ssential hen t comes othe tructure f this present-now,"ndthis clarification hreatens o complicate verything hat will discuss(409-10).Celan makes clear that his present-now f the poem, mypresent-now, hepunctual resent-now f the punctual , my here-now

must et the present-now f the other peak, he time of the other. tmust eavetime, t must ivetime o the other. o the other, t mustleaveorgive ts ime. ts proper ime.

To the other, t must eaveor give ts ime. o the other, t must eaveor give its proper ime.This formula s not literally elan's, but Iascribe ohim his mbiguous, ndeed nheimlich, rammar, ccordingto which ne no longer nows o whom he possessive djective efers:to the self or to the other to the other, o leave or to give its time).give or leave him this grammatical quivocation n order o translatewhat believe obe the ruth boutCelan:to the other, o leave or togive tsproper ime.

There t s, to be sure thatwhich ntroducesnto he present-nowdivisibility r an alterity hat changes verything. he formula ur-nishes verything or rereading f the predominant uthority, ndeedof the majesty f the present, hich ecomes hat f the other r that fan asymmetricalharing ith he ther, urned oward he other r com-ing from he other. will now read the passage in question nd its

wording, hen ecessary,ntwo anguages.Thepoembecomes under what onditions the poemof some-one who - always gain perceives, ho s turned zugewandten,I stress his urn, heturn f this turned"]oward homever






8/13/2019 17-40


Jacques Derrida 25

appears [dem Erscheinenden ugewandten], ho interrogateswhomeverppears nd ddressespeech o him dieses rschei-nendeBefragenden ndAnsprechenden.. this Ansprechen,histurning owardheother n order o address peech ohim, oaddress neselfothe ther, ospeak othe ther, ndeedoshoutat him this Ansprechens doubtless he urning ndthe urn hatrespondsoeverythingn he assage,s in he Meridian"peech;and say his turn" ess osuggest figure, turningndeed foneof these hetoricalropes elan o mistrusts,han atherogestureowardheAtemwende,he urn,he urningfbreath hatso often s literallyhe ery nspiration,he pirit f the Merid-ian"speech];his ecomes dialogue often despairingia-logue eswirdGesprach oft st sverzweifeltesesprach].3

Thepoem s therefore speaking o two ides Gesprach, conversa-tion], speech omore han ne, speechwhosenowknowsmore hanone within t, a speaking hat n itself ssemblesmore han ne (I say"assembles" ecause,withinwhat s known n the now, here s, you

will understand, movement f assembling, being-together, chanceof assembling, ersammlungonceagain sharply eideggerian otif- a movement, springing, step that ssembles more than one initself), nd the address f one to the other, ven f t fails, ven f theaddress s not received r does not rrive t its destination,ven f thedespair f the ther, r about he ther, lways ies nwait nd even f tmust lways ie in wait, ywayof tsownpossibility, or he possibilityof the poem.4Celancontinues:What s addressed das Angesprochene]takes hapeonly n the paceof this onversation,athers round ver-sammelt s sich]the addressing nd naming t. But what s addressed[das Angesprochene]nd is now [in diese Gegenwart] ecome Thou[zum du gewordene] through aming, s it were, lso brings long tsotherness nto this present bringt . auch sein Anderssein mit]. Even

3. Herewe have ranslatedaunay nto nglish, ecause f the orce nd ength fDerrida'smeditation n the meaning f "turning" Celan'szugewandten, hich aunaytranslates s "tournm"ndwhich elstiner enderss "facing"). aunay's ersion, ited nDerrida'secture, uns s follows: Lepodme evient a quelles onditions le podme equelquun ui- toujours ncore pergoit, uiest ournd ers e quiapparait t ui ddresselaparole; eladevient ndialogue souvent est undialogue isisperd." f.Felstiner10.

4. We render he phrase uneparole dont e maintenant aintient lus d'un enelle"as "a speechwhosenowknowsmore han ne within t."Theverb,maintient, ug-gestsmaintaining, olding, r keeping; e have hosen knows" nthehopeof retainingsomething f Derrida's llusionwhen ewrites lemaintenant aintient."






8/13/2019 17-40



in a poem'shere nd now noch mHier undJetzt es Gedichts] thepoem tself eally asonly his ne, unique,momentary resent dieseeine, einmalige, unktuelle egenwart] even n this mmediacy ndnearness t lets the Other's wnmost uality peak: ts time noch ndieser UnmittelbarkeitndNaiheisst es das ihm, emAnderen, igen-stemitsprechen:essen eit] 410).

