art - poststructuralism and the new humanism

8/13/2019 ART - Poststructuralism and the New Humanism

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/art-poststructuralism-and-the-new-humanism 1/17

Poststructuralism and the New HumanismAuthor(s): Jean-Jacques Thomas and Jeff LovelandSource: SubStance, Vol. 21, No. 2, Issue 68 (1992), pp. 61-76Published by: University of Wisconsin Press

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3684902 .

Accessed: 06/10/2013 17:40

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 forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Wisconsin Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

SubStance.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 186.125.44.154 on Sun, 6 Oct 2013 17:40:21 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

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

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3684902?origin=JSTOR-pdf

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





http://www.jstor.org/stable/3684902?origin=JSTOR-pdf

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



Poststructuralism

and theNew Humanism

Jean-Jacqueshomas

THE "TOWER OFBABEL"by

PieterBreugel

heElderdepicts

uringuis-tic research s a titanic ollective nterprise equiring he efforts f an

organized,hard-workingmultitude.The imageof the"Tower of Babel"can be seen as a representationf the structuralist ovement s well.

Closelyexamined,thepainting's aboringmasses surpriseus with their

generalmovement way from he tower nd towardus, theviewers--sothatwe can imaginethe title fthepainting o be "Structuralistsf Yore

Turning heir acks onLinguistics."

Amongthemostwell-known rench tructuralists,any t onepointoranother ave becomeapostates, enouncingheir riginal rinciplesnd

ventriloquizing hat has become knownas "poststructuralist"ositions.Barthes, oucault,Todorovand Deleuze areexemplaryfthis adical hift.A full reatmentftheir poststructuralist"heorieswould require n ex-tensivediscussionnotpossiblehere. It s,however, ecessary oproposeabrief ssesment ftheconditionswhichhave led to their evolution,spe-cially ta timewhen nEurope--particularlynFrance ndGermany-thelegitimacyftheir postasy omesunderquestion, ndwhenthechallengeof the New Humanismpromotes nnovativemeans to shape a different

critique fourcontemporaryociety.

I. Deleuze vs. Deleuze

Thetenets f tructuraloeticsbeing

well knownbynow,

t sprobab-lybest topick up thedebatewithGillesDeleuze's book,Proust t es ignes,

and moreprecisely,with thechangeofperspective rom he first o thesecondedition f thatbook. Thefirst dition 1964)beginswith n unam-

biguousdeclaration fallegiance o the ign'srallying ry:

The sign s what forces s to think.... Thinkings always nterpreting,whichsto ay xplaining,eveloping,eciphering,ranslatingsign....There reonly s many xplicitignificationss therereclear deas.

SubStance68,992 61








62 Jean-Jacqueshomas

Meaningsre lwaysmpliednsideigns.Works f rt re smuch ornfromignsssignsrefromhem;he reators n sense jealous, ivine

interpreterho verseeshe ignsowhich ruthetraystself.190)1Deleuze's functionalism anagesto uncover ll the secret ombina-

tions and interconnectionshat characterize roust's textand, up until

Chapter7, the author'sdeclaredpurpose s to interpretxplicative igns.Atthe end ofthat hapter,hebook is interruptedyan extremelyeduc-tiveand didacticgeneraldefinition ne would expect n an introductoryworkon literary nalysis.Deleuze concludes:

What sessentialnLaRecherchesneither emoryor ime ut ruthndthe ign.... Thework's otionsre: the ign,meaning,ssence;he on-tinuityf pprenticeshipnd the rusquenessfrevelations.hework'sleitmotifsre: I still idn't now; was ater o earn;ndalso, wasnolongernterestednthingsnce quit earning.

Obviously, heseconclusions re meant ohaveglobalvalue and to articu-late the text according to complex but inherently otalizing codes.Madeleine Chapsal is quite rightwhen, in her lionizing account of

Deleuze's project,heemphasizes hebook'sknackfor uccinctly efininghowProust's ext unctions:

This ittle ook is]one of thebest ffortso date tobringolight hestructuralaws fProust's ork.twashighimeomeonehrewhisolidnet nto he omain f iteraryriticism.aulednbyGilles eleuze,hecatchs abundant.quotednback over,roustt es ignes)

"Structuralaws," "net" (suggesting network")-all thiswould seem to

swingDeleuze back ntothe tructuralistogueoftheperiod nwhichthefirst ditionwas published 1964). When the second editionappeared(1970),a brief oreword ythe authorwas added as well as,more mpor-tantly,n entirenewchapter alled "TheAnti-Logos"-which, s the first

steptowardsubversion,ntroduces perverse ormal imensionnto the

analysis.Deleuze's functionalismttempts o escape the orderand lawsthat thas established-proposingnstead hatwe abandon thevainhopeof "constituting"roust'sworldby setting p laws, since these aws are

nothing utapparent ormswhich onceal "a deeper, ragmentaryeality."Theworld has crumbledntochaos. Inorder owrite,we have togiveuptheperspective f logos, thetotalizing erspective,nd we have to see

signsas fragmentshatruleout holistic pproaches. Proust'stexts husbecome iterarymachineswhichproducean "anti-Logos tyle" omposedofdiscrete ragments,fderelict hunksbelonging o differentroupsor

perhapsnotbelonging oanyunity arger han tylengeneral.Thetexts

SubStance#68,992









II. Science and Modernity

In La Conditionostmoderne1979),Jean-Francoisyotardnotes theconcurrentppearance, oward heend of the 19th entury,f theconceptof "Modernity" nd of scientific ositivism. Lyotardoutlinestheprin-ciples governinghispositivisms follows:

