Hegel, Death and Sacrifice Author(s): Georges Bataille and Jonathan Strauss Source: Yale French Studies, No.

78, On Bataille (1990), pp. 9-28 Published by: Yale University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2930112 Accessed: 27/10/2010 23:16
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=yale. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. 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 support@jstor.org.

Yale University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Yale French Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

GEORGES

BATAILLE

Hegel, Death and Sacrifice'

of The animaldies.Butthedeathoftheanimalis thebecoming
consciousness.

I. DEATH

Man's Negativity In the Lecturesof 1805-1806, at the momentofhis thought's full the periodwhenhe was writing maturity, during The Phenomenolin thesetermsthe black character ogyofSpirit, Hegel expressed of humanity: "Man is thatnight, thatempty whichcontainsevNothingness, in itsundivided erything thewealthofan infinite simplicity: number ofrepresentations, of images,not one ofwhichcomes precisely to are not [there] mind,or which [moreover], insofar as theyare really It is thenight, present. theinteriority-or-theintimacy ofNature whichexistshere:[the] In phantasmagorical purepersonal-Ego. repit is night on all sides:heresuddenly resentations surges up a bloodspattered head; there, another, white,apparition; and they disappear just as abruptly. That is the nightthatone perceives ifone looks a man in the eyes: then one is delvinginto a nightwhich becomes it is thenight oftheworld terrible; whichthenpresents itself tous."2
a study on the-fundamentally 1. Excerpt from Hegelian-thought ofAlexander as possible, tobe Hegel'sthought, Thisthought Kojeve. seeks,so far sucha contempowhatHegeldidnotknow(knowing, for rary spirit, knowing example, theevents that since 1917and,as well,thephilosophy haveoccurred ofHeidegger), couldgrasp it and and courage, developit. Alexander Kojeve'soriginality it mustbe said, is to have of going any further, the necessity, perceivedthe impossibility consequently, ofrenouncing the creation ofan original philosophy and,thereby, theinterminable ofthought. This essaywas first whichis theavowalofthevanity starting-over pub? 1988. ofEditions Gallimard lishedin Deucalion 5 (1955).Withpermission ed. 2. G. W. F. Hegel, Jenenser Philosophiedes Geistesin SamtlicheWerke, vol.20 180-81.CitedbyKojeve FelixMeiner, in Hoffmeister, (Leipzig: 1931), Johannes C) 1990byYale University. YFS 78, On Bataille,ed. Allan Stoekl,

10

Yale FrenchStudies

whereHegel'sRomanticism this"beautiful finds Ofcourse, text," it IfHegelwas a romantic, loosely. is nottobe understood expression, manner in a fundamental (hewas at anyratea romantic was perhaps revoat thebeginning-inhisyouth-, whenhe was a commonplace bywhicha themethod buthe didnotsee in Romanticism lutionary), the real worldto proudspiritdeems itselfcapable ofsubordinating Alexander in citing ofitsowndreams. them, Kojeve, thearbitrariness says of these lines thattheyexpress"the centraland finalidea of andthe whichis "theidea thatthefoundation Hegelianphilosophy," and empirical exisreality sourceofhumanobjective (Wirklichkeit) whichmanifests itself as negative tence(Dasein) aretheNothingness or creative Action,freeand self-conscious." I havefelt accessto Hegel'sdisconcerting obliged world, To permit bothits violentcontrasts and its to mark, examination, bya careful ultimateunity. of philosophy For Kojeve, "the 'dialectical' or anthropological whichis the ofdeath (or, Hegel is in thefinalanalysisa philosophy ofatheism)"(K, 537; TEL, 539). same thing, a humanlife"(K,548; TEL, 550),man's Butifmanis "deathliving givenin deathby virtueof the factthatman's deathis negativity, from risksassumedwithout necessivoluntary (resulting essentially nevertheless the of is action. principle without biological ty, reasons), and Negativity Action.On Indeed,forHegel,Actionis Negativity, intoit, theone hand,theman who negatesNature-by introducing the anomalyof a "pure,personalego"-is present like a flip-side, within like an intimacy light, withinthatNature'sheartlike a night whicharein themselves-like ofthosethings withintheexteriority in which nothingtakes shape but to evanesce, a phantasmagoria wherenothing existsexceptabnothingappearsbut to disappear, which it sorbedwithoutrespitein the annihilationof time,from aspect: drawsthe beautyofa dream.But thereis a complementary in consciousness-where ofNatureis notmerely thisnegation given that which existsin itselfappears(but only to disappear)-; this and in beingexteriorized, really(in itself) negationis exteriorized, Man and ofNature. works he transforms fights; changesthereality it he createsa Nature and in destroying the given;he transforms
totheReading Gallimard, 573.(TELedition ofHegel,(Paris: Introduction [Paris: 1947), as K; TEL). citedin thetext, Gallimard, 575.) Henceforth 19801,