What he poem ets speakat the same time mitsprechen:also letsspeak," ays Launay's ranslation,nd the mit f mitsprechen eservesan accent, his peaking s originally, priori speaking ith he otheror to the other, venprior ospeaking lone, nd this mit oesnot nec-essarily upture olitude,we might ven say it is its condition, s itsometimes s that f despair),what hepoem ets speak with t, etsshare ts speech,what t lets colloquize, on-voke so many ways totranslate it-sprechen, hichmeansmore han dialogue),what t etsspeak, ndeed ign,with t co-sign, onsign, ountersign) s the ime fthe other, ts time n what s most roper: hemostproper nd thus hemost ntranslatable ther f he ther's ime.

It would be necessary o comment orever n the wording f thesesentences. t is not only question, ousee, of an assembling n dia-logue.What here s not even a poetics s still ess a politics f dia-logue, a dialogue in the course of which, aided by experts ndconsultants n communication, e would earn aboriously o allowtheother ospeak. t is not question f a democratic ebate n the courseof whichwe allow the other ts time f speech, nder hesurveillanceof one of those locksthat, longwith hecalendar, re also, further-more, n question n the Meridian" peech. t is not a question f thetime f speechbut of leaving othe other, hus f giving othe otherwithoutmaking performance f generosity nd so effacing t alto-gether, f giving o the other ts time andgiving s here eaving, orweonlygiveto the otherwhat s proper oit, rreducibly roper), t s notonly question f letting heother peak, ut of letting ime peak, tstime,what s most roper o ts time, he ime f the ther. t's time hatit s necessary o let speak, heother's ime, ather han o leave to theother ts time f speech. t is a question f letting ime peak, he ime

of the other n what s most proper o the other, ence n which t ismost ther and that rrives, hat let arrive, s the other's ime n thepresent ime f "my" poem.Andthat let arrive, hat let arrivewhatarrives of the other), his etting eutralizes othing, s not a simple






8/13/2019 17-40


Jacques Derrida 27

passivity, ven f a certain assivitys required; othe ontrary, t s thecondition on which an event may happen and something may arrive.What I would make arrive nstead of letting rrive well, that wouldarrive no longer. What make arrive does not arrive, vidently, nd it isnecessary to draw consequences from this paradoxical necessity ofappearance though vidently he "lassen" of Celan's German means atthe same time letting nd making noch in dieser Unmittelbarkeit ndNahe Iasst es das ihm em Anderen, igenste mitsprechen: essenZeit]).

Starting rom here, f may ay so, though must tophere for hissession], the "Meridian" speech starts ver, we make a half-turn. fterhaving said that he poem seeks this place [Ort], Celan approaches thequestion of place [Ort, place of rhetoric, ilder und Tropen], he ques-tion of topoi and of u-topia, ll the while remembering hathe speaks ofa poem that sn't there, f an absolute poem that annot exist [das gibtes gewiss nicht, as kann s nicht eben ].

I had announced hat fter hese hree urns nd three xamples, wouldread through o the end this conclusion hat have started o quote. I will

do so, and then will come back again to the "Meridian" peech. thuswill come back, in the hope that necessity will become clearer, o themotifs f the Other nd of the Stranger, f the Unheimliche, f the head(the "Meridian" peech shifts ack and forth etween heads and decapita-tions, t frequently peaks of a fall in the Grund nd Abgrund); nd wethenwill rediscover, mong ther eads, heMedusa'shead in its rela-tion to erection nd castration), nd, finally, e'll make a turn acktoward hemonkey, oward hemarionettes a question f art DieKunst,das ist, ie erinnern ich, inmarionettenhaftes.. kinderloses esen].

I . . . seek- for 'm back where began the placeof my ownorigin.

I am seeking ll of that with n inexact ecause uneasy inger nthemap ona children's ap, must dmit.

Noneof these laces s to be found, hey o not xist, ut knowwhere, specially ow, heywouldhave to exist, nd . . I find

somethingLadies ndGentlemen, find omethinghat omforts ea little thaving aken,nyour resence, his mpossible ath, his ath f heimpossible.






8/13/2019 17-40


28 The Majestyof the Present

I find omething hat inds nd eads to encounter, ike poem.find omething like anguage immaterial et arthly, errestrial,

something ircular, eturning pon tself ywayof both olesandthereby happily even rossing he ropics nd ropes: find..,.meridian.