Scientificnowledgeequireshe solationf ne spect f anguage-thedenotativespect-to he xclusionfallothers. heacceptabilityf nenunciations determinedy ts ruthalue. Other inds f nunciationscanundoubtedlyefound-interrogations.. prescriptions..--butthey

aremere rticulationsna dialecticrgumenthat ecessarilyndsupindenotativeorm.We are thusknowledgeableo the xtenthatwe canmake ruetatementsbout referent,nd cientificothe xtenthatwecanmakeverifiabletatementsbout hose eferentshichre ccessibleto xperts.47)

Recognizing,withLyotard, he importantoncomitance fthe ap-pearance of modernityand of scientific ambitions springingfrom

positivisms indispensable o ourunderstandingfthe ntellectual volu-

tion eadingup to the tructuralismf the 60s and theNew Humanismofthe 90s.

Both theCoursde linguistiqueendralend the works of thePraguecirclecut themselves fffrom heirpredecessors nd at the same time

justify heirradicality hrough n insistence n scientificobjectivity."Barthes's riginal riticalworksmake no attempto conceal his tiestothisscientificinguistic ormalism. t is also well-known hatBarthes's unc-tional nterestnfashion

rewoutofhis

acquaintancewith

studybyPetr

Bogatyrev entitled "The Function of Clothing in Slavic Moravia."Evidence can be found nthree ittle-knownrticles-"Historynd Sociol-

ogy ofClothing" 1957), "Home Knitwear" 1959),and "Language and

Clothing"1959). This nterest ulminatesnBarthes's ystcmee a moden1967 and, tangentially,n 1970, n a kindofsemiologist'smanual called

Elementse emiologie.There s nodoubt, nfact, hat hefirst alf fElImentsesemiologies

presented s a faithfulpplication fthebipolar oppositionsused in theCours, nd that he second halftranslatesnto emiological erms hesys-tem of oppositionsproposed by Nikolai Troubetzkoy ordefining he

phonological particularities according to distinctive oppositions:bilaterals, roportionals,rivatives,nd so on. Ultimately,hisrespect orthe"scientific"dvancement fsynchronicinguisticsswhat ustifiesnd

explains making semiology a subfield of linguistics. The switch in

SubStance #68, 992








Poststructuralismnd New Humanism 65

prioritiess clearly n attempt oprotecthenewlyfoundeddiscipline f

"semiology" y appealingto the cientificuthorityhat inguistics njoys.

In RolandBarthesarRolandBarthes1975),twoyearsafter hebreakdefinedby Barthes'sLe Plaisirdu texte1973),one of the rarepassagesdealingwith cienceconcerns emiology,whichconfirmsmybelief hatvehementyearning or cientificruthayat theheart f Barthes's emiol-

ogy. The fragment La Science dramatis&e"of this autobiographyreproaches emiologynotforbeingunscientific,ut forhavingstoppedshort:

He thusmaginedhat lackofpassionatenergyad preventedemi-ologicalcience romccomplishinguch: emiologyasonly murmurof ndifferentrojects,achoneworkingo ndifferentiatehe bject,hetext,he ody.How canweforget,hough,hatemiologys somehowntouchwith he assionfmeaning:tsapocalypsend/ortopia?163)

There is an interestingspectof thepassage from tructuralismo

poststructuralism.tructuralism'sapid displacementf whatpreceded toccasionedbattles and murderous postrophes: "Nouvelle critiqueou

nouvelle imposture?" Assez decod " and who has forgottenarthes's"habitateunuchoide"?Nonetheless,heresult fall thiswas the upplant-ingof one group byanother,nless thantenyears, nd theelevation fafewnew names to the French ntellectual antheon. Nothing fthe sortoccurredwithpoststructuralism.he structuralistshemselvesweretheones who becameaware of the crisis nd of theopeningfissure,nd their

teaching, heir ublications,nd their ublicapostasycalled intoquestionthedogmasto whichtheywere so attached.Apostasy nfavor fwhat?

Apostasy nthe name of a kind ofretrospectiveutocriticismhichcoulddefine tself nly nopposition o what tgaveup.

