198229568 the tooth the palm j f lyotard

7/22/2019 198229568 the Tooth the Palm J F Lyotard

1/6

THE TOOTH, THE PALM*Jean-Francoisyotard

1. Theaterplaces us rightt the heartof what s religious-political:n theheartofabsence,nnegativity,n nihilism s Nietzschewould ay,thereforen thequestion fpower.A theory f theatricaligns, practice f theatricalignsdramatic ext,miseenscene, nterpretation,rchitecture)re basedon accepting he nihilismnherentnre-presentation.ot onlyacceptingt: reinforcingt. For thesign, eirceused tosay,is somethingwhich standsto somebodyforsomething. o Hide, to Show: that stheatrality.he modernityf our fin-de-siecles due to this: there s nothingo bereplaced,no lieutenancyl s legitimate,r else all are; the replacing-thereforehemeaning-istself nlya substitute ordisplacement.ake twoplacesA andB; a movefromA to B meanstwopositions nd a displacement;ow declare hatB comesfromA; youare no longer aking 's position ositively,ffirmatively,ut nrelation oA,subordinatedo A, itself bsent gone by,hidden).B is turned ntonothingness;s anillusion fpresence,tsbeing s inA; andA is affirmeds truth,hat s tosayabsence.Such is the apparatusof nihilism. s theatralityhuscondemned?By repeatinghisapparatusn its specific eading, emiology ontinues heology, hetheology f thedeath fGod,ofstructure,f critical ialectics,tc.2. DisplacementFreud's VerschiebungrEntstellung)s an energy ransfer,reudsaid an economicprocess;the ibido nvests hisor thatregion f thebody'ssurface(which urnsnward o ts internalrgans lso); it establishestself here,npositionA; itmoves; t settles lsewhere;n positionB. Shallwe sayB represents? In hisPetiteanatomiede l'imnage,ans Bellmer akes thisexample: I have a toothache,clenchmyfist,mynailsdig ntothepalmofmyhand. Two investmentsf the ibido.Shallwe saythattheaction f thepalmrepresentshepassion f thetooth? That t isa signof it? Is thereno possibilityo reverse ne and theother, hierarchyf oneposition over the oth'er,power of one over the other? For anatomicalandphysiologicalciences,forre-flexology,nd forany reflexion,he answer s yes,ofcourse. n themove of the ibido,no irreversibilityspossible; he rotic-morbidodycanfunctionnall directions,angofrom he lenchingf thepalmto that f the aw,fromthe fear imagined?)or a father r mother o obesity real?) or ulcer real?)of thestomach.This reversibilityromA to B introduces s tothedestructionfthesign,ndoftheology,ndperhaps ftheatrality.3. Reversibilitys partof our social,economic, deological xperience f moderncapitalism,which is ruledby a simple aw: value. In precapitalisticconomy, heproduct, roduction,onsumptionwhicharenot evenseparated s distinctpheres)are relatedas signsor as sign-makingctivities o positionsdeemedoriginalorpre-existing:heobject,work, hedestructionrcirculationfobjects rethoughtfwithin Mystique rwithin Physics, eing here y and for nother hing. artofMarx'sworkperpetuates his semiotic heory f precapitalistconomy,notably ySub-Stance o. 15 105

This content downloaded from 2.99.202.227 on Tue, 26 Nov 2013 07:24:50 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