With ouandGeorgBilchner ndthe tate f Hesse believe 'vejust ouchedt gain. 413)

II

The question of the sovereign, f the upright osition, f the grandeuror the highness f the Very High had led us last time not only from heRoman majestas, as the sovereignty f the State or of the Roman peo-ple to the majesty n La Fontaine's able, heWolf nd the amb, o HisMajesty hewolf. t also led us to a doubledivision, f can say so, adivision f division tself n what wouldventure ocall, through hispoemon poetry hat s the Meridian" peech, n this ideof or through

the poem, Celaniandiscourse, he discursive ogic or axiomatics hatsubtends r canshispoem, double ivision. his s to say:1.) On the one hand, primary ifference, issociation, r division

between hemajesty f the Monarch here of the monarch ouis XVI,of the one who ost his head n a Revolution) nd, et us say, hemaj-esty of the present r of poetry Dichtung, ince as you remember,Celanafter aving poken f the fir die Gegenwart esMenschlichenzeugendenMajestait esAbsurden," dds"but believe t s... poetry"[aber ich glaube, es ist . . die Dichtung]); that ultimate majesty, hatultimate overeignty, oetic sovereignty s not, Celan says, the politicalsovereignty f the monarch.

2.) And on the other hand, there s the division in the point, n thevery tip, n the very punctuality f the now, as the very presence of thepresent, n the very majesty of the poetic present, n the poem asencounter, he dissociation and the partition hat is also a partaking,between my present, he very present, he very presence of the present,of the same present, within he present f the same. And on the other

hand and t s the other and f partition nd of partaking the otherpresent, hepresent f the other o whom hepoemmakespresent tstime, o letting peak n a Mitsprechenheother's ime, ts proper ime.[Das Gedicht elbst hat a immer ur diese, einmalige, unktuelle






8/13/2019 17-40


Jacques Derrida 29

Gegenwart noch in dieser Unmittelbarket nd NdiheIisst

es das ihm,dem Anderen, Eigenste mitsprechen: essen Zeit: "Even in a poem'shere and now - the poem itself really has only this one, unique,momentary resent even in this immediacy nd nearness t lets theOther's wnmost uality peak: ts ime" 410)].

We havegradually pecified hatwasthe ime f that peech eft othe other within he encounter f the poem,beyond ts politico-demo-cratic nterpretation,eyond he ime f calculable peech r of a countofvoices t themoment f he overeign's lection.

Havingreached uch a point, o as not o lose sight f our questionregarding heproper f man, egardinghephallicmajesty nd revolu-tionary ecapitation f the sovereign, would ike, while privilegingsuch motifs s those of the animal, he monkey, he marionette ndespecially heMedusa'shead, o reconstruct s quickly nd as schemati-cally s possible hepath hat ecurs o whatCelan evokes s a settingoutfrom hehuman einHinaustretenus demMenschlichen].

This setting ut from he human, he human n behalf f which he

poeticmajesty f the Absurd estifies, ould be (here the conditionalmust be maintained, ou will see why t must lways remain perhaps")the proper f art ccording oBiichner, ut of an art hatwould be "unhe-imlich" the word, you will understand, ppears wo more imes5) an artthat would be "unheimlich," ecausein such an art ome apparently nhu-man things would find themselves t home [zuhause]. There would bethree pparently nhuman r unhuman hings fter whose figures rt, incethe beginning f discourse, has produced ts apparitions. hese threeapparitions ould e 1.)a Medusa's ead it comes o bea questionnthemouth f Biichner's Lenz through hom Celan pretends ohear the voiceof Biichner imself); .) "the monkey's igure" die Affengestalt, hat lsomade ts ppearance bit arlier] nd 3.) automata r marionettes.

Here it is necessary s always to be most attentive o ellipses and fur-tive shifts f meaning, o cursive llusions. his setting ut from hehuman,which Celandescribes s one describes he gesture r move-ment f the other, iichner's enz or Btichner imself, he characterthat elanrecognizes s him, ttributes o him r confers ohim, s that

of the unheimlich." ou know hat hewordhastwo pparently ontra-dictory nd undecidable enses;we havespoken t great ength f this5. In his lecture, errida efers o Launay'swording n French, hichwe have

retained nd rendered nto nglish. elstiner ranslates elan'sunheimlichs "uncanny."Launay endersheGerman ord s "6trange" nd 6trange, 6paysant."Seenote .)