III. Getting verPoststructuralism:he CloudTheory

Philippeollers ublishednarticlen heDecember969number8)issue of Tel Quel thatwas

widelydiscussed at the time-"De

quelquescontradictions: apport deologique."Here, n an analysiswhichmarkedthe theoretical ardening f Tel Quel's position s an ever-closer llyoforthodoxtructuralists,ollers tarted y presentingtructuralisms a

responseo thehastydulterationfFreud'segacy.Sollers laimedhatin the aftermathfLacan-an atheoretical raud, n his opinion-psychoanalysis was retreatingfrom science's domain with undue

precipitation,nly obe led astraynto dealism.Structuralismlsoof-

SubStance#68,1992









fered, ollerscontended, way of combattinghetransformationeingcarried out in Marx's name-a transformationhose referencemodels

weretoo often rawn from tereotypeddeas about activism r from er-sonalpsychology.Concluding, ollerswrote:

Thebourgeoisies in a decliningdeologicalituation.t is becomingideologicallyacuous,ndall ts ffortsrebeing irectedoward idingthe xtentf hismptiness.

Sollers'sconception f an "emptiness" utside ofstructuralismug-gests, hroughnexpansion f tscentraldea,thepaucity fnewthinking

in the second half of the 70s. Outside ofParis, n Franceand abroad,peopleareasking:"What'snewinParis?" The standard esponse:"Noth-

ing " Twentyyearslater,nearingtheend of thiscentury,we are still

anxiouslyquestioning nd re-evaluatinghisodd intellectual acuum wehave crossed nd left ehind. I might haracterize hisperiodbyre-usingtheterminologyfJeanBaudrillard, orwhom themovement rom truc-turalism opoststructuralisms the"gradualmovement rom differential

logicof

value/signto an undifferentiated

ogicof

symbolic xchange"(149).Such a viewofthe ransformationellsusnothing, owever, bout the

intellectual onditions f thechange. This drawback s remedied n the

analysisproposedby Luc Ferry nd AlainRenaut n 68-86, tindrairese

l'individu, hichdefines hetransformationoncretelyndsuccinctly:

Understandinghe assage romhe60s o he80s seasy ncewerealizethat he80s areultimatelyomore han hendividualismfMay, 968

minushe topian rojectsntowhich he ndividualismf1968 adbeendirected.hese rojectsadbeendeveloped otwith neye oward heirpoliticalealizationut, ather,norderoaccomplishhe ocial riticismimpliednthendividualism... First, e have ealizationf he utilityfthe hilosophiesf lapens6e68"and,morepecifically,f he utilityftheiriquidationf ubjectivity,heir liminationfthe ubject,heir n-nouncementf he eath fman,ndtheir thertupiditieshich havelabeled renchdeology;hen omes he ise fthe pathetic,arcissisticindividualismhichulminatesnthe arly80s. 59)

This passage explicitlyriticizesnd denigrates he 70s, the"CloudDecade"-a pejorativenicknamethatHenri Meschonnic in Modernit4,modernit4,988)borrowedfrom hetitleof HubertDamish's famousart

history ook of theearly 70s, Thdorieu Nuage. Thispoststructuralismtakes the formof a re-evaluation f its predecessors: old material s

brought ut,onlyto be contradicted.Previously everedprinciples redenouncedas illusions, nd substitutesor hem resought.

SubStance#68,992








PoststructuralismndNewHumanism 67

Thework f he rcheo-avant-gardistesegins ere.Accompaniedya fewnewepigones,heold intellectualeaders ontriveore-evaluate

their ormerositionsndtorepositionhemselves ith especto oneanother.A classic xample fthis edistributionomes rom series farticlesalled"Le dogmatisme a rescousse u revisionnisme""Dog-matism o the RescueofRevisionism") hich ppeared n TelQuelat

irregularntervalsn theearly70s. A strikingxample f thiskind fintellectualedistributionanbe foundn issuenumber6,1973,n anarticleyBernardichere:

Having raggedlong ehind he renchevisionistartyor consider-abletime,heCahiersuCineimarenowtakingrders rom neoftheself-proclaimedmarxist-leninist"icrogroups.bjectivelyothe ightfTelQuelup until ow, heCahiers ouldnow ike oplacethemselves,subjectively,n ts eft.This scillation--or,ather,his tability--shouldnot urprises. The o-calledmarxist-leninists,"ike he ne-timeacro-revisionists,hink s lackingninvention.erfect hemicros ndthemacrosre t eastnagreementnonepoint: he vant-gardeasnoexistenceutsidef hem,inceheylone,f ourse,re hevant-gardef

themasses.A familiarefrain.he recordan urny tself.Faced with what seems an intrinsicallyotalizing ystem,namely

structuralist hought, ntellectuals decide to abandon a model that

privileges goals and finality nd to wrest themselvesaway from a

knowledgethatmakes use of exhaustive ystematizationo limitpos-sibilities. Arrayedagainstthe monster f Totality, estrained arrative