GEORGES BATAILLE

11

the a worldwhichwas not. On the one handthereis poetry, world, and diluted a thathas surged itself, blood-spattered destruction up On the one struggle. head; on the otherhand thereis Action,work, whereman "differs fromNothingness hand, "pure Nothingness," a historical onlyfora certaintime"(K,573; TEL, 575).On theother, thatNothingness thatgnawshim whereman's Negativity, World, thewholeofconcrete creates reality from within, (atonce objectand man who thinksand subject,real world changedor unchanged, changestheworld). is a Philosophy Hegel'sPhilosophy ofDeath-or ofAtheism3 ofHegelianphilosoThe essential-and theoriginal-characteristic ofwhat is; and,consequently, at the phyis to describethe totality whichappearsbefore our same timethatit accountsforeverything accountofthethought andlanguage to givean integrated which eyes, express-and reveal-that appearance. "In my opinion,"says Hegel, "Everything dependson one's exandunderstanding Truth not(only) as substance, butalso as pressing subject."4
andthefollowing, I repeat in a different 3. In thisparagraph, form whathas been Butnotonlyin a different I havetodevelop saidbyAlexander Kojeve. form; essentially whichis,atfirst difficult thesecondpartofthatsentence, tocomprehend inits glance, ofthe 'Subject'is thetemporalizing concrete aspect: "The beingor theannihilation the annihilated ofBeing, whichmustbe before annihilation being:thebeingofthe a beginning. Andbeing the(temporal) 'Subject'necessarily has,therefore, annihilation in Being, whichnihilates ofthenothingness beingnothingness as Time),the (insofar ofitself: therefore is essentially it has an end."In particular, "Subject" I have negation for this(asI havealready doneinthepreceding followed thepart ofIntroducparagraph) tionto theReadingofHegel whichconcerns parts2 and3 ofthepresent study, i.e., Appendix II, "The Idea ofDeath in thePhilosophy ofHegel,"Kojeve, 527-73. (TEL, note:This appendix, from whichall ofBataille'sreferences 529-75.) [Translator's to remains untranslated in English; it is notincluded Kojevearetaken, in AllanBloom's ofKojeve's Introduction reedition totheReading of Hegel(NewYork: (andabridgment) BasicBooks,1969).J 4. Cf.,G. W.F. Hegel,The Phenomenology trans. A. V. Miller(Oxford: ofSpirit, Oxford University Press,1977),9-10. In his footnotes, Batailleattributes theFrench versions he uses ofHegel to Jean translation of The Phenomenology Hyppolite's of and often also citesthepagesfrom Spirit Introduction a la lecturede Hegel where Alexandre Kojeve quotesthesamepassages. However, Kojeve's version differs from that ofHyppolite from andBataille's both.It is thelatter thatI havetranslated. Pagereferenceswillhereafter be given totheEnglish translation byA. V.Miller, which is often at withthequotations as I haverendered significant variance them.[Translator's note.]

12

Yale FrenchStudies

it does notand is incomplete, naturalknowledge In other words, isolated from a whole,from entities, anybutabstract cannotenvisage whichalone is concrete. mustat Knowledge totality, an indissoluble "in additionto the ontological the same time be anthropological: mustfind those bases ofnatural Kojevewrites, "[knowledge] reality," through whichalone is capable ofbeingrevealed ofhumanreality, thisanthropology does not Discourse"(K,528; TEL, 530).Of course, sciencesbutas a movement impossiMan as do themodern envisage In a sense,it is actually theheartofthetotality. a ble to isolatefrom whereman has takentheplace ofGod. theology, whichhe placesat theheart, and Hegel,thehumanreality Butfor is very different from thatofGreekphilosophy. ofthetotality center, tradition, whichemis thatoftheJudeo-Christian His anthropology and individuality. Like Judeohistoricity, phasizes Man's liberty, Christianman, the Hegelian man is a spiritual(i.e., "dialectical") theJudeo-Christian is fully realworld,"spirituality" being.Yet,for and Spirit speaking, properly onlyin thehereafter, ized and manifest is God: "an infinite andeternal real"Spirit, being." truly "objectively or "dialectical"beingis "necesto Hegel,the "spiritual" According This meansthatdeathalone assuresthe and finite." sarilytemporal existenceof a "spiritual"or "dialectical"being,in the Hegelian man's naturalbeingdid not sense. If the animal which constitutes die,and-what is more-if deathdidnotdwellinhimas thesourceof itand his anguish-and all themoreso in thathe seeksit out,desires it-there would be no man or chooses no liberty, sometimesfreely in whatnonetheless ifhe revels In other orindividual. words, history who risks him,ifhe is the being,identicalwithhimself, frightens a then man is Man: he himself separates truly being itself, (identical) no a he like an is immutatheanimal.Henceforth from stone, longer, andtheforce, himNegativity; theviolence he bearswithin ble given, movement ofhistory, which casthimintotheincessant ofnegativity oftheconcrete real himandwhichalonerealizesthetotality changes to the finish what to it has finish time.Onlyhistory is, power through and immutable in the passageoftime.And so theidea ofan eternal a provisional God is in thisperspective end,whichsurvives merely better. and the while awaitingsomething history Only completed whom then revealed the of history revealed, Sage (ofHegel)-in spirit ofits becomingofbeingand the totality in full,the development whichGod onlyprovisionally occupies, position, occupya sovereign as a regent.

GEORGES BATAILLE

13

The Tragi-Comic Aspect ofMan's Divinity

This way of seeing thingscan with justice be considered comic. it explicitly. The textswhereit is Besides,Hegel neverexpressed affirmed are ambiguous, and their extreme implicitly ultidifficulty fullconsideration. mately keptthemfrom is circumKojevehimself spect.He does notdwellon themandavoidsdrawing preciseconcluthe situationHegel got sions. In orderto expressappropriately one wouldneed thetone,or at himself into,no doubtinvoluntarily, the horror of tragedy. least,in a restrained form, But things would quicklytake on a comic appearance. Be thatas itmay, topassthrough deathis so absent from thedivine that a mythsituatedin the tradition figure associateddeath,and the agonyof death,withthe eternaland unique God of the JudeoThe deathofJesus ofcomedy Christian totheextent sphere. partakes introduce theforgetting thatone cannotunarbitrarily ofhis eternal divinity-whichis his-into the consciousnessof an omnipotent andinfinite God.Before theChristian Hegel's"absolute knowledge," based precisely on thefactthatnothing was already divineis myth senseofsacred)whichis finite. possible(inthepre-Christian Butthe vague consciousnessin whichthe (Christian) mythofthe deathof God tookform from thatofHegel: in order to differed, nonetheless, a figure ofGodthatlimited theinfinite as thetotality, it misrepresent was possibleto add on, in contradiction withits basis,a movement thefinite. toward for him-to addup thesum Hegelwas able-and itwas necessary ofthemovements (theTotality) whichwereproduced in history. But it is with workand its necessary humor, seems, incompatible asI shall return to thissubject;I havemerely, siduity. for themoment, to that... of the apotheosizedand sovereign by divine grandeur Sage,his prideswollenwithhumanvanity.
A Fundamental Text shuffled cards.... It is difficult to pass froma humanityhumiliated

In whatI havewritten up to thispoint, onlyonenecessity in emerges a precisefashion: there can be authentic Wisdom(absolute Wisdom, orin general anything approaching it)onlyiftheSageraiseshimself, ifI can put it thisway,to the heightofdeath,at whatever anguish to him.

