Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
-
Upload
ile-sartuzi -
Category
Documents
-
view
226 -
download
1
Transcript of Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
-
7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
1/13
The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Diacritics.
http://www.jstor.org
Bataille in Theory: Afterimages (Lascaux)Author(s): Suzanne GuerlacSource: Diacritics, Vol. 26, No. 2, Georges Bataille: An Occasion for Misunderstanding (Summer,1996), pp. 6-17Published by: The Johns Hopkins University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1566293Accessed: 03-09-2015 18:34 UTC
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 contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
This content downloaded from 143.107.34.99 on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:34:28 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1566293http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1566293http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/ -
7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
2/13
B T ILLE
N
TH ORY
AFTERIMAGES
LASCAUX)
SUZANNE
GUERLAC
If there is a
single
term
poststructuralism
ould not
live without-at least
within
the
intellectual
circles associated
with the review Tel
quel-it
is
"transgression,"
nherited
from Bataille.
"God-meaning," hilippe
Sollers
writes
in
an
early
essay,
"..
.
is a
figure
of
linguistic
interdictionwhereas
writing-which
is
metaphoricity
tself
(Derrida)-
transgresses... the hierarchic rderof discourseandof the worldassociatedwith t"["La
science de Lautr6amont"
08,
my emphasis].
In
their Dictionnaire des sciences
du
langage
Ducrot
and Todorov declare
grandly
that text "has
always
functioned as a
transgressive
field
with
respect
to
the
system according
to
which we
organize
our
perception,
our
grammar,
ur
metaphysics
and
even
our
science"
[443-44,
my
emphasis].
They
describe
he advent
of
poststructuralism
s a
"Copernican
evolution,"
nd
t
became
customary
to characterize he before
and after of this break
by
referring
o Bataille's
distinctionbetween
"restrained" nd
"general"
conomies.
An influential
essay by
Foucault,
"Pr6face
a la
transgression"
1963),
might
be
considered
he
opening
move
in what
would become
Tel
quel's
appropriation
f Bataille.
Foucault's
essay
examinesBataille's L'drotisme
1955),
a
study
hat heorized
ransgres-
sion
in
a
complex
elaborationwhich
articulated
hilosophical
discourse
(Hegel/Kojeve)
with
a
"sociological"
discourse of the sacred
(Caillois).
Foucault's
reading
of the text
removes the
transgression
f
eroticism
from
boththese discursivehorizonsand moves it
toward ate
Heidegger
(an
ontology
of the
limit)
and
Nietzsche. If one
of Bataille's most
radical
gestures
was to insert
he
ethnographic
istinction
acred/profane
nto
philosophi-
cal
discussion,
Foucault's
analysis
reinscribes
ransgression
within
the
intertextual ield
of
philosophy,
radicalized,
of
course,
through
the inclusion of
the
"marginal"
igure,
Nietzsche,
and
the
philosopher
who announced
the end
of
philosophy,
Heidegger.
Foucault'srewritingof Bataillemayreadphilosophyagainst tself,mayevenpropose he
transgression
of
philosophy;
nevertheless,
t
is structured
by
the
vicissitudes of
philo-
sophical
discourse.Batailleon the otherhandhadconfronted
philosophy
with
something
radically
other-tout autre.
In "Pr6face la
transgression,"
oucault
defined
ransgression
s
"a
gesture
concern-
ing
the limit." He
presented
t as a flash of
lightning,
an
image
that
not
only figures
transgression
but also emblematizes he
move into
what will
become the
philosophical
register
of
poststructuralism.
t
traces
a
line,
a line that
igures
he
Heideggerian
ontology
of
limitation,
he
coming
into
being
(or
appearance)
f
beings
on
the
horizonof
Being;
it
suggeststhe limit of the ontologicaldifference betweenBeing andbeings.
Anticipating
Derrida
through
Heidegger,
Foucault
analyzed
transgression
as an
eventof
difference,
alluding
o
Blanchot's
"principe
e
contestation" nd
o a Nietzschean
notionof
affirmation.
"Might
not the instantaneous
lay
of the limit and
transgression
be
today
the essential
test of
a
thinking
of
'origin'
which Nietzsche
bequeathed
o us... a
thinking
hatwould be
absolutely,
and
n
the same
movement,
a
Critique
andan
Ontology,
a
thinking
hatwould
think
finitudeand
being?"
Foucault759].
Transgression
becomes
identifiedwith a
"philosophy
of
eroticism"
which
plays
on Sade's
"philosophie
dans
le
boudoir"),
a
gesture
thattransvalues
philosophy
from
the realm of
cognitive
or
rational
activity
to
"an
experience
of
finitude
and
of
being,
of
the
limit and of
transgression."
he
6
diacritics 26.2: 6-17
This content downloaded from 143.107.34.99 on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:34:28 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
3/13
"philosophy"
of eroticism
is
thus
a
"test/ordeal
[Vpreuve}
of the
limit,"
one that "no
dialectical
movement,
no
analysis
of fundamental
aws
[constitutions]
and of
their
transcendental
oundation
leur
sol]"
can
help
us think.
Foucaultthen asks a rhetorical
question
hatcould
be said
to
structure
muchof the discourse
of
theory
n the next decade:
"Would
t
be
an
exaggeration,
o
say,"
he
asks,
"..
. that
it
would
be
necessary
to find a
language
for the
transgressive
hat would be
what dialectic
has
been
for contradiction?"
[759].
In this
way
Foucault established
transgression
as an alternative o the
machine
of
dialectical
contradiction.
Attuned
to the recent discoveries
of
structuralism,
which had
begun
to reverse the conventional
understanding
f relations
between the
subject
and
language
(the
subject
s no
longer
considered
master
of his
or
her
anguage
but
structured
by
it),
Foucault
announced hat "the
gesture
of
transgression
eplaces
the
movement of
contradiction
by
plunging
the
philosophical
experience
into
language"
[767].
Here
is
where the
paradox
of the
transgression
of
philosophy
comes in.
For if Foucault
poses
transgressionoreroticism)as a philosophy, he positionof thephilosopher andto this
extent
philosophy
itself)
is said to be
transgressedby
the
limitlessness
of
language:
the
philosopher,
Foucault
writes,
finds
"not
outside
language,
but in it... the
transgression
of his
philosophical
being"
[767].
From his
point
on,
theorists
will
look
to
transgression
as
a
way
of
getting beyond
the constraintsof
Hegelian
dialectic.
Taking
their
cue
from
Foucault,
hey
will
begin
to
identify transgression
with
language.
Foucault's
nterpreta-
tion of
transgression nticipates-we
could even
say programs-the
role
Bataille
will
be
assigned
n the
context
of
poststructuralist
heory.
t
prepares
he
way
forthe
appropriation
of
Bataille-librarian, writer,
editor,
militant,
"madman"-as
theorist.