8/13/2019 17-40


30 The Majestyof the Present

(cf. Freud and Heidegger) the familiar ut as the non-familiar, he terri-ble disquieting f the stranger ut as the proper's ntimate t home. Theword ppears wo times n this passageand even more often lsewhere:

This sa question f setting utfrom hehuman, f ransportingne-self o a realm hat urns oward hehuman ts trange ace the amerealmwhere he igure f hemonkey, he utomatonsnd s a result... ah art, oo, eems t home.

This s not hehistorical enz who speaks hus, utBilchner's enz;we hear he voice of Bichnerhere: rt or imyet etains omethingstrange, omething isoriented.6

Here the word "unheimlich" ears all of the stress, recisely where tremains quivocal nd so opento mistranslation;t expresses he ssen-tial bearing f the Meridian" peech, t seems ome. t reappears lse-where nthe ext, ssociated ith word ully s pervasive: he tranger.

And poetry? oetry, hich till has to take hepath f art? Thenwe'd really ave he ath otheMedusa'shead nd he utomaton.NowI am not eeking wayout, 'm only uestioning urther,nthe amedirection nd also, believe, n the direction f the Lenzfragment.

Perhaps I'm only sking perhaps oetry, ike rt, s goingwitha self-forgotten toward heuncanny nd the trange, nd s again- but where? ut n what place?but with what?but s what?

setting tself ree?7406)

Although he strangeness f the Unheimliche which s a familiarstrangeness, hichdepends n what he figures f the automaton, he

6. Our translation rom aunay's rench nd Celan'sGerman riginal. elstinerrenders t thus: Thismeans tepping ut of what s human, etaking neself o a realmthat s uncanny et urned oward hat's uman the amerealmwhere he monkey, herobots nd thereby . . alas,art oo seems obe at home. This s not hehistorical enz

speaking, ut BUichner's,ere t's Baichner's oicewe've heard, ere oo:art for himretains omething ncanny."7. What elstiner iveshere s "uncanny nd strange" s translated y Launay s

"dtrange t tranger" 69).For he ake of consistency,nthis assage ndthe emainingcitations f Felstiner's ranslation, e havereplaced isword robots" or elan's "Auto-maten" ith aunay's ndDerrida's ord automata."






8/13/2019 17-40


Jacques errida 31

monkey, nd the Medusa'shead are at home zuhause] although hestrangeness f the Unheimliches often ssociated n thiswaywith hestranger, t s by no means ccidental hat t should e so near owhatforms he ecret f poetry, hat s to saythe ecret f the ncounter. or"secret" alls tself n German eheimnis the ntimate, herecoiled, heretired n the retreat, hehidden nterior f at home, f the house); ndthis secret f the encounter s at heart he most ntimate f what spresent ndpresenceGegenwart ndPrdsenz] nthe oem.

Then poemwouldbe - evenmore learly han efore the an-guage-become-formf a single erson nd, ollowingts nmostnature, resentnessnd resent.

Thepoem s lonely.t is lonely ndunderway. hoever ritesone taysmated ith t.But n ust thiswaydoesn't hepoem tand, ight ere, n anencounterin hemysteryf n ncounter?

Thepoemwants o reach nOther,tsneeds his ther, t needsanOver-against.t eeks t ut, peaksowardt.For hepoemmakingowardn Other, ach hing, achhumanbeingsa form f his ther.409)

Before oming ackto this oncept f the Stranger o associatedwiththe trange, ith he trangeness f what s "unheimlich," would iketo point ut to you at least heroute f a longdetour hrough he extsof Heidegger. havemyself, or everal years, nderlined hedecisiveimportance f, and so far haveremarked lightly r not at all on, thelexicon of the Unheimliche r of Unheimlichkeitn Heidegger animportance ully s great, owever ifferent, t least n appearance, sin Freud).Now, without anting or being ble to reopen n full hequestion f the Unheimlichen Heidegger, rom eing nd Time p tothe end, will contentmyself ith ignaling oyou,precisely ecausethere xists he human nd the unhuman ithin hehuman, hatpas-sage in the ntroduction oMetaphysics1935)that esonates trangely[unheimlich] ith what, by the Unheimliche, elan names as thatwhich, t home n art, eems o exceed hehuman n the human, eemsto step ut f hehuman nhuman rt.

With ome violence, nd guidedby what s important o us here n






8/13/2019 17-40



this moment, reopen he ntroduction o Metaphysics t that pointwhere Heidegger nce more raisesthe question what s man?" Twoessentialmarkers efore rriving t what nterests s here n this our-ney, amely heUnheimliche.