14

Yale FrenchStudies

forceto thePhenomenology ofSpirit5 thepreface A passagefrom Thereis no doubt of such an attitude. the necessity fullyexpresses not text, ofthisadmirable ofthe "capitalimportance" thestart from ofHegel,butin all regards. onlyforan understanding Hegel,"-if we wishso to namethatunreality"Death,"writes there is and to upholdtheworkofdeathis thing is themostterrible hates beauty Impotent thegreatest strength. thetaskwhichdemands ofbeauty, makesthisdemand becauseunderstanding thisawareness, is Now,thelifeofSpirit whichbeautycannotfulfill. a requirement ofdeath,and sparesitselfdestrucnot thatlifewhichis frightened attains butthatlifewhichassumesdeathandliveswithit.Spirit tion, It is not in absolutedismemberment. itself onlybyfinding its truth the awayfrom thatturns bybeingthePositive power that(prodigious) or (thisis) thisis nothing Negative,as when we say of something: thereto something falseand,having(thus)disposedofit,pass from in whichit contemis thatpoweronlyto thedegree else; no, Spirit with it. This prolonged to face dwells face platesthe Negative (and) thenegative intogivenwhichtransposes is themagicalforce sojourn Being." The Human NegationofNatureand oftheNaturalBeingofMan thepassagejustcitedat an earlier tohavestarted I ought In principle, point.I did not want to weighthis textdownby givingthe "enigit.ButI shall sketchout thesenseofthe matic"lineswhichprecede whichthe without linesbyrestating interpretation, omitted Kojeve's would consequences,in spite of an appearanceof relativeclarity, remainclosed to us. and altogether of asworthy ForHegel, it is both fundamental thathumanunderstanding (thatis, language, tonishment discourse) should have had the force(an incomparable force)to separateits These elements(thistree, the Totality. elementsfrom constitutive
A. V.Miller, 19.CitedbyKojeve, trans. Spirit, 5. Cf., Hegel,ThePhenomenologyof "ZertheGerman andBatailleall translate Hyppolite, 538-39. (TEL,540-41.) Kojeve, the whichI in turn havegivenas "dismemberment," by "dechirement," rissenheit" to notethat ofHegel.It is important in Miller's translation same wordwhichappears and "tearing" and,unlike of "shredding" has themeanings theword"dechirement" InL'Exunits. intopredetermined a disarticulation doesnotimply "dismemberment," as leftin "lambeaux" forexample,Bataillespeaks of himself p6rienceint6rieure, achevaitde. .. d6chirer," torespond whichhis "inability as ofclothorpaper) (shreds, (Paris:Gallimard, 1954),19).[Translator's note.]

GEORGES BATAILLE

15

from thewhole.Theyare thisstone)arein fact thisbird, inseparable indeed material,bonds "bound together by spatial and temporal, Theirseparation whichare indissoluble." impliesthehumanNegativity toward NatureofwhichI spoke,without out its depointing cisive consequences.Forthe man who negatesnaturecould not in any way live outside of it. He is not merelya man who negates ofall an animal,thatis to say the verything he Nature,he is first negates:he cannottherefore negateNaturewithoutnegating himin Kojeve'sbizarre exofman is reflected self.The intrinsic totality ofall Nature(natural thattotality is first pression, it is "the being), animal"(Nature, theanimalindissolubly linkedto anthropomorphic and which thewhole ofNature, supports Man). Thus humanNegadesireto negateNaturein destroying Man's effective it-in tivity, it to his ownends,as when,for he makesa toolof reducing example, it (andthetoolwill be themodelofan objectisolatedfrom Nature)insofar he Man at Man as is cannotstop is exposed himself; Nature, To negateNature is to negatethe animal to his own Negativity. not the underIt is undoubtedly whichpropsup Man's Negativity. breaker ofNature's whichseeksman'sdeath, andyet standing, unity, Actionof the understanding the separating the implies monstrous ofthought, ofthe "pureabstract energy I," whichis essentially opto the inseparable character ofthe elements-conposed to fusion, ofthewhole-which firmly stitutive upholdstheir separation. It is the veryseparation of Man's being,it is his isolationfrom in themidstofhis ownkind, his isolation Nature, and,consequently, The animal,negating him to disappear whichcondemn definitively. to whichit offers no oppositionnothing, lostin a globalanimality lostin Nature(andin thetotality is itself ofall justas thatanimality dies,but today'sfliesare the same as thoseoflast year.Last year's has disappeared. The flies rehave died? . . . Perhaps, but nothing like the waves of the sea. This seems main, equal to themselves a fly a biologist can separate from theswarm, all it takesis contrived: itfor Buthe separates he a brushstroke. does not it himself, separate from the others a flywouldneed the forthe flies.To separateitself force oftheunderstanding; thenit wouldnameitself monstrous and effects do what the understanding normally by means oflanguage, of elementsand by founding which alone foundsthe separation it itselfon it,withina worldformed ofseparated founds and denominated entities.But in this game the human animal findsdeath; it
that is)-does not truly disappear... No doubt the individual fly

