The Essay as Form: Presentation, Representation and the Self in Jorge Luis Borges

Silvia G. Dapía

lthough Jorge Luis Borges has achieved international fame mainly as Aa short story writer, he was also a very productive essayist. His ini- tial essays appeared in the magazine El Hogar (1936-1939) in newspapers such as La Nación and Crítica, and in literary journals like Sur. Borges wrote thousands of pages of essays, including prologues, book and film reviews, and short articles on politics and culture. In 1925 he published his first book of essays, Inquisiciones, which he later rejected and prohibited any reprints to be made, as he also did with reprints of his second and third books of essays, El tamaño de mis esperanza (1926) and El idioma de los argen- tinos (1928), respectively. Beginning with Inquisiciones, his essays spanned some fifty-seven years until the publication of Nueve ensayos dantescos in 1982,1 and includes five more volumes of essays: Evaristo Carriego (1930), Discusión (1932), Historia de la eternidad (1936), Otras inquisiciones (1952), and Siete noches (1980). The purpose of this article is not to attempt an interpretation of Borg- es’s essays as a whole: such an interpretation would render only oversim- plification and sweeping generalities. I intend to enhance an understand- ing of issues of philosophy—which are perhaps best expressed by an essayistic mode—through the selective examination of three of Borges’s essays: “El idioma analítico de John Wilkins” (1942), “Nueva refutación del tiempo” (first published in its entirety in 1947; the first part appeared

1 Five of these nine essays were first published in 1948 and one in 1951.

Variaciones Borges 28 » 2009 Silvia G. Dapía 128 2 Thus, the essay was, for the English empiricists, the most appropriatemost the empiricists, English the for was,essay Thus,the I. The Philosophical System and ItsDisconen discussion of Borges’s philosophical essays, see JaimeRest. Historically, the essay emerged out of discontent with the rigidity of rigidity the with discontent of out emerged essay the Historically, different from the philosophical system’s coercion upon reality. Withreality. upon coercion system’s philosophical the from different a sses f hi tms Mce Mnage wo a traditionally has who Montaigne, Michel times, their of systems cal captured than in the English empiricists’ use of the word (and the form emergenceforthis counting 79).(Hartle context,Withinthis doubtno valued any longer and with its disappearance, the possibility of submit expression for a philosophical reflection understood as the adventure the as understood reflection philosophical a for expression of one who seeks to submit to “what there is” in a way that is radicallywayis a that in is” there“what to submit to seekswho one of and interpret them. approach reality. It is perhaps appropriate to be reminded here of the of here reminded be to appropriate perhaps is It reality.approach amination of the essayistic qualities of his short stories, see De Obaldia (247-82). For a (247-82).For Obaldia De stories,see short his of essayisticqualities the of amination upon which their thinking struck, continuously forced upon them the the them upon forced continuously struck, thinking their which upon sophical writings essays the “because power of freshly disclosed reality This attempt.” “to or try” “to say, to is that sayer,” conform reality makes demonstrations, and deductions, syllogisms, section of this article shall discuss briefly the history of the essay as a genre for their philosophy). John Locke and David Hume called their philo their called Hume David and Locke John philosophy). their for the fragmented essay provided Montaigne with a less coercive tool to toolcoercive less a with Montaigneprovided essay fragmented the ac then and emerge to it allowing than rather logic of rules these to ting ting to the power of “what there is” was also lost. Consequently, from a the post-Kantian century, however, the risk of experimentation was not 38).Philosophy”, of Actuality “The (Adorno experimentation” of risk wordthe “essay”ofetymology nowhere perhapsthe is better in tained in in order to provide the selected essays with a context within which to place in meaning of the word “essays” and its derivation from the world “es world the from derivation its and “essays” word the of meaning plained about the “rigid method” used in philosophy, which, with its philosophy,which,with in used method” “rigid the about plained ap philosophi the to Rejecting fluidity. and complexity its ability in reality proach philosophy’s hampers which systems, philosophical been credited with the invention of the modern essay,modern comrepeatedlythe of invention the with credited been Sur For a study of the oxymoronic structure in Borges’sessays,ex Alazraki. in the seeFor structureoxymoronic the of study a For in 1944), and “El escritor argentino y la tradición”(1951).The first la argentino y escritor “El 1944),and in 2 tentativeness con ------That totality, Schlegel explains, is invariably constructed by means of means by constructed invariably is explains, Schlegel totality, That gitimize the philosophy of its possessor” ( possessor” its of philosophy the gitimize Georg Simmel and Max Weber believed that systematic philosophy was concerned about would be, they believed, best expressed. Members of a of Members expressed. best believed, they be, would about concerned ofissues the whichessayisticsystems, privileged mode,calthe they in violence, through the power that syllogisms, deductions, and demon and deductions,syllogisms, that power the through violence, ers such as Thomas Mann, Robert Musil, and Hermann Broch, to name philosophi by imposed order inflexible, unalterable the Over19). Luft in their place to refused philosophers dogmatism,these of formevery used previously expression of modes and methods inflexible the ers, essay becameform aminor of aesthetics. ophers as diverse as Fritz Mauthner, Edmund Husserl, Henri Bergson,Husserl,Henri Edmund Mauthner,Fritz as diverse as ophers of the literary “fragment”—filtered by Friedrich Nietzsche’s contribu Nietzsche’s Friedrich by “fragment”—filtered literary the of about the about younger generation such as Georg Lukács,GeorgLudwig Wittgenstein,as generationsuch younger Ernst Bloch and Walter Benjamin also welcomed the fragmentary essayisticfragmentary the welcomed also Benjamin Walter and Bloch literature (Luft 16-20). losophers born in the generation between 1840 and 1870. Thus, philos strations exert on their organization of reality. Schlegel is concerned is Schlegel reality. of organization their on exert strations sophicalsystems takenot did emerge.longto wasIt carried phi by out ut fw as bgn o oe oad saim tasomn their transforming essayism, toward move to began also few, a just for philosophical inquiry seemed to have run their course. Rejecting course. their run have to seemed inquiry philosophical for the risks, intellectual from away shy not did that philosophy a of form tellectual work “under the rule of a single system” single ofa (Husserl,rule tellectualthe work“under quotedby totality”—a limited view of the whole which “does not suffice to le to suffice not “does which whole the of view limited totality”—a Schlegel, For 20). (Luft form as essay the on genre—had the to tions expression, of writ forms fluid and flexible moretoward systemsrigid beforemoved1914,decade awayphilosophers the while abstract,from important influence that Friedrich Schlegel’s and the romantics’ notion o hlspia sse hs vr rdcd oe hn “polemical a than more produced ever has system philosophical no formsexisting between morenovelsphilosophythe and“hybrid” into mode as a more adequate vehicle for their inquiries. Simultaneously, in no longer adequate to address the complexity of reality. For these think philosophy of language and philosophy of culture which they were were they which culture of philosophy and language of philosophy A reaction, however, against the rigidity of the post-Kantian philo post-Kantian the of rigidity the however,reaction,against A Lukács, and more than a decade later Thomas Mann, identify the the identify Mann, Thomas later decade a than more and Lukács, remainder that evades or escapes the controlling philosophi controlling the escapes or evades that Philosophical FragmentsPhilosophical 81). ------129 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 130 4 3 5 combine the two” (quoted by Carter 28-29). On F. Schlegel’s “theory of the fragment,” the of “theory Schlegel’s F. On 28-29).Carter by (quoted two” the combine Kraus, Adorno develops his theory of the essay as form. By means of means By form. as essay the of theory his develops Adorno Kraus, cal system and its concepts. In an attempt to rescue that “excess” that is consists of an infinite series of perspectives (fragments) of the same the of (fragments) perspectives of series infinite an of consists world can be betterfragment)approachedbe broken(the can forma worldthrough ence of thinkers such as Nietzsche, Lukács, Bloch, Benjamin and Karl and Benjamin Bloch,Lukács, Nietzsche, as such thinkers of ence ers who were gravitating toward this form since at least the first decade excludedlockedor fromout rigid philosophical systems, Schlegel puts Morot-Sir, Jacques Derrida, andMax Bense. of the twentieth century. of his own philosophy into his notion of “perspectivism.” In this sense, reality. rebelliousalways the of ognition non-system—be and system between border the at lies which that of Nietzsche’s perspectivism may be regarded as a manifestation of the the of manifestation a as regarded be may perspectivism Nietzsche’s and that was alive at the time of Locke and the English empiricists. Inempiricists. English the and Locke of time the at alive was that and see Lacoue-Labarthe (40-45). andNancy appearing more naïve thanyou really are” ( up the romantic notion of fragment, modulating it within the contextthe within it fragment,modulating of notion romantic the up totality. us for world the turn, in Nietzsche,fortotality, polemical a from than fragment. the of order transgressive organizing,recnecessityconceptthe the tweenthe of and dominating to be presented. By contrast, the task of the essay, in Adorno’s view, con the of form the textorderthe and ofexperience advance. both are in determined Traditional argues, Adorno texts, philosophical traditional eliminate to try systems philosophical that uncertaintydangerous the this theory, Adorno “attempts” to introduce philosophical into inquiry ironic distance, the fragment sets out a process of release or liberation or releaseprocess of a out sets fragmentdistance, ironicthe and form broken the on emphasis an With fragment. the action into fatal for the mind to have a system and to have none. It will simply have to decide to decide to have simply will It none.have to and system a have to mind the for fatal rior form of perversion, a character’s disease; immorally explained, this will is the will of philosophicalsystems preconceive which formthe arethoughts in our best articulates of the meaning the essay for the philosophers and writ Nietzsche claims: “The will for system: to a philosopher, morally explained, a supe philosopher,explained,morallya a system: forto “Theclaims:will Nietzsche This position is most succinctly stated in the often cited Athenaeum For a discussion of different conceptions of the essay, see Georg Lukács, EdouardLukács, Georg essay,see the of conceptionsdifferent of discussion a For It is perhaps Theodor Adorno’s article, “Der Essay als Form,” which 5 Written the latein 1950s and under the influ Kritische Gesamtausgabe 4 Thus, just as for Schlegel the the Schlegel for as just Thus, 3 Nietzsche, for his part, takespart, his Nietzsche,for 8: 246).

53: “It’s equally ------7 n h svnenh etr, eea atmt a cetn a universal a creating at attempts several century, seventeenth the In Society in London. The goal was twofold. On the one hand, the hope hope the hand, one the On twofold. was goal The London. in Society ceived, that rather, as Lukács claimed as early as 1911, “has to create to “has 1911, as early as claimed Lukács as rather, that ceived, was that such a language would be used by every scientist, thinker and and thinker scientist, every by used be would language a such that was preconor predetermined essay,form,not way,the a is promoting that was able to remember both the classification or system of concepts and “ as conceived were of its vision” (11). But let us now turn our attention to Borges’sattentionessaysto our turn now us let (11).vision”But its of of the combination of those signs or “ 6 II. as Bishop Wilkins in England, Leibniz in Germany, and Descartes in Descartes and Germany, in Leibniz England, in Wilkins Bishop as diverse as Thinkers thought. of mathematics of sort a articulate to able condi the themselves, within create,from they which in ways the and From his first essays published in the magazine magazine the in published essays first his From seven Those language. a such create to possible was it believed France and Mauthner’s Critique of Language” (49-56). nard,” see Dapía “Pierre Menard Context.” in language emerged in Europe, in many cases associated with the Royal the with associated cases many Europe,in in emergedlanguage eun sois uh s Per Mnr, uo dl Quijote,” del autor Menard, “Pierre as such stories sequent out emerging name things—every to corresponddirectly to supposed communication. of On means efficient an as world the overall scholar different a in thinking philosophical approach to us allowing in sists from within itself all the preconditions for the effectiveness and validity tions for theirown effectiveness. teenth-century thinkers, however, show different degrees of confidence be then would one concepts, universal those to assigned characters the (Eco,itself world the of nature revealthe name a constitute that signs or characters the since hand, other the in thisproject,in withLeibnizperhapsone of being themore optimistic. “El idoma analítico deJohn Wilkns” (1942) For a discussion of Borges’s use of the motive of universal language in “Pierre Me“Pierre in languageuniversal of motive the of useBorges’s of discussion a For On Borges and universal language, see Dapía “The Metaphor of Translation: Borges h tee f nvra lnug i praie n ogss work. Borges’s in pervasive is language universal of theme The real hrces—ht s o a, hs sgs were signs those say, to is characters”—that real characters” would necessarily On LiteratureOn El Hogar El , 114). Once one one Once 114). , through sub through 7 o later to 6 - - - - -