logic,microfunctions,nd mini-strategiesome ntofashion. ncomplete-ness and

indeterminacyre touted.Functional

nstabilitys theone ac-

cepted principle. Objects of knowledge no longer exist in global

systems-instead, pale epiphanies, theybecome commonplace com-

moditiesovernedy rbitraryarketaws.Confrontedithtructuralism'shannelingf cientificnergynto

desire forprogress nd itspostulation f a scale ofvalues, intellectuals

advocate therelinquishingf all value systems nd thusof all absolute

judgmentsnesthetics,thics,ndpolitics. acanfindsn himselfll the

authoritye needs o ffirmispositions;whole enerationill et tselfup as individualnterpretinguthorities.ragmaticfficiency,nternal

immanence,ndsubjectiveutonomyecome raiseworthy.heretruc-turalismmade use of differenceo categorize nd hierarchize,n equi-valence of differencess proclaimedto justify ll choicesand opinions.Differences no ongerhe nimatingeuristicfdiscoveryut he ign f

illegitimacyncritical ork."Wehavenorightouseoppositionsnour

thinking,"ffirmsyotardnLa Conditionostmoderne.

SubStance#68,1992









As has often been said, structuralism'smore radical moments

presagedthe end of humanism.Thus, nhisessayentitled, recisely,La

Finde l'homme,"PierreDaix wrote:

Weabsolutely ust reak part hisnetworkfappearancesnownsman. nthis oldpli),s Foucaultointsut, hilosophyasfallenntonewslumber,o longerhe lumberfdogmatism,ut nstead hat fanthropology.his tructuralriticisms thepreconditionf cience.1)

The poststructuralistondition eplacesuniversalman by isolatedindividuals occupyingcentralpositions in various temporarymicro-

universes. The subjectreturns,orcefuln its ndividuality. t confrontstheUniversaldirectly, roclaimingtself n essencewithrespect oall the

phenomenologicalaccidents of re-objectifiedeality. The subject,anautonomousentitywithina nebulous autonomy, ecomes the site of arevolt gainsthierarchynd dominance.

There s no point n continuinghis istofpoststructuralistllusions.As the adage says, "On ne brfile ien que ce que l'on a passionementadord"-"One

onlyburns

properlywhatonehas loved

passionately."The

partial onfirmationfthis lich6nthepoststructuralistituationuggeststhat patrophagicmovement etup to accuse itsprior xistencewillem-

phasize negative spects,parodize tspast, nd thusforce tructuralismo

accepttherole of a senescent irdon itswayto thetaxidermist...But beyond this recognition f a clear ruptureseparatingwhat

precedesfromwhatfollows, oes poststructuralismave an identity?Bywideningourreading,we realize mmediatelyhat he"Cloud Theory" s

in fact the object of nebulous terminology.The deliquescenceof thetheoreticalspectmakes tdifficult,nfact, opinpoint reciselyny prin-cipaltheoreticalngredients. he "cloudiness" o whichMeschonnicroni-

cally refersemphasizes the decentralized, namorphicnature of thismoment f French ntellectualism,ustas the"post"ofpoststructuralismtries to set up a chronologicalbenchmark:the before/afterf what

pretends o be an epistemologicalupture.But f,vagabondish rsimplyinfusedwiththespirit f 1992 "Europe Europe Europe "),we chooseto

sweep aside theoretical ationalism,s we are encouraged o do bynewintellectualbjects uch as Liber,henewEuropeanreviewofbooks ointlyproduced byLeMonde, El Pais, Frankfurterllgemeine,'Indice,nd theTimes iteraryupplement-if e choose to do this,we shall discover hatnotonly s France's elf-centerednessot nspiringnyemulators ut thatit is eliciting profound eeling frejection.A HolyAllianceofGermansand Anglo-Saxonss forming.

SubStance#68,992








PoststructuralismndNew Humanism 69

In fact,German heorists se theterm Neostructuralism"o refer othisdiffuse,muddledperiodof French ntellectual istorynwhich ndif-

ference o values and a fixationn microperspectiveas brought houghtto a standstill.As a linguist, have towonder aboutthe choiceofprefix.Why"neo" and not"post"structuralism?he break mpliedby"post" smoreaccuratelyeenas continuation ith twist.Theusuallypejorative"neo"betrays hedesire odisparage hemovement. n ntellectualmove-ment known as "neostructuralism" s a cheap substitutefor struc-turalism-as a Germanwouldsay,an "ersatz."