Fromhere t is buta shortstepto theidentification f transgression nd ext.Phillippe
Sollers
takes this
step
four
years
later n "Le toit:
Essai
de
lecture
syst6matique"
1967),
an
essay
that
updates
Foucault's
analysis
of Bataillefrom
a
perspective
nformed
by
more
recent
developments
n
poststructuralist
hought,
since Derrida's
De
la
grammatologie
had
appeared
n
the interim.Sollers follows the
basic lines of Foucault's
nterpretation,
but he adds
an
important
lement
by
interpreting
nterdictionas
a
discursive
constraint
upon
language.
"Theworld
of
discourse,"
he
writes,
"is the
mode
of
being
of
interdiction
..
interdiction
s the
signifier
itself
(in
the world of
discourse)" ["Le
toit"
29].
This
interpretation,
mplicit
in
the
Foucault
essay,
is not
unjustified,
but Bataille
does not
restrict he
meaning
of
interdiction
n
this
way.
In
L'drotisme,
or
example,
interdiction
is said to
open
up
the worldof
a rationaland ordered
ivilization
which
it
marks
off
from
the animalworld
of
nature,
but
t
is also characterized s an
affective
experience
of horror
before
the sacred.
It
is
precisely
the othernessof the
sacredwhich resists
the
conceptual
unity
of
philosophy.
In
L'drotisme,
nterdiction
s
not so
simple.
It
belongs
to the
profane
world
it
opens,
but also
to
the world of the sacred.
Sollers insists on an
exclusively
linguistic interpretation
of
interdiction,
while
at the same time
retaining
the
broad
philosophical
(or
ontological)
claims
Foucault
had
made
for
eroticism.
The net effect
is
an inflation
of
the claims
made
for
transgression
n
the textualor
poetic register,
claims
that then inform
poststructuralistheory
of
writing
and
text.
Once interdiction is isolated from what Bataille had referred to as the "dual
operation"
f
interdiction/transgression,
ndonce it is
interpreted
s
discursive
constraint,
the next
step
s
to articulatewhat
Foucaulthad
baptized
he
"philosophy
f eroticism"with
psychoanalysis,
the
discourse
that theorizes eroticism. Interdiction
s identified with
repression,
which
reveals
ts
operations hrough inguistic
parapraxis.
t
is
then
associated
with
language
in
the
mode of
representation
nd
opposed
to
transgression,
now
charac-
terized as "a
space
of
organic
effervescence of
language" by analogy
with
various
practices
of
avant-garde
oetics.
A
play
of the
signifier
resists he
constraints hatstructure
meaning
in
the
ordinary
course of useful
communication:
his is
the
meaning given
to
transgressionn the formula"eroticism s the antimatter f realism" "Letoit"36].
diacritics
/
summer 1996
7
This content downloaded from 143.107.34.99 on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:34:28 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
4/13
When
transgression
s
analyzed
n
exclusively linguistic
terms,
that
s,
in
relation
o
the "fundamental candal of the arbitrariness
f the
sign,"
it becomes
writing
(in
the
emerging
poststructuralist
ense),
as Sollers announces
bluntly
at the end of
his
essay.
"'Eroticism
represents
a
reversal,'"
Sollers
writes,
citing
Bataille.
He
then
adds
this
programmaticommentary:"writing akeschargeof thisreversal romthispointon...
it
then has
the same statusand
ultimately
he
same
meaning
as
eroticism."With
Sollers,
then,
as he states
categorically,"writing inally
takes over
from
transgression"
"Le
toit"
41].
Construed
as
writing,
transgression
or
the
now-theoretical
erm
"eroticism")
s
inscribedwithinthe
polemical
opposition
hat
pits writing,
as what
Sollers calls
"l'envers
de la
litt6rature,"
gainst
"literature." he
subversionof
"literature"
y
theory,
charged
with
energies
of
cultural
evolt,
remainedat the
heartof
Tel
quel's agenda.
Not
only
does
the
polemical edge,
discernible n
Foucault,
become
more
pronounced
n
this
context;
n
"Le toit"
Sollers
stages
an
epic polemos
within
eroticism
itself,
a
"dialectic
of war"
between
transgression
andinterdiction.
In
L'6rotisme,
Bataille
insists that
the two
moments
of
the
dual
operation
of
eroticism are
so
intimately
bound
up
with
one
another
as
to
be
all
but
indistinguishable.
The
terms
"interdiction" nd
"transgression"
ecome
meaningful
only
subjectively,
hat
is,
as affective
experiences
of
attraction
nd
repulsion,
which
distinguish
he two
realms
of the
sacredandthe
profane.
Bataille
presents
his
as
a
dance,
a
ronde,
or
the
experience
of
seduction
thatmoves us
toward he
sacred
object
and the
feeling
of
horror
hat
repels
us from it
are
closely
interrelated.
When Sollers
stages
the
relation
between
interdiction
and
transgression
as
conflict,
it
becomes a
matter
of
choosing
sides;
in
spite
of his
disclaimer to the contrary,"Le toit" becomes an apology for transgression.Once a
dialectic
of war
replaces
Bataille's
ntimatedance
(ronde),
and
transgression
s
set
against
interdiction,
other
binary
oppositions
are
pulled
into the
argument.
On the side of
interdiction,
"literature"
omes to
standnot
only
for
representational
iscourse
but also
for
bourgeois
oppression;
writing,
which
is
transgressive,
belongs
with
poetry,
madness,
excess,
and
revolution-or
at least a
"revolutionof
poetic language."
When
"Le toit"
transposes
Bataille's notions
of
eroticism
and
transgression
nto
the
register
of
language,
writing,
and
text,
the
signifier
replaces
he
woman
as
erotic
object
and
anguageprovides
a
field of
theory-or
what
Sollers will
call,
looking
back
on
it
"the
dreamof
theory"-
where
linguistics,psychoanalysis,
deconstructive
philosophy(Heidegger,Derrida),
and
a
certain
marxism nteract.I
Transgression
s
thus
reformulated s
text,
and text
(considered
n
relation
to the
productivity
of
signifiance)
is
analyzed
on a
model
of
modern
poetry
that
devolves
from
Mallarm6.
n
the
context
of
poststructuralist
heory,
poetry
s
construed
as
action,
in
an
unusual
displacement
of
Val6ry
and
Sartre. n
philosophical
erms
Hegel)
action
mplies
negativity
(see,
for
example,
Kristeva's
"Po6sie
et
negativit6"
1968])
and is
endowed
with
the
force of
critical
negativity,
which
Adorno
heorized
n
his
analyses
of
modern
art.
Theory,
n
the context of
Tel
quel,
radicalizes
he
modernist
momentwe
find
in
Adorno,
pressing
it
towarda certain
avant-gardism,
nd
it
does so
with
the
help
of
Bataille. The
negativityKristevaascribes owriting s double.Inaddition o the
Hegelian
negativity
of
consciousness
and
of
action that
Blanchot had
brought
to
bear
on
language
in
"La
litt6rature
t
le
droit
t
la
mort,"
Kristevaaffirms
that
another
"irrecuperable"
egativity
is
at
play
on
the
level of
genotext,
or
of
signifiance
proper.
n
"How
Does
One
Speak
to
Literature?"he
writes:
Writing
stablishes
a
different
egality..,
it
brings
together
n
a
heteronomous
space
the
naming
ofphenomena
their
entry
nto
symbolic
aw)
and
the
negation
1. SeeSollers's
preface
o thereedition
f
Theoried'ensemble
1980).
