No Fun and Games Until Someone Loses an Eye: Transgression and Masculinity in Bataille and

Foucault
Author(s): Judith Surkis
Source: Diacritics, Vol. 26, No. 2, Georges Bataille: An Occasion for Misunderstanding
(Summer, 1996), pp. 18-30
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1566294 .
Accessed: 27/01/2015 17:48
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 support@jstor.org.

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Diacritics.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NO

AND

FUN

SOMEONE

LOSES

UNTIL

GAMES
AN

EYE

TRANSGRESSIONAND MASCULINITYIN
BATAILLEAND FOUCAULT
JUDITHSURKIS
'
In August 1963 Critiquepublishedan "Hommage Georges Bataille,"a special issue
commemoratingthe deathof its founder.How did the volume's contributorsgo aboutthe
seemingly trickybusinessof pledgingfealty to the philosopherof sovereignty?How did
they profess loyalty to, in effect recognize, the sovereign subject known to insistently
refuse masterfulidentity?
Apparentlyundisturbedby this difficulty,the articleswrittenby Bataille's acquaintances-Alfred Metraux,Michel Leiris, RaymondQueneau,Andr6Masson, and Jean
Piel amongstthem-establish an explicitly fraternalrelationto theircontemporary.Piel
beginshis homagewithanaccountof theirinitialencounterchez Queneauin 1927, noting
his "impressionof extraordinary
fraternity,animpressionwhich,throughourlastmeeting
his
before
never
diminished"
death,
[721]. Interminglingintellectualand personal
days
these
occasional
remember
in a varietyof contexts:the awakening
Bataille
history,
pieces
of his interestin ethnology and work on Documentsin the 1920s, his early "confrontations" with Hegel and work on Critiquesociale and Contre-attaquein the 1930s, his
sensitivityto eventsanddevelopmentsin post-World-War-II
Europe.While significantly
diverse in focus, these articles manifest a similar approach,at once biographicaland
autobiographical,detailingthe unfoldingof sharedintellectualamitil in favorite caf6s,
apartments,andstudios.Batailleemergeshereas a historicalsubjectwhose interestsand
investments, while multiple and, to use Leiris's metonym, even "impossible," are
repeatedlylinked to a varietyof intellectualand political milieux.
Michel Foucault's"Prefaceto Transgression"assumesa morereverentialtone than
the pieces writtenby membersof Bataille's own generation.While framedas an explicit
"homage"in its recognitionof a certaindebtto Bataille,Foucault'sessay also plays upon
the contradictionof pledgingloyalty to a "sovereign"who repeatedlyrenounceshis own
claim to mastery.Bataille's deathbecomes an occasion on which to heraldthe "breakdown"and"shattering"of themasterfulphilosophicalsubjectconventionallyassumedto
be in control of the "natural"language of dialectics [42-43]. For Foucault, a new
possibility for philosophy is seen to arise in "the non-dialecticallanguage of the limit
which arises only in transgressingthe one who speaks"[44], a transgressionrepeatedly
performed,accordingto Foucault,in Bataille's own writingand metaphoricallyenacted
in and by his death.Bataillehad, afterall, proclaimedin the conclusion to Erotism:"To
give transgressionto philosophyas a foundation(it is the approachof my thought). . ."
Bataille's theoryof transgressionaims to evoke a "worldof play"in which "philosophy
disintegrates"[275]. Yet, if the disintegrationof philosophyin andthroughtransgression
is alreadyBataille's "project,"we might inquireinto why Foucaultframeshis articleas
a preface.

diacritics 26.2:18-30

18

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

In introducingthis presumablyalreadyachievedtransgression,the "Preface"affects

a curious,alternatingtemporality,a certainconfusionof anteriorityandposteriority.1At
once following andprecedingBataille,Foucaultremainsout of sync andhence unableto
coincide with Bataille in the sharedamitie inscribedby the author'scontemporaries;it
would appearthat this generationalgap introducesa certainshift in the recollection of
Bataille's legacy. Following in his footsteps,Foucaultappropriatesone ofBataille's own
disorienting gestures-the tactical use of prefaces, itself mentioned in the "Preface"
[43]-in orderto dislodge Bataille from his anteriorposition;instead,Bataille comes to
epitomize the transgressionpredictedby Foucault's "philosophical"preface. Bataille's
(and, by implication,Foucault's own) "location"becomes confused and obscured;as I
hope to show, Foucault is invested in achieving this state of indeterminacyfor both
himself and Bataille.
To honorBataille in deathassumesa double significancefor Foucault:it represents
a "transgressionof the philosopher'sbeing"which "hassent us to the puretransgression
of his texts" [40] and simultaneously allows Foucault to sacralize Bataille. "Pure
transgression"becomes liberatedfrom the historicallylocatedbeing of the philosopher.
And further,since the languageof transgressionis linked by Foucaultto the "deathof
God,"Bataillebecomes, in a sense, "deified"in the announcementandcelebrationof his
death.In introducingus to the "image"of the now passed,absentedBataille,the "Preface"
offers up a void into which Foucault (as well as the reader)may proceed to fall, thus
facilitating a self-shattering.The question is whether Bataille is as lost in the "pure
transgressionof his texts" as Foucaultmakes him out to be.
In his attemptto lose himself (rupturehis own philosophical and discursive limits) in
Bataille, Foucaultboth appropriatesand repositionsBataille's theory of transgression,
effacing the gendereddynamic that I think structuresBataille's concept, an exclusion
upon which, I will argue, Foucault's own project of self-loss relies. Moreover, an
examinationof the genderingof transgressionmightthrowits veryviabilityinto question.
In orderto sketch this complex play of positions,I will begin with Bataille's own model
of eroticism.
The vision of erotictransgressionset forthin Erotismconcentrateson the experience
of the "discontinuoussubject" in his attempt to transgressthe limits of individual
existence by leaping or falling into the realmof continuityor limitless being in orderto
access the zone of death.2ForBataillethisexperienceof continuityshouldnotbe confused
with absolute and final death; he stresses that "continuityis what we are after, but
generally only if that continuity which the death of discontinuous beings can alone
establishis not the victorin the long run"[18-19]. The experienceof death in eroticism
is, by definition, always only proximate-simultaneouslyrupturingand maintainingthe
limits of individualexistence. Batailleinsists:"Atall costs we need to transcend[limits],
but we should like to transcendthem and maintainthem simultaneously"[141]. The
transgressiveexperience is thus organizedand producedby the imposition of a limit
always existing in relation to it, even and especially at the moment of its rupture.The
sensationof transgressionis conditionedby a cognizance of the taboo and is, as a result,
fundamentally"duplicitous,"performing"areconciliationof what seems impossible to
reconcile, respect for the law and violation of the law... " [36].