By1984-as Mark Poster

bservesnhis Critical

heoryndPoststruc-

turalism1989)-a certain ranch fAmerican riticalheory ad takenuptheviewpoint fthe Frankfurtchool and was stigmatizinghe"reaction-

ary" aspectof Frenchntellectualismfthe ate 70s. Meanwhile,nParis,the term reactionary" as used todesignate henewphilosophers: am-bet,Lardreau,Dollk,Bernard-Henrikvy,Glucksman,nd so on. In theUnited States and in Frankfurthese new philosopherswerepracticallyunknown, nd theirParisianantagonists, ather hanthey, ame under

attackforbeing intellectually eactionary.When the AmericanPerryAndersonwrites, Today,Paris s theEuropean capitalofreaction," e is

referringoFoucault,Derrida,Lacan,Lyotard, nd Deleuze. Similarly,nhis1981essay "La modernit6,nprojectnacheve" "Modernity--then-finished roject")published nCritique, abermasdoesn't hesitate o call

Foucault,Derrida and Deleuze "young narchist onservatives."He adds:"Thespirit fNietzsche, ediscoverednthe 70s,animates ll theserepre-sentatives." Habermas sees this return o Nietzsche as an enormous

provocation,ince t was Nietzschewho,preaching he rrational nd at-

tackingthe idea of a reasonablesubject,put an end to Enlightenmentthought.

In spiteofthe ndignation abermas'sremarks ccasioned nFrance,no discussion ookplace and,withno changeofposition, he discourse f

critical heorywentitsseparateways in France and in theAnglo-Saxonworld. Most criticsworkingn alliance with theFrankfurtchoolregret

this egregation.Manfred rank, or xample,writes:

Lookingvermyessons arelyight earsater,have oresign yselfothe fact hat rench-Germanialogue boutpoststructuralismndher-meneuticsever ook lace.And haveno sincereope hat he rincipalrepresentativesfthetwopositionsre n anyway tryingoinitiatedialogue.9)

Now that French poststructuralismhas inevitably influenced

Americancriticaltheory, nder the hybridterm"deconstructionism,"

SubStance68,1992









Americanriticsreallthemorehrillndenouncinghe ackofdialoguebetween he womajor--butlasparallel--currentsfEuropeanhought.Mark ostersunequivocalnassigninglame or his ejectionfdebate.Frenchntellectuals,e brutallyccuses, reguilty f chauvinisticr-

rogancend theoreticalnobbery:

Itmay e that he seofthe ermpoststructuralism]ntheUnited tateshas omethingodo withhe acthatheGermanndFrenchheoristsreunable oengage roductivelyndiscussionsnseriousssues.... Withinthe ntellectualothousefParis,where heoreticaltarsncitenvy ndferociouslyompete ithne notheror ir ime,t sunlikelyhat clearsense f ommonhemes ould mergemonghe oststructuralists....Because fdeplorableranco-Germanelationsnd nhospitablearisianconditions,heUnitedtates asbeen,ince he aly 970s,hemajorite fdebates etweenraditionsf riticalheoryndpoststructuralism.4,n.4)

Mustwe accept his valuationnd follow osternbelievinghatno

dialogue is possiblebetween hese twoEuropean ntellectualom-munities? rovidedwe are carefulo alter urterminologyndperspec-tive, doubt his s the ase.

IV. Raising he takes:TheQuarrel etween heModemsandthePostmoderns

German terminologyrefuses to perceive a radical break in the

metamorphosisftheapostates. Instead, t treats neostructuralism"s aweakbyproductf tructuralism-itsailure,tsmenopause.At the ame

time, owever,nother ayof dentifyingndvalidatinghe eriod om-prisinghe70s and 80sbringshe itillationfepistemesnto he rgu-ment. It has been clearly stablished hat, n its triumphantays,structuralismepended na blind aithnscience's alue. Thisbeing o,and sciencebeingindubitablyssociated withthemodem episteme, heex-structuralists'isavowal f sciencemplies concurrentisavowal f

modernity.Whence thequalificationf the ntellectual mbitions f the

'70s and '80s as "postmodern." This sly intertwiningf "poststruc-turalism" nd "postmodernism"s amusingand cavalier. Mark Posterthusnotes nthe ntroductiono hisCritical heoryndPostStructuralism:

This confrontationetween hepoststructuralists,ho represent"postmodern"hought,ndthosewho tand astwith he modernity"fEnglightenmenthilosophys of mmediatenterest.

SubStance#68,992









Here thepassage betweenpoststructuralismnd "postmodernism"oescompletely nquestioned: Poststructuralists"re "postmodern"hinkers.

There s a watertightomology etween hetwopractices.Like the "Cloud Theory,"poststructuralism'sreation, he idea of

postmodernismertainly as something o do with art: herewe have

painting, here rchitecture. orproof, ne has onlyto read the worksofPaolo Portoghesi, ho,withCharlesJenks,s the nventorf"postmoder-nism." Sincehis interestwas in finding counterparto theutilitarian

architecturenherited romBauhaus,theconceptof "postmodernism"s

presentedna manner ecalling iffuse,loud-like ndecision:... thepostmoderneans hat xplicit,onsciousbolitionf thedamcarefullyuilt roundhe ure anguagelaboratednvitronthe asis ftherationalisttatute. his anguages put nto ontactgainwith heuniversefthe rchitecturalebate, ith he ntire istoricaleries f tspast xperiences,ith omore istinctionsetweenhe eriodseforerafter he irstndustrialevolution. ithhe arrierorn own, ldandnewwatersavemixedogether.he esultingroductsbeforeur yes,paradoxicalnd mbiguousutvital, preparatoryomentf omething

differenthat anonly e magined:eintegrationnarchitecturef vastquantityfvalues,ayers,emitones,hich he omologationf he nter-nationaltyle asunpardonablyispersed.10)