8
This content downloaded from 143.107.34.99 on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:34:28 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
5/13
of
these
names
(phonetic,
semantic
and
syntacticshattering).
This
supplemen-
tary
negation
(derivative
negation,negation
of the homonomic
negation)
eaves
the
homogeneous space
of meaning (of naming
or,
if
one
prefers,
of
the
"symbolic")
and
moves,
without
"imaginary" ntermediary...
towards what
cannot
be
symbolized
one
might
say
toward
the
"real"). [
111,
my emphasis]
This is Kristeva's
passage
to the sacred
(via
psychoanalysis),
for
this account of
the
legality
of
writing
repeats
he movement
of Bataille's
accountof
interdiction/transgres-
sion
inL'6rotisme
and,
even more
explicitly,
n
an earlierversionof
that ext
subsequently
published
as
"L'histoire
de l'6rotisme."Here
interdiction
s
presented
as a
negation
of
nature
le
donne)
which founds
culture,
marking
he
emergence
of
man from
animal.This
negation
hen announcesanother
"un
mouvement... de
contrecoup"),
negation
of
the
order et
up by
the first
negation.
The first
step
corresponds
o interdiction
ndthe
second
to
transgression
n
this
(almost)
narrative ersionof
the "dual
operation"
f
interdiction/
transgression.This is the movement Bataille calls a "renversement es alliances,"to
which we shall
return,
momentarily,
n relation to the miracle of
Lascaux.2
Kristeva's
"negation
of the
homonomic
negation"
epeats
he
second-ordermovement
of
transgres-
sive
negation.
In
theory,
this becomes the law of
writing.
As Foucaulthad
anticipated
n
1963,
then,
ransgression
id
become
the
paradigm
or
a "nondialectical
hinking,"
ne
characterized
y
the
"irrecuperable
egativity"
Kristeva
theorizes first
in
connection
with
the
rejet
and then with
the
abject.3
In
order o
obtain
a
"poststructuralist"
some
would
say
"postmodern")
ataille,
however,
it was
necessary
to
subject
him to
readings
hatevacuated rom
his
writing
not
only
the
dimension
of
the
sacred,butalsoeverytraceof theconstellationof termsassociatedwithwhatBataillecalls
the fictive-the
image,
the
figure,
representation,
ramatization,
nd so
forth.4
When he
is
portrayed
s a dialectical
opposite-a
kind of
"antimatter"-to Breton
whose
fascina-
tion
with the
image
is well
known),
he
can
be identified
with the law
of
writing.
So intense
was the resistance o realism-and
the
distaste
for
Surrealism-that all
modes
of
image
and
figuration
became
suspect.
It
was
necessary
to
subject
Bataille to what
I call
"modernist"
eadings,
where
"modernist"s
understood
n
the sense
of Adorno
and also
in the sense of "modern
art,"
as
this
termwas
deployed by
the art
critic
ClementGreen-
berg
and
by
those who called themselves "new
critics"
n
the
literary
domain.
When
French
theory migrated
to
the
United
States,
it was
received
within this
modernist
atmosphere.
n Blindnessand
Insight
(1971)
PauldeMan
analyzed
hecontact
between American
literary
criticism and French
structuralism,
an
amalgamation
he
labeled
"new new
criticism." As he
points
out,
both
new
criticism
and
stucturalism
2.
Bataille,
"L'histoire de
l'drotisme"
[66-67].
After
presenting
the
"renversementdes
alliances"
narratively sequentially),
Bataille
qualifies
this
gesture:
"I
want..,
to insist
on the
act
that
his doublemovementdoes not
even
imply
distinct
phases.
For
clarity
ofexposition,
I
can
speak
of
two moments
deux
temps].
But it is a
question of
an
ensemble
[ensemble
solidaire]
and one
cannot
truthfully
en
v6rit6]
speak of
the one without
indicating
the other"
["L'histoire
de
l'rotisme"
67].
The "ensemble olidaire" is
presented
n
L'6rotisme
by
the
metaphorof
la
ronde.
3.
In La
r6volution u
angage
o6tique
nd
n Pouvoirs e
l'horreur,
espectively.
he erm
rejet
is
invoked
by
Bataille in "L'histoirede
l'rotisme"
(in
connection
with the
negation
of
the
donn6associated
with the
movement
of
interdiction)
66].
4.
Here
are
just afew
of
the
manyreferences
o
such terms n
"Histoirede
l'drotisme"
alone:
"the
privileged
domain
of
love is
fiction" [141];
"A
sacrifice
is no
less
fictive
than a
novel..,
it
is
not
a
crime
but a
representation, form of play
[un
jeu]"
[92];
"What
xcites animals
directly
...
affects
men
throughsymbolic
igures.
This
is not a
secretion,
but a
meaningful
elaborated
image"
[128].
In
this connectionsee also the discussion
of
the
object
of
erotic
desire,
in contrast
to the eroticism
of
the
orgy
which "has
the
defect of
not
being
clearly
limited,
of
being
informeand
of
never
offering any
clear
feature [aspect
saisissable]
to
desire"
[123].
Concerning
the
erotic
objectand its dialectic,see Guerlac, "Recognition,bya Woman
diacritics
/ summer 1996
9
This content downloaded from 143.107.34.99 on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:34:28 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
6/13
refusedauthorial
ntentionand
referentiality
r
representation.
or he
new
critics,
de
Man
writes,
literary
language
was
"entirely
autonomous
and without exterior referent."
Criticism
nvolved
an "an ronic reflexion of the
[formal]
unity
it had
postulated"
28].
Modern
painting
was
likewise consideredas an autonomous
object,
endowednot
merely
with aestheticbut
also with
existential
orce.
Modernist
riticismshared
with Tel
quel
an
appreciation
of Mallarme's
purification
of
meaning
and of the aesthetics of
difficulty
associated
with
it. The two also
sharedan aversion o Surrealism.6
he common
ground,
then,
between
modem
art,
new
criticism,
and French
theory
was a
critique
of
represen-
tation that
implied
a
refusal of
figuration
n all its forms. All of this contributed o
the
reformulation
f
transgression
s "antimatter f
realism."
Bataille's
study
of Lascaux
presents
ransgression
uite
differently,
hat
s,
in
relation o
a "sacredmoment
of
figuration"
hat involves
a visual realism. Childrenwere
playing,
Bataille writes, near a great tree. A tempest turnedthis tree-tree of knowledge,
perhaps-upside
down,
uprooting
t,
andwhere
the rootshad
been,
the entrance o a cave
was
suddenlyexposed.