1.) Heidegger egins yexpressinghe econdary, erived, nd n shortlatecomingndbasically ery nsatisfyingharacter, rom n ontologicalpoint f view, f the definition f man as "rational nimal" r as zoonloghon khon. his definition e elsewhere ames n an interesting ndunassailable ashion, zoologic,"not only but also in the sense that talliesthe ogoswith he oon, nd that t pretends oprovide n accountof and a reason or logondidonai] heessence f man n speaking fthatwhich sbefore ll a "living eing," n "animal": Die genannte ef-inition es Menschen st m Grunde ine zoologische." ut the oon ofthis oology emainsn large espectragwirdig. o put t otherwise,nas much s we havenot nterrogated,ntologically,he ssence f beingin life, heessence f life, o defineman as zoon logon khon emainsproblematicnd unclear. ow, t s on this ninterrogatedoundation,n

this roblematic oundationf anunexplainedntologicaluestion f ifethat he entireWest, eclaresHeidegger, as constructedts psychology,its ethics, ts theory f knowledge,nd ts anthropology. nd Heideggerthen describes ith rony nd hauteur he state f culture n which welivewherewe can obtain ooks bearing n their over he itle, What sMan?,"without hefirst nkling f the question eing osed beyond hecover f such book a bookthat, e then otes in 1935), heFrank-furter eitung raises s "courageousndventuringut f he rdinary."

2.) Consequently,heresponse o the uestion what s man?" annotbe a response ut question, questioning,n act or an experience fFragen, ecause n that uestion t s man himself ho s determined nself-interrogationbout himself, bout his being, o discovering im-self s the questioning ssencewithin he Fragen.From hisHeideggerdraws wo conclusions n one,namely: It is only n so far s he pro-ceeds in questioning hatman comes o himself nd is a himself' derMensch ommt rst ls fragend-geschichtlicheru ihm elbst nd ist einSelbst].And so this Selbst, hishimself, his pseity as we translateSelbst)which nce again s neither n "I" nor n individual, eitherwe nor community,s a "who" before ll "I," all individual, ll some-body, ll we, andall communityafortiori, would dd with espect owhat nterests s, neither political ubject or nimal, orHeidegger's






8/13/2019 17-40


Jacques Derrida 33

suspicion regarding he place of man as zoon loghon ekhon, animalrationalis, will be equal regarding he place of man as political animal,Aristotle's word to which we will return t length ater on). So that, ec-ond conclusion wrapped in the first, he question of man about hisproper eing nach einem igenen ein]transforms tself: t no longeris "what s it that s man," what s man," Was st der Mensch?," ut"who sman," Wer st derMensch?"

With hese womarkers aving eenrecalled, ou hen ee, f youreadthe text s I ask you to, Heidegger s he temporarily bandons ar-menides, homhe is about oread, nd turns oward ophocles'sAnti-gone to search here or hepoetic ketch f what ould be the Greekoverhearing f man's ssence. It is a poetic ketch n whose nterpreta-tion he advances reascension o what he takes o be a more riginarysenseof the Greek olis, forwhich, e says, he ranslation y "city" r"state," tadt nd tadtstaat, oesnot ender the lain ense" dies rifftnicht en vollen inne]).Before hestate, enceprior o what we callpolitics, hepolis is the Da, the here n which, nd n so far s which,

theDa-sein sgeschichtlich,ventuatess history, s the historical riginof history. o this historical ite belongnot only hesovereigns Herr-scher], hemenwhopossesspower, he rmy, henavy, he abinet, hepeople's ssembly, ut lso the gods, he emples, hepriests, hepoets,the hinkers. ut n the ourse f this eading f Sophocles, hat s mostimportant ous is the moment henHeidegger ranslateshedeinotatonof deinon the most errible,hemost iolent, r the most isquietingfthedisquietinglines332-375 f Antigone) hich ccurs n ines hat ayalsothat here s nothing ore einon hanman by das Unheimlichstedes Unheimlichen,f which e will saythat t resides n the conflict, nthe antagonistic relation [im gegenwendigen Bezug] between justice[dikd] nd tekhnd. eidegger sks himself, Why do we translate einonby un-heimlich?" he principle f his response s the sentence Spruch]that ays, "Der Mensch ist das Unheimlichste deinotaton], hen." Manis the most unheimlich" ives the authentic, roper, Greek definition fman gibt die eigentliche riechische efinition esMenschen].