One mayask,as AntoineCompagnondoes inLesCinqparadoxese a

Modernit6,hya movement hat ejects ivision ndstylisticeriodizationand privileges cultural odgepodgehas chosenfor ponym form sing"post," ince thisprefix ositsepistemic upture s a valid functional on-

cept.Paolo

Portoghesidefines the

specificcharacterof architectural

postmodernism:

Inplace ffaithnthe reatenteredesigns,ndthe nxious ursuitsfsalvation,he ostmodernonditionsgraduallyubstitutinghe oncrete-ness f mall ircumstantiatedtrugglesithts recisebjectivesapableofhaving greatffectecausehey hangeystemsf elations.12)

In the same text,Portoghesi nveighsagainstthe "new conserva-tives"-those who "want to uphold Modernity,whatever he price, by

arguingthatthemodernist roject s unfinished nd mustbe continued"(8). Portoghesi'sxpressionnew conservatives"eveals hegulf f ncom-

prehension eparating heModernists nd thePostmodernists.tymologi-cally,it is no doubt correct: hose who wish to conservethe modern

epistemeare conservative. Yet we have already seen the expression"youngconservatives" eingappliedbyHabermas, n an oppositesense,to the leading "Cloud Theorizers":Derrida,Deleuze and Lyotard-the

verypeople whom, n thenew 1983 ntroductionohisbook,Portoghesi

SubStance#68,992









recognizes s thepostmodernntellectuals.On theotherhand,when Por-

toghesi riticizes he "newconservatives,"e isreferringoHabermasand

his followersn the Frankfurtchool. This attack s doublyeffective,ybringingto mind the textthat startedthe scandal-Habermas's "La

Modernit&:un projet nachevV"-thevery extnwhichHabermas abelshis antagonists s "youngconservatives." From Habermas's viewpoint,theFrench ntellectuals f the 70s and '80s-Derrida, Deleuze, Foucault,

Lyotard-are "conservative"in advocating ideas that abandon suchuniversalEnlightenmentalues as the iberating otential fknowledge,

respect or eason, ndconfidencentheburgeoning owersof cience. Asoutlinedhere,thedebate seems to involveopponentswho refuse o see

anythingmore neach other han terilentellectualonservatism. till, f

Anglo-Saxon ntellectuels ecrythe absence of debatebetween FrenchneostructuralistsndGermanhermeneuticists,largely quivalentdebatebetween modernism nd thepostmodern xistsand can even be said toconstitutehe essential ntellectual ebate ofcontemporaryrance nd, na certainway,ofEurope.

Thus, nLaConditionostmoderne1979),for xample, yotard irectlychallengesHabermas'sposition:

Forthis eason,tseems ome neitherossible orprudentofollowHabermasnorientinghe laborationf he roblemoward search oruniversalonsensus.....Wehave hown.. that onsensussonly state fdiscussion-nottsend.... Consensus as become noutmoded,ues-tionablealue.106-7)

The great"Cloud Theorizers" re attackednotonlyon the Germanfront ut also fromwithinFrance,wherethey re relegated o beingnomorethanthe tail-end f thepenultimatevant-garde,nterestingnlyas

grist or ntellectual istory.Thegeneration ap,no doubt. Glucksman'sLesMaftresenseurs ad started hedestabilization,ut the decisive workwas uncontestablyuc Ferry nd AlainRenaut'sLa Pensde 8, subtitledEssai surl'antihumanismeontemporain.ublished n 1988and already n

paperback, hisbookclaimstolaythe"Cloud Theorizers" o rest.A typi-

callyFrench roduct,tnonetheless ideswithHabermas, nd its conclud-ingcommentary espondsdirectlyoLyotard's ttack n Habermas. Theauthorsbeginby quotingfrom ne ofLyotard'svariousattempts,n LaCondition ostmoderne,o undercut Habermas: "Consensus obtained

through iscussion, s Habermaswants t?Thatviolates heheterogeneityofthe anguagegame." Their esponse s:

SubStance#68,992








Poststructuralismnd New Humanism 73

Very imply,we're sking] double uestion: hat's o awful boutconsensushatsfreelyiscussedndconsentedo?And fwe don't ryo

obtainne hroughpendiscussion,an nythingut iolenceesult?A whole seriesofessayspouredoutafter he ppearanceofthisbook.