16

Yale French Studies

findsprecisely human death,the onlyone whichfrightens, which freezes-but which only frightens and transfixes the man who is in his future absorbed to theextent disappearance, thathe is a separatedand irreplaceable being.The onlytruedeathsupposesseparationand,through thediscourse whichseparates, theconsciousness of beingseparated. "Impotent BeautyHates the Understanding" a simpleand commontruth, Up to thispoint,Hegel's textpresents but one enunciatedin a philosophicalmannerwhich is, properly speaking,sibylline.In the passage fromthe Prefacecited above, and describes affirms a personalmomentof Hegel,on the contrary, violence-Hegel, in otherwordsthe Sage, to whom an absolute has conferred definitive satisfaction. Knowledge This is not an unbridled violence.WhatHegel unleasheshereis not the violenceof or theviolence,oftheUnderstanding-the Nature,it is the energy, oftheUnderstanding-opposing itself to thepurebeauty Negativity ofthe dream, whichcannotact,whichis impotent. is on thatsideoftheworld thebeauty ofthedream Indeed, where from whatsurrounds is yetseparated nothing eachelement, it,where in contrast to the abstract objects of the Understanding, is given in space and time.But beautycannotact. It can onlybe concretely, actionit would no longerexist,since and preserve itself.Through whatbeautyis: beauty, actionwouldfirst whichseeksnothdestroy to moveitself butwhichis disturbed ing,whichis, whichrefuses by oftheUnderstanding. does theforce not have the Moreover, beauty to therequestoftheUnderstanding, whichasks it powerto respond theworkofhumandeath. to upholdandpreserve is incapable Beauty ofit, in the sense thatto upholdthatwork, it wouldbe engaged in it is an end,orit is not: thatis whyit is Action.Beautyis sovereign, to acting, not susceptible and whyit is, evenin principle, powerless why it cannotyield to the activenegationof the Understanding, whichchangestheworldand itself becomesotherthanit is.6
6. Here myinterpretation differs from slightly Kojeve's(146 [TEL, 1481). [Transfrom lator'snote: thispassagetoo is missing Bloom'sabridgment ofKojeve, which starts onlywiththelectures givenin 1937-38. (The passagein questionis from the states that"impotent 1936-37lectures.)I is incapable Kojeve simply beauty ofbending to therequirements oftheUnderstanding. The esthete, theromantic, themystic, flee itself as something theidea ofdeathandspeakofNothingness which is." Inparticular, in thisway.But the same ambiguity the mystic he admirably describes is found in

GEORGES BATAILLE

17

without consciousness ofitself cannot therefore This beauty realwhich"recoils in horror thesamereasonas life, ly-but notfor from annihilation"-beardeathand death and wantsto save itselffrom in it.This impotent at leastsuffers itself from preserve beauty feeling ofwhatis (ofthe oftheprofoundly indissoluble thebreakup Totality Beautywould like to remainthe sign of an accord concrete-real). of the real with itself.It cannot become conscious Negativity, and the lucid gaze, absorbedin the awakenedin dismemberment, theviolentand laborious attitude Negative.This latter presupposes of Man againstNatureand is its end. That is the historic struggle himself whereMan constitutes as "Subject"or as "abstract struggle as a separated and namedbeing. I" ofthe "Understanding," "thatthought and thediscourse "Thatis to say," Kojeveclarifies, Actionwhichactuwhichrevealsthe real are bornofthe negative alizes Nothingness byannihilating Being:thegiven beingofMan (in and the givenbeingofNature(through the Struggle) Work-which from thereal contact withdeathin theStruggle.) results, moreover, thatthehumanbeinghimself That is to say, is noneother therefore, thanthatAction:he is deathwhichlivesa humanlife"(K,548; TEL, 550). I wantto insiston the continualconnection betweenan abyssal down-to-earth aspectand a tough, aspectin thisphilosophy, theonly to be complete. The divergent one havingtheambition possibilities ofopposedhumanfigures confront eachother andassemblein it: the ofthedying man and oftheproudone,who turns figure from death, and thatofthemanpinnedto his work, ofthemaster thefigure the and thatoftheskeptic, oftherevolutionary figure whose egotistical limitsdesire.This philosophy interest is not onlya philosophy of and work. death.It is also one ofclass struggle I do notintend thelimitsofthisstudy Butwithin to envisage this otherside. I would like to comparethatHegeliandoctrine ofdeath withwhatwe knowabout "sacrifice."
philosophers at leastultimately. In truth, Kojeve seemsto me (inHegel,in Heidegger), not to have envisaged, wrong classicalmysticism, beyond a "consciousmysticism," conscious ofmaking from a Being Nothingness, and,inaddition, defining that impasse as a Negativity whichwouldno longer havea field ofaction(attheendofhistory). The atheistic consciousofhaving to die and to disappear, mystic, self-conscious, would said concerning live,as Hegelobviously "in absolute himself, but, dismemberment"; for itis onlythematter ofa certain him, unlike hewouldnever period: Hegel, comeout ofit,"contemplating theNegative intheface," butnever right abletotranspose being it intoBeing, to do it and maintaining refusing himself in ambiguity.