Why? Why translate hus? Not in order o add, after he fact, senseto the word deinon (which we often translate by "violent" or "terri-ble"), nor because we hear the Unheimliche s a sensible impression,like an affect r that which makes an impression n our sensibility, utbecause there s in the Unheimliche omething hat hrows s out of the






8/13/2019 17-40



heimliche, f the appeasing uietude f the domestic, f the heimisch,of the habitual Gewohnten],f the urrent ndof the familiar Gelaufi-gen]. Man is the most unheimlich, ecausehe sets out from hefamil-iar, from he habitual rontiers Grenze] f habitude, tc. When thechorus aysof man that e is to deinotaton r das Unheimlichste,t snot question, ccording oHeidegger, f saying hatman s this r thatand, n addition, nheimlichste;t s indeed question n the first lace,indeedfrom he first, f saying hat he essence f man, heproper fman (his fundamental rait, is Grundzug) s to be estranged romeverything hat we can identify s familiar, ecognizable, tc. Theproper f man wouldbe, in short, hisfashion f not being t home nsecurity heimisch],s if t were near o him s his proper ssence.Asif, according o what s now, on the whole, a somewhat raditionalmotif, eidegger aid that man's proper s this xperience hat onsistsin exceeding heproper n the opinion f whoever s appropriatedntofamiliarity.n point f which, eidegger ill not uite ay "there s noproper f man,"but rather hat his proper therwise as as its funda-

mental rait certain mpropriety r ex-propriety,t least he proprietyof being pprehended to the extent f propriety as the trange, henon-appropriated,ndeed the non-appropriable, he stranger o theheimisch, othe reassuring roximity f the dentifiablend the imilar,to familiarity,ointeriority t home: n particular eyond ll of the defi-nitions eidegger alls oologic f man s zoon ogon khon.

Leavingoff here or want of time, verything n those pages andbeyond hosepages resonateswith Heidegger round he utterance,"Der Mensch s to deinotaton, as Unheimlichstees Unheimlichsten."Before eturningo what withCelanappears oproduce strange chothere, emphasize nly that hesuperlative das Unheimlichste]oesnot count ess than he quivocal nd unstable ense das Unheimliche]that he superlative hus xaggerates nd radicalizes.Man is not onlyunheimlich,ssence lways lready quivocal nd strange see, I repeat,what reud ays n the ssay hat ears he itle as Unheimlichen thecontradictory ignifications f the German word, which designates tonce the most familiar nd the most trange),man, what calls itselfman, s not only deinon nd unheimlich, t is to deinotaton nd dasUnheimlichste,hebeing hat s most unheimlich, hich s to say thatexcels with overeign ower n this core, t is more unheimlich hananything nd everything. t attains, wouldsay, hough ere t is not






8/13/2019 17-40


Jacques errida 35

expressly eidegger's anguage nd word, sort f exceptional xcel-lence, sort f sovereignty mong nheimlich eings nd modalities fUnheimlichkeit.he superlative ndthe ignof the hyperbolic,t wearsthe crown of sovereignty f humanDasein. And this sort of sover-eignty, ou haveunderstood, oncerns, nder hemark f the Unheimli-che, a certain xperience f estrangement: otonlyof the strange, utof the Stranger a figure hat inds tself aken ver somewhat ater nthe exts n Trakl nd n Unterwegsur Sprache).

If now,keeping n memory his ndissociable air of with overeignpower, uperlatively nheimlich nd of the stranger, heestrangement,wereturn o the Meridian" peech ndto themoment f crossing henCelan comesto evoke this setting ut from he human ein Hinaus-treten us dem Menschlichen]and that movement hich onsists f"transporting neself o a realm hat urns oward he human ts trangeface": art's three pparitions: heautomata, hefigure f the monkey,the Medusa's head).This moment f the setting ut from hehumanmust be compared o the one which, irst f all, had let it be under-

stood that perhaps" "I believe," ays Celan)poetry s that homagerendered o the majesty f the Absurd, hich estifies o the present rto the now of the human fiir ie Gegenwart es Menschlichen eu-gendenMajestatdes Absurden]. elanasks himself s well,you haveunderstood, hether r not poetrymust ake the path of an art thatwouldbelong, s well, to the Medusaand to the automata. rom hatinstant nward, hevalueof the unheimlicheeparates tself o longerfrom hat f the tranger, ot nly f the trange ut f the tranger, ndall of the multiple approaches f whatever ight e poetry re allapproaches ot of an essencebut of a movement, f a path nd of astep, f a direction, f a turning n the direction f a step, s of a turn-ing nthe amebreath Atemwende].