131 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 132 452). [Each monosyllabic word corresponds to a general idea whose specific meaning meaning specific whose idea general a to correspondsword monosyllabic [Each 452). 10 Wörterbuch der PhilosophieWörterbuchder Wilkins.” Among other parallels, both the real Borges and the fictional Ferri havein common their cal Language of John Wilkins John of Language cal 9 depends on the context or upon accompanying grimaces. The word ‘nrz,’ for example,for ‘nrz,’ wordgrimaces. Theaccompanying upon or context the on depends contrario”( sentido un tener puede visajes,palabraotros concada o manera otra de combinatoria,” in its context of production. The narrator claims: “Cada palabra mono palabra “Cada claims: narrator Theproduction. of context its in combinatoria,” ering of the four witch doctors, carnal conjunction, or a forest. Pronounced in another forest. in Pronounceda conjunction,or carnal doctors, witch four the of ering despar de acto salpicado,el lo aves,viruela, de la bandada leopardo,una estrellado,un of a language that forces us to seek out meaning for every “word” admitted by the “ars the admittedeveryby “word” for meaning out seek forcesto languagethat us a of ( esl agae n h svnenh etr. ae o Fiz Mauthner’s Fritz on Based century. seventeenth the in language versal and then describing how the Bishop progressed from his world-catalogue smallpox, something bespattered, the act of scattering, or the flight that follows defeat follows that flight the scattering,or of bespattered,act smallpox, something the suggests dispersion or spots, and may stand for the starry sky, a leopard, a flock of birds, corresponde sílaba general,idea una a el por sedefine contextoque visajes. los por o La Borges next points out a precursor system in a Chinese encyclopedia enti encyclopedia Chinese a precursor a systemBorgesin out points next many similarities between similarities narratormany the story,ofFerri,the Alejandro realthe and Borges. accompaniedgrimaces,or other manner by wordeach oppositemayan hold meaning] stories such as “El informe de Brodie” (1970) stories work to it. Thus, Ferri’s mention of his work entitled work his of mention Thus,Ferri’sit. to work to each class, subdivision, and subsubdivision of his world-catalogue. his of subsubdivision and subdivision,class, each to consonants and vowels arbitrary assigning by language universal a to this theme surfaces in Borges’s writings in diverse fashions. Certainly, the is tobefound “Elidiomaanalítico in deJohn Wilkins.” for the tribe, a tree trunk, a stone, a heap of stones, the act of heaping stones, the gath stones,the heaping of act stones,the of heap stone,a a trunk,tree a tribe, the for forme de Brodie,” as he describes the language of the Yahoos. Yet Borges conceives here ramar o la fuga que sigue a la derrota. la a sigue que fuga la o ramar malize a real script, claiming that Wilkins created first a world-catalogue, a first createdWilkins that script,claiming real a malize Borges’suniversalworkslanguage within a completediscussionof most interest in the universal language created by Bishop Wilkins and both have devoted a devotedhave both and Wilkins Bishop by created languageuniversal the in interest standmay dense.It or compact something hand,means other the onwarfare. ‘Hrl,’ in Pronunciadabosque. un y carnal unión hechiceros, cuatrola los de congreso el ilarlas, puede significar la tribu, un tronco, una piedra, un montón de piedras, el hecho de ap de hecho piedras, el de montón piedra, un tronco, una un tribu, la significar puede palabra 8 Reader “El Congreso” (1975) again takes up the idea of a universal language. There are Therelanguage. universal a of idea the up takes again (1975) Congreso” “El In 1970, Borges revisits the subject of universal language in his short story, “El in “El story, short his in languageuniversal of subject the revisitsBorges1970, In No doubt Bishop Wilkinsuni completeBishop a projectformost createdNodoubt the OnBorges’s debttoFritz Mauthner, see Dapía “The Metaphor of Translation.” 301). nrz , por ejemplo, sugiere la dispersión o las manchas; puede significar el cielo el significar puede manchas; las o dispersión la sugiereejemplo, por , , reminds us of Borges’s essay “El idioma analítico de John de analítico idioma “El essayBorges’s of us reminds , , Borges discusses how Wilkins intended to for to intended Wilkins how discussesBorges, Hrl , en cambio, indica lo apretado o lo denso; lo o apretado lo indica cambio, en , 8 A Brief Examination of the Analyti the of Examination Brief A and “El Congreso” (1975), OC 10 9 ------

13 12 pertene- (a) en dividen se animales los que escrito está páginas remotas sus “En 11 Wilkins’s or any one else’s universal language—do not seem to be the be to seem not language—do universal else’s one any or Wilkins’s Wittgenstein’sprohibition sayto unsayablethe languagewith ( gie concept must give voice to the non-conceptual. With this demand, Adorno counters Adorno demand, this With non-conceptual. the to voice give must concept sirenas,(f) lechones,(e) amaestrados,(d) embalsamados,(c) Emperador,(b) al cientes elements that would hinder the construction of reproducible knowledge” (Plass 23). (Plass knowledge” reproducible of construction the hinder would that elements even thesciences in possession isnine-tenthsof thelaw” ( ( moscas” parecen lejos de que jarrón,(n) el romper de acaban que etcétera,(m) very act of selecting a certain classification necessarily entails silencing or classificationcertain necessarily silencing entails a selecting of act very would havewould challengedessaythey an “attempted”writehad Bishop to on excluding those aspects of reality that do not fit into the chosen catego chosen the into fit not do that reality of aspects those excluding of philosophical systems philosophical of according to which they are no longer understood as static, rigid signs rigid static, as understood longer no are they which to according 83).TruthLies” Ul (“On and things” unequal of equation the fromarises deductions and demonstrations the of character “militaristic” the about always will fail—and classifications those that works) other in (and here at eliminating uncertainty, ambiguity, vagueness and all other intrusive, “‘particular’ “‘particular’ intrusive, other all and vagueness ambiguity, uncertainty, eliminating at us briefly examine Borges’s argument. some kind of violence upon the reality that it “attempts” to explain. Theexplain. to “attempts” it that reality the upon violence of kind some 86) [we do not knowuniversewhatnot [wethe do 86) ( is] Indeed, crucial to Adorno’s theory of the essay is the paradoxical declaration that the that declaration paradoxical the is essay the of theory Adorno’s to crucial Indeed, fail— because “no sabemos qué cosa es el universo” ( universo” el es cosa qué sabemos “no because fail— ries or concepts. Within this context, we should read both Schlegel’s claim systems,all Borgesofcharacter suggestshistorical the emphasizing than at arrivingof tainty tled “Emporio celestial de conocimientos benévolos.” ht n ih o ter hois I eiv Shee, itsh o Adorno or Nietzsche Schlegel, believe I theories, their of light in that reality—exclusions from out lock systems classificatory or concepts that object. an designate reliably that timately, along these lines, Adorno argues for a new approach to concepts, fabulosos, (g) perros sueltos, (h) incluidos en esta clasificación, (I) que se agitan como agitan se que clasificación, (I) esta en incluidos sueltos,perros(h) fabulosos, (g) the sense of military jargon. And its deductions aren’t much better than those of politics; most shockingly incongruous classification, Borges undermines the cer the undermines Borges classification, incongruous shockingly most locos, (j) locos, 85-86). 1: 88). No doubt that a classification, or any system whatsoever, implies whatsoever, system any or classification, a that doubt No “En sus remotas páginas está escrito que los que escrito está páginas remotas sus “En Adorno challenges both the reliance on stable, fixed concepts and the attempt the and concepts fixed stable, on reliance the both challenges Adorno Schlegel states: “The demonstrations of philosophy are demonstrationssimply in innumerables the , (k) dibujados con un pincel finísimo de pelo de camello, (l) camello, de pelo de finísimo pincel un con dibujados (k) , “true” classification of the world. the However,classification of “true” rather 12 and Nietzsche’s assertion that “every concept“every that assertion Nietzsche’s and 13 However, the unrealized possibilities unrealized the However, animales��������������������������� ����������������������������������� Other InquisitionsOther Philosophical Fragments se dividen en (a) pertene (a) en dividen se 11 PhilosophischeTerminolo Thus, through the Obras completasObras 104).

But let But 82). OC 2: 2: 2: - - - - - 133 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 134 “remainder” of reality or unrealized possibilities that Wilkins’ universal Wilkins’ that possibilities unrealized or reality of “remainder” “priority of the object.” by used categories or concepts the match not does that reality “excess”of 14 Wilkins’s universal language. Rather, Borges focuses on a different issue:different a on focuseslanguage.Borges Rather,universalWilkins’s object” (Adorno object” object and credited to the subjects are due in subjective experience to the primacy of the (Plass 21). “The qualities the traditional critique of epistemology eradicated from the from eradicated epistemology of critique traditional the qualities “The 21). (Plass question arises: Should we interpret Borges’s conclusion about the con the about conclusion Borges’s interpret we Should arises: question century, many philosophers, as in Wilkins’ universal language,by universalWilkins’began in as philosophers,century, many If subjectivities. our to minds, our to systems—whatbelongs or cations world outside our perceptions, systems or classifications amounts to amounts classifications or systems perceptions, our outside world it. upon minds our by exerted control the to subjected entirely is world end up forcing reality into their own definite,own their categories. clear-cut forcinginto realityup end the Yet essay, this In is.” there “what of inventory firm and fixed a establishing of anysystem of concepts whatsoever. Why? out: ifthere is, itremains inaccessible tous. comprehension( human our mls f o Bre adess h psiiiy f o-ytmtc and non-systematic of possibility the addresses Borges how of amples Borgeschallenges systemsclassifications proposethose andto seem that beyond is that angels] [of ángeles”“de worldelsewhere, a it Borgesputs representations,classifi Borges,is to accordingus, for is there All Borges? representationssystemsor our outside thereanything realityofis But for language or, for that matter, any system whatsoever may exclude or lock or exclude maywhatsoever system matter,any that for or,language ject relation called “experience” is completely free of subjective control over the object— there is a reality outside our representations, it is inaccessible to us. Theus. to inaccessible is representations,it our outside reality a is there creations.ownthe Borges,considerour arenot they Adorno,unlike does the world “out and things there” depend, Borges’s in view, on our minds; the arbitrary and conjectural character of those concepts or, for that matter, the existence of a world with firm contours and clearly defined objects and or,as thing-in-itself”) say, “the would philosophers (as unknowable the tempt to link philosophical concepts through aesthetic experience to concrete objects concrete to experience aesthetic through concepts philosophical link to tempt the objectdoesnotbecome detached andobjectified(Plass 21). main issue for Borges. Borges does not seem to be concerned about that about concerned be to seem not Borges.does Borgesfor issue main playful philosophical expression by means of an essay. In the seventeenth “El idioma analítico de John Wilkins” is perhaps one of the best ex best the of one perhaps is Wilkins” John de analítico idioma “El Rather than existing independently of us, free of our subjective rule, subjective our of free us, of independently existing than Rather The expression “primacy of the object” encapsulates Adorno’s anti-nominalist at anti-nominalist Adorno’s encapsulates object” the of expression The“primacy CriticalModels 14 Clearly, Borges believes that our experience of the 250). “Primacy of the object” means that the subject-ob the 250).that means object” “Primacythe of OC 1:443). Therefore, Borges,for no is there - - - - - 2:86; Thus, within the framework of idealist philosophy, after examining his examining after philosophy, idealist of framework the within Thus, III. “Nueva refut Or is Borges’s emphasis on the conjectural and arbitrary character of our of character arbitrary and conjectural the on emphasis Borges’s is Or I attempt to begin the discussion of “Nueva refutación del tiempo” in in tiempo” del refutación “Nueva of discussion the begin to attempt I deconstruct the very concept of time along the same lines of Berkeley’s of lines same the along time of concept very the deconstruct our turn now we tiempo,” del refutación “Nueva Borges’s of discussion classifications and his subsequent statement that “no sabemos qué cosa qué sabemos “no that statement subsequent his and classifications rigid,aseptic question to intended criticism a mean I which by criticism, world amultiplicity into of representations of it? es el universo” [we do not know what the universe is] rather at the service on our own mental structure and activity—to dissolve the solidity of the of solidity the dissolveactivity—to and structure mental own our on ( Schopenhauer of sense pessimistic,the some despair, romanticofin and Hume’s idealist thought. Because this idealist perspective is crucial crucial is perspective idealist this Because thought. idealist Hume’s and attention tothisessay. ratherinvokingassumptionhe idealism—the whattherethat depends is multiplic the denies that world the accountof any criticize attemptingto understanding of GeorgeofDavid understanding and Hume’s Berkeley’s “thing” ofnotion systems that do not adequately account for the ambiguity of our world? our of ambiguity the for account adequately not do that systems jectural and arbitrary character of our classifications as a kind of“technical” the light of Borges’sidealism.lightview,ofof offavorite the that point philosophical it adopts in Berkeley’s and Hume’s philosophies, is at the center of our of center the at is philosophies, Hume’s and Berkeley’s in adopts it ity of possible, perspectivist interpretations as a feature of our world? Or is notion of “self,” I shall focus on Borges’s attempts both to construct and construct to Borges’sattemptsboth on focus shall I “self,” of notion means of his criticism of the arbitrariness of Wilkins’s universal language, ic Bre’ udrtnig f daim priual i te forms the in particularly idealism, of understanding Borges’s Since Other InquisitionsOther ación del 104)? To104)? formulate differently:it BorgesIs here, by sideswithoutcomprehending itwholly— sequence of itsparagraphs, takes from athing many It was approximately theway in thatanessay, the in down intoaconcept wholly comprehended instantlyloses itsbulk andmelts tiempo” or a Play ofFragments survey andhandletheworld andhisown life. —that hebelieved hecould best Musil, The Man withoutQualities (1: 297, italics are mine) for athing OC -