All of them, ampoonishin tone,sought to liquidate the influence f

postmodernismy reiteratingnd defendingHabermas'sstrategic laimthatModernity s not onlyfar frombeingfinished ut also worthy fcontinuation.Bernard-Henrievy's Eloge es ntellectuels1989)proclaims:

Concerned ith escuinghoughtswell sModernism,first antedo

understandhe cope f he risis.....Modernism.hereligionfModer-nism....This religion"as tsmeritsndundeniableirtues.. Ithasbeenandremainshemostppropriateeapon gainsttupidityndregressionin rt.111, 17)

Contemporary ccusations are thus becomingmore urgent. Allaroundus, moreand more voices are denouncingpostmodernisms a"cloud" ofmediocrityhathas hidden the cathedral fknowledgefor oo

many years. The legalismofEnlightenmenteason s invokedtoreplace

theuncontrolled italismFoucaultinherited romNietzsche. Thus, forexample,Luc Ferrynd AlainRenaut learly ontrasthe tudent evolts f1968 and 1986in 68-86,tindrairesel'individu.Associatedwithneostruc-

turalism,he revolt f 1968 was against ystems,while the revolt f1986,associatedwith egalism, ontested law. In their iew,thegreateman-

cipating nd legalistic rinciples ftheEnlightenmentlso underpin hemovements owardfreedom owsweepingacross EasternEurope.Attheheart f this

general alvagingofModernism s a

politicalwarenessofthe

accomplishmentsf humanism. Where the neostructuralistloud an-nounced the "death of man," contemporaryModernism nsistson thereturn f the subject, nd returnsMan to the centerof his intellectualuniverse.

V. Anotherge, nothereneration:

The NewFrench umanismA fundamental orkpublished yLuc Ferryn 1986, hilosophie

politique:edroit,a nouvelleuerellees ncienst desmodernes,ontainswould-bemanifesto:

Considerationfthese woprinciples-rejectionf idealism,ejectionfhistoricism-leadsothe ormulationf his ook's entraluestion: ow

SubStance#68,1992









to conceive f a modern umanism hichwouldbe neither aivelymetaphysicalor latlyistoricizing.33)

This s infact hequestionfour time.As the entury'snd drawsclose,Paris has no desire to end up liketurn-of-the-centuryienna. Weneed humandignity.And forthis,we need a methodical ttackon theintellectual overty nd worldly axityof the 70s and '80s. As AlainFinkielkrautffirmsn LaD6faitee apensde,houghtmustnotdie-it istheintellectual's esponsibilityo not"quietlygive waybefore heridiculousawfulness fdebating anatics nd zombies." We have to resist hismove-

ment oward uncriticalameness,"whichpromises o makethinkingothanticriticalnd defeatist.As Ferrynd Renaut ndicaten their eideggertlesmodernes,ne can anticipate heconsequencesof such thinking yob-

serving ne ofDerrida'sepigones,PhilippeLacoue-Labarthe, ho alreadypraisesNazi doctrine s "humanism" nd as "an ontology fsubjectivity(ofthe willof thewill)whichhas ustculminated"8).

The lastwispsof theCloud mustbe driven ff.Bernard-Henri6vy,onceagain, umsup postmodernism'sefectsnEloge es ntellectuels:

Sothenpostmodern]ashionecided hat he erydeaof ystemsadtobeoutlawed romurthinking. ar gainstystems,gainstoherence.Anaversion oanythinghat, rom hatevererspective,eemed obeglobal.A fallingack ntoweak hinking,nto eliberatelyull,modestideas hat bove ll couldnotbe accused ftryingo dominate.Wary fchangeftertspreviousrrors,hilosophyecidedoremaintaticnd,forfear fmaking urther istakes,oquitthinkingltogether--orothingsppeared.Afterpost]structuralismratherorryulgaterystal-lized n

which--whyot dmit

t?--weere

ncouragedothink

oosely,unambitiously,ndfeebly. ncertaintyas ts ardinalrinciple,ndmin-imalismhe ntiretyf ts rogram.29-30)

In contrast, e proposesbroadprinciples ormobilizing oday'snew

humanism: Intellect,s I've said,is truth,eason,ustice, nd so on. It'sthe llusionof a world nwhichuniversal aluescantriumph"91); "Intel-

lect s also thetranscendencefKnowledge, fConcepts, fLaws" (97).The universalityfvalues,a sense ofprinciple,nd themonumen-

talityof intersubjectivepace would thusbe substituted or ndividualauthority,ontingency,nd relativism,or ll theneostructuralist'sloudyexpressions or ggrandizeddisorder. And literarycholarsmight inallyridthemselves f thepredilectionor he"minor"whichpermits hem o

bring ogetherndiscriminatelyadvertising rappersfrom aint-Gobainanda pageofSaint-Johnerse "(23)