We will find n example n almost very ineat least from his pointin the Meridian" peech orwardpage406)?I willciteno more hanfew n order osuggest hat his nsistence n the tep that iberates,that uts hrough, hat oesand that omes n suchor such directioncommands s to think f poetry s a path Weg] and it is so oftenCelan'sword hatwe,for etter r forworse, akebadlywhenwe disso-ciate t from n incessant nd nsistent ork f meditation n the path,on the Bewegung f the path, n the movement f Wegwith Heideg-ger).As a path, ccording oCelan,forwhatever omes r goesandthat






8/13/2019 17-40



thus s lesssomething hat s an event han he oming f an event hatarrives. will underline ery uickly his rivilege ccorded o the path,to the going nd to the oming, othe tep.But n reading hese ines,willnot ontent myself ithmarking he tep, willalsomark he tepon three ther words for reasons hat will disclose n a moment,namely he , the tranger, nd he bysswith o ground Abgrund].

Then rtwould e the istanceoetry ust over no ess, omore.

Iknow,

herere ther horteraths.

utoetry

oohurrieshead fus at times. a podsie, lle aussi, bralenosctapes ..

Willwe nowperhaps ind he lacewhere he trangenessas, heplacewhere person as ble o et imself rees an estrangedI?Willwefind uch place, uch step?

" ... only t sometimes roubled im hat e couldnot walkon hishead." That s him, enz.That s, believe, im ndhis tep, imandhis Longive he ing."

" ... only t sometimes roubled im hat e couldnot walk on hishead."

Whoever alks n hishead,adies nd entlemen,hoever alks nhishead asheavens an byss eneathim.406-07)

On this ubject, eeHeidegger t the beginning f The ntroduction oMetaphysics, here e raises hequestion why s there eing?What sthe foundation f being?"Heidegger sks himself, hen, f such foun-dation s an originary oundationUrgrund] r indeed f such n origi-nary foundation efuses ll founding nd becomesAbgrund, r evenfurther foundationhat s not ne, n appearance f foundation, cheinvonGriindung, ngrund.

Here, then, ventuates n the path or in the poetic peech of Celan,but, s with ll decisive vents nder he category f the reserve r"perhaps" vielleicht], n truth etween wo "perhapses" nd indeedthree perhapses" nd evenfour, ive, ix, seven, ight perhapses" in

sometwenty-odd inesand two paragraphs), ere herefore ventuatesbetween woand three nd four, ive, ix, seven, ight perhapses" heevent f an extraordinaryurning hoserisk would ike,withyou, odare nd whose ngle would ike oexplore. elancomes o evoke he






8/13/2019 17-40


Jacques errida 37

obscurity roper opoetry s the place of an encounter ocome fromthehorizon f distance ndof he tranger. ere s a first erhaps.

That bscuritys, believe, f not ongenital,hen he bscurityassociated ith oetry or he ake f nencounter,y perhapsself-devisedistancer trangeness.407)

And there s then, lwaysunder he reserve f a secondperhaps,strange ivision f the Stranger tself: here re perhaps wosorts f

Strangers, nenearby he ther:But erhaps,none nd he ame irection,herere wokinds fstrangeness chockablock.407)

And here now, n order o specify hisduality t the heart f thestranger, sort f revolution ithin he evolution.ou recall hat ucile's"Long ive the king " had beengreeted s a counter-wordGegenwort]thatwasperhaps "I believe," o saidCelan)poetry, here here omagewasrendered, ar rom hepolitical ode of the reactionaryounter-mani-festation, o the non-political) ajesty f the bsurd hat estifieso thepresent r to thenowof thehuman. etherenow nother Long ivetheking ," enz's "Long ivethe king ,"which s to say Biichner's,s sup-posed o take ne stepmore han hat f Lucile.And t s no longer, histime, speech, or ven counter-wordGegenwortestifyingoa Gegen-wart], t s above ll no longer majesty, t s a terrifyingilence, t s aseizure mitingpeech umb, hich uts ff reath nd uts ff peech.