1. On the complexities of such prefaces in philosophical writing, see Jacques Derrida,

"Outwork,Prefacing."
2. I use the masculinepronounhere quite deliberately,for, as I will hope to show, there is a
fundamentallygendered structureoperative in Bataille's theorizationof the experience of eroticism.

diacritics / summer 1996

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

19

Transgressionthusheightensor createsan awarenessof the law. As Bataille writes:

"If we observe the taboo, if we submitto it, we are no longer conscious of it. But in the
act of violating it we feel the anguishof mind withoutwhich the taboo could not exist.
. That experience leads to the completed transgressionwhich, in maintainingthe
.
prohibition,maintainsit in orderto benefit by it [pourenjouir]" [38; OC 42]. Since the
pleasuresorjouissance of eroticismareintimatelyrelatedto the injunctionsthatprohibit
them,the subjectmust always be awareof the existence of the law in orderto experience
limitless being in the momentof transgression;he mustbe sensitive "tothe anguishatthe
heartof thetaboono less greatthanthedesirewhichleadshimto infringeit" [38-39]. This
is the fundamentalstructureof Bataille'stransgression,and,as CarolynDean has argued,
this paradoxicaldynamicis integralto his understandingof the subject.Because his selfloss actuallymakes him awareof the law, it is "livedas the constituentmomentof selfhood" [242; see also Hollier]. However, Dean questionsthe universalapplicabilityof a
subjectivityfoundedby its own dissolution. She arguesthat it presumesa "masculine"
subjectwho initiallypossesses a positionor self to transgressor lose. Dean suggests that,
for Bataille,the reconciliationof "manhood"andcastrationareconstitutiveof his notion
of the "virile"ratherthan incompatiblewith it. In effect, the "wholeness"of Bataille's
virilemanis, as she writes,"paradoxicallylinkedto an experienceof transgressinglimits
ratherthan of containmentwithin boundariesthat would demarcatehis being." If this
virility is repeatedlyproducedin and by self-dissolutionof a masculine subject, Dean
wonders where "women figure in this scheme of things" [244-45].3 Upon reading
Erotism,we find thatimages of women's self-loss are prominentin Bataille's theoryof
erotic transgression;they are instrumentalto the enactmentof masculine self-loss.
Bataille's introductorydiscussion of the processby which individualdiscontinuity
is ruptured-the mise en oeuvre of eroticism-relies on an initial, gendereddifference
between erotic partners.Bataille writes:
Thetransitionfromthenormalstate to thatof eroticdesirepresupposesa partial
dissolution of the person as he exists in the realm of discontinuity.
In the
...
the
masculine
has
process of dissolution,
partner[partenairemasculin]
generally an active role, while thefeminine part [partie f6minine] is passive. The
passive, female side is essentiallythe one that is dissolved as a separate entity
[en tantqu'&trecontinu6].Butfor themalepartnerthedissolutionofthe passive
partnermeans one thing only: it is paving the wayfor a fusion where both are
mingled,attainingat length the same degree of dissolution. [17; OC 23]
A fundamentaldivision is enacted here between the "masculine partner"and the
"femininepart";the feminine side is alreadylost as a subject,a partialobject from the
beginning.In orderfor the masculineside to lose himself,thepassive, feminineside must
be always already dissolved as a continuous being: her loss initiates his fall into
continuity. In the meantime, the masculine partner is only "relatively dissolved,"
remaining "discontinuous"enough to derive meaning and sense from her imaged
annihilation.The femininedissolutionis thusnecessarilypriorto the masculine,with his
experienceof continuitypredicatedon her priorand total self-loss.
Bataille elaborateson what is "seen" by the masculine partnerin this scenario,
outlininghow an"auraof death"is necessaryin orderto "denote"eroticpassion.To whom
is this passion denoted?The beloved is repeatedlyinscribedas significantfor the lover;
the scenario functions within a speculareconomy in which her image of dissolution
3. Deaninterrogates
women'sabilitytoparticipate
inBataille'sschemeoftransgression.
For,
is definedas thatwhichis not "one,"is not "whole,"as in effectalreadyat a lossfor
if "woman"
a self thenhowcansheparticipatein a modelof transgression
whichisfoundedon self-loss?
20

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

appearsas ameaningfulsign forhim.Bataillewrites:"Onlyin theviolation,throughdeath

