From: James P Castonguay <jamesp-AT-csd.uwm.edu> Subject: deleuze excerpt Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 20:02:51 -0600 (CST) deleuze scholar cj stivale posted this to the d&g list. thought foucault fans mght be interested--sorry for repeats. jim Excerpt from "La sce`ne de la philosophie" [The scene of philosophy], conversation with Moriaki Watanabe (theater and French literature specialist, Japanese translator of _The History of Sexuality_ I), April 22, 1978 (published in _Sekai_, July 1978), reprinted in vol. 3 (571-595) of the new 4-volume collection of Foucault's interviews and short/occasional written texts, _Dits et e'crits_ (Paris: Gallimard, 1994). M. Watanabe: ... Would you like to speak a bit about your friends? For example, about Gilles Deleuze whose name we mentioned toward the start of our conversation, or about Pierre Klossowski, or even Georges Bataille, Maurice Blanchot, who sparkle throughout your books like magical constellations. Or Claude Mauriac, who even in private life, mentioned in his book _Et comme l'espe'rance est violente_ [Grasset, 1976] unexpected images of certain Parisian intellectuals, especially in their political activities: the inquiry that you led into the illegal arrests of immigrant workers or the activities of the Prisons Information Group, both constituting very important evidence of your work as political militant. M. Foucault: Let us speak about friends, then, but I will not speak to you of friends as such. I belong perhaps to a rather old-fashioned generation for whom friendship is something at once capital and superstitious. And I confess that I always have some difficulty in completely superimposing or integrating relationships of friendship with organizations, political groups, schools of thought, or academic circles. Friendship for me is a kind of a secret Freemasonry, but with some visible points. You spoke of Deleuze who is clearly someone of great importance for me. I consider him to be the greatest current French philosopher. M. Watanabe: "The century to come will be Deleuzian?" M. Foucault: Permit me to make a small correction. One has to imagine what kind of climate we live in in Paris. I recall quite well how I used that sentence. But this is what it was: at the moment -- we were in 1970 -- very few people know Deleuze. Some initiates understand his importance, but a day will come perhaps when "the century will be Deleuzian." That is, "century" taken in the Christian sense of the term, the common opinion as opposed to the elite, and I would say that this will take nothing away from Deleuze's importance as a philosopher. It was in its pejorative sense that I used the word "century." Yes, Deleuze is someone of great importance for me, as were Klossowski, Bataille, Blanchot. And I am indeed afraid of not having given sufficient credit in what I have written to the influence that they certainly have had on me. I believe that I have not done so more out of timidity than ingratitude. I say timidity because I consider their literary or philosophical work as so much more important than what I could ever do, that I find it of doubtful merit for me to valorize what little I have tried to do by placing it under the sign or protection of their names as one might some divinity, and I do not want to seek any patronage for myself, especially not from people that I hold in too high a regard to call upon as my godfathers. At the moment it happens occasiaonlly that I meet student who ask me, when I say Blanchot's name, 'Who is that?' M. Watanabe: That ignorant? It's scandalous! M. Foucault: They know Klossowski's work a little, Bataille as well, but I have realized that really, I and others have perhaps not adequately showing the debt that we owe to them. In point of fact, these writers were the ones in the 1950s who were the first to begin to lead us away from the Hegelian fasciation in which we'd been locked away or that, in any event, overshadowed us all. Second, these writers were the first to reveal the problem of the *subject* as fundamental problem for philosophy and for modern thought. In other words, from Descartes to Sartre -- I do not say this polemically --, it seems to me that the subject was considered as something fundamental, but that one just did not touch: it was what no ever placed in question. The result of which in all likelihood (at least this is what Lacan pointed out) was Sartred never accepting the unconscious in the Freudian sense. The idea that the subject is not the originary and fundamental form, but that it is formed based on a certain number of processes that themselves are not on the order of subjectivity, but of an order evidently very difficult to specify and to display, but more fundamental and more originary than the subject itself -- this idea did not emerge. The subject has a genesis, a formation, a history; the subject is not originary. And that, who stated it? No doubt, Freud did, but it was Lacan who revealed it clearly, thus his importance. Bataille in a certain manner, Blanchot in his way, Klossowski as well, they all equally blew up, I believe, the originary evidence of the subject and introduced other forms of experience in which the subject's explosion, its annihilation, the collision with its limits, its toppling outside its limits, all showed well that the subject did not have this originary and self-sufficient form attributed to it by classical philosophy. This non-fundamental, non-originary character of the subject is the point in common, I believe, among all so-called structuralists, and that caused so much irritation in the preceding generation or its representatives; it's true in Lacanian psychoanalysis, in Levi-Straus's structuralism, in Barthes's analyses, in what Althusser did, in what I tried doing myself, in my own way, that we all agreed on this point: one must not take the subject as departure point, the subject in Descartes's sense of the originary point starting from which all must have been engendered, and that the subject itself has a genesis. And through this one discovers the link with Nietzsche. [_Dits et e'crits_ 3:588-590] ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005