Nonmetaphysical,this new humanistic universalismwould be

foundedna new definitionf ntersubjectiveelations ithinociety-

SubStance#68,992









which,as everyone dmits,has yetto be constructed.Butthereturn ouniversalshas already taughtus to read canonicaltextswith new eyes.Thus, as Meschonnic bserves 121-127),Rimbaud'soverlyfamous nsis-tence hat ilfaut tre bsolumentmodeme"-which infact tarted very-thing-reclaims tshumanistic alue. After imbaud's "Adieu" topoetry,thereturnothe bsolutelymodern ignalsthe ndoftheperiodofcrazed,

solitarywanderings nd irrational, himsicalourneys.Thepoethas noth-

ing eft o do butabandonhis revolt nd reintegrateociety,heworldsof

"science"and of"nation," nd hemustbecome "French" nceagain. The

imperative"il faut" in

his pronouncement"il

faut etre absolumentmoderne" uggests collective bligation.ForRimbaud,being"modern"is being ustone subject mong many-abandoningsolitary,ndividualis-ticescape for heuniversal nd thereasonable. Similarly, is declarationthat Je st un autre" "I is anOther")canfinally e disentangled rom tserroneousnterpretationt thehandsofAndr6BretonnthefirstManifestedusurrialisme. imbauddidnotanticipate reud nspeakingofan uncon-scious Other. Putback in itstemporal ontext,heutterance ollows he

tradition fVictorHugo's "Insens, qui croit ue je ne suispas toi" "Fool,youwhobelieve amnotyou") and simply xpresses niversality. his sthehumanist redo ofmodernism-thepoetis all ofhumanity, e is eachand every person, as Rimbaud announces in the poem "Soleil etChair"("SunandFlesh"):

L'Homme estroi, 'Homme est Dieu [...]Car l'Homme a fini 'Hommea joue tous es r6les 25)[Man is

king,Man isGod ...

For Man has finishedMan hasplayedevery ole ]DukeUniversity

TranslatedyJeffoveland

NOTE

1. AllEnglishranslationsfFrench orksnthisssayhave eenmade y heessay's ranslator.agenumberseferothe riginalrenchexts.

WORKS ITED

Barthes,oland.El6mentsesdmiologie,nLeDegrddroe 'dcriture,uivi e:Elimentsde emiologie.aris:Gonthier,970. LesElementse eimiologieasoriginallyublishedinCommunications,1964,pp. 91-135.

SubStance68,1992









. LePlaisir utexte. aris: euil,1973.

-. Roland arthesarRoland arthes. aris: euil,1975.

. Systhmee a mode.Paris: euil,1967.

Baudrillard, ean.Pour unecritiquee l'conomie olitiqueu signe. aris:Gallimard,1972.

Bogatyrev,etr. "Fonction u vetementn Slov6niemorave." n FunkcieKrojanamoravskomSlovendu. Matica Slovenka: Spisy narodopisnehoodburu Matice

Slovenskej, 937. quoted nN. Troubetskoy,rincipesephonologie.aris:Klincksiek,1949, . 19.

Compagnon,Antoine. esCinqparadoxese amodernitd.aris: euil,1990.

Daix,Pierre. La fin e l'homme."LesNouvelles ittiraires. ay1970. Series: Struc-turalismetrevolutionulturelle."

Deleuze,Gilles.Proust t es ignesParis:PUF, 1964,1970.

-. Rhizome. aris:Minuit, 976.

Deleuze, Gilles, nd Fl1ixGuattari.L'Anti-Oedipe.apitalismetschizophrinie.aris:Minuit, 972.

Ferry, uc.Philosophieolitique:edroit,a nouvelleuerellees nciens tdesmodernes.Paris:PUF,1986.

Ferry,uc,andAlainRenaut. 8-86,tindrairese 'individu. aris:Gallimard,987.

. LaPensee 8. Essai ur 'antihumanismeontemporain.aris:Gallimard,985.

Finkielkraut,lain.LaD6faitee apensee. aris:Gallimard,987.

Frank,Manfred. u'est-ceue e Niostructuralisme?aris:Cerf, 989.

Habermas, irgen."La Modernit6,nprojetnachev6." ritique,13,1981.

Levy,Bernard-Henri.loge es ntellectuels.aris:Grasset, 987.

Lacoue-Labarthe,hilippe.LafictionupolitiqueHeidegger,'art tapolitique).

tras-

bourg:P.U.S.,1987.

Lyotard, ean-Francois.a Conditionostmoderne:apportur e savoir.Paris:Minuit,1979.

Meschonnic, enri.Modernit6,odernite.agrasse:Verdier,988.

Portoghesi,aolo. Postmodern:heArchitecturef he ostindustrialociety.NewYork:Rizzoli, 983.

Poster,Mark. Critical heorynd Poststructuralism.thaca:CornellUniversityress,

1989.Rimbaud,Arthur.oisies.Une aison nenfer.lluminations.aris:GallimardPodsie,"1984.

Saussure, erdinand. ours eLinguistiqueendrale.aris:Payot, 931.

Sichbre, ernard. Ledogmatisme a rescousse u revisionnisme."elQuel56,Dec.1973.

Sollers,Philippe."De Quelques contradictions:apportdeologique."TelQuel,38,December 969.

SubStance68,992

art - poststructuralism and the new humanism

Documents