if needbe, of theindividual'ssolitarinesscanthereappearthatimage of thebeloved object
which has for the lover the sense of all thatis [qu'apparaftcette image de l'Vtreaime qui
a pour l'amant le sens de tout ce qui est]" [20-21; OC 26]. This image of the beloved is,
paradoxically,transparent,a window onto a worldof limitless being: "Thebeloved is for
the lover the transparencyof the world.Throughthe beloved appears... full andlimitless
being, which does not limit, which no longerlimits personaldiscontinuity[l'Vtreplein et
illimitd,que ne limite, que ne limiteplus la discontinuit,personelle]" [21; OC 26]. Full
and limitless being "appears"to the lover through the beloved's transparency-her
present absence. This being is "glimpsed as a deliverance throughthe person of the
perceived being [l'&treapergue]"[21; OC 26]. Continuousbeing arises as a possibility
only when seen throughthe transparencyof the beloved; she renderslimitlessness to the
lover. This limitlessness is then alwaysperceived by the lover; he remains"discontinuous" and distancedenough to sense her loss. It is unclearwhat the beloved ever "sees."
Or rather,the point is precisely thatthe beloved sees nothing.
The perceptionof transgressionin eroticism(andhence, also its theorization)relies
uponan initialspecularandspeculativedistancethatallows one of the partnersto witness
the other's image of loss. Bataille writes, "it can happenthat without the evidence [of
transgression]we no longer have the feeling of freedom [il arrive que sans l'evidence,
nous ne dprouvonsplus ce sentimentde liberte]thatthe full accomplishmentof the sexual
Erotictransgressionrelies upon a prior
act demands"[107; OC 107, alteredtranslation].4
We
traceor evidence of transgression. have seen thatthe interactionbetween taboo and
transgressionin physical eroticism rests upon the fundamentallyparadoxicalplay of
appearancesin which "thetaboo never makes an appearancewithoutsuggesting sexual
pleasure,nor does pleasurewithoutevoking the taboo"[108]. In effect, "theremarkable
thing aboutthe sex taboois thatit is fully seen in transgression"[107]. But how is the law
seen? Whatform does its appearancetake?In Bataille's model, the taboo is seen in the
image of a feminine other's transgression.
For Bataille, the woman, as the markerof difference,becomes the site upon which
transgressionappears.This is wherethe genderederoticobjectcomes intoplay. Bataille's
eroticism posits a distance and difference between partnersin order to permit the
presentationof an image or "evidence" of transgression.The masculine partnerin
physicaleroticismhas difficultysensingtransgressionwithinhimself. Batailleposits that
"a man cannotusually feel thatthe law is violated in his own personand that is why he
expects a woman to feel confused,even if she only pretendsto do so" [134]. Withoutthe
woman's confusion, the masculine partner"would not have the consciousness of a
violation"[OC 133,my translation].Thewoman'sequivocal"confusion"imagesboththe
existence of the taboo and its transgression;her reconciliationof whatseems impossible
to reconcilemakesthe transgressionappearand"marks[marquer]""thatthe taboo is not
forgotten,thatthe infringementtakes place in spite of the taboo, in full consciousness of
the taboo."(134;OC 133]. Priorto his own, subsequentself-violation, the man must be
conscious of her violation.
The image of the woman's dissolutionis "anannouncingsign of crisis"[OC 130, my
translation]. For Bataille, "a pretty girl stripped naked is sometimes an image of
eroticism" [OC 130, his emphasis, my translation]. He points out, however, that the image
presented by the erotic object is not "eroticism itself; it is not eroticism in its completeness,
but eroticism working through it [en passe par lui]" [130; OC 130]. The erotic object,

scenefroma novel
4. In afootnote,Batailleillustrateshispointbydescribinga voyeuristic
byMarcelAymi.Thesceneinvolvesa couplehavingsex whilewitnessingan execution.Bataille
writes,"Thepassagedescribestheexecutionof somemilitiamen,precededbyotherhorribleand
withthevictims"[107].
bloodyincidents,observedbya couplewhosympathized
diacritics / summer 1996

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

21

lacking in itself, is the conduitfor masculineself-loss. Bataillewrites, "eroticismwhich

is fusion, which shifts interest away from and beyond the person and his limits, is
neverthelessexpressed by an object"[130; my emphasis].Thus the desired fusion and
self-loss rely uponthe object's (prior)expressionor "image"of transgression.This erotic
objectis fundamentallyparadoxicalfor Bataille.The womanbecomes the condensedsite
of an apparentcontradiction;while she "symbolizes the contrary,the negation of the
object,she herself is still an object"[131]. The womanis thus always only a symbol that
expresses or denotes transgressionto the masculinepartner.As SuzanneGuerlacwrites,
"Thewoman-the eroticobject-is essentialto eroticismin orderto renderit saisissable,
in orderto figure it or presentit to consciousnessthroughthe mediationof visual form"
[104].5

In heressay, Guerlacexaminesthe images of women in Bataille's eroticismin order

to problematizeits use as a model for the transgressionof the limits of philosophy. In
particular,she questions Derrida's characterizationof Bataille's transgressivesovereignty as "anexpenditurewithoutreserve"which takesno-thingas its object.She argues
thatthe erotic objectdoes introducea relationshipof subordination,"of possession in a
nonreciprocalrelation,"into Bataille's erotic dynamic [102]. Her readingclarifies that,
althoughperhapsdesiringan "expenditurewithoutreserve"in the loss of discontinuous
self into continuity, sovereignty relies upon the image of another's loss in order to
envision the possibility of self-transgression.
In his conclusion to Erotism, Bataille proclaims: "I believe that the supreme
philosophicalquestioncoincides with the summitsof eroticism" [273]. The inarticulable
moment that exists beyond the grasp of philosophicaldiscourse is experienced in the
suprememomentof eroticism-in its silence. How close does Batailleget to this answer?
He remarksof his own project,"Talkabout[eroticism]I shall, but as somethingbeyond
our present set of experiences . . ." [252]. Languagecan only gesture or point to this
beyond. Yet it serves a crucial function. Bataille asks: "But would the summit be
accessible if discoursehad not revealedthe access?"[OC 269, my translation].Bataille
constantlykeeps his sights focused on a beyond he cannot see, on the moment when
transgressionwill disruptthesense of his discursivelanguage.The silence revealedby the
transgressionthus exists beyond and subsequentto-but following on a route revealed
by-discursive language.
Batailleis not unawareof the difficultythis presentsfor his own project.Throughout
Erotism,he stresses thateroticismis defined by a partialand proximategesture toward
continuousexistence.And, in his conclusion,he cites JeanWahl'scritiqueof the dynamic
between erotic partners:
Oneofthe partnersmustbe consciousofcontinuity.Bataille talksto us, Bataille
writes,he is aware of whathe is doing, and the momentthathe is, the continuity
can be broken.I don't knowwhatBataille will have to say aboutthis, butI think
thereis a realproblemhere. Consciousnessofcontinuityis no longercontinuity,
but there is no more speechfor all that. [276]
Batailleresponds:"JeanWahlhadtakenmy meaningexactly."But he adds,"Ianswered
him straightoff andtoldhim he was right,butthatsometimeson the borderlinecontinuity
and consciousness drawvery close together"[276]. Bataillehighlightsthe "possibility"
5. Guerlac'sarticlecomplicatesDerrida's readingofBataille's sovereigntyas "subordinated
to nothing" by examiningthe role played by an erotic object-the prostitute-in his theorization
of physical eroticism[104]. Whilemy readingfollows aspects of her argument,our emphasesare
different.She is moreinterestedin investigatingBataille's relationshipto Hegel. I will laterdiscuss
the implications of her reading in the context of my own project. See also Chantal Thomas's
discussion of the necessaryfemininityof nudityin Bataille in "Contrele sexefade" [28].