18

Yale French Studies

II. SACRIFICE

on theone hand, and on theother, Sacrifice, theGaze ofHegel Absorbedin Death and Sacrifice I shallnotspeakoftheinterpretation ofsacrifice whichHegelgives in ofthePhenomenology the chapter devoted to Religion.7 It no doubt ofthechapter, makessensein thedevelopment butit strays from the thepointofviewofthetheory essentialand,from ofsacrifice, itis,in ofless interest thantheimplicit myopinion, representation whichis in thetextofthePreface andwhichI shallcontinue given to analyze. I can essentially Concerning sacrifice, say that,on the level, of Man has,in a sense,revealed Hegel'sphilosophy, andfounded human in sacrifice truth he destroyed bysacrificing; theanimal8in himself, andtheanimalto survive himself allowing onlyas thatnoncorporeal truth whichHegel describes and whichmakes ofman-in Heidegwords-a beinguntodeath(Seinzum Tode), ger's or-in thewordsof Kojevehimself- "deathwhichlives a humanlife." theproblem ofHegelis given in theactionofsacrifice. Actually, In strikesthe corporeal sacrifice, death,on the one hand,essentially in sacrifice being;and on the otherhand,it is precisely that"death livesa humanlife."It shouldevenbe said thatsacrifice is theprecise theoriginal to Hegel'srequirement, response formulation ofwhichI repeat: in absolutedismemattainsits truth itself "Spirit onlybyfinding berment. It does not attain that (prodigious) powerby being the to whichit contemplates theNegative face poweronlyin thedegree thattheinstitution ofsacrifice Ifone takesintoaccountthefact is it is clearthatNegativity, incarnated in Man's practically universal, ofHegel,butalso thatit construction notonlyis thearbitrary death, in of has playeda role thespirit thesimplest men,without anycom7. The Phenomenology ofSpirit, 8: Religion, chapter B.: Religion in theform of Art,a) The abstract workof art (434-35). In thesetwo pages,Hegel dwellson the of objectiveessence,but withoutdeveloping disappearance its consequences. On thesecondpageHegellimitshimself to considerations proper to "aesthetic religion" oftheGreeks). (thereligion 8. Still,although animalsacrifice seemstopredate humansacrifice, there is nothingtoprove thatthechoiceofan animalsignifies theunconscious desire toopposethe animalas such;manis onlyopposedto corporeal thebeing thatis given. He is, being, furthermore, justas opposedto theplant.

Positive that turns away from the Negative. . . no, Spirit is that

to face [and] dwells with it . . ."

GEORGES BATAILLE

19

mon grounds comparable to thosewhichare regulated once and for of a Church-but nonetheless all by the ceremonies in a univocal to see thatacrosstheworld manner. It is striking a communal Negaof tivityhas maintaineda strictparallelismin the development stableinstitutions, whichhave the same form rather and the same effects. He Lives orDies, Man CannotImmediately Whether KnowDeath I shall speak laterof the profound differences betweenthe man of ofthefullscope ofwhat sacrifice, actingin ignorance (unconscious) to theimplications he is doing, andtheSage (Hegel)surrendering ofa Knowledge which,in his own eyes,is absolute. the questionofmanifesting theNegaDespite thesedifferences, tivestillremains(andstillundera concrete form, i.e.,at theheartof whoseconstitutive elements areinseparable). The privitheTotality, ofNegativity is death, butdeath, in fact, legedmanifestation reveals In theory, it is his natural, animalbeing whosedeathreveals nothing. nevertakesplace. Forwhen the but the revelation Man to himself, himdies,thehumanbeing animalbeingsupporting himself ceasesto himself for Man toreveal tohimself, be. In order he would ultimately have to die,buthe wouldhave to do it whileliving-watching himselfceasingto be. In other deathitself wouldhaveto become words, at thevery consciousness moment thatit annihilates thecon(self-) scious being.In a sense,thisis whattakesplace (whatat least is on thepointoftaking place,orwhichtakesplacein a fugitive, ungraspIn thesacrifice, able manner) thesacrificer bymeansofa subterfuge. himself withtheanimalthatis struck identifies downdead.And so he dies in seeinghimself die,and even,in a certain way, byhis own will, one in spiritwith the sacrificial weapon.But it is a comedy! ifsomeother Atleastitwouldbe a comedy method existed which could revealto thelivingtheinvasionofdeath:thatfinishing off of the finite being,whichhis Negativity-whichkills him,ends him and definitively suppresses him-accomplishes alone and whichit alone can accomplish.ForHegel, satisfaction can only take place, desirecan be appeasedonlyin the consciousness ofdeath.Ifit were based on the exclusionof death,satisfaction would contradict that ifthe satisfied whichdeathdesignates, beingwho is not conscious, not utterly conscious,of what in a constitutive manner he is, i.e., wereeventually to be driven from mortal, satisfaction bydeath.That

20

Yale FrenchStudies

mustreflect is whythe consciousnessthathe has ofhimself (must themovement ofnegativity whichcreates mirror) him,whichmakes reasonthatit will one daykill him. a man ofhim forthevery He will be killedby his own negativity, but forhim,thereafter, therewill be nothingleft;his is a creativedeath,but if the consciousness of death-of the marvelousmagic of death-does not he dies,during his lifeit will seemthatdeathis not touchhimbefore destinedto reachhim,and so the deathawaiting him will not give him a human character. Thus, at all costs,man must live at the momentthathe reallydies,or he mustlive withtheimpression of reallydying. a Subterfuge: Knowledge ofDeath CannotDo Without Spectacle thenecessity ofspectacle, This difficulty orofrepresentaproclaims thepractice ofwhichitwouldbe possiblefor without tionin general, in respectto death,just as beasts us to remainalien and ignorant is are.Indeed,nothing less animalthanfiction, whichis apparently thereal,from from death. moreor less separated Man does not live bybreadalone,butalso bythecomedieswith In Man it is theanimal,it is the deceiveshimself. whichhe willingly naturalbeing,which eats. But Man takes partin ritesand performances. Or else he can read: to the extentthat it is sovereignin himthehaunting authentic-, literature prolongs magicofperforor comic. mances,tragic In tragedy,9 at least,it is a questionofouridentifying withsome thatwe die, althoughwe are who dies, and of believing character butit has alive. Furthermore, pureand simpleimagination suffices, as theclassicsubterfuges, orbooks, thesame meaning performances, to whichthe masses have recourse. between Naive Behaviors and Disagreement and Agreement Hegel's Lucid Reaction withtheprimary it withsacrifice theme Byassociating and,thereby, in performances), I have sought ofrepresentation (inart,in festivals, is fundamental thatHegel's reaction humanbehavto demonstrate or a strange it is par excellencethe ior.It is not a fantasy attitude,
on. further 9. I discusscomedy