2/6

106 Jean-Francoisyotardusingthecategory f use-valueof commodities,utespecially flaborpower).Butthepresent xperience fgrowth conomy eachesusthat o-called conomic ctivityhas no anchoringn an origin, n any positionA. Everythings exchangeable,reciprocally,nlyunder heconditionsnherentn the aw of value: work sno lesssign than money,moneyno more than a house or car, there is only a fluxmetamorphosingntobillionsof objectsand currents-such teaching rom oliticaeconomymustbe comparedto what libidinal conomyteaches us: bothpoliticaeconomyand libidinal conomy n so muchas they hapeourmodern ife, upportcriticismnd thecrisis f thetheater. semiology ould nhibit hecrisis ndgagthecriticism.4. ReadingZeami'streatisesn R. Sieffert'sranslation,nd at the ametimeArtaudandBrecht,whose nalyses ndconcurrentailures till ominate oday'stheater, amlearninghow theater, ut at the place wheredis-placementecomesre-placement,where libidinal flux becomes representation, aversbetween a semiotics nd aneconomic cience. n thefirst ooks of theFushi-kaden,heearliestc. 1400) Zeamimultiplied iscontinuities;e dividedup, the ifeof theactor ntoperiods, heyearintoseasons, hedayintomoments;mimicryntotypes, herepertoryntogenres fn6 (ofwaki,ofashura, fwomen, f the realworld ..), thediachronyfthetheatricalshow in units (kydgen,nO), assembledaccordingto an unchangeable equencejo-ha-kyal,hestage pace intoplaces ascribed osuch and sucha roleand to such ndsuch a moment nthe ction, he ound pace ntoregions,hemimicryntoposes,theverypublic itself nto categories, tc. This material s everysemiologist's ream;everythings discrete nd coded,each unit of one orderreferredo a unitof anotherandof all otherorders; hewholegameseemsgoverned y the twoprinciples f theprimaryf significationiwdre)and ofthe earch or hegreatest greements6O).Tofully ealize thesign ystem,he actorhimself ad todisappear spresence;wearingmask,his hands hidden,when playingwomen's roles; the flower fleur) of theperformance as conceived s absolute nterpretation,hat s to say,non-interpreta-tion;and whenplaying he role of madmenwithout mask,he wouldunderline hedifficultyf performing adnessby allusions o possession, hereforemitatinghepossessor-demon, ithouthoweverfalling ntothe expressionismf facialfeatureswhereas here s nonecessityo imitate hefacial xpression;thappenshowever hatin changing ne's usual expression,one composes his countenance. That is theinterolerableight. ntolerablen that tmakesvisible he nvisible,tconfuses oneswithskin,substancewithsecondary ffects,t violatesthehierarchyf social andcorporal paces distancednto front ndback,into llusion nd reality. he extremenihilismurkingn Buddhism s whatpushesthissemiotics o its imit, ransformingthesignsnto igns fnothing,fthenothinghat sbetween he igns, etweenA andB; saidZeami, t is in the ntervals etween he actionshe performs,e they poken,sung,dancedormimed, hus n momentswhenhe is doingnothing,hat the actor struly sign, ignifyingheverypowerofsignifyinghich s a deviation nd a void:apuppet.Zeami citedin this connection zen formula boutpuppetswhich referredtheWesternero BookVII of theRepublique.



3/6

The Tooth, the Palm 1075. Howeverthe semiotics fZeamiseemstraversed,ometimeshwartedya verydifferentrive, libidinal rive, search or ntensiveness,desire or otency isn't tnecessaryo expressn6 as potency,Macht,might,n theNietzschean ense, n thesamesense that Artaudtakescruautei?). he name of flowerfleur) s given o thesearch ortheenergeticntensificationf thetheatricalpparatus. he elements f atotal language aredivided nd linked ogethern order opermit heproductionfeffects f intensity hroughlight ransgressionsnd the nfringementfoverlappingunits.The signs reno longerookedat in their epresentativeimension,hey on'tevenrepresentheNothing nymore, heydo not represent,heypermit actions,theyoperateas the transformers,ueledby natural nd social energiesn ordertoproduce affectsof a veryhigh intensity.n this way, we can understand heappearance a little ater) nZeami'swork fthethemes ftheunusual, f thefluidityand the unpredictable ffectivenessf acting,of the uncalculable ignificancefseizing herightmoment; bove all thefact hat heflowerfleur) f nterpretationsnothing,s onlyeffervescentshoiretaru). he well-triedrocedureskojitsu),whichcorrespondo theunity f a culturewhich s also a cult, husmakeroomfor flux nmotion,for a displaceability,nd fora kindof effectivenessy means of affects,which elong o ibidinal conomy.6. The hesitation fArtaudwas the sameas that ofZeami. But it leanedtheotherway. Artaudsoughtto destroynot so much the Italian, .e. EuropeanRenaissance,theatricalpparatus, ut at least thepredominance f articulatedanguage nd thesuppressionf thebody. n thiswayheexpected o rediscover libidinalfficiencyfthe performance:power, underlyingnergy, hepowerto displacetheaffectswhichworkby thedisplacement fwell-orderednits; the secret fthetheater nspace is dissonance, the discrepancyof voice timbers and the dialecticaldeconcatenationfdiscourse. Here sevidence fsomethingery losely pproachinglibidinal conomy; in theardour f life, nthe ustof ife,ntheunreasonedmpulseof life,there s a sortof initialmeanness, hedesire of Erosis a cruelty ecause tburns ontingencies,eath s cruelty,esurrectionscruelty,ransfigurationscruelty,because n all directionsnd in a circularndclosedworld, here s no room forruedeath,because ascension s a tearingway,because theclosedspaceis teamingwithlife, nd becauseevery trongerifepassesthroughther ives, husdevouringhemna massacrewhich s transfigurationnd a positivegood. But on theway to thisgeneralizeddissemiotization,rtaudstopped and what stoppedhimwas nihilism,religion,perceptible ven n this ettre ur a cruaute).Forintensitiesofunction,ehad to manufacture tool whichwould againbe language, system f signs,grammarf gestures,fhieroglyphics. hat is whathe thought e found nEasterntheater,particularlyn Japanese nd Balinese.Thus he remained European,herepeatedthe invention of an agreement etweenthe body and the senses,herepeatedthe greatdiscovery f the uniting f the Eros-libidowiththe libido asdeath-wish, e repeatedhis ethnographicmiseen scenehereon theEastern tage.But the Eastern choolmaster,o less nihilistic hanhisWestern upil,had to alsoinvent theparadise,whether uddhist r anyother, fnon-duality.n thiswaythemutiliationhatArtaudsfleeingomesbacktohimbywayofBalinese ieroglyphics.