"Lascauxou
la
naissance
de
l'art"
s
a
parodicmyth
of
origins-
the
story
of a miracle
hat inks the
origin
of art
o the
origin
of the
species,
that
s,
human
beings
as
subjects
of
transgression.
Bataille rewrites he
miracle of
Greece,
substituting
a
primitive
worldfor
the
classical
one,
a
worldof the sacred
or a worldof
reason.
We
are
carried
back in time to another
hreshold,
hat of the archaic and the
animal-la
bite
humaine.
If
the miracle
of Greece
gives
us the
rational
animal,
the miracle
of Lascaux
yields
man as
"religious
animal."Lascaux
ransfigures
s,
Bataille
writes,
and it does so
througha force of figurationthat transfixes and fascinates, trans-figuresand trans-
fascinates.
Lascaux
transfigures
us-and
doubly
so.
First
there
is the
question
of
origins,
of
a
passage
from animal to
man
that
opened up
our future
(and
our
present).
From bite
humaine,
we are
transfigured
nto etre humain.
But there
s
also
the
question
of
our
ends,
that
is,
of our
transfiguration
nto our
proper
selves,
"religious
animals"-"the man of
work
and
of
technique
reduces himself to
a
means,
of which the
being
who is not
subjugatedby
work,
the animal
being
without
echnique,
s the end"
["Lascaux"
8].
The
defining
characteristic
le
propre]
of the
human
species
is a "desire to
be
filled with
wonder,"
an
"anticipation
f
miracles"
16].
This is the miracle
figured
on
the
walls
and
ceilings
of the
cave, where,
at the same
time,
this desire
and
anticipation
receive
their
response.
If Lascaux
transfigures
us
(of
course much
is
at stake
in
the
identity
of "us" and
"them"),
t also
transfigures
nimality,
andonce
again,
his involves
a
double
gesture.
The
paintings
n the cave
transfigure
he animal
hey
figure, giving
it
not
only
beautiful
orm
but
also a force of
prestige.
It
is
precisely
this
transfiguration-one
that
passes through
the
figure-that
transfigures
us. But at
the same
time,
the
very
seductive force of the
painted
igures
also
transfigures
he
artistswho
created
hem,
transforming
he cavemen
from
animal
(bate
humaine)
into
man,
that
is,
into someone who "resembles us."
Followingin the footstepsof Bataille,moving throughhis text, we enter the ronde,the
circulardance of the
animals
set in
motion
by
our movement
through
he
cave.
At
the
sight
of these
figures
we are
overwhelmed:
"this
ncomparable
eauty
andthe
sympathy
t awakens n us
leave us
painfullysuspended
suspendu]"
14].
Our
religious
emotion
is
doubled,
according
o
Bataille,
by
our sense of the
prestige
the
images
must
have held for those
contemporary
o theircreation. f art"is
bornof emotion
andaddresses
5. De Man
speaks
of
"American
ormalism"
in
this
context.
6.
I
am
referring
o the critical
writingsof
Greenberg
in
practice,
artists in New York
elt
the
impactof Cubismand of Surrealismmore or less together).
10
This content downloaded from 143.107.34.99 on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:34:28 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
7/13
itself to emotion"
(in
a
dynamic circularity
igured
by
the animal
ronde),
the
sentiment
experienced
by prehistoric
man
is felt
by
us to
parallel
our
own;
it is
a
question
of
the
"sense
of
the miraculous
[sentiment
de
miracle]"
declared o be the
identifying
trait
[le
propre]
of man as
opposed
to the animal.
What
overwhelms
us at Lascaux s
the
"useless
figuration
of these
signs
thatseduce"
[13].
The emotionalcommunication
f
these
figures
requires
he
temporal eap
of
millenniaand s
catastrophic
n its
effect. It
overwhelms
us
(nous renverse)
ike the tree
overturned
renverse)
by
the
tempest
at the
entrance
o
the
cave
and
exposes
our
roots,
leaving
us
suspended.
Our emotional
response
to
the
communicationof these
figures-our
renversement-is the
sign
of our
transfiguration,
which
performs
or
completes
the
transfiguration
f
the
other-that of
the bete
humaine
into etre
humain.
This
circuit of
emotion,
of
emerveillement,
s
the
miracle.
Communi-
cation,
the
one
that
inks art
and
the
sacred,
performs
he
origin
of art
andthe
origin
of
man
at the
same time-it is a
veritable
origin of
the
work
of
art,
in the
double
sense
of
the
genitive
of the
difference.
All thismeanders,but heconceptual tartingpoint s simple:man s opposed obeast.
The
opposition
s
performed
inguistically
n
the
pronominal
istinction
betweennous
and
il-pronoun
"of
the
nonperson"
see
Benv6niste].
If
the
question
is,
how
to
pass
from
nonperson
o
person?
he
answerwe
receive is
this:
through
an act
of
figuration
eceived
(by
Bataille)
as
an act of
address.
t
is
a
question
of the
origin
of the
species,
but
here we
are
dealing
with a
quite
different kind of
survival-an
afterlife
of
images.
Figuration
performs
the
"enduring
urvival"
of
an
address,
an
address
that crosses
time,
figuring
across
death
with
the
kind
of
posthumous
each
hat
so
movedVictor
Hugo.
WhatBataille
calls "thesacred
moment
of
figuration"
63]
is
catastrophic
n
its
effect,
according
o the
specificmeaningBataillegives to thistermwhenhespeaksof sacrifice: tcollapseslinear
time.7
The
painted igures
communicate o
us,
transferring
ntimate
motion,
and
through
this
operation
the
nonperson
that was
the
man-beast
comes
to resemble
us-"nous
pouvons
dire
qu'il
nous
ressemblait."The
nonperson-il-passes
to the
discursive
position
nous.
The
imperfect
tense of
the
verb
ressembler
traces the
trajectory
of
the
image,
its
survivalto
the
present.
It
signals
the
"enduring
urvival"of
figuration,
which
lets art
communicate
"from
afar"
and
"through
ime
[dans
le
temps]."
"Every
profound
pirit
needs a
mask,"
Nietzsche
wrote
[Beyond
Good
and Evil
51].
Aurignacian
manwas
such
a
spirit-"to
designate
himselfhe
hadto
give
himself
the
mask
of
another..,
he
hid his
features
beneath
he
mask of
the
animal"
63].
At the
same
time,
these
images
of the
nonpersongive
us the "sensible
sign
of our
presence."
Thus,
if
part
of
the miracle
of Lascaux
nvolves the
survival
(durable
survie)
of an
address-the
fact
that,
miraculously,
"these
paintings
have
reached
us
[nous
somme
parvenues]"-this
arrivalmarksour
arrival
oo. When the
animal
bete
humaine)
passes
across
to
resemble
us,
this
marks
the
moment
not
only
of
our
origin
but also of
our end. We
also come
to
resemble
t
as
subject
of
transgression,
r "animal
divin";
his
is the
"secret"
of
the
cave.
Lascaux involves
"the
paradox
of man
adorned
with the
prestige
of
the beast"
[63],
but t
also
involves
a
temporal
paradox.