GEORGES BATAILLE

21

It is notHegelalone,it is expression endlessly repeated bytradition. to seize whicheverywhere all ofhumanity alwayssought, obliquely, whatdeathbothgaveand tookawayfrom humanity. therenevertheless BetweenHegel and the man of sacrifice redifference. a was conscious of his mains profound Hegel representain a definite tionoftheNegative:he situated it,lucidly, pointofthe him to himself. discourse"whichrevealed That Totality "coherent includedthe discoursewhichrevealsit. The man of sacrifice, who consciousnessofwhathe did,had onlya "senlacked a discursive sual" awareness, i.e., an obscureone, reducedto an unintelligible It is truethatHegelhimself, andin spite emotion. beyond discourse, received theshockof ofhimself (in an "absolutedismemberment,") Moreviolently, aboveall,for theprimary deathevenmoreviolently. ofdiscourse extended its reachbereasonthatthebroadmovement of the Totality of the real. yondlimits,i.e., withinthe framework for theslightest Beyond doubt, Hegel,thefactthathe was stillalive The man ofsacrifice, on theother was simplyan aggravation. hand, He maintains it not onlyin the sense his lifeessentially. maintains fortherepresentation ofdeath, but [also in the thatlifeis necessary it.Butfrom he seeksto enrich an external sensethat] the perspective, of sacrifice was of greater inpalpable and intentionalexcitement the of terest than of involuntary sensitivity Hegel. The excitement is definable; it is sacred horror: which I speak is well-known, the andthemostagonizing richest whichdoesnotlimititself experience, but which,on the contrary, to dismemberment like a opens itself, ontoa realmbeyond thisworld, theatre where therising curtain, light all things and destroys ofdaytransfigures their limitedmeaning. ifHegel'sattitude Indeed, opposeslearned consciousness and the ofa discursive limitless to thenaiveteofsacriorganization thinking andthatorganization stillthatconsciousness fice, remain unclear on one point;one cannotsaythatHegel was unawareofthe "moment" of sacrifice; this "moment"is included,implicatedin the whole movementof the Phenomenology-where it is the Negativity of as it is assumed,whichmakes a man of the human death,insofar animal.Butbecausehe didnotsee thatsacrifice in itself borewitness of death,10 to the entiremovement the finalexperience-the one
I imagineCatholicism 10. Perhaps forlack of a Catholicreligious experience. I meanto a universal closerto paganexperience; from whichthe religious experience distanced itself. a profound Reformation Catholic couldalonehaveintroPerhaps piety whichthephenomenology ducedtheinward sensewithout ofsacrifice wouldbe im-

22

Yale FrenchStudies

to thePhenomenology peculiarto theSage-describedin thePreface he initialand universal-he didnotknowto whatextent was at first movement he described theintimate was right-withwhatprecision of the feeling he did not clearlyseparatedeathfrom of Negativity; of yard opposesa sortofshunting sadnessto whichnaiveexperience the emotions. Pleasureand the Sadness ofDeath ofdeathfor theunivocalcharacter Hegelthatinspired Itwas precisely from whichapplies,again,to the Kojeve, thefollowing commentary the Preface: theidea of (K, 549; TEL, 551). "Certainly, passagefrom ofMan; it doesnotmakehim thewell-being deathdoesnotheighten in what happynordoes it givehim anypleasure."Kojevewondered a familiarity from withtheNegative, from a results waysatisfaction ithisduty, outofdecency, toreject withdeath.He believed tete--tete The factthatHegel himself said,in thisrespect, vulgarsatisfaction. in absolutedismemit truth itself thatSpirit"onlyattains byfinding in principle, withKojeve's ConseNegation. berment" goestogether, to insist.... Kojevesimply it would even be superfluous quently, man's states that the idea of death "is alone capable if satisfying to be which . . the desire Hegel places . "recognized," Indeed, pride." in an intrepid couldbe expressed ofhistorical at theorigin struggles, toitsbestadvantage. "Itis ofthesortthatshowsa character attitude, awareofone'smortality only," saysKojeve,"in beingorin becoming one's existencein a universe in existing and in feeling or finitude, his liberty, orwithout a God,thatMan can affirm withouta beyond andhis individuality- uniquein all theworld-and his historicity
much moreextensive possible.Modem knowledge, thanthatof Hegel's time,has assuredly contributed to thesolution ofthatfundamental without enigma any (why, in general"sacrificed"?), has humanity butI seriously plausiblereason, believe thata could only be based on at least a Catholic correct phenomenological description period. whichdoesnothing,-to -But at anyrate, whatsimply is, Hegel,hostiletobeing in military and is notAction,-was moreinterested suchdeath death;it is through thetheme ofsacrifice he himself thatheperceived usestheword ina moral sense): (but he statesin his Lecturesof 1805-06, "and war are the "The state-of-the-soldier," ofthepersonal-I, thedanger realsacrifice ofdeath objectively for theparticular,-that ofhis abstract immediate . . A" contemplation Negativity Werke, (inHegel,Sdmtliche to theReadingofHegel,558 [TEL, vol. 20, 261-62. CitedbyKojevein Introduction sacrifice 560]).Nonetheless, religious ofview, has,evenfrom Hegel'spoint an essential signification.

GEORGES BATAILLE

23

ButifKojevesetsaside vulgar satishave thembe recognized. (Ibid.). faction-happiness-he now also sets aside Hegel's "absolutedisis noteasilyreconciled memberment": indeed, suchdismemberment withthe desireforrecognition. in one point, Satisfaction and dismemberment however, coincide, withpleasure.This coincidence harmonize takesplace butherethey understood as thenaive form it is generally in "sacrifice"; oflife,as existencein present whatMan is: the every time,whichmanifests in theworld he has becomeMan, on after whichhe signifies novelty his "animal" needs. the condition thathe has satisfied is such thatin At anyrate, pleasure,or at least sensualpleasure, affirmation touphold:theidea toitKojeve's wouldbe difficult respect and in certain manner ofdeathhelps,in a certain cases, to multiply the pleasuresof the senses. I go so faras to believethat,underthe theworld(orrather thegeneral ofdeath form ofdefilement, imagery) of sin is connectedin lucid is at the base of erotism.The feeling consciousnessto the idea of death,and in the same mannerthe no human withpleasure. 11Thereis in fact ofsinis connected feeling in its circumstances, someirregularity without without the pleasure and themostpowerful ofan interdiction-the of breaking simplest, that of is which, currently nudity. Moreover, possessionwas associatedin itstimewiththeimageof is very itrefers from ancient association backto a poetry meaningful; in whichthesacrificial precisestateofsensibility element, thefeelingofsacredhorror itself, joined,in a weakenedstate,to a tempered sacrifice andtheemotion pleasure;in which,too,thetastefor which totheultimate itreleasedseemedinno waycontrary uses ofpleasure. liketragedy, was an element ofa It mustbe said too thatsacrifice, it bespokea blind,pernicious celebration; joy and all the danger of theprinciple thatjoy, and yetthisis precisely ofhumanjoy;it wears withdeathall who getcaught out and threatens up in itsmovement. Gay Anguish, AnguishedGaiety To theassociationofdeathandpleasure, whichis nota given, at least in consciousness, is notan immediate is obviously given opposedthe
11. Thisis at leastpossible and,ifitis a matter ofthemostcommon interdictions, banal.

sacrifice;it was a sacrificein which woman was the victim....

That

24

Yale FrenchStudies

ofconsciousness. In prinalwaysin thebackground sadnessofdeath, in horror "recoils In prinbefore death." humanity ciple,consciously, effects ofNegativity have Natureas theirobciple,the destructive to drive himintoa confrontation with Man's Negativity ject.Butfor or at least oftheanimal,ofthe danger, forhim to make ofhimself, the negation, naturalbeingthathe is, the objectofhis destructive is his unconsciousness ofthecause andtheeffects banalprerequisite for of Hegeltogainconsciousness ofhisactions. Now,itwas essential its horror-here thehorror as such,to capture ofdeathNegativity in theface. and bylookingtheworkofdeathright byupholding is less opposedto thosewho "recoil"thanto Hegel,in thisway, He seems to distancehimself most thosewho say: "it is nothing." from thosewho reactwithgaiety. similarity, their as clearly as possible,after I wantto emphasize, the oppositionbetweenthe naive attitudeand thatof the-absolute-Wisdom of Hegel. I am not sure,in fact,thatof the two attitudesthemorenaiveis theless absolute. ofa gayreaction inthefaceofthe I shallcitea paradoxical example workofdeath. known butwas The IrishandWelshcustomofthe"wake"is little It is thesubjectofJoyce's at theendofthelast century. stillpracticed ofFinnegan 12 Finnegans Wake-the deathwatch lastwork, (however, at best).In Wales,the the readingof this famousnovel is difficult at theplace ofhonorofthehouse. was placedopen,standing coffin suit and top hat. His The dead man would be dressedin his finest all the departed who honored would inviteall ofhis friends, family the morethe longertheydancedand the deepertheydrankto his butin suchinstances, thedeathof health.It is thedeathofan other, the otheris alwaysthe image of one's own death.Only underone of could anyoneso rejoice;withthepresumed condition agreement in the dead man-who is an other-, thedead man thatthedrinker his turnwill become shall have no othermeaningthanhis predecessor. a responseto the reactioncould be considered This paradoxical desire to deny the existenceof death. A logical desire?Not in deathis commonly on In Mexico today, theleast,I think. envisaged the same level as the amusementsthat can be foundat festivals:
dumonomythe "Elucidation book,videE. Jolas, ofthisobscure 12. On thesubject 1948):579-95. in Critique(July de James Joyce"

GEORGES BATAILLE

25

skeletonpuppets, skeletoncandies,skeleton merry-go-rounds-but thiscustomis associatedwithan intensecult ofthedead,a visible 13 obsessionwithdeath. it is not thatI too say,in turning IfI envisagedeathgaily, away "it is is or "it false."On theconwhatis frightening: nothing" from withtheworkofdeath, causesme anguish, connected is trary, gaiety, and in return exacerbates thatanguish: accentuated bymyanguish, ultimately, gay anguish,anguishedgaietycause me, in a feverish whereit is my joy thatfinally chill,'4 "absolutedismemberment," wouldfollow butwheredejection tearsme apart, joywereI nottorn all thewayto the end,immeasurably. I wouldliketobring that Thereis oneprecise opposition outfully: on the one hand Hegel's attitudeis less whole than thatof naive but thisis meaningless one sees that humanity, unless,reciprocally, is powerless to maintain itself without thenaiveattitude subterfuge. Discourse Gives UsefulEnds to Sacrifice "Afterwards." to Man's behavioronce his I have linkedthe meaningof sacrifice Man differs animalneedshavebeensatisfied: from thenatural being is whathe humanly whichhe also is; thesacrificial gesture is,andthe thenmakeshis humanity spectacleofsacrifice manifest. Freed from he does whathe pleases-his pleaanimal need,man is sovereign: he is finally sure.Undertheseconditions able to make a rigorously he as So needed to autonomous gesture. long satisfy animalneeds,he had to actwithan endin view(hehad to securefood, protect himself thecold).This supposesa servitude, from a seriesofactssubordinated to a finalresult:thenatural, animalsatisfaction without whichMan properly speaking, sovereign Man,couldnotsubsist. ButMan's intelas functions ligence,his discursive thought, developed ofservilelabor.Onlysacred, limitedto thelevelofimpotent poeticwords, beaufull sovereignty. ty,have retainedthe powerto manifest Sacrifice, is a sovereign, autonomousmannerofbeingonlyto consequently, it is extent that uninformed the by meaningful discourse.To the extent thatdiscourse informs is given it,whatis sovereign in terms of
13. This cameoutin thedocumentary whichEisenstein drew from hiswork for a longfilm:i VivaMexico!The cruxofthisfilm dealtwiththebizarre practices whichI have discussed. 14. Reading "chaudet froid" for"chaud-froid," whichmeansa dishprepared hot butserved cold.

26

Yale FrenchStudies

Indeedbydefinition servitude. whatis sovereign does notserve.But simple discourse must respond to the question that discursive themeaning asks concerning thateach thing thought musthave on In principle, the level of utility. each thingis thereto servesome purposeor other.Thus the simple manifestation of Man's link to the purerevelation ofMan to himself annihilation, (at themoment his attention) when deathtransfixes passes from sovereignty to the ofservileends.Myth, associatedwithritual, primacy had at first the ofpoetry, butdiscourse impotent beauty concerning sacrifice slipped intovulgar, witheffects self-serving interpretation. Starting naively on thelevelofpoetry, such as theappeasing imagined ofa godorthe the end ofmeaningful ofbeings, discourse becametheabunpurity The substantial danceofrainorthecity's workofFrazer, well-being. forms of that recalls those were the who mostimpotent sovereignty theleastpropitious for and,apparently, tendsto happiness, generally oftheritualact to thesame purposes as laborin reducethemeaning an agrarian rite.Todaythatthesis and to make ofsacrifice thefields, butit seemed-reasonable ofthe GoldenBoughis discredited, insofar who sacrificed inscribed as thesamepeople sacrifice within sovereign It is truethatin a very ofplowmen. ofa language theframe arbitrary merited thecredence ofrigorous whichnever manner, reason,these and musthave laboredto, submitsacrifice to the people attempted, weresubmitted, or laws of action,laws to which theythemselves themselves. to submit labored on theBasis Impotenceofthe Sage to AttainSovereignty ofDiscourse is not absolute either. of sacrifice It is not Thus, the sovereignty maintainswithinthe absolute to the extentthat the institution a form whose meaningis, on the conworldof efficacious activity A slippagecannotfail to occur,to the benefit of trary, sovereign. servitude. oftheSage (Hegel)is not,for its part, Iftheattitude at sovereign, in theopposite function leastthings direction; Hegeldidnotdistance authentic andifhe was unabletofind he cameas himself sovereignty, him from it would even be near to it as he could. What separated werewe not able to glimpsea richer imperceptible image through of meaning, which touch on sacrifice and which these alterations an end to a simplemeans. The keyto a lesser have reducedit from

GEORGES BATAILLE

27

on the partof the Sage is the fact, not thatdiscourse rigorousness withina framethat cannotsuit him and engageshis sovereignty theopposite: in Hegel's whichatrophies it,butprecisely sovereignty attitudeproceedsfroma movementwhich discourserevealsand from its revelation. is neverseparated It which,in the Sage's spirit, cannot failto cannever, be fully theSage,infact, therefore, sovereign; it to thegoal ofa Wisdomwhichsupposesthe complesubordinate tion of discourse.Wisdom alone will be full autonomy, the sovfor ifI searchfor it: and,in fact, the bysearching it,I am undertaking buttheproject ofbeing-sovereignly ofbeing-sovereignly: project preWhatnonetheless assuresthesovereignty of supposesa servile being! is the "absolutedismemberment" ofwhich the momentdescribed But thatrupture fora time,ofdiscourse. Hegel speaks,therupture, In a sense it is an accidentin the ascent. itselfis not sovereign. thenaiveandthesageones,areboth thetwosovereignties, Although of death,beyondthe difference betweena decline at sovereignties a alteration and an birth (between gradual imperfect manifestation), on yetanother differ itis precisely they precise point:on Hegel'spart, It is nota stroke offate, a piece ofbadluck, a questionofan accident. ofsense.Dismemberment whichwouldbe forever deprived is,on the of attains full its writes meaning. ("Spirit only Hegel truth," contrary, itselfin absolutedismember(but it is my emphasis),"by finding is unfortunate. It is whatlimitedand imment.")But thismeaning therevelation whichtheSage drew from poverished in the lingering regionswheredeathreigns.He welcomedsovereignty as a weight, whichhe let go ... Do I intend to minimize Hegel'sattitude? Butthecontrary is true! I wantto showtheincomparable scopeofhis approach. To thatendI cannotveil the veryminimal(and even inevitable) partof failure. To mymind, it is rather theexceptional ofthatapproach certainty whichis brought out in myassociations. Ifhe failed, one cannotsay thatit was the resultof an error. The meaningof the failure itself fromthatof the failurewhich caused it: the error differs alone is In general,it is as an authenticmovement, perhaps fortuitous. with sense,thatone must speak ofthe "failure" ofHegel. weighty manis alwaysin pursuit ofan authentic Indeed, sovereignty. That sovereignty, apparently, was, in a certainsense,originally his, but thatcould not thenhavebeenin a consciousmanner, doubtless and so in a sense it was not his, it escapedhim. We shall see thatin a
ofbeing. . ereignty
.

. At least it would be ifwe could findsovereignty

28

Studies Yale French

topursue ofwayshe continued whatforever number eludedhim.The essentialthingis thatone cannotattainit consciously and seek it, because seekingdistancesit. And yetI can believethatnothing is givenus thatis not givenin thatequivocalmanner. Translated byJonathan Strauss