4/6

108 Jean-FrancoisyotardTo hushthebodywith thewriter'sheater, ear to bourgeois uropeof the19thcentury,s nihilistic; ut to make it speakthe lexiconand syntax f mime, ong,dance, s thend does, sagain wayofannihilatingt; a bodycompletelyransparent,skinand fleshof the bonewhich s spirit, ntouchedby all displacement,vents,libidinal enseness. ot to mention hatmodern uropedoes nothave t itsdisposalanykojitsu, nycertified eans ofconveyingheaffects;t wants igns ndspeaks fthem t theverymoment hat t acksthem. his swhyArtaud utmore mphasisnthe acred handidZeami.7. Will he theater aveto limit tself oa critical unction?heonlyoneallowed ythe crisis fmodernism?hatwas Brecht's olution.To him, t is notenough or hemovement f the handto make a silent llusion to the toothache, ffectivenesssdefined s a processof understandingr of realization,hat s to say a processofappropriation,f espousing he cause (positionA). The theater imsat making srecognize hat there xists a structureonnectinghetooth nd thefist, onnectingsuch and such a behavior f Mother ourage o such andsuchan infrastructure,ndsuch and such anotherbehaviorto such and such an ideology.The theatricaleffectiveness,efined s knowledge,s mediated y conscience. Conscience s, nfact, preciseanguage pparatus,Marxistmaterialism: his pparatus f language,nitsturn,ntroducesntoBrechtian laywritingndscenography,complex pparatus,no lessprecise, hatBrechtdefines s distanciation. istanciationppearsto be anextreme ase ofnihilism,heactorperformsuch nd such n action n suchandsucha situation,uthistext, isactingnd thewholemise n scene takeholdof this ctionin order o show that t couldbe another: to actoutall the cenes nterms f otherpossiblescenes. This is a processthatreduces tsobject to nothing,much as therecountingf a witnesson the street orner,farfrom ctualizing he accident,distanciatest through iscourse.Here Brechtcan also call upon Easterntheater(especiallyChinese): it is evidently matterof repetitiony a thirdpartyof aprocess,f a descriptiondmittedlyrtful. he artisthowsrepresentingomeonenarage)that hisman s besidehimself,nd he pointsto completelyxternal igns hatprove t for xample, aking lockofhis hair etween isteeth ndbitingtoff).Butno nihilism an realize tself,ll nihilismmustremain eligious;where here s a gapbetweenA and B (thenihil), heremustalso alwaysbe the inkbetweenA andB (toconnectt,thereligio).Whatperformss religionn Brechts the anguagepparatusof Marxism: he whole theatrical ffectiveness hichhe anticipates, eliesupon asystemfbeliefs, otonlythebelief hatthere xist ociological eterminationshatcorrespondo economic tructures,ut thebelief hatthesedeterminationsorm hedeep lexiconand grammarf historical assions, hattheyproduce ndgovernhedisplacementf affects nd the investmentsf thetheatrical udience.That is whythistheaters calledepictheater. ut ours s no longer timeof theepic anymorethanof tragedyr ofsavage ruelty. apitalism estroysll thecodes, ncludingheone that ivesndustrial orkers heroleof thehistorical ero.TheMarxism f Brecht= an epic graftedntoa critique.After centuryf nternationalongressesndhalfa century f SocialistStates,we must say: the grafthas not taken,neither s



5/6

The Tooth, the Palm 109dramaturgy,cenography,or as world olitics.Marxistemioticssas arbitrarynthetheaters is anyother emiotics or orrelatingheperformernd theperformedndto allow the communication f the audiencewith tself hroughhemediary fthestage.8. Alienationtself, nihilistic,eligiousndagainMarxistategory, ust e thoughtthroughffirmatively.he importance f alienation s not that it pointsout thedistance rom norigin,rom lostnature,ts mportances in thewayMarx nalyzedit in the introduction o the Contributionritiquede l'conomrie olitiqiein theGrundrissen (the unpublished) hapiterVI of Kapital 1: as indifferencef mantowards iswork nd of worktowards tsman,ofmoney owards hatwhich tcanbuy nd of thecommodityowardstsmonetaryounterpartand itspossessor). hisindifferences theexperience f thepredominancefexchange alue.We must topthinkingf it as the oss of something,he loss of thedifference,hat s to sayofqualification,raft, uality, sage,meaning,greement,ossession.Rather et's thinkof tpositively,his ndifferenceeads to libidinal conomy, o a directinking ithoutrepresentationf thepolitical conomywith ibidinal conomy.The theory fvalueputsus potentiallynto a non-hierarchicalirculation, here he toothand thepalmno longerhave a relationshipf illusion nd truth, ause and effect, ignifierndsignifiedor viceversa),but theycoexist, ndependently,s transitorynvestments.accidentallyomposing constellation altedfor n instant,n actualmultiplicityfstops n thecirculationfenergy. he toothandthepalmno longermeananything,they reforces,ntensities,resentffects.9. An energetic heaterwould produceevents hat are effectivelyiscontinuous,suchas the acts notedrandomlyn slipsof paperthemselveseing ots,drawn yJohnCage and proposedto the interpretorsf Theater iece. Likewisewhat thistheater eeds, nsteadof sod, of agreementetweendance,music,mimicry, ords,seasons, ime, hepublicandnothing,srather he ndependencendthe imultaneityof noises-sounds, f words, body arrangements,mages that characterize heco-productionsfCage, Cunningham,auschenberg.y eliminatinghesignrelationand its hollowness,one makes the power relation hierarchy)mpossible, ndconsequently,what becomes also impossible s the so-calleddomination f theplaywrite metteurn scene+ choreographerstage-designerver he o-calledignsandalsoover he o-calledpectators.10. So-called pectators, ecause thenotionof such a personor sucha functionsitself ontemporary ith thepredominancef there-presentationn social ife; ndspecificallyfwhatthemodernWestcallspolitics.The subject s a product f theperformancepparatus,tdisappears hen he pparatus isappears.11. As for hetheater splace,this ffirmativehinkingfalienationmplies otonlythebankruptcyf thehierarchizedelation tage/house,utthatof thehierarchizedrelationof inside/outside.or all theater s an apparatusduplicated t leastonce(sometimesmore than once; Hamlet,Marat-Sade,La prochaineJbis e vious e



6/6

110 Jean-Francoisyotardchanterai: t could be reversed,t couldbe displaced; ctorsplayingn thewings,heaudience seated on stage) thus made up of two limits, f two barriers ilteringhecoming nd going nergies; ne limit 1) whichdetermines hat s exterior o thetheater reality ) and what is interior, second limit 2) which,on the inside,disassociates hat stobeperceivednd what snot to beperceivedunderneath,tagelights,wings, hairs, eople ...). Criticism,nvolvednthenewtheater,ddressed tselfessentially o the problemof the second limit 2), as staging nd architecturalexperiments rove. But the crisis is now that of the first imit (1); stage +house/ outside. t is a selectiveimit, arexcellence; ounds,ights, ords, yes, ars,postures,and thereforelso incapitalism,hewallets)get orted ut so thatwhat s alibidinaldisplacementmay yieldto there-presentativee-placementfperformance.On the outside, thetoothache,on the inside, tsrepresentationytheclenchingof the fist.But the business f an energetic heater s not to make allusion o theaching oothwhen clenched ist s thepoint,nor thereverse.ts business s neitherosuggest hatsuchand suchmeanssuch and such,nor to sayit,as Brechtwanted. tsbusiness s to producethehighestntensityby excessor by lack ofenergy) f whattheres,without ntention. hat smyquestion: s itpossible, ow?

Translatedy AnneKnapand MichelBenamou

NOTES*From Des Disposilits pulsionnels. Permissiongranted.1. A pun is here intended;lieu-tenant= place holder


198229568 the tooth the palm j f lyotard

Documents