Lenz- that s, Bfichner has goneone step further han ucile.His Long ive heKing"sno onger ords,t s a frightfulall-ing ilent, t akes wayhis also our breath ndword.Poetry:hat an ignifynAtemwende,Breathturn. hoknows,perhaps oetry ollows ts path also the path of art for hesake f uch breathturn?407-408)

What would ike, lways n privileging he hought hat oncerns s

here,namely hethought f sovereignty, f its majesty n the figure fpresent r present-to-itselfpseity, ometimes resent o itself n theform f the ego, of the ego's living resent, f "I," of this I," of thepower osay "I" that rom escartes oKant nd to Heidegger lways






8/13/2019 17-40



has been literally, xplicitly eserved or human eing only man canspeak he ignifier I," "I me" n referring n an auto-deictic ashion ohimself, s those hree here Descartes, ant, Heidegger havewrit-ten) ... What would ike to make pparent, f it is possible, s bywhatmeansCelan makes sign o an alterity hat, n the nside f "I"as the punctual, iving resent, s the very ip of the iving, resent-to-itself resent, s an alterity f all other omesnot to include nd tomodalize nother iving resent as withHusserl n the nalysis f tem-poralization of the protention nd the retention f another ivingpresent n the now living resent the ego comprises n itself, n itspresent, nother resent), uthere,what s altogether nothermatter, olet appear hepresent f the ther, hat to eave the most roper f thetime f the ther" f whichwespoke ast ime.

I read n the first lacethat ongpassageriddledwith ountless per-hapses" that ll finally aveas their estination he removal f suchpoeticutterances bout he event f the poemto the dimension nd tothe uthority f knowledge.

Perhapsince trangenessthe byss nd heMedusa's ead, heabyss nd he utomatons seems o ie n single irection,er-hapspoetry ere ucceedsn telling trangenessrom trange-ness, erhaps ight ere heMedusa's ead hrinks, erhaps ighthere he utomatons reak own for his nique riefmoment?Perhaps ere, ith he - the strangedset ree ere nd n uchwise here erhaps et ome ther ecomesree?

Perhaps rom ere he poem s itself.. .

and n this rt-less, rt-free ay annow ollowts ther aths,ncludinghe aths f rt- again nd gain?

Perhaps.

Perhaps emay aythat very oemhas ts 20th f January"inscribed?erhaps hat's ew or oems rittenodays ust his:that ere he ttempts clearestoremain indful f uch ates?But don't we all datefrom uchdates?Andwhat ates o weascribeoourselves?

Yet he oem oes peak t remains indfulf tsdates, et itspeaks.ndeed,t peaks nly n ts ery elfmostause.






8/13/2019 17-40


Jacques Derrida 39

But I think and now this hought an hardly urprise ou - Ithink hopeof poemshas alwaysbeento speak n ust this wayin the ause of the trange no, can't use this word nymorein ust this way to speak n the ause of an Other who knows,perhaps n the ause of wholly ther.

This "who knows" see I've arrived t is the only thing canadd,formyself, oday ndhere, othe ldhopes.

Perhaps, must tell myself now - perhaps ven a meetingbetween his wholly ther" I'm using familiar erm ereand a not ll that istant, quitenear other" ecomes hinkablethinkable gain nd gain. 408)

Perhaps we begin here to think this subtle, unheimlich ifferencebetween he two strangers, ifferencehat s likethe pacefor henar-row passageof poetry f which Celan before ongwill speak. t's the

difference n the punctuality f the now, n the tip-point f the presentinstant, f my resent, etween, n the ne hand,my iving, ther resent(retained r anticipated yan indispensable ovement f retention r ofprotention)nd, n the other and,wholly ther, hepresent f the otherwhose emporalityannot e reduced, ncluded, ssimilated,ntrojected,appropriated within mine, cannot even resemble t or be similar to it,present r time proper o the other or which must doubtless make mymourning, adically renouncing t, but also whose very possibility the"perhaps" beyond ll knowledge) s at once the chance of the encounter[Begegnung] nd of this event, of this coming, of this step that we callpoetry. An improbable oetry "who knows?"), but a poetry f cuttingoff and of turning he breath, which is to say also life and the path,which an be moreover path of art t once too large nd too narrow.

I read a last passage before making, ot without ome violence, a leapbackwards and sideways to the text about a scene of dissection fromwhich we had proceeded n an earlier eminar, he dissection f a grandanimal, of the elephant, n the presence f his majesty Louis-the-Grand.

Elargissez l Art With ts old,with tsnewuncanniness,his ues-tion tepsup to us. I went oward iuchner ith t - I thought ofind t here gain.






8/13/2019 17-40


17-40

Documents