The cave
artists,
Bataille
writes,
createdwhat
they
represented.
The
figuration
hat
survives
to
arriveat us
(nousparvenir)
s
at the
same
time
areturn:"Theyreturnedo this worldof thesavagery[sauvagerie]of thenight."Bataille
writes
of the cave
artists,
"they
figured
t
with
fervor,
n
anxiety"
70].
The
Aurignacian
man-beastscome
to
resemble
us
just
at
the
moment
hat
we
find
tracesof
ourselves-the
sign
of
our
sensible
presence-in
them,
that
s,
in
their
way
of
becoming
what
they
are
by
7.
The
question
oftime
is
crucial to
Bataille's
notion
ofsacrifice.
See
"Sacrifices"
concerning
timeand
catastrophe:
"La
catastrophe-le
temps
vecu"
[94].
The
discussion
of
time
here
refers
us
to
Bergson
(as
the
abrupt
passage
to
the
question
of
revolution
uggests
Sorel).
For
an
extensive
discussion
of
Bergson
see
my Literary
Polemics:
Bataille,
Sartre,
Val6ry,
Breton
[forthcoming,
StanfordUP, spring1997].
diacritics
/
summer
1996
11
This content downloaded from 143.107.34.99 on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:34:28 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
8/13
figuring
where
hey
have
been.
"Could
we
miss thefact
that,
entering
he
grotto,
n
unusual
conditions,
we
are,
deep
in the
ground,
n some
way
lost
[egares]
'a' a recherchedu
temps
perdu?'"
[43].
"Lascaux
ou
la
naissance
de l'art"
puts
usa la
recherchedu
tempsperdu
as we enter
the marvelous
grotto
a la
recherche d'un instant
sacre,
only
to meet our
primitivecounterparts
nd
to find ourselves nscribed
hrough
heiract of remembrance
and
sensible return.
Lascaux s
a
parody
of the
miracle
of
Greece,
and of the miracle of
art
(Proust).8
t s a
question,
as Nietzsche
wrote
n
Ecce
Homo,
of "howone becomes what
one
is"
[253].
At
Lascaux,
his
happens
hrough
igurative
art,
and the movementoccurs
in two directionsat
once,
forwardand back
ike the ronde.In
"trans-figuring"
he human
through
he
animalacross time to
us,
Aurignacian
man
se
transfigure
n nous
and
at
the
same time
transfigures
us-transforming
us
from
rational
man
into
religious
animal
by
these
figures
that transfix.
It is not
by
chance
that Lascaux is the miracle of
a
double
transfiguration-of
the
animal
andof the human
being.
Forthe
story
Bataille
projects
n the
cave
presents
he two
momentsof the renversement esalliances
already
mentioned, hat s, thedual
operation
of
the sacred: nterdiction
nd
transgression,hrough
which
it
is
possible
to renewcontact
with
the sensible world-retrouver le sensible.
In
L'6rotisme
this movement is
figured
metaphorically,
as we have
seen,
by
the
ronde,
a
two-step
dance of
attraction
o and
repulsion
rom
the
sacred,
he same dancerefracted
by
the
prism
of the cave
("this
cavern
is
a
prism"
[17],
Bataille
writes,
in what could
only
be called
a
surrealist
mage)
and
danced
over
the millennia.
What Bataille calls
"transfiguration"
t
Lascaux,
then,
is linked to
transgression.
Both
require
he
figure-not
the
resembling imaginary)
ne,
where
resemblance ollows
the pathof address n a gestureof mirroring-as if, for example, prehistoricmanhad
spoken
directly
to
us
by
sending
us a
self-portrait-but
the useless
one,
the
image
of the
nonperson.
t
requires
a
trans-figuring
which
passes
across
the
system
of
enunciationand
through
he third
person,
"il,"
he animal
and he
mask-figure
inutile.These
figurescarry
prestige
in the
etymological
sense of the
term,
as
"illusion,"
o be understoodnot as
mimetic
representation
in
the
service of instrumental
eason)
but
in
its derivation rom
the
Latin word for
play:
ludere.
Transgression
nvolves the
passage
from
homofaber
to
homo
ludens.
It
is in this sense that
iguration along
with
representation, arody,
andthe
fictive)
is
transgressive
n
Batailleand
that
ransgression
inds its
origin
(if
not its
end)
in
figurative
art.
"Transgression,"
ataille
writes,
"only
exists
from the moment art
itself
appears que
l'art
lui-meme
se
manifeste]"
41].
The
figural
andthe fictive have been
suppressed
n
Bataille
by readings
hat
dentify
transgression
with
writing.
f "Lascaux"
resents
moreor less the same
story
of the sacred
thatreturns
n
L'Protisme,
what t adds s the
relation
between
ransgression
nd
igurative
art,
an art of the
image-even
a
"naturalism
f
the marvelous
[merveilleux]."
For the
reversalof alliances is
presented
here before it is theorizedas
eroticism,
which
will then
be
transposed
nto the
register
of
text. "Lascaux u
la
naissancede l'art"
reveals thatwhat
became the
law of
writing
for Kristeva-antimatter of
realism-emerged
more
primi-
tively
in
relation
to visual realism.
Although
various
types
of
signs
are
present
in
the
cave-"grotesque" representations f the humanmale, "deformed" culpturesof the
female
form,
and
"abstract"
markings
on the wall-Bataille identifies
transgression
with
the iconic
sign. Transgression
ccurs
in
and
through
he "sacred
moment
of
figuration,"
8.
The
ull
citation-a
veritable
pastiche
of
Proust-reads as
follows:
"Upon entering
the
cave,
could we
mistake the
fact
that,
in unusual
conditions,
in
the
depths of
the
earth,
we
are
somehow 'a la recherchedu
tempsperdu?'
A
vain
search,
it is
true:
nothing
will ever enable us
to
authentically
relive this
past
which oses
itself
in the
night....
What
hese dead have
left
us
would
matter ittle to
us,
were it
notfor
the
hope
we
have,
even
or
afleeting
instant,
of being
able to make
them live again in us" [43].
12
This content downloaded from 143.107.34.99 on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:34:28 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
9/13
figuration
of the
nonperson
n the mode of "divine"
animality
which is
the
spiritual
ruth
of
man-"le
divin,
dont
le
caractere
nfini
s'exprimait
sous forme
animale."9
Bataille's interest
in the
genesis
of
figurative
art can be tracedback
to his
article
"L'art
primitif"
1933),
which examined
G. H.
Luquet's
theory
of
primitive
art.
Luquet,
whose
methodwas to
compareprehistoric
art
o children'sartand make
inferencesfrom
the latter to the
former,
had introduced
a
concept
of
"intellectual
realism" which
he
distinguished
rom"visualrealism."
Visual
realism
s
mimetic;
t
aimsto show
things ust
as
they
appear.
ntellectual ealism
represents hings
as
the mind knows them
to be.
Since
a
human head
is known
to have
two
eyes,
for
example,
the
representation
f
a
human
profile
might
include
both
eyes.
Intellectual ealism was a
way
to
account for
primitive
modes of
figuration,
which are
mimetically
inexact.
For
Luquet
this
concept
was the
defining
characteristic
f
prehistoric
art.
In
his review
of
Luquet's
book,
Bataille
expresses
both his
admiration
or
Luquet's
theory
andhis reservations
oncerning
methodsandresults.He is
concerned
hat
Luquet'
analysisnecessarilyneglectsprehistoric culpture,which was notrealistatall. He is also
concerned hat
Luquet'
theory
cannotaccount
or
the artof
the
Aurignacians,
where the
animal
mages,
for the most
part,display
visual,
not
intellectual,
realism. If one
were
to
follow
Luquet,
Bataille
observes
wryly,
one would be forced
to
conclude that
"[the]
first
men who
made what
we call a
work
of
art would
have known
nothing
of
primitive
art"
[25,
original
emphasis].
Inspiredby
Luquet,
Bataille
proposes
a
revised
theory
of
primitive
art and of
the
genesis
of
figurative
art,
one that
turns
on a
notion of
alteration
adapted
rom R.
Otto's
study
of
the sacred.
This
concept,
defined as
a desire to
alter
whatever
s
at
hand,
can
encompasseverythingLuquetgainedfrom thecomparisonbetweenprimitiveman and
children,
but it
also
enables
Bataille to
find
a
place
for
the
art
of
Aurignacian
man
within
the domain of
primitive
art,
and
to
include
the
sculptures
neglectedby
Luquet.
For
even
if
the
animal
paintings
display
a
visual
realism,
the
representations
f
human
beings
(especially
the "alterations
olontaires" f
the
sculptures
f
female
forms)
are
nforme
and
display
traces
of
the
process
of
deformation
Bataille calls
alteration.
This reformulation f
Luquet's
thesis
leaves
Bataille
with
a new
puzzle,
however,
namely
the
fundamental
difference
between
representations
f
humans
and
representa-
tions of animals in
prehistoric
art.In
"L'art
primitif"
Bataille
makes a
stab
at
analyzing
the
"categorical uality"
he has
brought
o
light.
He
sketchesout
the
basic
lines of
a
theory
of
primitive
art
that enables
him
to
overcome the
fundamental
opposition
between
figurative
representations
and
nonfigurative
or
informe)
ones,
though
he
cannot
yet
account for the
fact that the first
represent
animals and
the
second,
human
beings.
The
genesis
of
figuration,
he
argues,
s an
instinct
of
alteration,
desire to
alter
whatever
s
at
hand---existing
objects,
such as
toys,
in
the case
of
children,
or
surfacessuch
as walls
or
paper.
n the
process,figures
are
recognized
n
(or
projected
nto)
the
random
cribblings,
yielding
a
virtual
object
of
representation
which is
then
alteredand
deformed
n
turn.
Art,
Bataille writes
"proceeds
by
successive
destructions"
253].10
But
it can also
take
another
path,
or
go
in the
other
direction:
another
way
out
is
available to
figural
representation
rom
the
moment
magi-
nation
substitutes a new
object for
the
destroyed
support.
Instead
of
treating
the
new
object
in the
same
manner as
the
support,
it is
possible,
in the
course
of
9.
In "L'histoire
de
l'drotisme"
Bataille
distinguishes
betwen
"l'animal
banal"
(before
interdiction)
and
"l'animal
divin,"
linked
to
transgression.
n
"Lascaux" he
presentation
of
the
former
occurs
textually,
n Bataille's
depiction
of
the
stereotypeof
the
cavemen
as
subhuman,
as
"classes
inhumaines."This
description
s
crucial
or
the
igure
of
divine
animality
to
emerge.
10. RosalindKrauss
discusses the
notion
of
alteration
and
the
informe)from
a
quitedifferent
angle n TheOpticalUnconscious.
diacritics I
summer 1996
13
This content downloaded from 143.107.34.99 on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:34:28 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
10/13
repetition,
o submit
t to
progressive appropriation
with
respect
to
the
repre-
sented
original.
In this
way
one
passes
quite rapidly
to the
increasingly
resembling
mage
[1'
mage
de
plus
en
plus
conforme]
ofan
animal,
or
example.
It
is
a
question
then
of
a
real
change
of
meaning
at
the
beginning
of
the
development[il s'agit alors d'un v6ritablechangementde sens au d6butdu
d6veloppement].
253,
originalemphasis]
Bataille
argues
that such a
change
of
meaning
occurred for the
Aurignacian
man
in
relation o
representations
f
animals,
but not to
representations
f
human
beings
[253].
However,
and
his s the
mportant oint,
both
n
thecase
of the
mages
he
will
characterize
as
informe
the
representations
f the
human)
and
in
the
case of the
images
that
are
"de
plus
en
plus conforme"
the
animal
mages),
the
fiction of
a
form is
presupposed.
f the
inhuman
images
are
characterizedas
informe,
this is
not
because there
never
was a
figurative
moment,
butbecause
he
figure
projected
nto
the
scribblings
hatalter
he
given
material
(in
a mode reminiscentof what Max Ernstcalls the "Lesson of Leonardo"n
Beyond
Painting,
andwhich
Val6ry
had alluded o much
earlier
n his
study
of
Leonardo)
is
subsequently
negated
or deformedand in
this sense rendered
nforme.
The alternative
gesture
s
to
appropriate
his fictive
figure
and
to
develop
it
until
it
is
with
form,
that
s,
until
it
conforms
o the virtualor fictive
figure.
If we
consider
this
analysis
in
theoretical
terms,
what Bataille
appears
to
have
discovered
n
his
adaptation
f
Luquet's
theory
of
primitive
art
s the basic
structureof
the movement he will
subsequently
call
"renversement
es
alliances"
n
"L'histoirede
l'6rotisme."
Bataille
closes his short
essay
by
noting
the
importance
of
considering
"psychologicalmotives" hatmightaccount orthecategoricaldualityconcerning he two
modes of
representation
nd
their
meaning.
This is
precisely
what
Bataille will
return o
two decades later in his
study
of
Lascaux,
where
interdictionand
transgression
are
associated
with the
representation
f
human
beings
and of
animals,
respectively,
and
analyzed
as
"ways
of
seeing."
The
"reversalof alliances"
provides
a
"psychological
motive"
(in
Bataille's
sense)
for
the
"change
of
meaning"
he
discerns
n
the
movement
of alteration
hat
yields
the
figurative
mage.
The
firstmode of
alteration,
he
negative
one,
opens
the world of
interdiction;
he second
opens
the
world of
transgression
as
an
appropriation
f
the
image.
This
corresponds
o what
Bataille
speaks
of
as
renewed
contact with
the
sensible world in
the
experience
of
religioustransgression.
"Lascaux"
ives
us "the
mage
of the
origin
of art"
36]
inasmuchas it
gives
us the
origin
of
artas
image.
It
also
suggests
one
origin
of
the
meaning
of the
story
of
interdiction/
transgression,
namely
Bataille's
meditationon the
origin
of
prehistoric
igurative
art.
Interdiction
and
transgression
do
not
give
us the
key
to
Lascaux.
Rather,
primitive
art
yields
the
secretof the
theory
of
alteration-and
provides
he
interpretation
f
its
"change
of
meaning"-through
the
dual
operation
of the
sacred.
"Lascaux"
s
the
story
of
this
story,
that
s,
the
origin
of
artas
origin
of
transgression.
t
is
perhaps
n
this
sense thatwe
are to understand
Bataille's
otherwise
puzzling
remark:
"transgression
oes not exist
before
the moment when
art tself
appears"
41].
ThereasonBataille
gives
a
specialplace
to the
figurative
mages
of theanimals s not
only
that
they
illustrate
his
theoretical
iction
(especially
the
hybrid
figure
of
the man-
beast)
but
because,
when
they
are
nterpreted
s a
reversalof
meaning hrough
he
theory
of
alteration,
they
bear
witness
to
the
refusal of the
human world of
work,
which
corresponds
o the
moment of
sacred
transgression.
The
visual realism
of the
animal
figures
gives
a
meaning
of
refusal o the
informe
epresentations
f the
human,
which
are
construed as
having
been
denied
the
light
of
appearance
or
subjected
to
"willful
deformation,"
ince the
animal
mages
attest to the
figurative
powers
of
the
prehistoric
artists. The
difference
implies
that
the
humanwas
represented
as
inhuman
and
guides
Bataille's interpretationf this gestureas a refusal of thehumanworldof work.
14
This content downloaded from 143.107.34.99 on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:34:28 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
11/13
This all
depends,
however,
on
the
uselessness of these
figures,
for it is
only
as
such
that
they
can inscribe
the
sacred moment of
transgression
n their
figuration.
Bataille
refuses
the
conventional
nterpretation
f
the
animal
paintings,
which
endows them
with
magical
force
in an
instrumental
ense,
placing
them in the
service of a ritualwhose
aim
was to enhance
huntingprospects,
or
example.
He allows
that he creationof these
figures
was a
magical operation,
but
he
insulates his notion of
the
magical
from
any
instrumen-
tality.
For
Bataille,
the
magical
nature
of artistic
creation
mplies
that
a value of
work has
been
superseded
by
a value of the
sacred;
t
implies
a
recognition
hat
no
amountof
work
could obtain he desired
result,
andhence
abnegates
human
nstrumental
owers.
Bataille
wants
to
convince
us
that
these
paintings
were
useless to
primitive
man,
created n
sheer
exuberance
as a celebrationof
the
magical per
se,
the sacred.
What
he
does not
explicitly
say,
however,
is that it is
just
as
important
hat
these
images
remain
useless
to us.
Otherwise
hey
would ose
their
power
of
seduction
andcease
to
communicate.
"[O]n
pouvait
dire
qu'il
nous
ressemblait,"
Bataille
says
of
the
primitive
artist,bite humaine.Butthepaintingsdo notoperate hisresemblanceby a self-portrait
that would allow us to see
ourselves
in
an
image
of
him,
and so
verify
the
resemblance.
Instead
t
is the inhuman
igure
that marks
the
passage
to the
human;
we see
only
the
nonperson.
As
Bataille
wrote
in
"L'art
primitif":
The
reindeer,
the
bison,
or
the
horse are
represented
n
such
perfectly
minute
detail that
if
we could
see
equally
scrupulous
mages of
the
men
themselves,
he
strangestperiod
in the
metamorphosis f
the human
la
p6riode
a
plus
6trange
des avatars
humains]
would
immediately
ease to
be the
most
inaccessible.
But
the drawingsand sculptureswhichhave been chargedwith representingthe
Aurignacians
are
almost all informe
and much
less
human than
those
that
represent
the animals.
[251,
original
emphasis]
The
paintings
do not
give
us the
image
our
curiosity
demands: he
portrait
f
the
caveman.
They convey
no
useful
information,
et
in
their
uselessness
they
seduce us and
enable
us
to find
our "sensible
presence"
n
the cave.
It is the
mask,
the
inhuman
all
too
human)
figure
of the
animalthat
guarantees
he
uselessness of
these
images-to
us.
And it
is the
figural
image
that bears
witness to
transgression
and
performs
our
transfiguration
nto
"divine animal."
We enter
he cave
"a
a
recherche
d'un instant acr6"
42].
Once
inside,
"a
feeling
of
presence imposes
itself
[un
sentimentde
presence
s'impose]."
A
sensible
sign
of
our
presence
is
given
as
tempsperdu-not
only
time
past
but
time
lost,
lost
in
uselessness.
This is the sacred
moment
of
figuration,
f
lafite,
and
of
sacrifice.
Sacrifice
iberates
ived
time
(le
temps
vicu)
ordinarily
ocked
in
(enferme'),
bsorbed
by
useful tasks
and
systems
of
measurement.
Sacrifice
opens
up
a
different
dimension of
time-lost
time-for
sacrifice is
"the
catastrophe
f
time" as
experience
of
being,
that
is,
of
time as
being,
or
being
as time-"il
y
ale
temps.""
Toward
he
very
end of
his
career,
Heidegger
reaches
a
similarconclusion: "time s a
kind of
Being"
[13].
He
writes
thatthe
future
dimension
of time(as thewithholdingof presence)and thepastdimensionof time(as therefusalof
presence) together"grant
and shield
presence
n
a
reciprocal
relationship,"
nd he
adds,
"nowhere do we
find
time
as
something
that is like
a
thing"
[3].
Heidegger's
remark
can
help
us
read Bataille's
statement
concerning
art as an
expression
of
religious
transgres-
sion.
"The forms of art
have no
other
origin
than
laifte
de tous les
temps"
[41],
Bataille
writes,
and sacrifice
is the moment
of
paroxysm
of this
carnival.
Laifte
de tous
les
temps
is
to be
understood
in
terms of sacrifice as
catastrophe
of
time,
and
thus as a
carnival de
11.
"Sacrifices"
96]--"there
s
neither
eing
nor
nothingness
here,
here s
time
il
y
a le
temps]."
diacritics
/ summer
1996
15
This content downloaded from 143.107.34.99 on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:34:28 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
12/13
tous
les
temps-of past,
present,
andfuture
imes.
"Being
as
presence,"Heidegger
writes,
"is
determined
by
time"-the
catastrophe
of
time,
Bataille would
say.
In
"Lascaux,"
transgression
ccurs
through
he
figure
or
the
fiction-for Bataille there is
nothing
ess
like
a
thing
han
he
useless
figure.Figuration
s
necessary
o
that
he
play
of
dissimulation
can occur and
inscribe the animal
(the nonperson-il--excluded
from the structureof
linguistic
enunciation)
nto
a
second-order ircuit
of addresswhich
passes through
he
image.
The
figure
s
necessary
or
an act
of
address
o communicate crosstime-to trans-
figure.
It
is the fictive
figure-figure
inutile-that
operates
he
reciprocal elationship
of
future,
past,
and
present
ime in the
afterlifeof
images.
Tel
quel
had much
to
gain by reading
Bataille as a kind
of
(anti)matter
o Breton's
"idealism."As
transgression
became
writing,
the fictive
and the
image
in Bataille
were
suppressed,
ust
as
they
were within Tel
quel
itself.12
In
his
study
of
Foucault,
Deleuze
alludes to "areactionagainstphenomenology"hatresulted n a "aprivilegeof the word
over
the
visible"
[58].
In this
context,
the fictive
was
considered
on
the realist model
as
a simulacrum
f the real
and
was
therefore
mplicated
n
relation o
discoursesof
truth
or
reference.
In
the world
of
digital
imagery,
however,
where
images
no
longer
guarantee
truth,
here is
no
longer
a
need to draw back from
the
visible."3
WORKS CITED
All
translations
of
Frenchworks are
mine.
Adorno,
Theodor
W.
Negative
Dialectics. Trans.E. B.
Ashton. New York:
Herder
and
Herder,1973.
. Prisms.
Trans.Samuel
and
Shierry
Weber.
London:
Spearman,
1967.
Barthes,
Roland.
"Drame,
poeme,
roman."
Critique
21.218
(1965):
591-603.
Bataille,
Georges.
"L'art
primitif."
OC
1: 247-54.
. L'drotisme.
Paris:
Minuit,
1957.
.
"L'histoirede
l'6rotisme."
OC 8:
7-165.
.
"Lascauxou la
naissancede l'art."
OC
9:
7-101.
.
Oeuvres
completes.
12
vols.
Paris:
Gallimard,
1970-88.
[OC]
.
"Sacrifices."
OC
1:
87-96.
Benveniste,
Emile. "La
naturedes
pronoms."
Problemesde
linguistiquegindrale.
Vol.
1.
Paris:
Gallimard,
1966.
Blanchot,
Maurice.
"La litterature t le
droit
a
la
mort."
La
part
du
feu.
1949. Paris:
Gallimard,
1980.
Deleuze,
Gilles.
Foucault. Paris:
Minuit,
1986.
de
Man,
Paul. Blindnessand
Insight.
New York:
Oxford
UP,
1971.
12. The
suppression
of
the
image
or
the
ictive
in Bataille
corresponds
with an
erasure
of
the
term
'fiction"
within the
pages of
Tel
quel.
In an
early essay,
"Logique
de la
Fiction,"
Sollers
appealed
to the
visual dimension
ofthefictive
in
the
phenomenologicalregister.
He cites
Mallarmn
concerning anguage
as
instrument
ffiction
whichhe
construes n relation o
imagination,
dream,
and the
surrealist
image.
After
the
publication of
Derrida's
critique
of
phenomenology,
the
elaboration
of
the
fictive
dries
up.
We hear
no more
of
what
Barthes had called
a
"chaine de
signifies"
in his
early
essay
on
Sollers's
Drame/["Drame,
oeme,
roman"
599].
By
1969
("Survol/
rapports
blocs)/conflit")
the
notion
offiction
has
been
rephrased
n terms
of
the
signifier;
it
has
become "the
ongoing
movement
[mouvance]
attained
by
inscription
itself
whose
oscillation
[battement]
s
presented
to
us...
by
Un
Coup
de des"
[11]-something
like what
Valdry
alled
a
'figure
de
la
pensde"
when
he
too
looked
at
this
book.
13. As William
Mitchellput
t
in The
ReconfiguredEye,
if
"photographs
eemed to
bond
mage
to
referent
with
superglue"
28],
with
digital
imagery
"the
referent
has come
unstuck"
[31]--"We
have now entered theage of electrobricolage"[7].
16
This content downloaded from 143.107.34.99 on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:34:28 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)
13/13
Derrida,
Jacques.
De la
grammatologie.
Paris:
Minuit,
1967.
Ducrot,Osvald,
and
Tzvetan
Todorov.Dictionnaire
des sciences
du
langage.
Paris:
Seuil,
1972.
Ernst,
Max.
Beyond
Painting.
New
York:
Wittenborn,
Schultz,
1948.
Foucault,
Michel.
"Pr6face
a la
transgression."
Critique
19.195-96
(1963):
751-69.
Greenberg,
Clement.
Art and Culture:
Critical
Essays.
Boston:
Beacon,
1965.
Guerlac,
Suzanne.
"'Recognition'
by
aWoman "Yale
French
Studies78
(1990):
90-105.
Heidegger,
Martin.
On
Time
and
Being.
Trans.
Joan
Stambaugh.
New York:
Harper
and
Row,
1977.
Krauss,
Rosalind. The
Optical
Unconscious.
Cambridge:
MIT
P,
1993.
Kristeva,
Julia.
"How Does One
Speak
to
Literature?" esire in
Language.
Trans.Leon
S. Roudiez.
New
York:Columbia
UP,1980.
.
"Po6sie
et
negativit6."
L'homme
8.2
(1968):
36-63.
.
Pouvoirs de l'horreur:Essai sur
l'abjection.
Paris:
Seuil,
1980.
. La revolution du langage poitique: L'avantgarde
a
la fin du XIXe sidcle:
Lautreamont
t Mallarm6.Paris:
Seuil,
1974.
Luquet,
Georges
Henri. L'art
primitif
Paris:
Doin,
1930.
Mitchell,
William J.
The
Reconfigured
Eye:
VisualTruth n the
Post-Photographic
Era.
Cambridge:
MIT
P,
1994.
Nietzsche,
Friedrich.
Beyond
Good
and Evil.
Trans.
Walter
Kaufmann.New
York,
Vintage,
1966.
.
Ecce
Homo.
Trans.Walter
Kaufmann.
New
York,
Vintage,
1969.
Otto,
Rudolf.
The
Idea
of
the
Holy:
An
Inquiry
nto the
Non-rational
Factor in
the Idea
of the Divine and Its Relation to theRational.Trans.JohnW. Harvey.New York:
Oxford
UP,
1958.
[Trans.
of
Das
Heilige.
1917.
Munich:
Beck,
1979.]
Sollers,
Philippe.
"Logique
de la
fiction." Tel
quel
15
(1964):
3-29.
.
"La
science de
Lautr6amont."
ritique
23.245
(1967):
791-833.
.
"Survol
rapports
blocs)
/
conflit." Tel
quel
36
(1969):
3-17.
.
Thdorie
d'ensemble. Paris:
Seuil,
1980.
.
"Le
toit: Essai
de lecture
syst6matique."
Tel
quel
29
(1967):
25-46.
Adapted
npartfrom
he
manuscript
fIntimate
Mechanics,
y
Suzanne
Guerlac,forthcomingfrom
StanfordUniversity ress.MaterialromIntimateMechanicss usedwith the
permission
f
StanfordUniversity
ress,
and
may
notbe
reproduced
ithout
heir
written
ermission.
diacritics / summer
1996
17