135 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 136 cideswith the entire mental human activity; nothing falls outside its scope venture further in the same direction than his two heroes. Given that the the that Given heroes. two his than direction same the in further venture writings, I intend to examine it in some detail. Furthermore, I attempt to to attempt I Furthermore,detail. some in it examine to intend I writings, world and the self are refuted, Borges understands his task as consisting consisting as task his understands Borgesrefuted, are self the and world or range. or our attention to the notion of idealism, to Borges’s understanding of it, and Russell’s statement that Hume “represents, in a certain sense, a dead end; in apology. Thus, theprologue in tothisessay, heclaims: his direction, itisimpossible togo ( further” throughout all at decrease not did philosophers two these for admiration ideal regardforhighest the Borgeshas mind. a in idea an is mind, my and coin realityreality; of whole the embraces mind Thestructure. and activity ley and Hume. His assessment of these philosophers’ accomplishments is is accomplishments philosophers’ these assessmentof His Hume. and ley sohigh that thein essay “Nueva refutación del tiempo” Borges attempts to con sciousness—and therefore of of reality—Borges redefines his object (time) by theory perspectivist Nietzschean almost an adopting how, show things there are in the universe depend, in this view, on our own mental own our on view, this in depend, universe the in are there things their centers hisendorsement of what hesees astheachievements of Berke in containedessays his to 1922, in written personalidad,” la de nadería essay,“La his From years. the in refuting time. Borges does not even appear to be dissuaded by Bertrand by dissuaded be to appeareven not Borgestime.does refuting in Borges’sfact, In philosophies. idealist Hume’s and Berkeley’s for and ism its relationship totheessay asform. means of a shift of frameworks at the end of his essay. But let us first turn turn first us let essay.But his of end the at frameworks of shift a of means both for the development of the essay as genre and for many of Borges’s of many for and genre as essay the of development the for both According to idealism, to be is to be known by a subject. Therefore, what ogs trs i “tep” o eue ie caatrsial, ih an characteristically, time, with refute to “attempt” his startsBorges de Kemp Smith. Publicada en 1947 Smith.en PublicadaKemp de anachronistic the is it Bergson—, 1947—after in PublishedSmith. Kemp or Huxley by line a Publicada al promediar el siglo XVIII, esta refutación (o su nombre) perduraríanombre) su (o refutaciónestaXVIII, siglo el promediar al Publicada en las bibliografías de Hume y acaso hubiera merecido una línea de Huxley o Huxley de línea una merecido hubiera acaso y Hume de bibliografías las en un argentino extraviado enla metafísica ductio ad absurdum name) would persist in Hume’s bibliographies and perhaps would have merited have bibliographieswould Hume’s perhaps in persistand would name) [ feeble anArgentine artifice of metaphysicslost inthemaze of If published toward the middle of the eighteenth century, this refutation (or its (or refutationcentury, thiseighteenth the of middle the towardpublished If

Thus, according to this doctrine, everything, including my body body my including everything,doctrine, this to accordingThus, reductio ad absurdum de un sistema pretérito o, lo que es peor, el débil artificio de Siete noches Siete — published in 1980, there remains at at remains there 1980, in published después de Bergsondespuésde of a preterite of system or, what is worse, the ( OC A History 2:

135) 659). — , es la anacrónica,la es ] ( Labyrinths 217). re - - - - - 135) [ 135) a predicate of temporal nature which establishes the very notion the subject the notion very establishesthe which naturetemporal of predicate a gerownattempt.his Indeed,essay, this ofoutset the at Borges admits exija o invoque denominado han lógicos los que monstruo del ejemplo would destroy would Hume’s philosophies. Heclaims: usqety Bre cnes i aaees ht hog te very the through that awareness his conveys Borges Subsequently, posible que no haya en estas hojas una sentencia que de algún modo no lo no modo algún de que sentencia una hojas estas en haya no que posible dan in put has he tiempo,” title,“Nuevarefutacióndel his of election nueva (o antigua) una refutación del tiempo es atribuirle un predicado de de predicado un atribuirle es tiempo del refutación una antigua) (o nueva also compromises the successBorges’scompromisesthethe ofrefutation: also is factor that in some way does not demand or invoke the idea of time of idea the invoke or demand not does way some in time that it is quite possible there is not one statement in these pages which pages these in statement one not is there possible quite is it that time logicians the sented by Berkeley and Hume? In which direction does Borges try to go to try Borges does direction which In Hume? and Berkeley by sented Despite these two endangering factors, Borges decides to venture fur venture to decides factors,Borgesendangering two these Despite [ jecto” further in his essay “Nueva refutación del tiempo”? In order to address temporal nature of language.heofcourse, this. AsBorgesnatureis, temporalawareof of “ intention. his against goes title its that this question, I shall turn to Borges’s understanding of Berkeley’s and ther in the direction of Berkeley and Hume. But what direction is repre “ time: índole temporal,índole instauraque quieresujeto el que destruirlanoción knows perfectly well, language is not an appropriate means to refute to means appropriate an not is languagewell, perfectly knows que nadie toca. Razonó que agregar una materia a las percepcioneses las a materia una agregartoca. que Razonónadie que sounds and tactile sensations; what he denied was that, aside from from aside that, was denied he what tastes, odors, sensations; colors, tactile of and existence sounds the denied he that note, should externo, hubiera dolores que nadie siente, colores que nadie ve, formas agregar almundouninconcebible mundosuperfluo( [Berkeley denied the existence of matter. This does not mean, one one mean, not does This matter. of existence the denied [Berkeley Berkeley negó la materia. Ello no significa, entiéndase bien, que negó negó que bien, entiéndase significa, no Ello materia. la negó Berkeley thing invisible, intangible, called matter. He denied that there were were there that denied He matter. called intangible, invisible, thing any was there world, external the up make perceptions,which these negó fue que, además de esas percepciones, que componen el mundo mundo el componen que percepciones, esas de además que, fue negó los colores, los olores, los sabores, los sonidos y los contactos; lo quecontactos; lo los y sonidos sabores,los olores,colores,los los los becauseistime refutationa that stating attributes old) (or new of itto tan saturado y animado de tiempo está nuestro lenguaje que es muy es que lenguajenuestro está tiempo de animado y saturado tan I am not unaware that it is an example of the monster termed by termed monster the of example an is it that unaware not am I contradictio in adjecto], he explains, “ explains, he adjecto], in contradictio ] ( ] ” ( ” Labyrinths OC 2: 135) [ 217). Moreover, there is another factor that factor another Moreover,is 217).there our language is so saturated and animated by No se me oculta que éste es un un es éste que oculta me se No contradictio in ad in contradictio porque decir que es que decir porque ] ( ] Labyrinths OC 2: 144). ” ( ” 218). OC 2: - - - - -

137 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 138 “know” exists in our minds? How could we prove that there are external are there that prove we could How minds? our in exists “know” of objectivity the assert therefore cannot we trusted; be can “perceived” According to Berkeley’s model, the individual has no direct access to the to accessdirect no has individual the model,Berkeley’s to According subjectively is what only that believedBerkeley here,suggests Borges As What Philonous claims here is at the same time very bizarre and not easy bizarrenot very and time same the at is here WhatPhilonous claims do not know physical objects but only sensations of them. For Mach,as For them. of sensations only but objects physical know not do vidual’s immediate sense-impressions.view,the Berkeley’simmediateMoreover, in vidual’s we may conclude thatfor Berkeley theself eventually becomes theworld. ownher sense-impressionsworldonlyto but “assembles”and worldthe our perception of the world. Thus, in his dialogues between Hylas and Hylas between dialogues his in Thus,world. the of perception our observed.observedAllis arethat sense-impressions arethat attributed to indi the than other nothing accepts Berkeleyimpressions. those of out as 1886, the famous empiricist and physicist Ernst Mach insists that we that insists Mach Ernst physicist and empiricist famous the 1886, as all? at exists object external any that inferring in justified be we can how hlnu, ekly ae Piooste hrce wo w my say, may we who, character Philonous—the makes Berkeley Philonous, speaks forspeaks Berkeley—claim: o Bree, h snain s h piay hn, hl te hns “out things the while thing, primary the is sensation the Berkeley, for tive” characteristic of the material world is, for the Bishop, an attributeofBishop, an the is, forworld material the tive”characteristicof “objec an be to “believe” we that characteristic Any world. material the those things. Hence, Mach encourages us to resist the tendency to think think to tendency the resist to us encouragesHence,Machthings. those never but inferred only are sensations cause to suppose we that there” tweensense-experiencesher external anything them.and to sense,this In differently, it say to Or, heads? our inside happens everything if things, a of existence the affirm we could How is: question The false. prove to individual is never in the position to verify any kind of correspondence be material world, totally external to our perceptions, when what we really we what perceptions,when our to external totally world, material Idealism has certainly made a strong impact in philosophy.earlier Asin impactstrong a made certainly has Idealism ed from those sensations. But if by the word an inconceivable, superfluousworld totheworld ( [w]hen I see, and feel, and taste, in such sundry certain manners, I am sure I, noranyone else, can besure itexists. ( thing thing distinct from its being perceived; then indeed I own, neither you nor the touches.reasonedmatterHe a add to that perceptionsour to addto is nature fromdistinct all those sensible qualities, and by its existence some pains that no one feels, colors that no one sees, forms that no one one no that forms sees, one no that colors feels, one no that pains cherry exists, or is real; its reality being in my opinion nothing abstract Three Dialogues cherry you mean an unknown Labyrinths 81) 227-28). - - - - - “attempt” Musil’s definition of the essay. Musil claims: “Were I to let my let to “Were I claims: essay. Musil the of definition Musil’s “attempt” the of half first the in philosophy on idealism of impact the of “sample” 16 15 34). ad absurdum About the Relationship Between Relativity Theory and Idealistic Philosophy.” After ex After Philosophy.” Idealistic and Theory Relativity Between Relationship the About Mauthner, for his part, proudly declaring Mach his predecessor, assertspredecessor, his Mach declaring proudly part, his for Mauthner, experience is not given; it is a mental construct” (144). Certainly, in light of Merrell’s of light in Certainly,(144). construct” mental a is it given; not is experience world happens inside our heads and consists of mental events.mentalconsistsof and heads our happensworld The inside devel would call thatanessay, anattempt…. I, who am norchar neitherscholar Mauthner reaches its full development in the Austrian “Vienna Circle” of the 1920s— the of Circle” “Vienna Austrian the in development full its reaches Mauthner opment of this point of view will lead to the conclusion that the distinc the that conclusion the to lead will view of point this of opment physical the of observe directly can we that “Everything asserts:Russell Mauth in Actually, experience. by verified be cannot objects material of language,of critique his In sensations. our transcends that something of a personal connection” ( connection” personal a thoughts my give only writer,can a be to want still case this in acter,but Borges “attempts” here to let his thoughts “go beyond the bounds” that bounds” the beyond“go thoughts his let to here“attempts”Borges amining Gödel’s essay, Gödel’s amining “linear that paperis Merrell Gödel’s of point concludesthe that all possible sense-experience can possibly have any literal significance” (Ayer, of limits the transcending ‘reality’ a to refers which statement “[N]o meaningless.are statement about being “ being about statement say, they are beyond our experience. And at this point we should not forget Kurt Gödel, among others. Along the same lines of Mach and Mauthner, members of members Mauthner, and Mach of lines same the Along others. among Gödel,Kurt with thinkers as diverse as Moritz Schlick, Hans Hahn, Otto Neurath, Rudolf Carnap and twentieth century, it cannot come as a surprise that Borges did not remain ( matterillusory” and is betweenmind tion Mauth as just work, philosophical whose Russell, Bertrand mention to existencelanguagethe ofsince parts misleading most the are nouns that thoughts go beyond the bounds of that which I could possibly justify, I justify, possibly could I which that of bounds the beyond go thoughts the lost mazein tine of metaphysics]—or, if he was, he was “good in com indifferent to it. to indifferent this group remind us that the propositions that we use to talk about material objects material about talk to use we that propositions the that us remind group this ner’s critique of language, was consulted by Borges on many occasions. many on Borges by consulted was language, of critique ner’s ner’s view, material objects are, for this reason, “transcendental,” that is to insightfuldiscussion, Borges’s “anachronousrefutationappearthe not as does pany” ( pany” FloydMerrell Remark “A articlerelates Borges’sKurt to refutationGödel’s time of This Berkeleyan-Humeansame wehavethat tendency idealist tracedMach in and OC ” thatBorges himself ittobe. claims 2: 135; 2: 15 In this sense, we can hardly apply to Borges his own his Borges to apply hardly can we sense, this In Labyrinths un argentino extraviado en la metafísica la extraviadoargentinoen un Tagebücher 217). 16 643-44). Thus, like Musil’s essayism,Musil’s likeThus, 643-44). Instead, we might apply to Borges’s to apply might we Instead, Our Knowledge Our 42).Giventhis ”[an Argen”[an Knowledge reductio ------

139 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 140 “transgresses” itsboundaries. “self.” In a first approach to this question, we might say that these percep these that say might question, we this approach to first a In “self.” I Given these “particular perceptions,” the question immediately arises as arises immediately question the perceptions,” “particular these Given Hume’s writings ascompleting Berkeley’sHume’s writings idealism. Borges claims: es moves from Berkeley’s idealism to Hume’s own version of it beforehe it versionof own movesHume’s Berkeley’sfromes to idealism l w hv ae es-mrsin o pretos Peiey eas we because Precisely perceptions. or sense-impressions are have we all always in reference to his notion of self. Hume, like Berkeley, believes “that Followingtraditionalthe narrative ofof histories philosophy, Borges sees Borges invokes Hume’s views often in his essays and stories, and almost stories,and essaysand his in often views Hume’s Borgesinvokes BerkeleyestablishedHume and for idealism. first us let But see how Borg sions and ideas, and that external objects become known to us only by only us to known become objects external that and ideas, and sions tions perhaps are inherent to some substantial self. However, for Hume,However, self.for substantial some to inherent are perhaps tions whatto integratesthat is it we entity that generally into them refer a as to remarks: those perceptions they occasion” ( nothing is nothing ever really present with the but mind its perceptions or impres V. A “Bundle” ofPerceptionsCtitutes a Self? “a bundle or collection of different perceptions, which succeed each other eachdifferent perceptions,succeedofwhich collection or bundle “a But settingBut metaphysicians some aside kind,ofthis mayI venture af to with aninconceivable rapidity” (op. cit., I, 4, 6)]( stumble on some particular perception or other, of heat or cold, light or shade, citada, I, 4, 6)( firm of the rest of mankind, that they are nothing but a bundle or collection el escéptico, la refuta y hace de cada hombre “una colección o atadura de atadura o colección “una hombre cada de hace y refutaescéptico, la el of different perceptions, which succeed each other with an inconceivablean with other differentperceptions,eachsucceed ofwhich a perception, andnever can observe buttheperception anything […] [Berkeley affirmedthe existence of personal identity, “Imyself am notmy For my part, when I enter most intimately into what I call myself, I always I myself,call I what into intimately most enter I when part, my For Berkeley afirmó la identidad personal, “pues yo no meramente soy mis soy meramente no yo “pues personal, identidad la afirmó Berkeley logues rapidity, andare aperpetualflux andmovement. in ( ideas, but somewhat else, a thinking active principle that perceives”( that principle active thinking else,a somewhat ideas, but ideas, otra sino cosa: activo un principio y pensante” ( lovehatred,or pleasure.or pain neverI cancatch without myselftime any at percepciones, que se suceden unas a otras con inconcebible rapidez” (obra ,3); Hume, skeptic,the refutes makesand identity this of every man OC 2: 138). A Treatise 67). Regarding the self, Hume Labyrinths A Treatise Dialogues 221). Iiv. 6: 252) , 3); Hume, Dia - - - - - 230). Hestates: 18 17 J. Ayer claims, “to be content to say that they belong to the same mind is mind same the to belong they that say to content be J.claims,“to Ayer governs our acts and receives our impressions] and concludes: “somos concludes: and impressions] our receives and acts our governs ceives anyreal connection amongexistences” distinct (636). Hume,turn, in of isolatedperceptions.bundle a dissolves into subject the que recibe las impresiones” [behind our faces there is no secret self which cept that there is no external world outside our own perceptionsownour externaloutside worldno ceptthere that is that and crete perceptual experiences, what accounts for its continuity? “What then dis of bundle collectionor a is selfshare, the to Borgesseems and claims we still need to find some way of linking those discrete perceptions. those linking A.way of some As find to need still we havewetraditionallywe say,as understandit,selfto a is that maintain as tise a self?” (Ayer,self?” a constitutes perceptions of bundle a which of virtue in relations the are that denies substance,Hume ofperception or sense-impression no have Borges believes, that neither does time exist—at least not “fuera de cada de “fuera not least exist—at time does neither believes,Borgesthat Borges,alreadywhohas accepted Berkeley’s externalthe that world claim subject. the into it collapsing world, the of erasing the started Berkeley all our distinct perceptions are distinct existences,” and (2) that the mind never per never mind the that (2) and existences,” distinct are perceptions distinct our all únicamente la la únicamente relawhateverthe in standthey that sayingwayof a just is it unhelpful,if to thesame underlyingmental subject”( them refers it unintelligibleif be,and to happensfor looking are we tion Yet(53).separation” their conceiveof consistently can we that sense the the “I” is a mere bundle of perceptions, we should be forced to conclude,forcedto be perceptions,should of we bundle mere a is “I” the the are,solely,[we rantes” y actos los gobierna que secreto, yo un caras las de detrás hay “no that instante presente” ( ( impressions] claim Hume’s accepts now sense-experiences, our of out constructed is ing a certain identity throughout life. ticularqualities, havenor when we talkwemeaning either other reasonany or concern is it in [his] power to renounce either one of them.” These two principles are: (1) “that are:“that (1) Theseprinciples two them.” of one renounceeither to power [his] in it is it”(Hume,ing he confesses that “there are two principles which [he] cannot render consistent; nor But we should not entertain any doubts regarding Borges’s intentions. Hume barelyHume attempts question.answerthis to fact,In appendixhis the in to par of collection a of that from distinct substances of idea “Weno havetherefore A Treatise Hume OC serie 2: de esos actos imaginarios y de esas impresiones er impresiones esas de y imaginarios actos esos de OC 52). I. i. 6: 16).

139; 2: 146) [outside each present moment] ( 18 Perceptions might be distinct existences—“in distinct be Perceptionsmight Labyrinths series of these imaginary acts and these errant these and acts imaginary these of 2; tlc ae ie. ne e ac we Once mine). are italics 221; 17 The question remains: If, as Hume Hume 53). Labyrinths Trea ------

141 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 142 “el momento del sueño” ( sueño” del momento “el V. Selves 19 20 Tzu’sdream fromboth Berkeley’s of view. points Hume’s and Thus, from es’s shortstory“Tlön, Uqbar, OrbisTertius,” see Martín. (95-96, 185-193). dreamt he was a man] ( man] a was he dreamt connecting it to Schopenhauer and also to Buddhism. to also and Schopenhauer to it connecting el cuerpo de Chuang Tzu” ( he was a man who had dreamt he was a butterfly or a butterfly who now butterfly who a butterfly or a was he dreamt had who man a was he awoke, he did not know “si era un hombre que había soñado ser una mari by self naturethe ofdelusory conviction the enhancedhis onlyabout has attempt project.” toanendtheidealists’“unfinished tobring rinths Berkeley’s point of view, we may claim that “no existía en aquel momento traced be can self the of negation idealist Hume’s acceptanceBorges’sof But let us turn our attention to the way Borges actually refutes time, in his should be notedbe hereshould Borgesthat remainedfaithfulconvictionhas this to four centuries ago Chuang Tzu dreamt he was a butterfly, and when he when and butterfly, a was he dreamtTzu Chuang ago centuries four throughout his literary career. If anything, throughout the years, Borgesyears, the throughout anything, If career.literary his throughout posa o una mariposa que ahora soñaba ser un hombre” ( hombre” un ser soñaba ahora que mariposa una o posa Tzu’sChuang of form the in essay this in position his supports also phy butterfly dream. Thus, according to the Chinese tradition, some twenty- some tradition, Chinese the to according Thus, dream. butterfly It 1922. in written personalidad,” la de nadería “La essay his to back For onBerkeleian-Humeanstudy theyilluminating as an principles apply Borgto On the connections between Borges’s notion of the self and Buddhism see Bossart 230), disregarding awakening.the suggestsHe considerChuang to which is time. Outside each perception (real or conjectural) matter does matter conjectural) or (real perception each Outside time. is which exist outsideeach present moment]( existirá fuera decada instante presente” ( esa retendremos derecho qué con sé no espacio, el [once matter and spirit—which are continuities—are negated, once space too is negated, I do not know with what right we retain that retain we right what with know not do I negated, is too teria;fuera cadaestadode mentalexiste no espíritu;el tampoco tiempo el ma la existe no conjectural) o (actual percepción cada de Fuera tiempo. not exist; outside each mental state spirit does not exist; neither does time también continuidades,negado son que espíritu, el y materia la negadas without Bodies Labyrinths OC OC 2: 146) [moment of the dream itself] ( itself] dream the of [moment 146) 2: 2: 146) [the body of Chuang Tzu did not ex 230). Borges invites us to consider the consider to us 230).Borgesinvites Labyrinths OC 2: 146; italics are mine) 230; italics are mine). continuidad 20 Oriental philoso Oriental OC 19

2: 146) [if 146) 2: continuity que es el es que Laby ------

According to Hume, on the other hand, it would be legitimate to assert to legitimate be would it hand, other the on Hume, to According different individuals’ lives—the existence of a repeated term is enough is term repeated a of existence lives—the individuals’ different Tzu,Chuang is she that dreams cal perceptions—although they belong to two different individuals. Ob individuals. different two to belong they perceptions—although cal of reality the is acknowledges idealism that reality only the concludes, viously, Borges appears to believe that once we identify identical percep identical identify we once that believe to appears Borgesviously, er she is a butterfly that is now dreaming she is a human being. Borges being. human a is she dreaming now is that butterfly a is she er of Chuang Tzu’s dream, also dreams that she is a butterfly and then and butterfly a is she that dreams also dream, Tzu’s Chuang of talk to or sense-impressions than rather “butterfly”) object (the objects argues that this case confrontsarguescasetwo this with that us about the subject (the self who is dreaming) rather than bundles of sense- du a vain perceived seems is butterfly which the to butterfly objective an a butterfly existed] ( rinths los procesos un yo le parece no menos exorbitante” ( exorbitante” menos no parece le yo un procesos los an siglos cuatro unos fue, que percepciones’ de conjunto o ‘colección la those perceptions and mental processes: “agregar a la mariposa que se que mariposa la a “agregar processes: mental and perceptions those término como Tzu;existían Chuang de mente la Cristo, de tes de momentáneo butterfly existed a término “como being of certainty the mari una ser certidumbrede la y sueño coloresdel existíanlos “sólo that to break down the series of time and thus refute the existence of a linear linear a existenceof the refute thus and time of series the down break to two to belong betweenmoments—evenmoments tionstwotwo these if not does individual this Tzu, Chuang like Thus, details. slightest their impressions doesnotmake anysense. infinite temporal series, between centuries four some which, perceptions’ of collection or ‘bundle the in serie temporal,infinita entre ist at that moment] ( know if she is a human whobeing has dreamt she is a butterfly, or wheth plication;selfthesea to processes adding seems lessno exorbitant] ( a agregarduplicación; vana una parece le objetiva mariposa una percibe posa”( before Christ, was the mind of Chuang Tzu;Chuang of before Christ,mind the was termthey existed a as Borges invites us further to imagine that somebody else, who knowselse, who somebody that imagine to further us Borgesinvites 231). In other words, from ofthe point view of idealism, to speak of OC 2: colors[onlythe dreamof146) the certainty the and ofbeing Labyrinths Labyrinths n-1 231). Borges explains that those colors and 231); only his dream as perception existed. y repeating n-1 n+i and ” ( ” OC n+1 Chuang Tzu’s mental states in in states Tzu’smental Chuang 2: 146) [as a momentaryterm2:a [as 146) identical ] ( ] Labyrinths moments,identi two OC 2: 146) [adding [adding 146) 2: 231). As Borges n de una de n in an in Laby ------143 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 144 2: 147; 2: 22 21 (Ayer, depend upon the identification of our bodies.toidentification our belonging the of dependupon than Rather he that Hume against objection the raised critics Some disembodied. no is there that denounce world,to the of history the confuse and down cation. Paradoxically, a theory to which our sense-impressions give rise rise give sense-impressions our which to theory a Paradoxically, cation. vital thus is It store.”“common of kind some to belonging as ceptions ends up denying the verysourcethe impressions:denying thoseof up ends body.the let But linear confuse] and down break [to confundir” y desbaratar “para ficient Leibniz’s principle of the identity of indiscernibles. According to Leibniz’s and sexuality—Borges, following Hume, seems to conceive here of per of conceivehere to sexuality—Borges,seemsHume, and following genderhistory, distinct a body—with distinct a with person distinct a hay( talhistoria?” say, “Nueva refutación deltiempo,” see Bossart (87-93). Borges, like Hume, equates personal identity with the identity of the the of identity the with identity personal equates Hume, like Borges, us go back to Chuang Tzu’sChuang to endangerthebackdream, goappears to us also which also identities our of attributions that forget to appears Hume, unlike success of Borges’s refutation. if even “identical” are perceptions two that say to meaningful seems such history?]( for Borges’s account of the self—and, therefore, for his success in the the in success his for therefore, self—and, the of account Borges’s for they were housed in two different persons. It seems quite obvious that obvious quite seems differentpersons.It two in housed werethey ( world] the of history [the mundo” del historia “la it, with and, time time. refutation of time—that we renounce the body as the primary identifi primary the as body the renounce we time—that of refutation Borges.of case the Borges, pressingin more much notbe to seems tion totally neglects the body in his notion of self (Ayer, mind, and defines identity of the mind without any reference to the body suf is Borges, to according disruption, This disrupted. is series the niz, paradesbaratar confundiry mundo,del historia la para denunciar no que identical,arestatesBorges perceptionsmental reasons, or Leib following principle, there cannot be twothe universein things exactly alike. But Leibniz’s principle by itself does not do the trick. For Borges,trick.Forit the do not does itself by principle Leibniz’s But For a discussion of Leibniz’s conception of time within the context of Borges’ses contextof the within time conceptionofLeibniz’s discussionof a For For therole thatthenotion of series plays Borges’s in essay, see Hayles 165. 21 Hume But how does Borges accomplish the trick? Borges introduces here Labyrinths 51). This allows Borges conceiveto ofperceptions totallyas Labyrinths 231). Borges claims: “¿No basta “¿No claims:Borges 231). OC 2: 147) [Is not one repeatedone break 2:not to [Is termsufficient 147) 231). un solo término repetido término solo un Hume 53). This objec 22 If two OC ------

V and While Chuang Tzu’s true identity may be an object of debate, “ un era “si know not did he us, tells Borgesup, wokeTzu Chuang When

change necessarily implies the existence of the time that Borges attempted act of recollection”ofact (157).words, other In Tzu’sChuang experienceof last an of consequence the be only “can out, points correctly Butler Colin as ( a man] butterflybutterfly a a was he or now dreamt who hombre que había soñado ser una mariposa o una mariposa que ahora so Berkeley andHume. Heasserts thewell-known statement: to refute. Tzu’sperplexityChuang of sense make to order in assume must we that to related is experience every that mean would this But it. precedes that in the initially selected context, the idealist philosophical framework of framework philosophical idealist the context, selected initially the in ñaba ser un hombre” ( presupposes a previous perplexity regarding his identity necessarily implies a implies necessarily identity his regardingperplexity I. I. F Borges appears to give up his “attempt” to refute time—at least with least refutetime—at “attempt”to his up giveBorgesappears to rom a Bu a rom the World by OtherMeans And yet, and yet and yet, And verso astronómico, son desesperaciones aparentes y consuelos secretos. consuelos y aparentes desesperaciones son astronómico, verso de la mitología tibetana) no es espantoso por irreal;porque por espantoso espantoso es es no tibetana) mitología la de destroza, pero yo soy el tigre; es un fuego que me consume, pero yo soy yo peroconsume, me que fuego un tigre;es el soy yo destroza,pero el fuego. El mundo, desgraciadamente,real;yo,mundo,desgraciadamente,fuego. es El soy el irreversiblees hierro.de y estoyhecho.que sustancia de la es tiempo El El Borges” ( tiempo es un río que me arrebata, pero yo soy el río; es un tigre que me que tigre un es río; el soy yo arrebata,pero me que río un es tiempo Nuestro destino (a diferencia del infierno de Swedenborg y del infierno del y Swedenborg de infierno del diferencia (a destino Nuestro memories OC change tt 2: 148-49) or erfly erfly … Negar la sucesión temporal, negar el yo, negar el uni el negar yo, el negar temporal, sucesión la Negar … recollections in the person who dreams he is Chuang Tzu—and a OC 2: 146) [if he was a man who had dreamt he was t o a Tex a o of experiences. This t : A nn i h i When timeisnot, Iam myself la ti continuity that’s flowing into that’s flowing Thee. ng ng series of experiences of series the ocean of eternity. In time, Iam ariver t Labyrinths he he Angelus Silesius that of memory S elf elf it is so,” 230). - - -

145 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 146 233-34; italics are mine). Borges is now somehow interested in an aspect an in interested somehow now Borgesis mine).are italics233-34; 23 (the idealist philosophies of Berkeley and Hume), he is actually “switching” You are music, rivers, firmaments, palaces, andangles] ( am the tiger the am destroys him, and the fire that consumes him, Borges is clearly identifying which were previously described and explained from the point of view ofview of point the from explained werewhichpreviouslyand described effects on him: “El tiempo es un río que me arrebata,perome que río un es tiempo “El him: on effects of pantheistic “All,” which guarantees that, as in Plotinus, “any thing is thing “any Plotinus, in as that, guarantees which “All,” pantheistic of scheme.conceptual initial his of realm the outside clearly is that time of and the universe, is emphasized by Borges’s quotation ending from Ange All,possiblethe separationany exist betweenherselferasing to in herself all ( things” perceptions, of “series” the about concerned longer no is he Noticeably, Berkeley’s and Hume’s idealism. What is Borges’s new framework about? Borges is not simply abandoning the previous framework of his refutation Eres música,/ firmamentos, palacios, ríos, ángeles” [everything is an infinity of things. of infinity an is [everything ángeles” ríos, palacios, firmamentos, música,/ Eres lus Silesius. Borges citestheoriginal Silesiusin German version: un tigre que me destroza, pero sweeps me along, but along, me sweeps frameworks.philosophically“unreal,” is “frightful”it becauseTimenot is the fact that Borges identifies himself with “time” instead of feeling its feeling of instead “time” with himself identifies Borges that fact the time and the “I.” Time appears to be understood here as part of some kind pero but because it is “irreversible and iron clad.” More important perhaps is perhaps important More clad.” iron and “irreversible is it because but By claiming that he is the river that sweeps him along, the tiger that tiger the along, him sweeps that river the is he that claiming By Compare this with the poem “The Unending Rose”: “Theinfinitas cosas.poem Unending cosa/es “Cadathe Compare with this yo soy el fuegoel soy yo ( which destroys me, but I am the tiger; it is a fire which consumes me, but I solations. Our destiny (as contrasted with the hell of Swedenborg and the of. Time is a river which sweeps me along, but I am the river; it is a tigera is river;it the am I but along, me sweeps which river a is of.Time am the fire.the am world,The unfortunately, real; is I, unfortunately, Borges] am [ hell of Tibetan mythology) is not frightful by being unreal; it is frightful is it unreal; being by frightful not is mythology) Tibetan of hell con secret and desperations apparent universe,are astronomical the ing because it is irreversible and iron clad. Time is the substance I am made am I substance the is Timeclad. iron irreversibleand is it because Labyrinths And yet, and yet and yet, And ; it is a fire which consumes me, but me, consumes which fire a is it ; Eneads 233-34). ” ( ” V, 8, 4). OC … Denying temporal succession, denying the self, deny self, the denying succession,temporal Denying … I am the river the am I 2: 148-49; italics are mine) [Time is a riverwhich a [Timeis 2: mine) 148-49;areitalics 23 Moreover, the idea of an individual who feels yo soy el tigre ; it is a tiger which destroys me, but me,destroys whichtiger a is it ; ; es un fuego que me consume, OC I am the fire the am I 3: 116; Selected Poems yo soy el río el soy yo ” ( ” Labyrinths 367). ; es ; I - - -

24 o is rsnain, h esy s gne eebe at “h Esy as Essay (“The art resembles genre a as essay the presentation), its (of (“The Essay asForm” 18). determines or shapes the thought process. Within this context, we may wecontext, this process.Within thought the shapes or determines mat a primarily is presentation.Adorno,thinking its Forof development decision. Letusfocus briefly on Adorno’s thought. Silesius tells the reader that if she wishes to read further, she should be should she further, read to wishes she if that reader the tells Silesius come the text herself. But how could the reader become the text? Since text? the become reader the could how But herself. text the come which were written in 1944 and 1946, respectively. This explanation might of his essay.his of Borges, presentationsomehowthe too,believe that to seems are reading is, in fact, the result of putting together two different essays,different two together putting of result the fact, in is, reading are he haspreviously pursuedbyothermeans(British philosophy). Form” 18). Form” Borges evokes here a pantheistic All, the contrast between “I” and universe, matter forces presentation to unremitting efforts. In this alone the essay resembles art” essayresembles the alone this efforts.unremittingIn forcesmatterto presentation understand Borges’s juxtaposition of those two almost identical essays as conclu This self. the of existence the denying to tantamount is universe sion is particularly relevant for our purpose. For, by means of Silesius’s of means by For,purpose. our for relevant particularly is sion the external). Moreover, denying the boundaries between the self and the the external flowsinto theinterior (and conversely, theinterior flows into take place. He goes as far as to claim that in its commitment to the form the to commitment its in that claim to as far as goes place.takeHe [ presentation of ter tions? Adorno’s theory of the essay as form may help us interpret Borges’s those parts that repeat each other? Why did he decide to keep those repeti nate as echoes of the first part of the essay. But why did Borges not edit not Borges did why essay. But the of part first the of echoes as nate mysticism,Borges achieves worldthe that ofselfand annihilation the the predetermined, but rather in how the essay shapes its reality in the very the in reality its shapes essay the how in rather but predetermined, reso essay the of portion second the in places some why clarify partially between “inside” and “outside,”object,and and subject between “inside” textand I disappears: Adorno is not interested in the essay as something preconceivedand something essayas the in interested not is Adorno It is interesting to mention here that Borges tells us that the essaythe Borgeswethat that heretellsus mention to interesting is It Adorno claims: “Consciousness of the non-identity of presentation and subject and presentation of non-identity the of “Consciousness claims: Adorno Go andyourself become thetext, yourself theessence]. So geh undwerdedasWesen dieSchriftundselbst selbst ( [My Friend, itisnow enough. Incase you wishtoread more, Freund, esistauchgenug. ImFall dumehrwillst lesen, 24 Borges, like Adorno, shows concern about the presentation the about concern shows Adorno,Borges, like Darlegung —ny y eoig om os thought does form becoming by ]—only

OC

2: 149) - - - - - 147 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 148 “switch” of frameworks, ending thus with the well-known Heraclitean well-known the with thus ending frameworks, of “switch” 1: 300). But Borges does not lock himself up in the British idealist phi idealist British the in up himself lock not does Borges But 300).1: 25 cism plays theessay. in direction, that of mysticism, where all differences between the universe universe the between differences all where mysticism, of that direction, essayist sees a sort of prison that “bring[s] the world into subjection” into world the “bring[s] that prison of sort a sees essayist the system, philosophical totalized the In world. and self between ence attemptrefuteconsistsofempo”:his to time Borges’sstrategy in initial ond, once he has dissolved the world into the individual’s own percepown individual’s the into world the dissolved has he onceond, the confining perceptions, own individual’s the than other nothing of and the “I” disappear. This interruption in the former direction of his of direction former the in interruption Thisdisappear. “I” the and (Musil, system very the in up us locks and Borges’s explain may process thought reader’s the shaping of way a achieving some kind of “closure” of the reflections he articulated within repetition,reality:essaystheir twothroughits “at these shaping wayof a late his refutation. Unlike systematic thinkers, Borges does not proceedrefutation.not thinkers,his systematic UnlikeBorgesdoes late articu to which within framework a as chose initially he that losophy steadily in the same direction (that of the British idealists). On the con the On idealists). British the of (that direction same the in steadily differ of erasure the and time ofpassage ceaseless the about statement shift of contexts? frameworks. Does this switch of frameworks mean that Borges attempts to recapture the external reality behind Berkeley’s and Hume’s atomis Hume’s and Berkeley’s behind reality external the recapture to shifts abruptly Borges scheme, conceptual idealist philosophical the than perceptions.However,rather of it) calls Hume as (“bundle,” tion summa mosaic a tions, into Borges,self Hume,dissolvesfollowingthe two main steps. First, following Berkeley, Borges accepts the authenticity of indiscernibility of experience same the reader the in evoke to tempt” thoughts has at least three consequences upon Borges’s essay. Firstly,essay. Borges’s upon consequences three least at has thoughts warning any almost without trary, abrupt Borges’sinterpret we should How world? the perceptionsof tic individual to a prison whose limits are indeed those perceptions. Sec perceptions. those indeed are limits whose prison a to individual the body of the essay, might be interpreted as “hints” anticipating the role that mysti that role the anticipating “hints” as interpreted be essay,might the of body the perceptions thattheessays discursively propose. preliminary” [Note to the Prologue] as well as the references to Schopenhauer within within Schopenhauer to references the as well as Prologue] the to [Note preliminary” To summarize our discussion of Borges’s “Nueva refutación del ti del refutación “Nueva Borges’s of discussion our summarize To rcsl Bre’ cnen bu te rsnain f i esy as essay his of presentation the about concern Borges’s Precisely The mentioning of the encounter between Milinda and Nagasena in the “Nota the in Nagasena and Milinda between encounter the of mentioning The 25 Borges turns in a totally different totally a in turns Borges The Man without Qualities without Man The ------“in-between” that opens up between these two systems Borges succeeds in V The goal of “El escritor argentino y la tradición” la y argentino escritor “El of goalThe completion of this transgressivenon-existencethis Borgessuggestsshift,the of completion vain precision], “un nuevo toque verosímil” [as a new proof of verisimili proofof new a [as verosímil” nuevotoque precision], vain “un work in the “interstices” or spaces in-between that emerge between sys between emerge that in-between spaces or “interstices” the in work which toread Borges’s regarding claims gauchesque poetry. er believe that the narrative is about the “real” world, Borges maintains, Borgesworld, “real” the about is narrative the that believe er gauchecandidates:possible main three considerstradition.Borges erary extinguishing theworld andthe“I”and, along withthem, time. Rather it belongs to the character of the essay itself, and allows Borgesessayallowsto itself, the and ofcharacter the to belongs it Rather reflections. Thirdly, our place to which within framework absolute an of of reality] ( reality] of here of his position regarding realism so as to develop a framework within and perhaps more importantly, this shift of direction prevents Borges’s es representation sented under a certain perspective so that literary representation cannot representationliterary that so perspective certain a under sented Westernliterature,the tradition.poetry,Spanish Borges and begins sque say from achieving closure within the initially idealist framework. But this failure to achieve closure should not be interpreted as interpreted be not should closure achieve to failure tradición,” where “remainders” of the idealist British framework still can frameworkstill British idealist the of “remainders”where tradición,” tems as diverse as British idealism and Silesius’s mystical thought. In that tion of reality. In every literary text, reality has to be thought of and pre and of thought be to has reality text,literary every In reality. of tion tude], seeing her as writing a “transcripción de la realidad” [transcription [each precisión” vana toda “de detail, each employs novelist realist the that pretends to reflect reality the way it is. In an attempt to make the read ing Borges’s position regarding gauchesque poetry let us be reminded be us let poetry gauchesque regarding position Borges’s ing origi was that system the of bounds the beyond go to him allows it nally chosen as the framework for the inquiry. by examining the first alternative, gauchesque poetry. But before discuss alternative,before poetry.first But gauchesque the examining by be perceived. II. Grenzargen tinier (“A Let us turn our attention to Borges’s “El escritor argentino y la la y argentino escritor “El Borges’s to attention our turn us Let Borges repeatedly opposes any kind of realist literary representation literary realist of kind any opposes repeatedly Borges Prólogos would ever be able to serve as a as serve to able be everwould 22-3; Reader rgentines a 123). However, Borges contends that no that However,contends123).Borges t direct

the borders”) Secondly, by means of the

is to define Argentine lit Argentine define to is and faithful Borges’s transcrip inability. ------149 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 150 27 26 In his essay, “El arte narrativo y la magia” [Narrative Art and Magic], Borges ad Magic],Borges and Art [Narrativemagia” la y narrativo arte essay,“El his In guage],which neveris themselves poets ( popular usedby daily, empirical world. For Borges, however, magical causality is the only valid causal valid only the is causality magicalhowever, Borges,For world. empirical daily, dresses the problem of realism from a different perspective. us by reminding He begins dez derives from thespontaneous poetryof the gauchos, establishingthus acontinuity concludes, governs boththedetective story andtheadventure novel. causality to the realist novel. Thus, in Borges’s view, the realist writer attempts to achieve encounter characters that may kill themselves because they are so happy, or “asesinos “asesinos happy,or so are they because themselves kill may that characters encounter every detail registered thenarrative in isanomenandacause. Magical causality, Borges out of fervor orhumility](Prólogos 22; novel,mayargues,Borges realistwe Russian the novel.Thus, realistin so-called the of ( candidate for Argentine the“authentic” literary tradition. of the reality of the gauchos but as one more artificial object. artificial more one as but gauchos the of reality the of a as attentionpoetry gauchesqueour Borges whatthe say to about to has any other representation of reality— will always remain an artificial object are two ways in which an author may achieve this fictional pact with the reader: either by means of “natural causality” or “magical causality.” Borges links the pursuing of natural verifiabil suspend and literary text the to inherent as element fictional acceptthe must may separate forever as a consequence of their love. And one man can inform on another un lenguaje deliberadamente popular” ( lenguaje deliberadamenteun popular” juego preciso de vigilancias, ecos y afinidades” ( afinidades” vigilancias,y de ecospreciso juego ject has been regarded as a matter of resemblance. This resemblance, moreover, is taken resentation and, as such, it may not be taken as a faithful “transcription” faithful a as taken be not may it such, as and,resentation tions, ( affinities] and echoes characters and things, events, fictional turning by disbelief of suspension reader’s the duda” la Coleridgewhatde implies suspensión “espontáneacallsliteraryreading a that resem any see not does however,Borges,is. it realist more the people, or events real resembles text a closely more view,the this look.On who all to objective,visible be to ing to Borges, a way of emphasizing the constructed nature of a literary object as “un “un as object literary a of nature constructed the emphasizing of way Borges,a to ing our in occurring as identify we causality the to analogous links causal of system a into ity in regard to all the references to reality present in the text. Borges indicates that there link between events, characters, or things in a literary text. Magical causality is, accordis, causality text.Magicalliterary a in things events,characters,or between link benevolence.Lovers of act an as murder [commit humildad” por o fervor por latores peculiarities of each of those genres. Gauchesque poets, Borges argues further, “cultivan Hidalgo, Bartolomé of poetry separarsesiempre,de para benevolencia,punto por el hastade adoran se que personas because an immediate relationship to reality is impossible. But let’s turn let’s impossible.But is reality to relationship immediate an because be but between both genres. Yet Borges contends that Rojas neglects here the fundamental the here neglects Rojas that contends Borges Yetgenres. both between figures or events fictional the in people or events real to similarity or likenessblance, OC 1: 226) [the willing suspension of disbelief] ( disbelief] of suspension willing [the 226) 1: Borges claims that gauchesque poetry, like the realist novel, is a rep a is novel, realist the like poetry, gauchesque that claims Borges In his In ob its representationand between relationship novel,the realist Typically,the in

artificial Historia de la literaturaargentinala de Historia . 26 Moreover, Borges contends that the realist novel—as realist the that contends BorgesMoreover, Reader

Hilario Ascasubi, Estanislao del Campo and José Hernán José and Campo Ascasubi,del EstanislaoHilario 38). magicalthe causalitymode,In Borges explains, Reader OC 1:[cultivate lan 268) deliberately popular a ,

Ricardo Rojas claims that the gauchesque the that claims RojasRicardo 122-23). OC Reader 1: 231) [a rigorous scheme of attenofrigorous scheme [a 1:231) 34). Accordingly, the reader the Accordingly,34). Labyrinths 178). Gauchesque 27 Moreover, ------“real” but in a current pictorial practice that may change entirely with a with entirely change may that practice pictorial current a in but “real” the to resemblancealleged an in rest not does one another than “realist” Alejandro’s estancia, he is to some extent disappointed: the behavior and acts of the of acts and behavior the disappointed: extent some to is he estancia, Alejandro’s Interestingly, we encounter a similar reflection in his story “El Congreso.” “El When story his in reflection similar a Interestingly,encounterwe gauchos do not correspond to the expectations that literature has awakened in Ferri. in awakened has literature that expectations the to correspond not do gauchos ( otro” cualquier como artificial tan “géneroliterario a is poetry gauchesque Goodman’s view of pictorial realism. Thus, not unlike Borges,Goodmanunlike Thus,realism. not pictorial of view Goodman’s “ is gauchesquepoetry dez o de Rafael Obligado. Bajo el estímulo del alcohol de los sábados eran fácilmente eran sábados los de alcohol del estímulo el Obligado.Bajo Rafael de o dez clear opposition between the reality of the gauchos and the representation carried out representationcarried the and gauchos the of reality the between opposition clear “trovas” Hidalgo’s Bartolomé as such compositions contends that the very reason why a certain painting is considered more considered is painting certain a why reason very the that contends it as literature and traditions oral between discontinuity and continuity of issues to discussion Borges’s connects Aizenberg literature, colonial en for spontaneous poetry produced by the gauchos for the simple reason also be argued that Borges’s discussion of gauchesque genre is relevant is genre gauchesque of discussion Borges’s that argued be also Borges alerts us to the fact that gauchesque poetry should not be mistak be not should poetry gauchesque that fact the to us Borgesalerts r eeuig oehn iprat n isiciey vi pplr od ad seek and words popular avoid instinctively and important something executing are gauchesca”( ación surfaces in African literature (104-05). From a differentliterature(104-05).perspective,Fromcana African it in surfaces extremelyis poetry sque suggestive. contextthe within it ofReading post violentos. No había una mujer y jamás oí una guitarra”( una oí jamás y mujer una había violentos.No gauchos,the of poetry or poetry popular removedfrom further be could view, nothing He comments: “poco o nada tenían en común con los dolientes personajes de Hernán de personajes dolientes los con común en tenían nada o comments:“poco He were no women, and I never heard a guitar” ( guitar” a neverheard I women,and no were who “tiene la convicción de ejecutar algo importante, y rehúye instintivamente las voces [literary genre asartificial asanyother]( to debates on pictorial realism. By emphasizing the element of artificial of element the emphasizing By realism. pictorial on debates to been has product;secondly,it arbitrary because an is such,it and,as tion sense, this In gauchos. as posing poets urban by written been has it that ity or conventionality present in the genre, Borges comes close to Nelsongenre, to the closeBorges comesin conventionalitypresent or ity función delgaucho, como dichas porelgaucho, para leacon queellectorlas unaenton the narrator, Alejandro Ferri, attempts to approach the gauchos who live closed to Don to closedlive narrator,whoFerri, the Alejandrogauchos approach the attemptsto ( intonation] gaucho a in it read will reader the high-sounding terms and expressions] ( expressions] and terms high-sounding produced bywriters who were notgauchos themselves. ligado. Under the spur of their Saturday alcohol, they could be casually violent. Thereviolent. casually be could they alcohol,Saturday their of spur the ligado.Under Ob Rafael or Hernández in characters mournful the with common in nothing or little popularesbuscay voces girosy altisonantes” ( by gauchesque poetry. As Edna Aizenberg correctly points out, Borges discussion of gauche of discussionBorges out, points correctlyAizenberg Edna As OC 1: 268) [in terms of the gaucho,gaucho,utteredthat the the as ofso termsby [in 1:268) doubly ”

contrived:Firstly, representaa is becauseit Labyrinths Labyrinths Collected OC Labyrinths 1: [have268) convictionthe theythat 179) 179). Thus, Borges concludes: the concludes: BorgesThus, 179).

intend to present themselves “en themselves present to intend 430).Thus, Ferrisuggestsa here . El libro de arena de libro El 178). However, in Borges’s However,in 178). 30) [Theyhad 30) OC 1: 268) 1: ------151 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 152 “puede definirse sin equivocación como un querer apartarse de España” apartarse un querer como equivocación sin definirse “puede Argentine writer the right to elaborate themes or any aspect from any lit any from aspect any or themes elaborate to right the writer Argentine 28 ( greenargues,paint,Goodmanthan realisticeventually regarded morewould be as this general … can handle all European themes, handle them without super without them handle themes, European all handle can … general Argentine the by supported proposal a fact, in was, poetry, gauchesque tradition literary Argentine authentic the as stand to poetry gauchesque currentpractice: pictorial generallyis what regarded realistmaychangeas entirelywith of using red paint to depict red objects. If artists generally did a painting of a red hat in in hat red a of painting generallya objects.redartists depictdid If to paint red using of demos manejar todos los temas europeos, manejarlos sin supersticiones, sin europeos,manejarlos temas los todos manejar demos is arises: poetry artificiality. question gauchesque its the If to And yet due o ua reeeca u pee ee, y tee cneunis afortu consecuencias tiene, ya y tener, puede que irreverencia una con convention. of change erature whatsoever. “nuestro patrimonio es el universo”( el whatsoever.erature es patrimonio “nuestro alternative doArgentine writers have? a (“doubly”) artificial construct posing as anindigenous genre, what other the of legitimacy the rejects Borges style, conventional or artificial an as semblance to the “real” red hat but in the simple fact that we are used to the convention a change of convention. re alleged its in rest not does claims, Goodman painting, green identical otherwise an literature: “Creo que los argentinos, los sudamericanos en general […] po stition, with an irreverence which can have, and already does have,fortu does already have,and can irreverence which an with stition, the for claims literature.He Spanish to pertain that those or poetry sque ventions displayed in it are extremely familiar to the observer. Thus, the reason why a why reason Thus,observer.the the to familiar extremely are it in displayed ventions from Spain] ( Spain] from rowly “local” themes and characters, be it those that belong to gauche to belong that those it be characters, and themes “local” rowly the likealternative, This adhere. should writers Argentine which to tion to Western tradition paradoxically enables her to play freely with all world ing that it is not coherent with Argentine history, which, Borges claims, Borgeswhich, history, Argentine with coherent not is it that ing the one done in red paint ( nadas” ( nadas” argu as restrictive, option this disqualifies rapidly Borges nationalists. preferred alternative ( universe],the is patrimony third asserts—and his and defiantly is he this painting of a red hat done in red paint is generallyis red paint in reddoneconsideredof a hat morebe “realist”to painting than OC ogs osdr te ieiod f pns ltrtr a te tradi the as literature Spanish of likelihood the considers Borges Borges argues that the Argentine writer’s marginal status with respect According to Goodman, a picture is classified as realist when the pictorial con pictorial the when realist as classified is picture a Goodman, to According 1:unmistakably[canbe 271) desire a become as to defined separated OC 1: 273) [I believe that we Argentines, we South Americans in in Americans South Argentines,wewe that believe [I 273) 1: Labyrinths Labyrinths Languages 28 Thus, just as Goodman rejects pictorial realism pictorial rejects Goodman as just Thus, 182). Thus, Borges refuses to be limited to nar to limited be to refuses Borges Thus, 182). 35-6). Hence, for Goodman, realism is a product of 185). OC 1: 273) [our 1:273) ------Te nelcul r-mnne f es n oen uoe (99. Pos (1919). Europe” Modern in Jews of Pre-eminence Intellectual “The 29 Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari’s influential theory of minor literature minor of theory influential Guattari’s Félix and Deleuze Gilles culture with respect to dominant European cultures to that of Jews with Jews of that to cultures European dominant to respect with culture vation, Veblen argued that assimilated, “gifted” Jews, who were living at living were whoJews, assimilated,“gifted” that arguedVeblenvation, ence of being on the “margins” (Piglia “¿Existe la novela argentina?”). ond Worldond War: Witold Gombrowicz. Gombrowicz’s awareness po ofthe ously,apart. This ambivalence, Veblen’s in view, alloweddevelop to them po the skeptics.on perfect Veblenemphasis laysthe Europe—became of as Borges sees his marginal position as paradoxically enabling him to play been also has culture, dominant the to commitment radical of lack and and another sensibility” (17). literature writtenminor is a ofpotentialfromthe the that claim their and France or Germany appears to echo Borges’s understanding of his experi his of Borges’sunderstanding echo appearsto Germany Franceor minority constructs within a major language. But the first characteristic of minor literalanguage. characteristicmajor minor first a of the within But constructs minority underscored by a Polish writer who was living in Argentina since the Sec the Argentinasince in living was whoPolish writer a underscoredby sition at the boundary of two disparate cultural worlds as crucial since crucial as worlds cultural disparate two of boundary the at sition sition of his Polishness with respect to the “central” cultures generated in freelyallwith world literature, Gombrowicz interpretedalso marginalhis that the privileged position “at the borders,” in terms of its distancewith its of terms borders,”in the privileged “at the position that Guattariforcenoteworthyliterature”tionaryalland (Deleuzeis 19).for It though they embraced the culture of Europe, they remained, simultane remained, they Europe, of culture the embraced they though Al “outsiders.” and “insiders” simultaneously be to them allowed that that and origin ethnic their of cultures—that two between margins the inno intellectual for departure of point ideal the as skepticism tulating article his in Veblen by understood is it as culture Western to respect ture in any case is that in its language is affected with a high coefficient of deterritorial of highcoefficient a affectedwith languageis its in that is case any in ture mind whenmind hearticulates hisappreciation of themargins. ness to emerge more clearly. But Borges seems to have Thorstein Veblen in another express “to possible is it where from border, the from margins, nate consequences] ( ization” (Deleuze andGuattari 16). position as a liberating force, allowing the minoritarian nature of Polish of nature minoritarian the force,allowing liberating a as position conditionmarginalitya artist’s as postulatethe forinnovative, an “revolu consciousness another for means the forge to and community possible n i esy Bre cmae te agnl iuto o Argentine of situation marginal the compares Borges essay, his In “A minor literature doesn’t come from a minor language; it is rather that which a which that ratherlanguage; is minor it a fromcome literature doesn’t minor “A Labyrinths 29 Borges, like Deleuze and Guattari, seems to 184). Borges’s position is not very far from

Just ------153 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 154 “Jews at the border,” a word that became synonymous for Jewish cosmo Jewish for synonymous became that word a border,” the at “Jews 31 30 (108),BalderstonDaniel ( derstanding of classical orcanonical literature (“Borges: The Argentine Writer” 37-40). context, Balderston discusses Borges’s rendition of British India in “El hombre en el en hombre “El in India British of rendition Borges’s discusses Balderston context, Borges’s of examples emblematic most the of one perhaps as cos” of cultural change is, it seems to me, irrefutable. That it is a liberating category liberating a is it Thatirrefutable. me, to seems it is, change cultural of duces a hybrid replica of the discoursedominant that almost “is the same develops or Borges’s talk “from the margins,” hybridity opens up a “third a as claiming Borgesis that border the at position the to connected dom catalyst for innovation. In German, one spoke of “Grenzjuden”—literallyof spoke oneGerman, innovation. In for catalyst Moreiras (395). appropriation of themes or ideas that belong to the dominant culture. dominant the By to belong that ideas appropriationor themes of irreverence abiding culturean which, real turn,dominant the the forin is similated and thus negated by the dominant culture. We see this tendency particularly culture.tendency Wedominant this see the by negated thus and similated as be to potential the has always hybridity Cultural questionable. more me to seems sider, it seems to me, is the position that Borges seeks for himself and himself for seeks Borges that position the is me, to seems it sider, postcolonialto sort unsettlingthe discourse powerexplain to ofBorges’s pure,never is meaning where sites “in-between” or “interstices” space,” Veblen that borders” the “at position the Likediaspora. and syncretism, understanding of the Westernthe of understanding canon, examineselsewhereBalderston Borges’s un own ( umbral” with respect to tradition. While Aizenberg stresses “the linguistic-interpretiveambigu “the stressesAizenbergtradition. While to respect with dimension integral an serve.statementsis Thathybridityhybrid these interestswhose right for himself. the Argentine writer. Despite her nearness, in Borges’s view, the Argentine in postcolonial theory’s emphasis on cultural hybridity, border-crossing,hybridity,cultural on emphasis theory’s postcolonial in ht hs tr sos ht utrl iaim ae awy aray opoie, con compromised, already “always are binarisms cultural that shows story this that taminated, always already mixed” (“Lost in Translation” 11). Within the postcolonial the Within 11).Translation” in (“Lost mixed” already alwaystaminated, monic authorityandchallenge itsmodel. Borgespro how show discussions,critics insightfulthese their of means never uncontaminated, never stable. ity that necessarily occurs in new and hybridized settings” (107), Molloy, in turn, claims and Chowdhury see hybridity of perils the For music. and film as such mediums in politans (Mendes-Flohr 21). It is precisely both the ambivalence and freeambivalenceand the both precisely is (Mendes-Flohr21).politansIt but not quite,” and that, in its difference, manages to threaten the hege the threaten to difference,manages its in that, and quite,” not but In any case, the paradoxical situation of being both insider and out and insider both being of situation paradoxical the case, any In Echoes of the image of the borders as elaborated by Veblen resonateVeblen by elaborated as borders the of image the of Echoes Both MolloyBoth Borges’sAizenbergto and evangelio “El point story short según Mar As we recognize the liberating potential of hybridity, we have to be cautious about Out of Context of Out 98-114). Furthermore, engaging himself with Harold Bloom’s Harold with himself Furthermore,98-114).engaging Out of Context of Out 30 Critics as diverse as Edna Aizenberg 98-114) and Sylvia MolloySylvia and 98-114) re(19) 31

marginal position per se per ------

V 1870 and 1900. In fact, the implications of this abyss between reality and reality betweenabyss this of implications fact,the 1900.In and 1870 between born writers of generation subsequent the and 1870 and 1840 Wittgenstein and in more recent developments such as Jacques Derrida’sJacques as recentWittgensteindevelopmentsmoresuch in and 33 32 ug ad elt. hs ocr hs en lqety xrse, among expressed, eloquently been has concern This reality. and guage essaystradición”?these Do la gentino y invoke different is or “traditions” gues,“Borges’s inventconditioncosmopolitanism allowsto a that him is deconstruction, but are ones we still wrestle with in the twenty-first cen twenty-first the in with wrestle still we ones are deconstruction,but between span the in born philosophers other by as well dictionary—as Sarlo explains further, “Borges also offers Argentine culture an oblique an culture Argentine offers also “Borges further, explains Sarlo co de John Wilkins,” “Nueva refutación del tiempo,” and “El escritor ar escritor “El and tiempo,” del refutación “Nueva Wilkins,” John de co way”( has and tradition, European to respect with outsider an remains writer other sources, in Mauthner’s critique of language of critique Mauthner’s sources, in other tion has been continuously consulted by Borges, particularly his philosophical subordinate any in not foreignliteraturebut to related is literaturethat a tradition,” national a reinventing “By literature.” Argentine for strategy a spective andhisuse of andinterest translation, in see Schwartz andWaisman. Fromhistoricalperspective,a Borges’s essays dominant resultareofa the there inherent here tradition asingle thatfeeds thethree essays? reading of Western literatures. From the edge of the West, Borges achieves perceptivelyar Sarlo Beatriz As invention.creative for potential the thus they are our own creations. All there is for us, according to Borges, is repBorges,is to accordingus, for is there creations.All own our are they the world “out and things there” depend, Borges’s in view, on our minds; “El is point in case clear representations:it.A our in dwells and reality he tury. Borges, for his part, does not attempt to circumvent the gulf between Ludwig of philosophy the in both reflected only not are representation idioma analítico deJohn Wilkins.” modernist concern with an insurmountable abyss opened between lan between opened abyss insurmountable an with concern modernist analíti idioma “El betweennectionofpostulatedby individual model the III. Coda . Rather than existing independently of us, free of our subjective rule, subjective our of free us, of independently existing than Rather On Borges relationship to Mauthner’s critique of language see Dapía, see language of critique Mauthner’s to relationship Borges On per marginal or peripheralBorges’s between relationship the of discussion a For JorgeLuisBorges 5). 32 However, conany arises:therequestion Is the 33 —which, as we know,we —which,as Die Rezep Die ------155 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 156 ( soy el río el soy dissolves.respect,this simultaneouslyIn is Borges’s that “I” imagethe of certain common thread traversing the three essays: the three essays appear sense-impressions,atomic of makingsummation a into self convertsthe other nothing accept we If perceptions. her of out world the constructs writer as described by Borges seems to be capable of great inventivenessgreat of capable be to seemsBorges by described as writer the creates sense-impressions her combining or assembling by world xetto o uedn cetvt—o te ubr f osbe combi possible of number the creativity—for unending of expectation who subject a as individual the of conception a invoke to seem essays only does the world dissolve (into our own perceptions) but the self also self perceptions)the own but our dissolve (into world the does only at the margins of two cultural worlds. Hence, what appears noticeable is a both world,“objective” an disappearanceof the With tiempo.” del ación analítico de John Wilkins,” and it can also be encountered in “Nueva refut idioma “El in pervasive is making our of not is that world“objective” an Borges’s concept of the individual as writer: distrusting “local” culture, the stroys me, but me,stroys sist on confining ourselves to our own directly accessible perceptions, not refutación del tiempo.” Thus, following Berkeley, he accepts the authentic the world is the external world can never be proved since all we have is our sense-data: perceptions,perceptiveimmediateown our ofour limits worldsthan the negate to tendency certain a Clearly us. to inaccessible is it resentation, resentations, classifications or systems. If there is a reality outside our rep to invoke the same individual, the modern Humean solitary “constructor” those bits of sense-impressions cluster together as they come. But if we in is a river which sweeps me along, but along, me sweeps which river a is prison-houseofperceptions.the those to individual Following Hume, he perceptions,own individual’s the than other nothing the confining of ity nations seems to be infinite. Not surprisingly, this last feature appears in appears feature last surprisingly,infinite. this Not be to seems nations consume,pero me fire become the limits of the external world. In other words, the existence ofexistence words, the other In world.external the of limits the become both its subject and object (“El tiempo es un río que me arrebata,me que río un pero es tiempo (“El object and subject its both Labyrinths ] testifies for the meldinginto each other of both the world and the self As we have attempted to show, Borges traverses this path in “Nueva in path this traversesBorges show, to attemptedhave we As liaey a iw ht rsns h idvda a cntutn her constructing as individual the presents that view a Ultimately, ; es un tigre que me destroza,perome tigre que un es ; 233-34; italics are mine). oneself. I am the tiger the am I

yo soy el fuego el soy yo ; it is a fire which consumes me, but me, consumes which fire a is it ; ” ( ” OC 2: 148-149; italics are mine) [Time mine) are italics148-149; 2: I am the river the am I yo soy el tigre el soy yo ; it is a tiger which de tigerwhich a is it ; ; es un fuego que fuego un es ; I am the am I yo ------34 cal system. In the “interstices” or spaces in-between that emerge out of the verse conceptual frameworks that other genre would probably not allow.not probably wouldgenre other that frameworksconceptual verse ophy and mysticism, allows access to each other in ways that would havewayswould mysticism, that in and ophyother allowsaccess each to of the world, which creates the world “outside any essential framework of access to the world—albeit a shapeless, contourless world, where all dif all whereworld, contourlessshapeless, a world—albeit the to access Not unlike Adorno’s and Benjamin’s use of the device of “constellation,” Borges’sjuxtaposition ofdifferent frameworks, likephilos idealist British shapes [herlife] asawhole” (Van derVeer 95). vice, see Helmling: “Constellation andCritique.” juxtaposition of these two different systems, Borges seems to have gained ferences between theself andtheworld collapse. moral questions, outside discursive tradition, outside a narrative which narrative a outside tradition, discursive outside questions, moral been probably impossible within the context of a traditional philosophi traditional a of context the within impossible probably been The essay as form allows Borges a kind of “transaction” between di between “transaction” of kind a Borges allows form as essay The On the difference between Adorno’s and Benjamin’s use of the “constellation”the of de use differenceBenjamin’s the and Adorno’sbetweenOn Purdue University Silvia G. Dapía 34 - - - - -

157 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 158 ---. Philosophische Terminologie: Zur Einleitung. ---. ---. ---. ---. ---. ---. Works Cited Ayer, Alfred Jules. Alazraki, Jaime. “Estructuraoximorónica enlosensayos deBorges.” Aizenberg, Edna. “Borges, Postcolonial Precursor.” Adorno, Theodor W. “The Actualityof Philosophy” [1931]. Berkeley, George. Bense, Max. Balderston, Daniel. “Borges: The Argentine Writer andthe‘Western’ Borges, Jorge Luis.

Critical Models: InterventionsandCatchwords El idiomadelos argentinos. A Treatise Concerning Human thePrinciples Knowledge of Context:Out of Historical Reference andtheRepresentation Reality of in The Problem Knowledge of “The Essay asForm.” 1968. 323-33. Alastair Reid. New York: Dutton, 1981. Tradition.” Reader Oxford: Oxford UP, 1998. Borges Buenos Aires: Borges, Gerchunoff, andArgentine-Jewish Writing Institute American of Latin Studies, 1998. 37-48. Suhrkamp, 1973. Shierry Weber Nicholsen. New York: Columbia UP, 1991-1992. prosa narrativa deJorge Luis Borges. Temas-Estilo New York: Columbia UP, 1998. Blackwell, 2000. 23-39. lis: Hackett, 1979. nover, NH: UPof New England, 2002. 102-13. . Durham: Duke UP, 1993. . Ed. BrianO’Connor. Trans. BenjaminSnow. Malden, MA: “Ueber denEssay Prosa.” undseine

Borges andEurope Revisited Three Dialogues between Hylas andPhilonous Hume. Borges: AReader Notes toLiterature New York: Hill andWang, 1980. . Baltimore: Penguin, 1956. BuenosAires: Gleizer, 1928. . Ed. EmirRodríguez Monegal and . Ed. Rolf Tiedemann. Trans. . Ed. Evelyn Fishburn. London: 2vols. . Trans. HenryW. Pickford. Merkur Books andBombsin Frankfurt am Main: . Madrid: Gredos, 3(1947): 414-24. . Ed. J. Dancy. The Adorno , Indianapo . Ha La - - ---. “The Metaphor of Translation: Borges andMauthner’s Critique of ---. “Pierre Menard Context.” in ---. ---. ---. ---. ---. ---. ---. ---. Chowdhury, Kanishka. “It’sAllYour within Reach: Globalization andthe Carter, Adam. “‘Insurgent Government’: Romantic Irony andtheTheory Butler, Colin. “Borges andTime: With Particular Reference to‘New Refu Bossart, William H. Derrida, Jacques. “The Law of Genre.” Deleuze, Gilles, andFélix Guattari. De Obaldia, Claire. Dapía, Silvia.

El tamañodemiesperanza Selected Poems Other Inquisitions: 1937-1952. Obras completas El libro dearena Prólogos Labyrinths: Selected Stories andOtherWritings Inquisiciones York: Peter Lang, 2003. Jorge Luis Borges Texas P, 1993. James E. Irby. New York: New Directions, 1964. Essay gust 1999). . July4, 2008. of theState.” html>. July4, 2008. Dana Polan. Minneapolis: Uof Minnesota P, 1986. tation of Time.’” . Oxord: Clarendon, 1995. . BuenosAires: Torres Agüero, 1975. Die Rezeption derSprachkritik Fritz Mauthners imWerk von . BuenosAires: Proa, 1925. . New York: Viking, 1999. Variaciones Borges . 4vols. Barcelona: Emecé, 1996. . BuenosAires: Emecé, 1975. Irony andClerisy The Essayistic Spirit: Literature, Modern Criticism, andthe Borges andPhilosophy: Self, Time, andMetaphysics . Köln: Böhlau, 1993. Orbis Litterarum . Buenos Aires: Proa, 1926. Variaciones Borges Trans. Ruth L. C. Simms. Austin: Uof Kafka: Towards aMinorLiterature. 21(2006): 23-85. . Romantic Circles Praxis Series(Au 28: 148-61. Critical Inquiry, . Ed. Donald A. Yates and 2(1996): 100-13. 7. 1(1980): 55-81. . New Trans. - - 159 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 160 ---. OnLiterature. ---. ---. “How To ReadAdornoon How To ReadHegel.” Goodman, Nelson. Husserl, Edmund. Hume, David. Helmling, Steven. “Constellation andCritique: Adorno’s Constel Hayles, N. Katherine. “Subversion: Infinite Seriesand Transfinite Num Hartle, Ann. “The Essay asSelf-Knowledge: Montaigne’s Philosophical Kaufmann, Walter. Lacoue-Labarthe, Philippe, andJean-Luc Nancy. Lukács, Georg. Eco, Umberto. Fishburn, Evelyn, ed. A Treatise Human Nature of 14.1 (2003). . July4, 2008. issue.903/14.1helmling.txt>. July4, 2008. bers in Borges’bers in Fictions.” 17.2(2007). Symbols toaTheory of Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist. Borges andEurope Revisited Oxford: Clarendon, 1990. . Trans. AnnaBostock. London: Merlin, 1974. . Oxford: Clarendon, 1992. The Cosmic Web: ScientificField Models and Postmodern Culture Essays in Honor of Donald Essays inHonor of . Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP, . Trans. Philip Barnard and

. London: Institute of Charlottesville, Virginia: . Trans. William Weaver. The Literary Absolute: The Postmodern Cul

Princeton: - - . -

---. Tagebücher. ---. ---. Musil, Robert. Morot-Sir, Edouard. Moreiras, Alberto. “HybridityandDoubleConsciousness.” Molloy, Sylvia. Translation: “Lostin Borges, theWestern Tradition and Merrell, Floyd. Mendes-Flohr, Paul. Mauthner, Fritz. Mauthner, Fritz. Martín, Marina Luft, David S. Louis, Annick andFlorian Ziche. Nietzsche, Friedrich. Wörterbuch derPhilosophie The GayScience 3 vols. Leipzig: Felix Meiner, 1923(1 1982. 119-32. 24 (1 A. Maynor Hardee. Columbia, SouthCarolina: Uof South Carolina, Jews andtheNew Culture, 1890-1918 July 30, 2008 Jorge Luis Borges.” . New Physics Kaiser. 3vols. London: Coward-McCann, 1953/1954/1960. du XXe siècle.” of California P, 2000. 14-30. ies Fishburn. London: Institute American of Latin Studies, 1998. 8-20. Fictions America.” of Latin Berkeley: Uof California P, 1980. no Montinari. 30vols. bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Lati/LatiMart.htm>. 13.3(1999): 373-407. st edition 1910-11, 2vols). in Robert Musil andtheCrisisEuropean of Culture: 1880-1942 Adolf Frisé, ed. 2vols. The Man withoutQualities. Unthinking Thinking: Jorge Luis Borges, Mathematics andthe .“ . West Lafayette, IN: Purdue UP, 1991. Borges, theApologist for Idealism.” . Trans.Walter Kaufmann. New York: Vintage, 1974. . “L’essai, oul’anti-genre littérature dansla française “The Jew Berlin asCosmopolitan.” The French Essay Kritische Gesamtausgabe Berlin: Walter Gruyter, 1967ff. . 2nded. 3vols.Leipzig: Felix Meiner, 1923- Borges andEurope Revisited “Bibliografía cronológica obra dela de Beiträge zueinerKritikderSprache Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1976. , Vol. IX, French Literature Series. Ed. Trans. Eithne Wilkins andErnst . Ed. EmilyD. Bilski. Berkeley: U st edition 1901-02). . Ed. ������������������������ July 4, 2008. Giorgio Colli andMazzi

. 3rd ed. . - - 161 The Essay as Form Silvia G. Dapía 162 ---. ---. “OntheTruth aNonmoral andLiesin Sense.” Waisman, Sergio. Veblen, Thorstein. “The Intellectual Pre-eminence of JewsModern in Eu Van derVeer, Peter. ‘The Enigma of Arrival’: HybridityandAuthentic Schwartz, Marcy. “Perilous Peripheries: thePlace of Translation Jorge in Schlegel, Friedrich. Sarlo, Beatriz. Russell, Bertrand. Rest, Jaime. “Jorge Luis Borges yelensayo especulativo.” Plotinus. Plass, Ulrich. Piglia, Ricardo. “¿Existe novela la argentina? A History of WesternA History of Philosophy . December 2007. 100. Selections from Nietzsche’s Notebooks theEarly1870s of Modood. London: Zed, 2000. 90-105. of Thorsteinof Veblen: EssaysinOurChangingOrder Court, 1914. Identities andthePolitics Anti-Racism of Luis Borges.” London: Faber andFaber, 1956. Lewisburg: Bucknell UP, 2005. New York: N. Kelley, 1964. 219-31. apolis: Uof Minnesota P, 1991. recoveco ture.” Daniel Breazeale. Atlantic Highlands: HumanitiesPress, 1997. 79- rope.” ity in theGlobalSpace.”ity in The New York: Routledge, 2007. Political Science Quaterly

. BuenosAires: Centro EditordeAmérica Latina, 1982. 73-82. Language andHistory inTheodor W. Adorno’s “Notes toLitera Eneads. Jorge Luis Borges: AWriter ontheEdge

Borges andTranslation: theIrreverence thePeriphery of Our Knowledge of theExternalWorldOur Knowledge of Variaciones Borges Philosophical Fragments Trans. Stephen MacKenna. Rev. B. S. Page. 2nded. Debating Cultural Hybridity: Multi-cultural . New York: Simon andSchuster, 1945. 34(1919). Reprinted in 23(2007): 93-112. . Trans. Peter Firchow. Minne . Ed. PninaWerbner andTariq Borges yGombrowicz.” Philosophy andTruth: . London: Verso, 1993. . Ed. Leon Ardzrooni. . Chicago: Open El cuarto enel . Ed. andtrans. The Writings - . - - -