22

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

of this limit situationas the focus of his interest.It represents"anessentialproject,a kind

of fundamentalgoal" [OC 693, my translation].However, the achievement of this
borderlinepositionremainsrelianton the "image"of theotherpartneras lost to continuity.
The lost partneris a figurefor thatwhich lies beyondthe limits of language,maintaining
an image of this beyond within the parametersof Bataille's discourse. His textual and
experientialaccess to the limit situationis conditionedby the woman's imaging of his
desiredself-absention.We will find,however,thatdescriptionsof the woman-subjectare
Bataille's
remarkablymissingfromFoucault's discussion.How doesFoucaultappropriate
model while at the same time excludingthe pivotalfigureof woman's self-loss described
above?
In my readingof "Prefaceto Transgression,"I arguethatFoucault(in orderto enable
his own transgressionof philosophical limits) performs this elision by positioning
Bataille (ratherthan a woman) as a placeholderfor self-loss. In this textually "erotic"
relationship,Bataille no longerexists in the limit position;he is beyondthe pale, already
continuous or "dead."In order to affirm his own future self-loss, Foucault obscures
Bataille's reliance on the image of a feminine other's self-loss. I hope to show that if
Foucault examined the gendering that inheres in Bataille's transgression,the model
would be much more difficult if not impossibleto assimilate.He would have to address
how the speaking/writingsubjects in Bataille (both Bataille himself and his fictional
narrators)are never fully dissipated.Foucaultwould thus be forced to question whether
his own self-dissolutionis ever fully possible.
Foucaultexplicitly takes up Bataille's projectof giving transgressionto philosophy
as a foundation.As emphasizedby Bataille, the relationbetween transgressionand the
limit is not one of simple opposition. Due to his interest in finding and founding a
"nondialectical"mode of thought, Foucault highlights this non-negatingoperationof
transgression,stressinghow its "nonpositiveaffirmation"is incomprehensiblein traditionalmodes of philosophicalanalysis.6He writes:"Noformof dialecticalmovement,no
analysisof constitutionsandtheirtranscendentalgroundcan serve as supportfor thinking
about such an experience.. ." [37]. This experience-as inconceivablein conventional
forms-thus challenges the limits of philosophical thought. In a sense, there are two
transgressionsgoing on here:the unthinkabilityof transgression,in turn,challenges the
limits of philosophy. In "Preface,"Bataille is posited as figure for the first of these
transgressionsin orderfor Foucaultto theorizethe second. Analogousto the lost partner
in Erotism,Bataillemaintainsanimageof thebeyond,the un- ornot-yet-thinkable,within
Foucault's theoreticalessay.
Foucaultupholds Bataille as an always already"sovereign"figure who marksthe
limits of (Foucault's) philosophicallanguage. He urges that "the sovereignty of these
experiencesmust surelybe recognizedsome day, andwe musttryto assimilatethem:not
to revealtheirtruth-a ridiculouspretensionwith respectto wordsthatformourlimitsbut to serve as a basis for finally liberatingour language"[38-39]. In representingand
formingthe limits of Foucault'sdiscourse,Bataille offers a glimpse of a future"liberation" to Foucault. He insistently positions Bataille beyond himself, figuring him as a
horizonto reachtoward.Ineffect, Foucaultignoreshow, as we haveseen in theconclusion
to Erotism,Batailleremainson the nearratherthanthe far side of the limit. In "Preface,"
Bataille takes on the characterof the convulsed or lost woman's body which appearsso
frequentlyin his own writings:"Bataille'slanguage.., continuallybreaksdown at the
centerof its space, exposing in his nakedness,a visible andinsistentsubjectwho hadtried
to keep languageat armslength,butwho now finds himself thrownby it, exhaustedupon
6. Here Foucault'sargumentdiffersfromDerrida'slaterdiscussion.For Foucault,transgression is beyondand in excess of dialectical thoughtratherthana displacementof it. For Derrida's
differentreading, see "FromRestrictedto General Economy:A Hegelianism WithoutReserve."

diacritics / summer 1996

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

23

24

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

the sandsof thatwhich he can no longersay"[39]. Foucault'sdescriptionof the exposed,

"naked,"and "visible"subjectis significantin light of Bataille's own discussions of the
role of nakedfiguresin the dynamicof erotictransgression.Bataille's languageprovides
the necessary,visible figurein andthroughwhom Foucaultcan "witness"the possibility
of his own transgression.Bataille's convulsed (figurative)body marks the limit and
makes the possibility of its transgressionvisible to Foucault. David Carroll, in his
discussion of "Preface,"comments that "thereis no doubt in Foucault's mind that the
philosophersof transgressionhave achievedthis [sovereignthought],thatthe liberation
of thoughtand discoursehas alreadyoccurred"[188]. Carrollarguesthat, "throughthis
mimetic identificationwith Bataille and others,Foucaultguaranteesin advancehis own
criticalpowerandgathersthe spoils of victoryfroma battlefoughtby others"[188]. Thus,
in Carroll'sinterpretation,as in my own, FoucaultmustfigureBataille's transgressionas
an event that has already occurred. I would argue that beyond simply supporting
Foucault's discourse, Bataille, as a figure who marks both the limit and its rupture,
actuallyallows Foucaultto envision his own (future)transgression.However, although
Bataille furnishes the necessary "image"of transgression,he does not complete the
projectFoucaulthas in mind; Bataille's transgression-like that of the erotic objectremains incomplete. The form of "the philosophy of eroticism" lies in the futureBataille's own projectnotwithstanding.Foucaultassertsthat "no form of reflection yet
developed, no established discourse, can supply its model, its foundation,or even the
riches of its vocabulary"[40]. He reiteratesBataille's own hope thatthe theorizationof
the subjectiveexperienceof eroticism,exemplified by "thelanguageof sexuality,"will
marka pathtowardthe transgressionof conventionalphilosophicaldiscourse.Bataille is
here positioned as already beyond language and, as a result, in need of Foucault's
theoreticalelucidation:
Oureffortsare undoubtedlybetterspentin tryingto speakof thisexperienceand
in makingit speakfrom the depthswhere its languagefails, from precisely the
place where words escape it, where the subjectwho speaks has just vanished,
wherethespectacle topplesoverbeforean upturnedeye-from whereBataille's
death has recentlyplaced his language. [40]
Foucaulthopes to attain,througha readingof the "puretransgression"of Bataille's texts,
a shatteringof his own philosophicalsubjectivity.Foucaultproposes an observationof
Bataille's "exemplary"self-torture.In Bataille,he witnessesthe "firstreflectedtortureof
thatwhich speaks in philosophicallanguage[Vcartelement premier et rflechi de ce qui
parle dans le langage philosophique.]"[42; 761]. Bataille providesan initial (therefore
prior) "image"or reflection of the philosophical subject's torture.Foucault observes
Bataille's own dismemberment,a disintegrationthat"makesus aware [renduesensible]
of the shatteringof the philosophicalsubject"[43]. How, we might ask, does Bataille do
this?
Foucaultturnsto the eye of Bataille's writingas a figure of "innerexperience"and
its implicitdisruptionof philosophicalbeing7andconcentrateson the significance of the
7. Martin Jay has argued that this discussion of Bataille may be placed in the context of
Foucault's wider antiocular discourse. See "In the Empire of the Gaze: Foucault and the
Denigration of Vision in TwentiethCenturyThought"[186].
Like Roland Barthes, Foucault reads the eye as a representativefigure for Bataille's own
transgressivelanguage which, in "describ[ing]a circle," "refersto itself and isfolded back on a
questioningof its limits"[44]. RolandBarthes's "Mitaphorede l'oeil" was originallypublished
in the same volumeof Critiqueas Foucault's own essay. Barthesconcentrateson the linguistic or
formal aspects of Bataille's transgression rather than on the significance of the eye for the
philosophical subject.ThetransgressionofBataille's textis imaged,for Barthes, by the rupturing

diacritics / summer 1996

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

25

eye as a "figureof beingin theact of transgressingits own limit"[45]. At thispoint,critical

slippages occur in Foucault's argument,for he insistentlyreadsthe eye as an image of
Bataille's own disruptiveinner experiences ratherthan examining how, in Bataille's
writings, the eye's transgressionsare persistentlywitnessed by a narratingwriter. In
Foucault's readings, Bataille himself (as the torturedsubject of philosophy) seems to
experiencethe transgressionof this eye. In effect, Bataille becomes a "figureof being in
the act of transgressingits own limit."
Foucault contrasts Bataille's images of the exorbitatedand upturnedeye to the
traditionaleye of philosophicalreflection.The conventionaleye of reflectionwithdraws
into the interiorof the self andis, in the process,grantedan ever greater"transparencyof
vision."Diametricallyopposedto thisfigure,theexorbitatedeye is thrownoutwardrather
thandrawninward;its sightis deniedratherthanaccordedanincreasedtransparency.The
subjectof this oculartransgressionis simultaneouslydeprivedof vision and offered"the
spectacleof thatindestructiblecore which now imprisonsthe deadglance"[45-46]. But
who witnesses this spectacle? Foucault writes that, "in the distance created by this
violence and uprooting,the eye is seen absolutely,but denied any possibility of sight."
Seen absolutely by whom? For Foucault,the "spectacle"is offered to the subject who
loses the eye. In the process of exorbitation,"the philosophizing subject has been
dispossessed and pursuedto his limit."The "sovereigntyof philosophicallanguage"is
seen to emerge from "themeasurelessvoid left behindby the exorbitatedsubject"[46].
No longer simply a figure for transgression,exorbitationis framedas an experiencein
which the philosophizing subject loses himself and accedes to a liberated language.
FoucaultparadoxicallyanimatesBataille's rhetoricalfigureforthesovereignphilosopher's
self-loss, bringingthis figurativedeath to life. However, if we examine the context of
exorbitatedeyes in the narrativeof Bataille's Story of the Eye, it appears that the
exorbitatedsubjectdoes not coincide with the subjectwho speaks.Exorbitationis rather
consistently offered as a spectacle to be witnessed by the narratingsubject.
One of two exorbitationsin Bataille'sStory,the spectacleof the deathof Granerothe
toreador-the scene cited in Foucault'sconclusion-presents the image of, in Foucault's
words, an eye "seen absolutely,but denied the possibility of sight."The denial of sight
presentedto the exorbitatedeye itself is invisible to the spectators.The eye presentsan
absence:the "image"of the witnesses' blindnessto blindness,thatis, a visible absence.
Such "obscene"paradoxicalpresentabsences,like those figuredin the eroticdynamicby
the feminine other who offers a spectacle of her absence to an onlooking partner,are
repeatedlypresentedto the narratorof Storyof the Eye.
The exorbitatedeye's loss of vision-its transgression-is explicitlyconnectedwith
the image of a lost feminine other. Within Bataille's narrative,Marcelle, who "loses
herself"by committingsuicide, is the privilegedfigure of/for absence;in the end, she is
invokedas a representationof the exorbitatedeye's loss of vision. Marcelleis, however,
notablyabsentedfromFoucault'sanalysis.Foucaultinsteadtracesconnectionsbetween
the exorbitatedeye, Bataille's experienceas a witness, and Bataille's writing.He links
Bataille's "being broughtback to the reality of his own death"to his experience as a
spectatorat Granero'sdeath.At thecorrida,Bataillesaw that"theuprootedeye could give
substanceto this absence[rendreprdsentecette absence] of which sexuality has never
stoppedspeaking..." Both the spectacle and Bataille's "languageof sexuality"render
absence present-a connection which Foucaultunderstandsas "crucialfor his thought
ofthe spherical,ocularmetaphorbyanothermetaphoricalchain- thatoffluidity.Thetransgression
is produced by "undoingthe usual contiguitiesof objects." Susan RubinSuleimanhas critiqued
Barthes's essayfor its near-exclusiveconcentrationon the linguisticelementsof transgressionin

Intent:Gender,
Politics,andtheAvant-Garde].
Storyof theEye[seeherSubversive
MichaelHalley

argues that in his concentrationon the linguistictransgressions,Barthesexcludes the violence, in

particular the violent death of thepriest Don Aminando,of Bataille's text [113].

26

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

andcharacteristicof all his language"[51-52; 768]. Foucaultcan identifywith Bataille's

spectatorial experience by reading Bataille. The significance of this identification
betweenFoucaultas readerandBatailleas witness becomes clearwhen we considerhow
Foucault analyzes the spectator's experience. In Foucault's reading, the narratoris
conflated with the transgressive act itself. After sketching the scene in which the
toreador'seye is exorbitatedand Simone "swallows"the bull's testicle, Foucaultcites
Bataille:
Twoglobes of the same color and consistencywere simultaneouslyactivatedin
opposite directions.A bull's white testicle had penetratedSimone's pink and
black flesh; an eye had emerged from the head of the young man. This
coincidence, linkeduntildeath to a sort of urinaryliquificationof the sky,gave
me [me rendit]Marcellefor a moment.I seemed,in this ungraspableinstant,to
touch her. [52; 769]
In this instant, opposites coincide in their simultaneoustransgression;the analogous
spheres cross the limits of their "normal"positions: the testicle is intruded,the eye
extruded.Boundariesbetweeninside andoutsidearevisibly disrupted,imagedbeforethe
narrator'seyes. The coincidence"renders"orre-presentsthe absentMarcelle,offeringan
imageof herabsence.Butthe narrator'saccess to heris atbestapproximate.He only seems
to reachherin an ungraspableinstant.Foucault'sreadingignoresthe asymptoticelement
here, effacing the final dis-junctionbetween the narratorand Marcelle.He writes:"it is
the moment when being necessarilyappearsin its immediacyand where the act which
crosses thelimit touchesabsenceitself"[52]. Foucaultconflatesthe narrator'sexperience
as a witness with the images of transgressionpresentedbefore him. All trace of the
narratingsubjecthas disappeared;the narrator's"act"of touchingthe absentMarcelleis
collapsed into the eye/testicle's transgressions,into the crossing of limits performedby
the spheres' simultaneousintrojectionand exorbitation;Foucault elides the requisite
speculardistancebetweenthenarratorandtheact, a distancethe narratoralmostbutnever
fully loses when he attemptsto cross the limit in orderto reach Marcelle.
In Foucault's discussion of Bataille's otherocularfigure, the upturnedeye, similar
slippages appear;the optic transgressionis yet again attributedto the philosophical/
speaking subject. Like the exorbitatedeye, the upturnedeye is opposed to the eye of
reflection. Its movementtowardthe interiordoes not reveal a transparencyof vision, an
"interiorsecret."Instead,"madeto turninwardin its orbit,the eye now only poursits light
into a bony cavern"[46]. In these instancesFoucaultyet again invokes the subjectwho
possesses the transgressingeye. However, in crossing the limit of its normalposition,
reversingnight andday (the white of the eye signifies a darknessof vision), the eye both
performsand images a transgression.Foucaultwrites, "Theupturnedeye discovers the
bondthatlinks languageanddeathatthemomentthatit figures [ilfigure] thisrelationship
of the limit and being" [47; 764]. The eye simultaneouslyexperiences and figures: it
"shutsout the day in a movementthatmanifestsits own whiteness"[46]. There are two
eyes here, one that shuts out the day and anotherto whom the whiteness is manifested.
In Bataille's fiction, both perspectives are represented. Like the spectacle of
exorbitation,the upturningof the eye is a horizonfor ratherthan an experience of the
narrator.In MadameEdwarda,the prostitutepresentsthe ocularfigure of transgression.
The writerwitnesses deathin hereyes: "Supportinghernape,I looked into hereyes: they
gleamed white .... Love was dead in those eyes, they containeda daybreakaureatechill,
a transparencewherein I read death's letters [une transparence je lisais la mort]."
oit
[157-58; 51]. The descriptionevokes the momentin Erotismwhen the lover "glimpses"
limitless being throughthe transparencyof the beloved. The narratorreadsthe deathand
absencewrittenin theprostitute's eyes. Transgressionis markedin andby Edwardaas she
presentsabsence to the narrator.
diacritics / summer 1996

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

27

Foucault'sreadingconsistentlyobscuresthis dynamic,collapsingthe experienceof

the upturnedeye itself into its significancefor an onlookingwitness. For Foucault,"the
eye of Bataille [l'oeil de Bataille] delineatesthe zone sharedby languageand death,the
place wherelanguagediscoversits being in the crossingof its limits:the non-dialectical
formof philosophicallanguage"[48]. Thediscoverythatis madeby theeye is always also
a representationthat "delineates."However, the referencehere to "theeye of Bataille"
maintainsthe confusion:is this the eye of Batailleas philosophicalsubjector the eye as
a figurein Bataille'swriting?Foucaultstressestheexperienceof Batailleas philosophical
subject:"Revealedto thiseye, whichin its pivotingconcealsitself forall time,is thebeing
of the limit" [49]. He, in turn,reads transgressionand deathin Bataille's eye. Foucault
consistentlyeffaces Bataille's representationof transgressionas a gendereddynamicin
orderto position Bataille as a figure of/for transgression.He can only repeatBataille's
transgressionby obscuringhow it is enacted in Bataille's writing. If Foucault were to
examine the consistent gendering of transgression,he would have to account for the
persistenceof the narratorwho never completelydisappears-who is only proximately
ratherthantotally lost.
Foucaultturnsto "thespectacleof eroticdeaths"in Bataille's storiesas exemplarsof
the upturnedeye's transgression,metaphorizingBataille's metaphorby substitutingthe
erotic scene for the ocularfigure.This substitutionmakesexplicit whatis implicit in the
spectacleof the upturnedeye-namely, two "perspectives,"one genderedas "feminine"
andthe otheras "masculine."However,in his citationof the climacticcemeteryscene in
Blue of Noon, Foucault yet again effaces the woman and concentratesinstead on the
revolutionin Troppmannthe narrator'ssight, as the groundof the cemetery, twinkling
with candlesmarkingeach grave,takes on the appearanceof the sky, and"thesky above
forms a hollow orbit,a deathmask in which he recognizes his inevitableend" [47]. He
elides how Dorothea's body becomes an initial "image"of absence and death-as she
takes on the aspect of a grave-into which the narratorcan proceedto fall. As Foucault
cites: "TheearthunderDorothea'sbody was open like a tomb,herbelly openeditself to
me like a fresh grave [commeune tombefraiche]. We were struckwith stupor,making
love on a starredcemetery.Eachlightmarkeda skeletonin a graveandformeda wavering
sky as perturbedas our mingled bodies" [47]. The "revolutionin sight,"the appearance
of the "starredcemetery,"follows Dorothea's"opening"andself-loss; it is subsequentto
her imaging of a tomb/fall(tombe/tombe),her representationof the narrator'spotential
loss. However, Troppmann,as the masculine partner,never entirely dissolves; like
Bataille in the introductionto Erotism, he remains conscious enough to write. The
proximity(ratherthancompletion)of his fall is enactedat the end of the scene. He writes,
"... we begansliding down the sloping ground.... If I hadn'tstoppedour slide with my
foot, we would have fallen into the night,andI mighthave wonderedwith amazementif
we weren'tfalling into the void of the sky"[145]. The narratorstops the slide, remaining
in a limit position in the face of Dorothea'stotal loss. As Bataille writes:"We approach
the void.., but not to fall into it. We want to become intoxicatedwith dizziness and the
image of the fall is sufficient" [qtd. in Guerlac 105]. In the scene, Dorothea's body
providesan image of a tomb/fallinto whichTroppmannalmostbutnevercompletelygets
lost. By concentratingexclusively on the narrator'srevolutionin sight,Foucaultexcludes
the process by which the narrator'sloss is (almost) enacted. He ignores both the role
played by the feminine "image"of the abyss as well as the explicitly partialcharacterof
the narrator'sloss.8
8. Troppmann'sdependenceonfeminine imagesof self-loss are a repeatedthemethroughout
the novel. As a necrophiliac,he relies on images of death in order to performhis own loss. He is
impotentunlessfaced with the image of a feminine other'sfall. Up until the scene withDorothea,
he is only able to overcome his impotencewithprostitutes who are, for him, explicitly linked to
figures of death.At one point, Troppmannrealizes that, "myattractionto prostituteswas like my

28

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Conclusion
In orderfor Foucaultto envision the horizon of his own loss, he consistently positions
Bataille (and his narrators)as alreadylost, as having always already transgressed.In
constructingthis horizon, he effaces how Bataille remains"discontinuous"throughout
his gesturestowardlosing himself. Foucault'sreadingscollapse the narrator's/Bataille's
attempts at loss with the self-annihilationrepeatedly imaged by feminine others: a
collapse that is never fully possible. While Bataille might desire to lose himself in an
"expenditurewithoutreserve,"the persistentgenderingof transgressionbelies a limitless
spending.The masculinepartneralways saves up some of himself at the expense of the
feminine partner.What, then, are the consequencesof Foucault'sreading?
Both David Carroll and Sherry Simon have critiqued Foucault's discussion of
transgressionon thegroundsthatit refusesto articulatethepositionfromwhichhe speaks,
a problemoften raised by criticalattemptsto "place"Foucault[Carroll197-98; Simon
180-81]. In "Preface,"Foucault'sexplicitinvestmentin "losing"ortransgressinghis own
philosophicalanddiscursivepositionraisesthisproblemmost acutely.Carrollwritesthat,
in identifying with and collapsing the distance between himself and his privileged
"disruptivediscourses"(what I have outlined as Foucault's attemptto lose himself in
Bataille's loss), Foucault"lightenshis load andfrees himself of the moretediousbut still
necessary task of carrying his own critical weight and assuming the philosophicalI have seen Foucault'seffacepolitical consequencesof his criticalperspective"[197].91
ment of the writingsubject'sposition as particularlysymptomaticof this difficulty. His
persistentconflationof narratingwitnesseswithwhatthey see enactsexactly the totalloss
of position thathe desires to achieve in his own readingof Bataille.I would suggest, like
Carroll,that the desired "blindness"of this conflation, entailing as it does a loss of all
"criticaldistance,"can have questionablepolitical consequences.AlthoughFoucaultis
wary of readingall discourseas a directexpressionof an (ideological) position, a close
examinationof the dynamicof transgressionreveals thata total loss of position is never
fully possible for the subjectwho continuesto write.10In focusing upona self-loss thatis
perpetuallydeferredas long as he continuesto theorize,Foucaultfinesses and obscures
the position he remainsin while writing.
An analysisof the genderedpositionsinscribedin Bataille's theoryof transgression
calls into questionthe possibility andeven viabilityof the totalself-loss thatis upheldas
its goal." This, it appearsto me, is exactly why Foucaultconsistentlyeffaces the role of
genderedpartnersin eroticism.An accountof the genderingof Bataille's transgression
demonstrateshow it remains within a specularand speculative economy in which the
writingsubjectis always at a certaindistancefromwhathe "sees."While he mightdesire
to totallylose himself in the loss of another,the writingsubjectalwaysremainsconscious
enough of thatloss to theorize.Bataille's transgressionmay thusbe readagainstitself in
attractionto corpses" [Blue of Noon 38]. For a more comprehensivediscussion of Troppmann's
relationshipto death in the novel, see Hollier, "Bataille's Tomb."
9. See also Allan Stoekl's critique of Foucault's analysis of transgressionfor its lack of

attentionto politicalproblemsin Writing,Politics,Mutilation:

TheCasesof Bataille,Blanchot,
Roussel,Leiris,andPonge[118-23].
10. For example, in The Order of Things, Foucault argues against those "who, in their
profoundstupidity,assert that there is no philosophywithoutpolitical choice, that all thoughtis
either 'progressive'or 'reactionary.'... Theirfoolishnessis to believe that all thoughtexpresses
the ideology ofa class" [328]. I am not here suggestingthatall discourseis thereforea unitaryand
seamless expressionofan ideologicalposition. Mypoint is thatpositions will be upheldeven ifthey
inevitablycontain tensions. In effect, their expressionmayprecisely reveal their contradictions.
11. Simonbrieflymentionstheproblempresentedby gender in her discussion of Foucault's
transgression[180-81].

diacritics / summer 1996

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

29

orderto demonstratethatthe "masculine"writingsubjectalways maintainshis position

vis-h-vis a witnessed "feminine"loss, which explainswhy Foucaultshies away fromthe
considerationof gender.We thereforeneedto examinehow transgressionunderwritesthe
theoretical/philosophicalsubjectin the processof purportedlyunderminingit and hence
to accountfor the writingsubject's position ratherthandeny its continuedexistence.
An interrogationof the genderingoperativein transgressionthenraisesa numberof
furtherquestions concerning the radicality of gestures toward self-loss (a series of
questions that, in his attemptto proclaimthe disruptivenessof transgression,Foucault
cannotaffordto address).Does this desire for self-dissolution,which is foundedon the
"image"of another'sloss, in fact strengthenor reinscribethe positionof the "masculine"
witness ratherthan radically disable it? An examinationof the gendered dynamic of
transgressionraises the problemof who is really lost. Who benefits from the enactment
of self-loss? Who witnesses andtheorizesaboutthe simultaneousappearanceof the limit
and its transgression?Who loses an eye?
WORKSCITED
Barthes,Roland. "M6taphorede l'oeil." Critique195-96 (Aug.-Sept.) 1963: 770-77.
Bataille, Georges. Blue of Noon. Trans.HarryMatthews.New York:Urizen, 1978.
. Erotism:DeathandSensuality.Trans.MaryDalwood.SanFrancisco:CityLights,
1986. Trans. of L'erotisme. Oeuvres complktes.Vol. 10. Paris: Gallimard, 1987.

[OC]
. MadameEdwarda.Paris:Pauvert,1973.
the Eye. Trans.JoachimNeugroschel.San Francisco:City Lights, 1977.
. Storyof
David.
Carroll,
"DisruptiveDiscourseandCriticalPower:The Conditionsof Archaeoland
ogy
Genealogy."Humanitiesin Society 5.3-4 (1982): 175-200.
Dean, Carolyn. The Pleasures of the Self: Bataille, Lacan, and the History of the
Decentered Subject.Ithaca:Cornell UP, 1993.
Derrida, Jacques. "From Restricted to General Economy: A Hegelianism without
Reserve."WritingandDifference.Trans.Alan Bass. Chicago:U of ChicagoP, 1978.
251-77.
. "Outwork,Prefacing."Dissemination. Trans. BarbaraJohnson. Chicago: U of
Chicago P, 1981. 3-59.
Foucault, Michel. "Prefaceto Transgression."Language, Counter-Memory,Practice:
Selected Essays and Interviews.Trans. Donald F. Bouchard and Sherry Simon.
Ithaca:Cornell UP, 1977. Trans. of "Pr6facea transgression."Critique 195-96
(Aug-Sept. 1963): 751-69.
Guerlac,Suzanne. "'Recognition'by a Woman!A Reading of Bataille's L'Erotisme."
YaleFrench Studies78 [On Bataille ] (1990): 90-105.
Halley, Michael. ".... And a Truthfor a Truth:Bartheson Bataille."Eroticismin French
Literature.Columbia,SC: U of South Carolina,1983.
Hollier, Denis. "Bataille'sTomb."October33 (Summer 1985): 73-102.
Jay, Martin. "In the Empire of the Gaze: Foucault and the Denigration of Vision in
TwentiethCenturyThought."Foucault:A CriticalReader.Ed. David CouzensHoy.
New York:Basil Blackwell, 1986.
Piel, Jean."Batailleet le monde:De la 'Notionde d6pense'a 'Lapartmaudite.'"Critique
195-96 (Aug.-Sept. 1963): 721-69.
Simon, Sherry. "Figures of Transgression:Foucault and the Subject of Literature."
Discours social-Social discourse 2.1-2 (1989): 175-86.
Stoekl, Allan. Writing,Politics, Mutilation:The Cases of Bataille, Blanchot, Roussel,
Leiris, and Ponge. Minneapolis:U of MinnesotaP, 1985.
Suleiman, Susan Rubin. Subversive Intent: Gender, Politics, and the Avant-Garde.
Cambridge:HarvardUP, 1990.
Thomas, Chantal."Contrele sexe fade."Magazine littiraire 243 (June 1987): 28.
30

This content downloaded from 86.24.47.10 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:48:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions