The Politics of Literature

Author(s): Jacques Rancire

Source: SubStance, Vol. 33, No. 1, Issue 103: Contemporary Thinker Jacques Rancire (2004),
pp. 10-24
Published by: University of Wisconsin Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3685460 .
Accessed: 20/01/2014 14:41
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.

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

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The PoliticsofLiterature
JacquesRanciBre
ofallwhatitdoes
I willstartbyexplaining
whatmytitlemeans-and first
notmean.Thepoliticsofliterature
Itdoesnotdeal
isnotthepoliticsofitswriters.
withtheirpersonalcommitment
tothesocialand politicalissuesand struggles
ofpolitical
oftheirtimes.Nordoesitdealwiththemodesofrepresentation
events
or thesocial structure
and thesocialstrugglesin theirbooks.The syntagma
meansthatliterature
"does" politicsas literature-that
"politicsofliterature"
linkbetweenpoliticsas a definite
thereis a specific
way ofdoingand literature
as a definite
of
practice writing.
I willfirst
Tomakesenseofthisstatement,
briefly
spellouttheideaofpolitics
thatisinvolvedinit.Politicsis commonly
viewedas thepracticeofpowerorthe
ofcollective
embodiment
ofcollective
willsandinterests
andtheenactment
ideas.
orembodiments
taken
that
are
into
account
Now,suchenactments
you
imply
ina commonworld,makingstatements
andnotsimplynoise,
as subjectssharing
What
discussingthingslocatedina commonworldandnotinyourownfantasy.
reallydeservesthenameofpoliticsis theclusterofperceptionsand practices
thatshape thiscommonworld.Politicsis firstofall a way offraming,
among
Itis a partition
ofthesensible,of
sensorydata,a specificsphereofexperience.
thevisibleand thesayable,whichallows (ordoes notallow)somespecific
data
to appear;whichallows ordoes notallow somespecificsubjectstodesignate
themand speakaboutthem.Itis a specific
ofwaysofbeing,ways
intertwining
ofdoingand waysofspeaking.
Thepoliticsofliterature
as literature
thusmeansthatliterature
isinvolved
inthispartition
ofthevisibleandthesayable,inthisintertwining
ofbeing,doing
and sayingthatframesa polemicalcommonworld.
Now thepointis:whatis meantby"literature
as literature"?
Surprisingly,
fewamongthepoliticalorsocialcommentators
ofliterature
havepaid attention
toliterature's
ownhistoricity.
Weknow,however,
thatclassifying
theartofwriting
underthenotionof"literature"
isnotold.Wecantraceitbacktoapproximately
thebeginning
ofthenineteenth
Butcritics
havenotoftendeducedany
century.
toconnect
literature
consequencefromthis.Someofthemhavetrieddesperately
name oftheartofwritingin general)withpolitics
(takenas thea-historical
conceivedas a historical
setofforces,
eventsandissues.Othershavetriedtogive
10

? Board of Regents,Universityof Wisconsin System,2004

SubStance
#103,Vol.33,no. 1,2004

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ThePoliticsofLiterature

11

thiswas doneon a
a specificcontenttothenotionofliterature.
Unfortunately
weak
literature's
to
the
search
foranintransitive
basis,
modernity
byreferring
very
flawed.
therewas no
On
this
the
connection
was
Either
basis,
initially
language.
and politicalaction,with"artfor
literary
intransitivity
wayofbindingtogether
oronehadtoassumea quiteobscure
art'ssake" opposedtopolitical
commitment,
betweenliterary
(conceivedofas thematerialistic
relationship
intransitivity
the
and
the
materialistic
ofrevolutionary
of
signifier)
rationality
politics.
primacy
Sartreproposeda kindofgentleman's
agreement,
byopposingtheintransitivity
ofpoetrytothetransitivity
ofprosewriting.
Poets,he assumed,used wordsas
tothepoliticaluse ofcommunicative
things,and had no commitment
speech.
Prosewriters,
used
words
of
as
tools
communication
and
were
by contrast,
committed
totheframing
ofa commonworld.Butthedistinction
automatically
Afterhavingattributed
theoppositionto thevery
provedtobe inconsistent.
oftwostatesoflanguage,Sartrehad toexplainwhyprosewriters
distinction
likeFlaubertused wordsinthesame"intransitive"
way as did poets.And he
had topursueendlessly
thereasonforthis,
ofclassstruggle
bothinthesadrealities
inthe1850sand intheneurosisoftheyoungGustaveFlaubert.In otherwords,
hehad topursueoutsideofliterature
which
a politicalcommitment
ofliterature,
hehad first
to
on
its
Itis
own
not
a
casual
purported ground
linguistic
specificity.
In fact,theidentification
ora personalfailure.
witha specific
ofliterature
stateor
use of language has no real linguisticrelevance,and it cannotgroundany
ofliterature
or itspoliticalinvolvement.
Moreover,itprovesvery
specificity
in
its
and
we
have
to
deal
with
thisambiguityifwe
use,
ambiguous
practical
wanttomoveforwardinunderstanding
literature
as a newsystemoftheartof
as wellas itsrelationship
tothepoliticalpartition
ofthesensible.
writing,
I would highlightthispointby comparingtwopoliticalreadingsofthe
samenovelist,
takentobe theembodiment
of"artforart'ssake"andtheautonomy
ofliterature.
Ihavejustreferred
toSartre's
Fromhispointof
analysisofFlaubert.
was thechampionofan aristocratic
assaultagainstthedemocratic
view,Flaubert
natureofproselanguage.He usedprose'stransparency
ofwordstocreatea new
formof opacity.As Sartreput it,"Flaubertsurroundsthe object,seizes it,
immobilizes
itandbreaksitsback,changesintostoneand petrifies
theobjectas
well."Sartreexplainedthispetrification
as thecontribution
ofbourgeoiswriters
tothestrategy
oftheirclass.Flaubert,
Mallarmdand theircolleaguespurported
tochallengethebourgeoiswayofthinking,
andtheydreamtofa newaristocracy,
livingina worldofpurewords,conceivedofas a secretgardenofpreciousstones
andflowers.
Buttheirprivateparadisewas nothing
butthecelestialprojection
of
theessenceofprivateownership.In ordertoshapeit,theyhad to tearwords
awayfromthosewhocouldhaveusedthemas toolsofsocialdebateandstruggle.
#103,Vol.33,no. 1,2004
SubStance

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

12

JacquesRancibre

So theliterary
ofwordsand objectswentalongwiththebourgeois
petrification
anti-democratic
strategy.
But theargumentof"petrification
ofthelanguage"had a longhistory.
Long beforeSartre,the same argumenthad been made by contemporary
commentators
ofFlaubert.
for
TheypointedoutinFlaubert's
prosea fascination
detailand an indifference
towardthehumanmeaningofactionsand characters
thatledhimtogivethesameimportance
tomaterial
thingsandtohumanbeings.
Barbeyd'Aurevillysummedup theircriticism
by sayingthatFlaubertwas
carryinghis sentencesjust as a workercarrieshis stonesbeforehim in a
Allofthemagreedthathisprosewas thepetrification
wheelbarrow.
ofhuman
actionandhumanlanguage.Andallofthem,likeSartrea century
later,thought
thatthispetrification
was nota mereliterary
device,thatitcarrieda deeppolitical
Now thepointisthatthenineteenth-century
critics
understoodthis
significance.
Forthem,petrification
was thesymptomofdemocracy.
Flaubert's
differently.
betweenhighand low subjectmatters,forany
disregardforany difference
betweenforeground
andbackground,
and ultimately
betweenmen
hierarchy
and things,was thehallmarkofdemocracy.
Indeed,Flauberthad no political
commitment.
He despisedequallydemocratsand conservatives,
and assumed
thatthewritershouldbe unwillingtoproveanything
on anymatter.
Buteven
thatattitudeof"non-commitment"
was forthosecommentators
themarkof
ifnottheequal abilityto be democrat,antidemocracy.Whatis democracy,
democrator indifferent
tobothdemocracyand anti-democracy
? Whatever
Flaubertmightthinkaboutthecommonpeople and therepublicanformof
hisprosewas theembodiment
ofdemocracy.
government,
Therewould be littlepointinprovingthatSartremistooka reactionary
fora revolutionary
argument
argument.
Itismorerelevanttohavea closerlook
at thelinkbetweenthe"indifference"
of a way ofwritingand theopposite
a wayof
statements
itallowsfor.Itappearsthatthreethingsareboundtogether:
without
a
of
as a symptom
writing
"meaning"anything,way readingthiswriting
thathastobeinterpreted,
andtwooppositewaysofmakingthispolitical
reading.
I would liketo show thatthisverylinkbetweena way ofwriting,a way of
canleadus tothecoreofthequestion.The
readingandtwowaysofinterpreting
"indifference"
ofwriting,
thepracticeofsymptomatic
readingand thepolitical
ambiguityofthatreadingarewoveninthesamefabric.And thisfabricmight
be literature
as such:literature
conceivedneither
as theartofwriting
ingeneral
noras a specificstateofthelanguage,butas a historicalmode ofvisibility
of
a
link
between
a
of
of
a
words
and
writing, specific
system meaning
systemof
ofthings.
visibility
Thismodeofvisibility
involvesa specific
ofwords,
systemoftheefficiency
whichdismisses
another
Thecontrasting
of"literature"
as such,literature
system.
SubStance
#103,Vol.33,no. 1,2004

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ThePoliticsofLiterature

13

and
totheoldworldofrepresentation
as themodernregimeoftheartofwriting,
"belles-lettres"
betweentwostatesofthelanguage.Norisit
isnottheopposition
an oppositionbetweenthe servitudeof mimesisand the autonomyof selfreferential
Itistheopposition
oftwowaysoflinking
meaningandaction,
writing.
offraming
therelationbetweenthesayableand thevisible,ofenablingwords
withthepowerofframing
a commonworld.Itis an oppositionbetweentwo
waysofdoingthingswithwords.
of
Thisiswhatwas involvedinthecriticism
madebytheFrenchchampions
theoldliterary
but
new
writers:
not
all
the
regime, onlyagainstFlaubert, against
theyhad lostthesenseofhumanactionandhumanmeaning.Forus,thismeans
thattheyhad lostthesenseofa certainkindof"action"and ofa certainwayof
thelinkbetweenactionand meaning.Whatwas thatsense?In
understanding
ordertounderstand
theoldAristotelian
it,we havetoremember
principlethat
sustainedtheedificeofrepresentation.
Aristotle
assumed,isnota specific
Poetry,
use oflanguage.Poetryis fiction.
Andfiction
ofactingmen.We
is an imitation
knowthatthispoeticprinciple
a hierarchy
alsowas a political
Itsetforth
principle.
the
causal
of
actions
the
of
life
as
itunfolds.
to
rationality
opposing
empiricism
Aristotle
thanhistory,
becausepoetry
builds
Poetry,
said,ismore"philosophical"
ina whole,whilehistory
causalplotsbindingeventstogether
onlytellstheevents,
as theyevolve.Theprivilegeofactionoverlifedistinguished
noblepoetryfrom
base history,
totheextentthatitdistinguished
thosewhoactfromthosewho do
but"live,"whoareenclosedinthesphereofreproductive
andmeaningnothing
lesslife.As a consequence,
was dividedintodifferent
fiction
genresofimnitations.
Therewerehighgenres,devotedtotheimitation
ofnobleactionsandcharacters,
and low genresdevoted to commonpeople and base subjectmatters.The
ofgenresalsosubmitted
ofhierarchical
convenience:
hierarchy
styletoa principle
kingshad toactand speakas kingsdo,and commonpeopleas commonpeople
do.Theconvention
wasnotsimplyan academicconstraint.
Therewasa homology
betweentherationality
ofpoeticfiction
and theintelligibility
ofhumanactions,
conceivedofas an adequationbetweenwaysofbeing,waysofdoingand ways
ofspeaking.
Fromthatpointofview we can figureout,at firstsight,whatupsetthe
ofthebelles-lettres
intheworksofthenewwriters.
defenders
Itwas thedismissal
ofanyprincipleofhierarchy
and subjectmatters,
ofany
amongthecharacters
betweena styleand a subjectmatter.The new
principleof appropriateness
was statedinallitscrudity
therearenohighorlow subject
principle
byFlaubert:
matters.Further,
thereis no subjectmatterat all,because styleis an absolute
way of seeingthings.This absolutizationof stylemayhave been identified
afterwards
withan a-politicaloraristocratic
it
position.ButinFlaubert'stimne,
couldonlybe interpreted
as a radicalegalitarian
thewhole
principle,
upsetting
SubStance
#103,Vol.33,no.1,2004

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Rancibre
Jacques

14

Itturnedupside
theold regimeoftheartofwriting.
systemofrepresentation,
of
as
an
downa certain
ways being,waysof
adequationbetween
put
normality,
doingand ways ofspeaking.The new principlebrokethatadequation.The
ofstylewentalongwiththe"democratic"
absolutization
"aristocratic"
principle
between
It wentalongwiththereversaloftheold hierarchy
ofindifference.
nobleactionandbase life.
a politicsofliterature,
On thatgroundwe couldeasilyconstruct
contrasting
tothehierarchical
law oftheold regime.
ofindifference
theegalitarian
principle
Such a "politicsof literature"could square with de Tocqueville'sidea of
Butwe cannotendmatters
conceivedas the"equalityofconditions."
democracy,
ofthe
thateasily.Democracyis morethana socialstate.Itis a specificpartition
sensible,a specificregimeof speakingwhose effectis to upset any steady
betweenmannersofspeaking,mannersofdoingand mannersof
relationship
being. It is in this sense thatliteratureopposed its "democracy"to the
accountedforthepowerofCorneille's
WhenVoltaire
hierarchy.
representational
argument.He said thathis tragedieswere
tragedies,he made a significant
infront
ofan audiencemadeoforators,
magistrates,
preachersand
performed
for
whom
made
of
an
audience
He
meant
speakingwas the
people
generals.
he assumed,theaudienceofhisowntimewas no
sameas acting.Unfortunately,
longercomposedofthosespecialistsoftheactingword.Is was onlymade,he
andyoungladies."Thatmeantanybody,
said,of"a numberofyounggentlemen
no
The
regimeofwritingwas based on a
nobody, addressee.
representational
was speaking.Andspeakingwas viewed
idea ofthespeech-act.
definite
Writing
as theactoftheoratorwho is persuadingthepopularassembly(eventhough
Itwas viewedas theactofthepreacher
therewas nopopularassembly).
uplifting
his
soulsorthegeneralharanguing troops.Therepresentational
powerofdoing
basedon the
artwithwordswas boundup withthepowerofa socialhierarchy
toappropriate
kindsofspeech-acts
kindsof
capacityofaddressingappropriate
audiences.
andhispeers,onthecontrary,
addressedtheaudiencestigmatized
Flaubert
is this
Literature
byVoltaire:a numberofyoungladiesand younggentlemen.
inwhichthewriter
is anybodyand thereaderanybody.
new regimeofwriting
Thisis whyitssentencesare "mutepebbles."Theyaremutein thesensethat
thewanderingof
theyhad beenutteredlongago byPlatowhenhe contrasted
theorphanlettertothelivinglogos,plantedbya masteras a seed inthesoulof
a disciple,whereitcould growand live.The "muteletter"was theletterthat
wentitsway,withouta father
toguideit.Itwas theletterthatspoketoanybody,
withoutknowingtowhomithad tospeak,and towhomithad not.The"mute"
letterwas a letterthatspoke too muchand endowed anyoneat all withthe
SubStance#103,Vol.33,no. 1,2004

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ThePoliticsofLiterature

15

I proposedto givethe
powerofspeaking.In mybook TheNamesofHistory,
name of "literariness"
to thisavailabilityoftheso-called"muteletter"that
a partitionoftheperceptible
inwhichone canno longercontrast
determines
thosewho speakand thosewho onlymakenoise,thosewho actand thosewho
onlylive.Suchwas thedemocraticrevolutionpinpointedby thereactionary
TheFlaubertian
critics.
ofstylewas originally
tiedtothedemocracy
aristocracy
ofthemuteletter,
anduse inhisor
meaningtheletterthatanybodycanretrieve
herway.
Literaturediscoversat itscorethislinkwiththedemocraticdisorderof
literariness.
Literature
thatspecifically
is theartofwriting
addressesthosewho
shouldnotread. Thisparadoxicalrelationship
is thesubjectmatterofmany
works.I willtakeas a tellingcaseBalzac'snovelTheCountry
nineteenth-century
which
a fableofdemocracy
as literariness.
Thenovel
is,strictly
Parson,
speaking,
recountsthedisastercaused by one singleevent:thereadingof a book by
somebodywho should neverhave read one. It is thestoryof a younggirl,
She livesin thelowerend ofthe
Veronique,thedaughterofan ironmonger.
smallprovincial
townofLimoges,
inan atmosphere
oflabor,religion
andchastity.
One day,as Veroniqueis strolling
withherparents,she sees on displayin a
bookseller'sshopa book adornedwitha niceengraving.
Itis PauletVirginie,
a
novelfamedforitschildlikeinnocence.She buysthebook and readsit.And
everything
goeswrong:thepureand chastebookinthehandsandmindofthe
pureand chastegirlbecomesthemostdangerouspoison.Fromthatday on,
Veroniqueentersa new life,carriedaway,Balzac writes,by "thecultofthe
ShedreamsofmeetingherPaul and livingwithhima
Ideal,thatfatalreligion."
lifeofpureand chastelove.Disasterensues.Veronique,becomerich,entersa
lovelessmarriagewitha bankerofthetown.As a wealthypatron,shemeetsan
honest,noble and pious youngworker.Theyfallin love. He becomescrazy
abouttheirdesperateloveand,inordertofleewithher,he robsandkillsan old
man.He is arrested,
sentenced
todeathanddieswithout
denouncing
Veronique.
Thusthedemocratic
ofthe"dead letter"becomesa powerofdeath.
availability
Thisevilmustbe redeemed.So inthelastpartofthebook,Veronique,
now
a richwidow,retires
toa smallvillageand triestogainhersalvation,guidedby
thecountry
Theparson
parson.Butthemeansofhersalvationareverystrange.
doesnotuplift
hersoulwithpiousdiscourseandtheHolyScriptures.
Thereason
forthisis clear:theevilthatcausedthewholedisasterwas theintrusion
ofa book
inthelifeofsomeonewho shouldneverhaveenteredtheworldofwriting.
The
evilmadebythe"muteletters"cannotbe redeemedbyanyword,notevenby
theWordof God. Redemptionmustbe writtenin anotherkindofwriting,
engravedin thefleshofrealthings.So theparsondoes notmakeVeroniquea
SubStance#103,Vol.33,no. 1,2004

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Rancibre
Jacques

16

He teachesherhowtomakeherfortune
a businesswoman.
nun,buta contractor,
andincreasetheprosperity
ofthevillagebycollecting
theforest's
watersinsluices
and irrigation
trenches.
Thusbarrenlandsbecomerichmeadowsnourishing
written
Andjustbeforedying,
prizedcattle.
Veroniquecanshowherrepentance
in
this
land
indelible
ontheland.Shesays,"I haveengravedmyrepentance
upon
inthefieldsgrown
record.Itis written
as an everlasting
characters,
everywhere
green(...) inthemountains'streamsturnedfromtheircoursesintotheplain,
nowfertile
andproductive."
oncewildandbarren,
Thismakesfora consistent
conclusion.Thecause oftheevilwas thevery
Theredemption
oftheperceptible
groundedon democratic
partition
literarity.
oftheevilis anotherpartition
of
oftheperceptible:
no moretheold hierarchy
ranks,no moretheold privilegeoftheactingword,utteredbythemaster,the
intheveryfabric
priest,orthegeneral,butthenewpowerofa meaningwritten
of"realthings."Thatwhichcanhealtheevildonebythedemocratic"mute"
letteris anotherkindofmutewriting:
a writing
engravedon thebodyofthings
and withdrawn
fromtheattempts
ofthegreedysonsordaughtersofplebeians.
The "mutepebbles" thustakeon anothermeaning.The collapseofthe
representational
paradigmmeansnotonlythecollapseofa hierarchical
system
ofaddress.Itmeansthecollapseofa wholeregimeofmeaning.The rulesand
ofrepresentation
hierarchies
hungontoa definite
linkbetweensayinganddoing.
Ifpoetrywas identified
with
ofactingmen,
withfiction
andfiction theimitation
itwas becausethehighestaccomplishment
ofhumanactionwas supposedtobe
theactionmade byspeakingitself.Itis thatpoweroftheactingwordthatthe
had tomrn
orderof
awayfromthehierarchical
popularoratorsoftheRevolution
rhetorical
cultureand appropriatedforunexpectedaims.Butthatidea ofthe
itselfreliedon a definite
idea ofwhatmeaningmeans:meaningwas
speech-act
a relation
ofaddressfromonewilltoanother.
Thehubofthesystemwas theidea
ofspeakingas usingwordstoproduceappropriate
aims:specificmovesinthe
soulsandmotionsofbodies.
Thenewregimeofliterature
dismissedthatconnection
betweenmeaning
andwilling.Theparsoncouldno longeruse wordstomoralizetotheplebeian's
critics
use themtomoralizetothewriter
daughter.Nor couldthereactionary
Flaubertand teachhimwhichsubjectmatters
and characters
he shouldchoose.
Buttheplebeian'sdaughter,theworker-poets
and themilitantworkerswere
equally subjectedto theconsequencesofthenew regimeofmeaning.In the
had appropriated
1790stheirfathers
forthemselves
thewordsand sentencesof
Ancientrhetoric.But theage ofrhetoricwas over.Meaningwas no morea
betweenone willand another.It turnedout tobe a relationship
relationship
betweensignsand othersigns.
SubStance
#103,Vol.33,no.1,2004

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ThePoliticsofLiterature

17

Suchwasthereverse
ofliterature.
Themuteletters
sideofthedemocracy
tothegreediness
offered
ofplebeianchildren
weretakenawayfrom
themby

anotherkindofmuteness.The reactionary
criticsthemselvesdiscoveredthis
doublebindofliterary
muteness.Thisis thereasontheydidnotteachFlaubert
whathe shouldhavedone.TheyexplainedtotheirreadersthatFlaubertcould
nothave doneotherwise,
becausehe was a writerof"democratic
times."They
didnotbehaveas defenders
ofrulesorteachersofgood taste.Theybehavedas
ofsymptoms.
In so doing,theyendorsedtheidea thatthebooks
interpreters
theywerefaultingforthesinofmuteness"spoke" in anotherway,thatthey
The"muteness"ofliterature
is anotherwayof
spokeoutoftheirverymuteness.
linkbetweenthings
another
andwords.Flaubert'sorHugo'ssentences
speaking,
weremadeof"mutepebbles."Now,intheage ofarcheology,
and
paleontology
whichwas also thetimeofGermanRomanticism,
philology,
everybodyknew
thatpebbles,too,spokeintheirownway.Theyhad no voice.Buttheyworeon
theirverybodies thetestimony
oftheirown history.
And thattestimony
was
muchmorefaithful
thananydiscourse.Itwas theunfalsified
truthofthings,
oforators.
Suchwas thelanguageofliterature,
its
opposedtotheliesandchatter
betweenonewilland
systemofmeaning.Meaningwas no longera relationship
another.Itturnedouttobe a relationship
betweensignsand othersigns.The
had todisplayanddecipherthesignsand symptoms
wordsofliterature
written
in a "mutewriting"on thebodyofthingsand inthefabricoflanguage.
Fromthatpointofview,themuteness
ofliterature
tookon another
meaning,
and thatmeaninginvolveda different
Thisnewidea ofmutewriting
"politics."
had been pioneeredby Vico, when he set out to upset the foundationsof
Aristotelian
ofthe"trueHomer."The "true
poeticsbydisclosingthecharacter
Homer" was nota poetintherepresentational
sense,meaningan inventorof
andrhythms.
His so-calledfictions
werenofictions
fictions,
characters,
metaphors
to him,forhe lived in a timewhen historyand fictionwere mingled.His
thevaliantAchillesor thewise Nestor,werenotcharactersas we
characters,
havethem,butpersonified
becausethemenofhistimehad neither
abstractions,
thesenseofindividuality,
northecapacityforabstraction.
His metaphors
bore
witnessto an age wherethoughtand image,ideas and thingscould notbe
and metresreflected
a timewhenspeakingand
separated.Evenhisrhythms
In short,Homericpoetry,
theessenceofpoetry,
singingwereinterchangeable.
was a languageofchildhood.Itwas,Vicosaid,similartothelanguageofdumb
ideaofthemuteness
ofliterature
was linkedtothisnewregime
persons.Another
ofmeaningthatbound togethermutenessand significance,
poeticalityand
And itinvolvedanotheridea ofpolitics,contrasting
thehistoricity
historicity.
enclosedinthelettertoitsdemocratic
availability.
SubStance#103,Vol.33,no. 1,2004

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Rancibre
Jacques

18

initsnewsense,
Thismightaccountforthewaytheverynameofliterature,
Itis usuallysaidtohaveoccurredaround1800,
replacedtheold "belles-lettres."
and Germainede Stail'sbook,De la littirature,
publishedin1800,is oftentaken
features.
as a turning
First,itdoes
pointhas twostriking
point.Butthisturning
Whatwas changedwas the
notpointoutanynoveltyinthepracticeofwriting.
ofwriting.
Germainede Stailsaidthatshewouldnotchangeanything
visibility
in therulesofbelles-lettres.
Her sole concernwas tohighlight
therelationship
Butthislittleadditionwas
betweentypesofsocietiesand typesofliterature.
ofwriting.And thatnew system
enoughto setup a new systemofvisibility
appearedas a responsetoa definite
politicalissue.Madamede Stallwroteatthe
endoftheFrenchRevolution,
andshewas thechampionofa thirdway,opposed
andtocounter-revolution.
bothtorevolution
Shewantedtoprovethattheideas
oftheEnlightenment,
ofprogressandperfectibility,
the
uttered
by philosophers
had notcaused therevolutionary
as charged.Theyhad
bloodshedand terror,
did notactas wills.Further,
not,becausethe"ideas" statedbythewriters
they
ofmovements
insocietyandcivilization
weretheexpression
thatdo notdepend
on anybody'swill.
Literature
did notactso muchbyexpressingideas and willsas itdid by
Inthiscontext,
thecharacter
ofa timeora society.
literature
displaying
appeared
at thesame timeas a new regimeofwriting,and anotherway ofrelatingto
on thisprinciple:
in
isnotimposingonewillon another,
resting
writing
politics,
thepriestorthegeneral.Itisdisplaying
thefashionoftheorator,
anddeciphering
ofa stateofthings.Itis revealingthesignsofhistory,
thesymptoms
delvingas
thegeologistdoes,intotheseamsand strataunderthestageoftheoratorsand
politicians-theseamsandstratathatunderlieitsfoundation.
Fortyyearsafter
De la littirature,
JulesMicheletwould setouttowritethehistoryoftheFrench
Revolution.He undoubtedly
was a greatRepublican.Buthe was a Republican
of "literarytimes."Whenhe relatedtherevolutionary
festivalsin thesmall
he
referred
the
to testimonies
written
villages, enthusiastically
bylocalorators.
Buthe did notquotethosewritings.
He conveyedwhatwas speakingthrough
theirspeeches:thevoiceofthesoilatharvesttime,orthemudand theclamorof
theindustrialcity'sstreet.In thetimesofliterature,
mutethingsspeakbetter
thananyorator.
Thisisnota matter
ofpolitical
Itisa politics
carried
engagement.
byliterature
TheRepublicanhistorian
itself.
novelistdoes so
putsitintoplay,thereactionary
as well.Thisnew regimeand new "politics"ofliterature
is atthecoreofthesocalledrealistic
novel.Itsprinciple
was notreproducing
factsas theyare,as critics
It
claimed. was displayingtheso-calledworldofprosaicactivitiesas a huge
ofsignsandtraces,
ofobscuresignsthathad tobedisplayed,
poem- a hugefabric
SubStance
#103,Vol.33,no.1,2004

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ThePoliticsofLiterature

19

ofthiscan be
unfoldedand deciphered.The bestexampleand commentary
At
foundin Balzac's TheWildAss's Skin. thebeginningofthenovel,thehero,
Raphael,enterstheshowroomsofan antiqueshop.And there,Balzac writes,
"thisoceanoffurnishings,
worksofartand relicsmadeup
fashions,
inventions,
forhiman endlesspoem."Theshopwas indeeda mixtureofworldsand ages:
theMoor'syatogan
thesoldier'stobacco-pouch
alongsidethepriest'sciborium,
atstained-glass
Stuffed
boasgrinned
windows.
andthegoldslipperoftheseraglio.
A portrait
an Indianchibbouk.
A
ofMadame Du Barryseemedtocontemplate
was
on.
machine
out
the
of
the
and
so
emperor
Augustus,
pneumatic
poking
eye
ofthecuriosity
Themixture
shopmadeallobjectsandimagesequal.Further,

itmadeeachobjecta poeticelement,
a sensitive
form
thatisa fabric
ofsignsas

well.All theseobjectsworea history

on theirbody.Theywerewovenofsigns
Andtheirrandomgathering
thatsummarizedan eraand a formofcivilization.
made a hugepoem,eachverseofwhichcarriedtheinfinite
ofnew
virtuality
Itwas theencyclopediaofallthe
thosesignsinnewcontexts.
stories,
unfolding
timesand all theworlds,thecompostinwhichthefossilsofthemwereblended
on inthesamebook,Balzaccontrasts
Further
together.
Byron,thepoetwhohas
tothetruepoetofthe
expressedwithwordssomeaspectsofspiritualturmoil,
who
time,a poetofa newkind- Cuvier,thenaturalist, has done"truepoetry":
he has rebuiltcitiesoutofsometeeth,repopulatedforests
outofsomepetrified
andrediscovered
foot.Theso-calledrealist
racesofgiantsina mammoth's
traces,
ofhistory
novelistactsinthesameway.He displaysthefossilsandhieroglyphs
He unfoldsthepoeticality,
and civilization.
thehistoricity
written
on thebodyof
Intheold representational
theframeofintelligibility
of
ordinary
things.
regime,
humanactionswas patterned
onthemodelofthecausalrationality
ofvoluntary
linkedtogether
andaimedatdefinite
ends.Now,whenmeaningbecomes
actions,
a "mute"relationofsignstosigns,humanactionsareno longerintelligible
as
successfulor unsuccessfulpursuitsof aims by willingcharacters.And the
charactersareno longerintelligible
throughtheirends.Theyare intelligible
the
clothes
the
theywear, stonesoftheirhousesorthewallpaperoftheir
through
rooms.

Thisresultsina veryinteresting
science,and
linkagebetweenliterature,
a
Literature
does
kind
or
of
The
politics.
side-politics meta-politics. principleof
that"politics"is toleave thecommonstageoftheconflict
ofwillsinorderto
intheunderground
ofsocietyand readthesymptoms
ofhistory.
It
investigate
takessocialsituationsand characters
earth-bound
awayfromtheireveryday,
and displayswhattheytrulyare,a phantasmagoric
fabric
ofpoeticsigns,
reality
whichare historicalsymptomsas well.Fortheirnatureas poeticsignsis the
sameas theirnatureas historical
resultsandpoliticalsymptoms.
This"politics"
SubStance#
103,Vol.33,no. 1,2004

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

20

JacquesRancibre

ofliterature
who
emergesas thedismissalofthepoliticsoforatorsandmilitants,
ofwillsand interests.
conceiveofpoliticsas a struggle
We aremovingtowarda first
answertoourquestionregarding
thepolitics
a twoofliterature
"as literature."
Literature
as suchdisplaysa two-fold
politics,
foldmannerofreconfiguring
sensitivedata.On theone hand,itdisplaysthe
thepowerofthe"mute"letterthatupsetsnotonlythe
powerofliterariness,
oftherepresentational
hierarchies
systembutalso anyprincipleofadequation
betweena way ofbeingand a way ofspeaking.On theotherhand,itsetsin
motionanotherpoliticsofthemuteletter:
theside-politics
ormetapolitics
that
substitutes
ofthemutemeaningwritten
on thebodyofthings
thedeciphering
forthedemocratic
oftheletter.
chattering
The duplicityof the "mute letter"has two consequences. The first
consequenceregardstheso-called"political"or "scientific"
explanationof
literature.
Sartre'sflawedargument
aboutFlaubertis nota personaland casual
mistake.Moredeeply,itbearswitnesstothestrangestatusofcriticaldiscourse
aboutliterature.
Foratleast150years,daringcritics
havepurportedtodisclose
thepoliticalimportofliterature,
tospelloutitsunconscious
tomakeit
discourse,
confesswhatitwas hidingand revealhow itsfictionsor patternsofwriting
themarketofsymbolic
unwittingly
cipheredthelaws ofthesocialstructure,
and
of
all
the
structure
the
field.
But
those
goods
literary
attemptsto tellthe
inMarxianorFreudiankey,inBenjaminian
truth
aboutliterature
orBourdieusian
Thepatterns
of
key,raisethesameproblemthatwe havealreadyencountered.
theircritical
relied
on
the
same
of
explanationof"whatliterature
says"
system
thepractice
ofliterature
itself.
Notsurprisingly,
meaningthatunderpinned
they
Inthesameway,theyendorsed
asSartre.
veryoftencameuponthesameproblem
as new critical
on literature
the"social" and "political"interpretations
insights
ofnineteenth-century
thepatternstheyhad touse to
conservatives.
Further,
on
revealthetruth literature
arethepatterns
framed
itself.
byliterature
Explaining
close-to-hand
realitiesas phantasmagorias
bearingwitnesstothehiddentruth
ofa society,thispatternofintelligibility
was theinventionofliterature
itself.
on
the
truth
the
in
surface
the
out
Telling
bytraveling
underground,
spelling the
unconscioussocial textlyingunderneath-thatalso was a plotinventedby
literature
itself.
ofBaudelaire's
theprocess
explainedthestructure
Benjamin
imagery
through
ofcommodification
andthetopographical
ofpassagesand loitering.
But
figures
theexplanation
makessenseon thegroundofa definite
modelofintelligibility
themodelofdeciphering
theunconscioushieroglyph,
framedbynineteenthre-elaborated
andborrowedfromhimbyBenjamin.
literature,
century
byProust,
Benjaminrefersto theMarxistanalysisofthecommodityas a fetish.Butthe
SubStance
#103,Vol.33,no. 1,2004

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ThePoliticsofLiterature

21

to allow forthe
Balzacian paradigmoftheshop as a poem had to existfirst,
as a phantasmagoria,
a thingthatseemsobviousat
analysisofthecommodity
firstglancebut actuallyprovestobe a fabricofhieroglyphsand a puzzle of
stemsfromtheBalzacianshop.And
theologicalquibbles.Marx's commodity
canaccountforBaudelaire'spoetry,
sinceBaudelaire's
theanalysisoffetishism
takesplacenotso muchinthepassagesoftheParisianboulevardsas it
loitering
does inthesameBalzacianshoporworkshop.The symptomatic
readingthat
ofall
ofhistorical
orsociologicalinterpretation
was first
underpinsthepractices
a poeticalrevolution.
And thesescienceshad toborrowfrom"naive"literature
thepatterns
forhighlighting
itsnaivetdand tellingthetruthaboutitsillusions.
itself.The politicsof
Now, thesecond consequenceconcernsliterature
of
literature
out
to
two
of
the
turns
be theconflict
"muteletter":the
politics
and thepoliticsofsymptomatic
politicsofliterariness
reading.Balzac'sCountry
Parsonstillis a good caseinpoint.Theevildonebydemocratic
literariness
hasto
in
the
be redeemedbythepowerofa writing
flesh
of
But
engraved
things.
very
thisfictional
solutionis a dead-endforliterature
itself.
Wereittakenatfacevalue,

itwouldmeanthatthewriter
muststopwriting,
mustkeepsilent
andcedethe

whoknowtherightwaytobindmentogether,
theright
place totheengineers,
in
the
flesh
of
This
was
not
a
to
write
without
words
way
simply fictional
things.
invention.It was thecoreoftheutopiaspelledout in the1830s,a fewyears
beforeBalzac wrotehisnovel,bytheSaint-Simonian
engineersand "priests":
Whatis needed tobindpeople
no morewords,no morepaper or literature.
is railwaysand canals.
together
ofcourse.Buthe spentfiveyearscompleting
Balzac didnotstopwriting,
thebook.He rewrote
inordertohave
itandrearranged
theorderofthechapters
the hermeneuticplot matchthe narrativeplot. But he failedto solve the
contradiction.
did not oppose therealisticwriterto the
That contradiction
moralist.
ofthepoliticsofliterature.
Christian
Itwas theself-contradiction
The
novelistwritesforpeoplewho shouldnotreadnovels.Theremedytotheevil
thatheevokesis anotherkindofwriting.
Butthatotherkindofwriting,
pushed
totheextreme,
meansthesuppression
ofliterature.
Thepolitics
ofliterature
carries
a contradiction
thatcanbe solvedonlybyself-suppression.
Thiscontradiction
is atplayinthecase oftheapoliticalwriteras wellas in
thewriterwho wantstoconveya politicalmessageand heal socialproblems.
WhenFlaubertwroteMadameBovary,
hewas unwillingtodenounceanymoral
orsocialtrouble.He onlywantedto"do" literature.
Butdoingliterature
meant
betweenlow and highsubjectmatters;itmeant
erasingtheold differences
was tomakeart
dismissing
anykindofspecific
language.Theaimofthewriter
invisible.ThemistakeofEmmaBovary,by contrast,
was herwilltomakeart
SubStance#103,Vol.33,no. 1,2004

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

22

JacquesRanciEre

inherhouse,a pianoinherparlor,and
visible,toputartinherlife- ornaments
Flaubert
woulddistinguish
hisartfromthatofhischaracter
poetryinherdestiny.
art
in
his
book,
and
it
by putting only
making invisible.In orderto tracethe
border-line
his prosehad to go
separatinghis artfromthatofhis character,
overboard
onthemuteness
ofcommonlife.Thatnewkindofmutewriting
would
nolongerbe thesilentlanguageengravedinthefleshofmaterial
Itwould
things.
fittheradicalmutenessofthings,
whichhaveneither
willnormeaning.Itwould
initsmagnificence,
thenonsenseoflifeingeneral.Theproseoftheartist
express,
itselffromtheproseofeverydaylifeinsofaras itwas stillmuter,
distinguished
stillmoredeprivedof"poetry."
Thatotherkindofmutewriting
resultsinanotherkindofself-suppression.
In Flaubert'slast novel,Bouvardet Pccuchet,
the two clerksfailin all their
endeavorstomanagetheirlifeaccordingtotheprinciples
intheirbooks
written
ofmedicine,agronomy,
archeology,
geology,philosophy,
pedagogy,etc.In the
endtheydecidetogo backtotheiroldjob ofcopying.Insteadoftrying
toapply
thewordsofthebooksinreallife,theywillonlycopythem.Thisisgoodmedicine
forthediseaseofliterariness
anditspoliticaldisorder.
Butthisgoodmedicineis
theself-suppression
ofliterature.
Thenovelisthimself
has nothingmoretodo
thanto copythebooksthathischaracters
aresupposedto copy.In theend he
has toundohisplotandblurtheboundaryseparating
theproseof"artforart's
sake" fromtheproseofthecommonplace.When"artforart'ssake" wantsto
undoitslinktotheproseofdemocracy,
ithas toundo itself.
Once more,itsis nota matterofpersonalfailure.Balzac's Christianand
conservative
commitment
comesup againstthesamecontradiction
as Flaubert's
nihilism.The same goes fortherevolutionary
attemptsto create,out ofthe
hermeneutic
a languagethatwouldmakelifeclearertoitself,
powerofliterature,
and changetheself-interpretation
oflifeintoa newkindofpoem,takingpartin
theframing
ofa newworldand a newcollective
life.In thetimesoftheParisian
Commune,Rimbaudcalledfora new poetrythatwould,as he
revolutionary
describedit,no longergiveitsrhythm
toaction,butrunbeforeit,in advance.
He calledforpoemsfilledwithnumbersand harmony,
fora languageopento
thefivesenses,a languageofthesoulforthesoul,containing
smells,
everythingsounds and colors.Thisidea ofa "poetryofthefuture"was in linewiththe
romanticidea ofancientGreekpoetryas themusicofa collectivebody.And it
mightsoundstrangethatsuchan idea ofpoetrycametotheforeinthetimesof
freeverseandprosepoetry,
whenpoetrywasbecominglessand lessa matter
of
andmetre,
andmoreandmorea matter
ofimage.Butthisinconsistency
rhythm
is consistent
withthepoliticsofliterature
thatputtheBalzacianshopintheplace
ofthetragicchorus.Accordingtothelogicofliterature,
therhythm
ofthefuture
SubStance
#103,Vol.33,no. 1,2004

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ThePoliticsofLiterature

23

andfossilsofthecuriosity
had tobe inventedoutofthecommodities
shop.The
Rimbaldianantiqueshop was thepoorman's shop.It was theshop ofthose
ofhis"Alchemy
oftheWord":stupid
scrapsthatRimbaudlistsatthebeginning
erotic
door
little
books,
paintings,
panels,sillyrefrains....
popularengravings,
ofa living
Rimbaudwantedto connecttwoideas ofpoetry:poetryas rhythm
body and poetryas archaeologyofthemutesignssleepingon thebody of
ordinary
things.Buttherewas no pathfromtheshopofthemutesignsand the
ofoutmodedrefrains
tothepoetryofthefuture
and thehymnofthe
poeticality
collective
body.
Literature
had becomea powerfulmachineofself-interpretation
and selfpoeticzationoflife,converting
anyscrapofeverydaylifeintoa signofhistory
andanysignofhistory
intoa poeticalelement.
Thispolitics
ofliterature
enhanced
thedreamofa newbodythatwould givevoicetothisreappropriation
ofthe
on anydoorpaneloranysilly
written
powerofcommonpoetryandhistoricity
refrain.
Butthispowerofthemutelettercouldnotresultin"bringing
back"this
The
had
to
the
collective
remain
the
livingbody.
"livingbody"voicing
hymn
utopia ofwriting.In thetimesoffuturist
poetryand Sovietrevolution,the
Rimbaldianprojectwouldbe attunedtotheidea ofanew lifewhereartand life
would be moreor less identical.Afterthosedays,itwould comeback to the
poetryof thecuriosityshop,thepoetryof theoutmodedParisianpassages
celebratedby Aragonin his Paysande Paris.Benjaminin turnwould tryto
rewrite
thepoem,tohavetheMessiahemergefromthekingdomoftheDeathof
outmodedcommodities.But thepoem of thefutureexperiencedthesame
contradiction
as the novel of bourgeoislife,and the hymnof the people
the
as theworkofpureliterature.
The lifeof
experienced same contradiction
literature
is thelifeofthiscontradiction.
The"critical,"
ofliterature
whofeel
"political'or"sociological"
interpreters
that
the
of
contradiction
literature
callengedbymyanalysismightreply
goes
backtotheoldillusionofmistaking
theinterpretation
oflifeforitstransformation.
has beenan attempt
toquestiontheoppositioninbothways.
Mypresentation
Ihave triedtosubstantiate
theideathatso-calledinterpretations
arepolitical
First,
totheextentthattheyarereconfigurations
ofthevisibility
ofa commonworld.
Second,I wouldsuggestthatthediscoursecontrasting
interpretive
changeand
"real" changeis itselfpartofthesamehermeneutic
plotas theinterpretation
thatitchallenges.
Thenewregimeofmeaningunderpinning
bothliterature
and
socialsciencehasmadetheverysentence
contrasting
"changingtheworld"and
theworld"intoan enigma.Theinvestigation
ofthis"politicsof
"interpreting
thatismuchmorethata matter
literature"
ofwriters
mayhelpus tounderstand
thisambiguity
andsomeofitsconsequences.
Thepolitical
dimension
ofliterature
SubStance#103,Vol.33,no. 1,2004

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

24

JacquesRancibre

has beenusuallyexplainedthroughsocialscienceand politicalinterpretation.

matters
Byturning
upside-down,I havebeenunwillingtoaccountforpolitics
and socialsciencesthrough
themeretransformations
ofpoeticalcategories.
My
wishhasbeensimplytoproposea closerlookattheirintertwinings.
Paris

#103,Vol.33,no. 1,2004
SubStance

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:41:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions