ROUNDTABLE

resPonses to “art, soCiety/teXt: a FeW remarKs on the Current relations oF the Class struGGle in the FielDs oF literary ProDuCtion anD literary ”

Karen Benezra, editor

introDuCtion ARTMargins recently published the fi rst (excerpted) English translation of “Art, Society/Text: A Few Remarks on the Current Relations of the Class Struggle in the Fields of Literary Production and Literary Ideologies,” together with an introduction by Nikola Dedi´c. First pub- lished anonymously, in Slovene, in the journal Problemi-Razprave (Problems-Debates), the text was later authorized by the members of the journal’s editorial board: Mladen Dolar, Daniel Levski, Jure Mikuž, Rastko Mocˇnik, and Slavoj Žižek.1 The Problemi-Razprave editors aimed to defi ne a simultaneously universal and materialist approach to the analysis of symbolic forms, by which they referred to literature and visual art, as well as texts of mass culture. More than merely signaling the highly debatable status of Yugoslav intellectual and artistic production as “marginal” to that of Western Europe, “Art, Society/Text” raises a series of transversal ques- tions about the specifi city of art and literature as signifying practices in the wake of modernist , the form assumed by class struggle within the authors’ structuralist framework, and the possible conse-

1 Nikola Dedi´c, “On Yugoslav Poststructuralism: Introduction to ‘Art, Society/ Text,’” ARTMargins 5, no. 3 (October 2016): 93–101. “Art, Society/Text,” ARTMargins 5, no. 3 (October 2016): 102–114. The full texts of both articles can be read online for free through the following link: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/toc/artm/5/3.

50 © 2017 ARTMargins and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology doi:10.1162/ARTM_a_00189

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 artistic movements are in dialogue. movements in are artistic which with background institutional and socio-cultural of the part simply are theory and criticism that to assume become routine it has of abygone relics as era, moment or resurrected current ofpations the antici as claimed “rediscovered” and are texts such Whether position. uncomfortable an movements in to such organic often are that courses of ARTMargins canons—part US Western European and from the excluded hitherto century 20th of the second movementshalf from the artistic discover to impulse work. The editorial own our in confront debate and daily that we issues and methodological critical the on to reflect occasion an as serve might exercise an such we considered responses, that iting solic In studies. American Latin and to Asian and theory, ary from ,range liter study,of fields contributors’ which for the possible relevance their and it poses that issues theoretical the sidering today. criticism for to considerand relevance cultural its ambitions theoretical its explore order in to further document to the to return we decided withstanding, not affinities elective own Our tice. prac or signifying form acultural of as labor and organization social adeterminate within embedded fact asocial as both work ofthe art abroader about question how poses to interpret it also literature, and about art Yugoslav contemplating In 1960s. discourses sincethe of art historiography and critique for issues the theoretical quences of such 2 the extent to which “Art, Society/Text” poses a question about aquestion how to poses Society/Text” “Art, to which extent the to underline we hoped contrary, the On terms. historical art or purely theoretical purely either in past from the texts critical favor of treating present. for the potential cal criti their sacrificing risks documents of such translation and culation cir the hypotheses, underlying texts’ the to historicize which through series. Documents Primary MoMA the in anthology edited an as 2015 in time first the for readers English-speaking to available made were writings Pedrosa’s Madrid. in Museum Sofía Reina the and City, Mexico in also Art, Modern of Museum the City, Mexico in (MUAC) Art Contemporary of Museum University atthe exhibitions of subjects the been recently have or currently are Pedrosa and Acha critic, art and literary Left New Argentinean the Masotta, Oscar Like forms. plastic non-Western in interest Pedrosa’s Mário critic Brazilian of impulse universalist the in or art to approach sociological Acha’s Juan critic Peruvian-Mexican in interest renewed the cite might we context, American Latin the In We asked contributors to comment on “Art, Society/Text” by con by We to comment Society/Text” on contributors “Art, asked The current dossier should not be understood as a polemic in in apolemic as understood not dossier should be current The ’ own mission—has left the critical and theoretical dis theoretical and critical the left mission—has ’ own 2 If we If do not consider aframework ------51 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

52 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 that the document’s privileging of literature is itself the product of an of an product the itself is of literature privileging document’s the that arguing by autonomy.” further, even goes Bosteels contribution, his In not philosophical if of theoretical exultation a“performative in results of language estrangement poetic for the capacity its and literature modernist high afford editors Problemi-Razprave the that privilege the to Eyers, According terms. subversion” materialist in former of the tual “tex the as or of literature social of the account its either to historicize fails of literature theory for amaterialist proposal article’s the which in ways to the point Tom Bosteels text. Bruno comment Eyersand on the to theorists We respondents. critical debate the among have invited of today, amatter is text of the relevance the as well as regard, this in from society. excluded constitutively unconscious, to the proper logic causal the and of thought aform both practice,” ostensibly signifying of “the return repression simultaneous the and stages ture litera modernity, bourgeois in editors, to the According text. and gle strug class contemplate between would relationship that the literature conception of of a“dialectical-materialist” part as practice” “signifying the term proposethey time, thesame At field. socio-symbolic from the struggle of class site exclusion for the privileged the as to another art from one of form shift historical the of suggesting labor and division social the it within placing standpoint, from ahistorical work ofthe art of the assert editors Problemi-Razprave the vocabulary, own text’s Or, approach. to the put it in materialist supposedly own account of its atheoretical to outline attempting time same at the while morespecifically, andliterature, of speaking, broadly art, of definition a seeks Society/Text” influences, “Art, Althusserian its with keeping In it be. should well as authors surveyed, the among of debate critique and subject the is itself term The of art. vision “materialist” a purportedly of name the in psychoanalysis Lacanian and Marxism of structuralist of articulation its relevance the to examine sought weproposes, also determinations. and social influences of intellectual acomplex intersection within less situated much intent, critical own of consideredtheir level at rarely the too all are theory and criticism art where art, of late-20th-century Western canon of the margins called so- at the to reading pertinent especially is issue This or historicism. particularism cultural beyond either theory art and art both ­historicize editors’ success or failure success or editors’ failure Problemi-Razprave of the measure The Society/Text” that “Art, hypotheses specific to the respect With - - -

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 editors’ structuralist framework. structuralist editors’ Problemi-Razprave the beyond take, might history and criticism art amaterialist what form about thought for further call article, original the like responses, ing follow the Society/Text,” to “Art, attention further Bydrawing begin. Es¸anu, Octavian by edited materialism, and roundtable on realism will art.” in reflection symmetric their economy the and in relations social of transparent fantasy Stalinist autonomy “the and idea of literary bourgeois the both against and over struggle site of class the as language condition for the treating as serves he argues, gesture, This latter. to the internal as former the ing understand by andsuperstructure, base of reflection purported of the notions mechanical undermines that of language materiality of the ing contemplates understand an practice signifying notion ofeditors’ the the that argues Khatib critique. Lacanian-Althusserian field of problematics.”and fields other into of tools analysis the displaces one that standpoint, allax world’s) problems,frombut par a of own its (or definition ‘literary’ the literature’s accepts that of point view not from the “begin interpretation that demands Society/Text” field, “Art, socio-symbolic to the internal exclusion an as practice” “signifying the Bypositing of literature. gory cate bourgeois the of questioning importance critical the underlines Walker, of capitalism.” part, for absolute his the anchoring with break about a of bringing compensate impossibility “to for if the as tradition, critical the with break of aradical fantasy the against over and tion, repeti and of return operations of the valence psychoanalytic and ure fig the to reclaim is Society/Text” of “Art, underpinnings structuralist aforced as offered or choice. at For best nant, Tomšicˇ, to the to return now are domi that positions posttheoretical and postcritical portedly pur the to critique from which aperspective us social—allow to the respect with it sustains that exclusion of relation internal the and tice prac signifying notion of the the operations—namely, and terms key and its article the respectively, and world literature, of philosophy fields of labor. organization social from the subtracted be could latter the if as practice, to signifying productive from social authors’ formulation, the within shift “undertheorized” ARTMargins present dossier where leaves off aforthcoming The to the relation in though this, just does Khatib’s response Sami Tomšiˇc Samo By contrast, Walker consider how, Gavin and the in ------53 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

54 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 numbered conclusions arrived at in the first part of “Art, Society/ of part “Art, first the at in conclusions arrived numbered three The general. in superstructure of the instances to other opposed as field, literary of the characteristic or exemption exception the be would This process. productive own upon its reflection internal of an way by social to the relates literature which in framework, overarching the not alter does or practices, practice signifying accountinto the order in to take especially psychoanalysis, from Lacanian terms nical The adoption of tech in general. field ideological to the relation in text literary the of specificity of the question to the answer Althusserian itself. text literary the within reflected somehow and are of shown ideology workings whereby usual the tance dis internal the defining in lies conundrum this to answering key The either. conditions, existing knowledge of really scientific any not us give but it does usual, as not ideology is just ideology. and science Literature both different from as field literary the of thespecificity to define ing art. literary particular, of art—in discourse the and unconscious, or of the analysis, psycho of discourse the discourses: or fields other at two least integrate to had terms, of these sense Althusserian ideology, and science the in between break the which in broader investigation amuch within tion produc field literary the of of thespecificity out set to define Balibar, Macherey, Étienne Pierre and Badiou, notably most Alain students, some and of his Althusser , Louis of For Reading and Marx aesthetic. the to turn belated its in theory of critical tradition Adornian the and Marxism structural of so-called school Althusserian the between agreement profound a to amounts actually one but that tension, irreconcilable an be to appears only what in caught 1965 1975, and wherebetween some moment, a philosophy: and theory contemporary momentin specific of a representative considered be can furthermore which remarks, these in expression finds platform, completetheoretical not a if program, reader. whole A the research not mislead should Ideologies” Literary and Production of Literary Fields the in Struggle Class of the Relations Current on the FewRemarks A Society/Text: “Art, title the under presented remarks of the nature preliminary The Bosteels Bruno “Art, Society/Text” shares many of the assumptions behind this this behind assumptions of the many shares Society/Text” “Art, hav in consisted school Althusserian for the challenge main The By now 1965 how, it common is the knowledge publication after ------Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 tution, suppression, containment. and tution, substi displacement, of concealment, of strategies kinds all by in vened inter butrather didposit not on own, field its literary the outside that of amaterial basis on the of literature, nature self-standing the apart it as breaks insofar precisely materialist to be claim can theory new the the contrary, On forabout self-reflexivity. literature’s supreme capacity critics new or the old formalists the either by talk any with confused be not should base material the by determined to be continues literature thefield of whereby reflection internal reason, the For same the itself. by entelechy, all aself-positing as aesthetic or the literary of the nitions defi or cultural-elitist) (universal-humanistic idealist all and any upset to supposed is causality, expressive or an alinear-mechanistic either to opposed as of astructural effect the itself exteriority, of internal of arelation terms or in distancing, internal of way by an society talist materialism. and of idealism tendencies twin the between of aconflict form the takes also production artistic Criticism Self- of Elements with work, beginning of his remainder the throughout make to continue would Althusser that affirmations with line in argument this develops Society/Text” “Art, theory, in struggle class the represents philosophy Philosophy,” and that “Lenin effect to the lecture effects. determined upon its reflection internal worksof way by an which determination, absent-negative or absent of an cause, an trope the Text”: above all, Society/ “Art, foundin be can thus Althusserianism classical called tropes of so- thefamiliar Many of reflected. not and externally nally it therefore inter is which in effects to the immanent ofrelation acause structural whole, the is the and but rather part the sive between relation “out nor expres there” an reality and sign the between mirroring nal exter thean order is on of neither linkage this metaphor of reflection, of the name the in to description open still While social. to the erature thefieldlit of links that of overdetermination causality specific on the himself. Macherey, Althusser Badiou, by and Balibar, ples at work studies in princi of the read summary aconcise be as can sense, Text,” this in “Art, Society/Text,” thus, can be read as a manifesto of sorts that that of sorts read amanifesto be as can thus, Society/Text,” “Art, capi to modern literature or art theof relationship defining Thus, Althusser’s 1968 in presented first argument an Finally, adopting insistence the is orientation Althusserian the with line in still Also , in the sense that such a struggle in the field of literary and literary field of the in astruggle such that sense the , in ------55 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

56 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 structural-deconstructive account, which nevertheless still pretends pretends still nevertheless which account, ­structural-deconstructive a and materialism, of historical sense the in analysis materialist a toward path the open to keep seeks which account, historical acritical- between text of the course over the to occur seems slippage asunder. burst to first the be should theory amaterialist timelessness and of naturalness work, whose appearance frame idealist an in trapped remains description the that sign surest however, evidence, the is This were self-evident. existence their if as description, phenomenological of apurely subject the are instances or levels works, these canonical Althusser’s in case the already also was as Instead, critique. to ahistorical-materialist not subjected is for example, practice, signifying from the practices productive ­ of social- of labor responsible separation for division the The tive. overly descrip for faulted being be can text this throughout or “levels” stand-ins. as serve they for fields which retical theo the as well as Lacan, and of Althusser names proper the through case particular this in psychoanalysis, and Marxism between dialogue the legitimate and urgent renders both that shift the is alone But this practice. signifying to the practices from social dominance in shift very practice. signifying the and practice social-productive the between divided of practices, or dualism duality a proposes fundamental text Finally, the plural. the in practices signifying others—of among example—one an to as referred is practice literary once, At least question. though, in terms of the meaning displace—the than to clarify—rather thing any did synonymy this if as and symbolic, social or the symbolic, the with were synonymous this if as practice, signifying not abut the just boot: to article adefinite with often singular, the in used is practice” “signifying expression the For part, most clear. the notis entirely made to a whole of slew liabilities. text programmatic this opens however, also aim, ambitious an Such privileged—example. a highly one—albeit just be would practice version), literary of which sounding more the (to Lacanian- use practice signifying of the theory materialist or a formula) more the (to Althusserian-sounding use production erary of lit theory adialectical-materialist less than to produce nothing aims Within the self-proclaimed materialist orientation, a decisive adecisive orientation, materialist self-proclaimed the Within “practices,” “instances,” as such More of terms use generally, the the undertheorized leaves remarkably fact, in Society/Text,” “Art, practice the signifying to literature the of relation place, first the In - - - - - Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 historical-materialist explanation for the privilege of idealist-humanistic privilege for the explanation ­historical-materialist further. even them to radicalize to want claims ­furthermore and materialism, of dialectical tenets radical the to all loyal to remain an astonishing reversal in the second half of the text. of the second half the in reversal astonishing an to end up with historical—only of the detriment to the hand, upper the gains account increasingly (or, more poststructural) to be precise, structural progression the Society/Text,” of “Art, argumentative the in But world of craftsmanship. precapitalist the with associated value use apparent the in rooted be still may literature, and art in repressed the as returns of which exclusion constitutive the effect, ideological of the redefinition completeness of ideology. This illusory the in except full, is never the social field of The totality. or self-sustaining circle rounded awell- in off closed be ever cannot for reality what in gate syntheses, social. of the midst the avoid in always is there that principle—namely, structural purely of a forgone is points, favor affirmation in of the jumping-off ical methodolog as serve could Capital and Grundrisse the in accumulation primitive on so-called sections the for account, which an such Text” Society/ But “Art, in being. own of very its attributes eternal were the they though as of becoming presuppositions its effective the positing by existence into coming of own its circle the closing of itself finds capitalism which in impossibility necessary of the terms cally, in accounted for be histori incompleteness still could of this principle Even the totality. asocial as thing no is such there that is, that assumption— or axiomatic formal from apurely stems butsis, rather analy ahistorical-materialist in grounded to be no longerappears that domination. faceof capitalist the in noncapital of pure promise the moreradically not if value, of use illusion the retains literature unity, a of such ise prom outholds the of writing act the as Insofar conditions. industrial in modern labor of experience reified the to opposed as work, artisanal craftsman’s the in product the and of production, means ducer,the pro of the power labor the between holds still that unity the in sought be to have would privilege for this base material destroy. to The seeks text programmatic their that artistic or the literary of the conceptions On the one hand, the authors offer at least the inkling of a inkling the at least offer authors the one hand, the On Parts I and II of “Art, Society/Text” almost seem to have been to have been seem almost II Society/Text” of Iand “Art, Parts supplements, or surro imaginary as serve then, literature, and Art of apostulate direction the moves in text the hand, other the On ------

57 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

58 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 order for society to appear as an imaginary totality without lack. without totality imaginary an as to appear order for society in social from the excluded to have been was that practice signifying to the witness or bearing representing, ofnamely, showing, that function— ultra-traditional an once again come to perform cally paradoxi context this in practices artistic and literary negativization, case. the is never and of what always description structural apurely now invites analysis, for ahistorical-materialist of calling instead social, of the arrival of the Even talk itself. history of kernel ahistorical the as incompleteness of society constitutive the affirm authorsSociety/Text” of “Art, the which with apparent ease the foreshadowed already in nonetheless is anti-Marxist, or become openly post-Marxist as present itself it will whether , this toward path But the Marxism. or orthodox of classical “essentialism” alleged the against turned be will symbolic social of the blindness constitutive the into insight poststructuralist the which in argument, ofabuses this struggle. class for the substitute intratheoretical astrictly as one),was have served already may there ever if formulation idealist (an theory field of the in struggle class the from “representing” far writings, canonical Althusser’s in even which science, and ideology between that than no less radical a break of attire irresistible the however, upall in dressed is literature, and art of modern or breakthrough cut of the characterization ultra-traditional so on.This and Cézanne; by Joyce; painting in music Schönberg; by in by prose fiction in or Mallarmé; Lautréamont, late Rimbaud, the by poetry in marked break to the attributed is negationism faux-dialectical element of subversiveness and intrinsic an no sooner than once again, off closed are literature and art of ideologies both of the critique ist amaterial toward paths the Nearly all ideologies. aesthetic and literary modern of the privilege and prestige cultural-elitist to the contributes that break the within from exclusively by working first, of the radicalism potential the completely undercuts text of the second part the Indeed, jure at de least then facto not de authors, if different two by ­written Finally, despite all the wild claims about textual subversion and about textual claims wild the Finally, despite all and uses later at of any the we have not arrived yet Admittedly, and Iberian Cultures and the Institute for Comparative Literature Literature Comparative for Institute the and Cultures Iberian and Bruno Bosteels is Professor in the Department of Latin American American Latin of Department in the Professor is Bosteels Bruno and Society at Columbia University. Columbia at Society and . - -

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 leniniste l’analyse pour of Cahiers predecessor journal to the Badiou’s 1966 Alain contribution ayoung be itSociety/Text,” well may pour l’analysepour Cahiers journal 1960s French the foundin to be theory Lacanian and Marxism, epistemology, Althusserian of rationalist marriage the practice,” and of “signifying brand Tel the Quel psychoanalysis, Lacanian but also economy culture, and between oppositions Marxist prevailing loosens one that Marxism, Althusserian already-mentioned the comprehensiveness and of syntheses: its quickness for the ing strik is text the Yugoslavia, liberal of relatively ” existing ally “actu reference by peculiar only to the 1975 explicable in and Written subverts. reproduces, partly it processes partly social to the immanent as of literature understanding materialist on ahistorical insist equally the They academy.in verboten largely now “literary” the of definitions Macherey, Pierre and Althusser of Louis footsteps the in obviously most lowing of Problemi-Razprave editors world. The from another in beamed text, out-of-time bracingly This howresponse: quaint! unguarded My first, T 7 6 5 4 3 later judged his early account of science to be insufficiently materialist, materialist, account insufficiently early ofto be science his judged later . with the real of history.” real the . with relation homological of the basis on the art “itcompletely is as impossible to explain insofar least autonomy, Badiou’s in asite becomes of radical reading, Art, at tice. prac of scientific/mathematical purity conceptual removed the from, comparable as radically to, production albeit moments of artistic syllogism-like the autonomy”“relative isolating absolute to its limits, of artistic thesis Althusserian the to push determined aBadiou reveals om E om 3 Ibid., 111. Ibid., 111–32. 2014), Verso, (London: Prose and Poetry Twentieth-Century on Writings Other and Poets the of Age The in Process,” Aesthetic the of Autonomy “The Badiou, Alain 2013). Bloomsbury, (London: France Post-War in Marxism and Epistemology, Post-Rationalism my in l’analyse pour Cahiers on atlength written I have 2006). Routledge, (London: Production Literary of ATheory Macherey, Pierre particular, in See, follows. what in parenthetically given are 5:3 ARTMargins in appears that Society/Text” “Art, of translation the to Citations If there is a clarifying intertext to be considered alongside “Art, “Art, considered to be alongside intertext aclarifying is there If wonderfully at odds with our frigid, horrifying moment, seems moment, seems horrifying frigid, our with at odds wonderfully yers , entitled “The Autonomy of the Aesthetic Process.” Autonomy Aesthetic of the “The , entitled 4 do not shy away from the kind of abstract, universalizing universalizing of abstract, do not shykind away from the . 5 , trans. Emily Apter and Bruno Bosteels Bosteels Bruno and Apter Emily , trans. Cahiers marxiste- , Cahiers 7 (If Althusser Althusser (If Psychoanalysis, : Psychoanalysis, 6 That essay That , fol - - - - 59 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

60 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 the conditionsthe struggle of class in “occur[ring] as of literature understanding to an commitment text’s this in clear seems turn of this imprint The life. intellectual and tural of cul instance every in struggle class of the universality embraced the culpa mea much-discussed his who issued Althusser the out of Althusser, alater have developed One could do so by reflecting (to use the parlance of “Art, Society/ of theparlance use (to “Art, do reflecting so by could One incompletely. only always and immanently distance acritical such duce that proone must butrather life, of social domain commodified and mechanized increasingly to the impervious is that realm aesthetic an assume might—merely aesthetician say,no longer—as, a19th-century one could aconclusion: that such toward precisely tended respects, key in that, ideology from ahigh-modernist social, of the or sublimation the negativization reflects whereby literature function, ture’s political own apparently anti apparently own fragmentation. and abstraction of modes aesthetic in of history within quasi- aesthetic of formal ideology modernist essay, of the much-belated ­target the very the register to reproduce aphilosophical in threatens one that autonomy, not philosophical if of theoretical exultation performative ironic, to say, is an essay is That what emerges from this formalism. apolitical same iteration of the high-modernist the and sake for art’s to art attachment humanist the to dismantling commitment surface its despite performs, of autonomy Society/Text” “Art, valorization that den hid thepartly reveals from objects its pushback significant from any production theoretical of their authors’ immunization ment the clear, argu my make and to differently this putTo self-sufficiency. aesthetic of constructions modernistic and of humanistic critique modulated (relative) differently Society/Text”’s of autonomy “Art, endgame the is artistic and theoretical to both former’s commitment the open that in Society/Text,” of “Art, symptom the remain theoreticism Althusserian 9 8 heights.) ridiculous, sublimely often to sublime, atheoreticism such elevates Badiou’s 1966 theoreticism, artistic account of the of acertain guilty Editor’s note: Here and throughout, bold-type emphases are in the original source. original the in are emphases bold-type throughout, and Here note: Editor’s Self-Criticism in Essays Althusser, Louis What is especially curious is the editors’ desire to prise apart their their apart to prise desire editors’ the is curious especially What is Badiou’s ­ early- of amplification its Nevertheless, essay and 8 On the face of it, however, “Art, Society/Text” seems to seems face of however, it, the On Society/Text” “Art, distanciation-from- art’s of avant-garde ­independence, -, or perhaps post-, modernist recognition of litera recognition -, post-, modernist or perhaps , abandoned his earlier “theoreticism,” and and “theoreticism,” earlier , abandoned his ” (103). , trans. Grahame Locke (London: Verso, 1976). Verso, (London: Locke Grahame , trans. 9 - - - - - Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 Marxism, conditions that have now been well documented, well have now been conditionsthat Marxism, and Lacan of synthesis specific of this birth saw the that Yugoslavia conditionsin cultural particular to deny the Ido notlowed. wish fol that years dark the in of neoliberalism triumph the by ironized one retrospectively possibilities, theory’s of Marxist-psychoanalytic onto projection autopian decline modernism’s in artistic pointments disap its transfers unconsciously one that formalism, but airless nious texts from actual of pushback possibility any advance in negating by genres; those within instances textual or different genres different apart wrench that (in)differences formal the muting by particularity; very its by unstable made tice prac signifying multitudinous internally an as of literature specificity intervention. an for such candidates the remain ­literature and art optimistically, and editors—instead, the by assumed directly not aposition is This syntheses. of conceptual labyrinthine most the shirk to at partially least ability its multifariousness, to its impervious largely remaining while of art necessity and power to the gestures up theory by work taken is that aproject—rather, of such no is longercapable itself art that is thematized, ference directly never adif for albeit Society/Text,” “Art, difference key sphere. The social the in fragmentation and of abstraction saturation extant already the Text”) 10 ceptualism in the visual arts had entered an uneasy alliance with a with alliance uneasy an entered had arts visual the in ceptualism postcon and conceptualism it had; ever indeed, if, function, disruptive significant any embody might art to whether as skepticism growing a registered had metropoles capitalist various the in art and ­literature itself. locates it explicitly which conditions within high-capitalist, or at European broader least global, the of reflection to and attunement its for ignoring alibi become an not should provenance Society/Text” of “Art, European Eastern the reason, momentthis in France. For1960s if fecund in a brief cifically more and Western Europe, spe in formulated largely pantheon retical atheo within position its situates that and particular, culturally to the not general, to the aspires ever one is that position That written. is text this from which of enunciation position the to ignore do Iwant ther (London: Bloomsbury, 2014). Bloomsbury, (London: Lacan Slovenian the of Emergence the On Contemporaries: His and Žižek Motoh, Helena and Irwin Jones But, again, by immunizing their theoretical production from the from the production theoretical their immunizing by But, again, By the year of this essay’s publication, 1975, theorizing about essay’s theorizing 1975, publication, of this year By the : what results from all of this is an inge an is of this from all : what results , a theory that that , atheory 10 but nei ------61 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

62 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 any more misunderstood idea in the Marxist pantheon? Nonetheless, Nonetheless, pantheon? Marxist the idea in moreany misunderstood fetishism enough, perversely is, question in term The apparent its exhaustion. override somehow comes that to term theoretical overused of an mobilization the the text, in moment of originality on asignificant instead to focus above, on display lavishly skepticism, and of disappointment sense own my past to push Iwant what remains in and Society/Text,” from “Art, exemplar. or theoretical) (political role the of resisting ever of art possibility to the indifference related its in and historicization critical resourcesfrom any theoretical own of its exempting Society/Text”’s “Art, in birthed is to form tentiveness inat antimaterialist This for analysis. selection their motivated already fact, in had, that presuppositions Lacano-Hegelian the to confirm seem content always that of thematic mere convenient decoration, instances as objects cultural treat which books, of latest Slavoj Žižek’s repetitions the ceaseless in of objects its specificity challenging potentially and the prickliness from theory of insulation this of results final the today rate, At any one witness may once have itpossessed. might potential radical any to disavow coming was art that to theory, from art cality of torch radi of the essay’s passing implicit this in registered sciously phraseology. Althusserian-Marxist of an rote repetition occasionally the incompletely in only disavowed anostalgia was, really never that radicalism modernist for European awhite defeated nostalgia rather a detects references—Joyce, Mallarmé—one literary canonized firmly 1975, by essay’s and, of the scant overfamiliarity the but in struggles, material to such modernism’s apparentcontest indifference earlier an editors theof Problemi-Razprave position” class art, (104) all cific of 11 11 in published 1975.) first also was Pleasure” essay, noting, it worth is “Visual Mulvey’s seminal (Laura screen. cinema the of flicker upon and every totality social Screen as such journals in Meanwhile, tail-chasing. to descend ironical into soon fracturing, modernist earlier its survived novel largely had of the self-consistency the and cosmopolitanism, curatorial apolitical mostly 2nd ed. (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 14–31. 2009), Macmillan, Palgrave UK: (Basingstoke, ed. 2nd Pleasures Other and Visual in Cinema,” Narrative and Pleasure “Visual Mulvey, Laura All of this is certainly not to say that there is nothing to be salvaged salvaged to be nothing is there not to say that certainly is of this All uncon sense, to the part in tied be surely must anostalgia Such , the ideological was said to be detectable at every level of the of the level at every detectable to be said was ideological , the . Is there any more bowdlerized psychoanalytic term, term, psychoanalytic more any . Is bowdlerized there 11 In explicitly recognizing the “historically spe “historically the recognizing explicitly In - , - - - Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 interweaving of the ideal and the material. the and ideal of the interweaving complex for model the now overdetermined!) a(itself as determination” of “over cooptation Althusser’s not in account, least this complicating in of 1975, by course, spilt been had of ink Gallons ofshape society. the decide ultimately that forcesenon of of production the relations and mere epiphenom the is ideology Marx, in enough rare although alism), materi Union’s (Dialectical Soviet the diamat in infamous popularized account, standard the In actuality. to material of relation ideology the (104). goods” of material production industrial dominant the in linked are they which in way opposite of the the is that away in linked are production literary labor process in ofments the proc its ofwork structuring thespecific production literary in finds ogy ideol “humanist humanities: the in production academic most inform to continue that ideology of humanist on forms tors’ attack resonant edi the on bears fetishism” the notion of “particular More specifically, Society/Text.” of “Art, levels analytical different the to connect power the has of capital’s displacement slide—fetishism pomorphic ceaseless anthro an signals Marx in and castration, horror of female to the tion adefensive reac Freud signals in that of quasi-concept—one akind as 12 12 itself—that leeches on the literary’s peculiar retention of aspects of of retention aspects peculiar literary’s on the leeches itself—that ideology matrix—humanist labor, butideological amore general literary of nonalienated image ideological produce afetishized that forces of production production.” Here determinate it not is the trial conditionsof “indus different nonetheless to the relation its mystify able is to literary shop—the coffee artisanal an in many among lated moment, iso contemporary or, our in more agarret likely in isolated writer of the image on emphasis “craft”—the the in that tors’ claim edi the More specifically, of capital. workings structural ofment, the adisplace thus and already, afetishization, at level, amore general is ideology humanist because fetish—particular particular its as ture litera claims subjects) of self-transparent autonomous the in strivings as centered understood best is culture that the notion put, (briefly ogy ideol humanist that claim the in lies complication; rather, interest its labor of now by redundant reiteration of this less the is Society/Text” particular fetishism particular its as use it then may which ­ess, Brewster (London: Verso, 2006), 87–129. 2006), Verso, (London: Brewster Marx For in Overdetermination,” and “Contradiction Althusser, Louis There is an intriguing reversal here of the usual way of construing of way construing usual here of the reversal intriguing an is There 12 What’s interesting in “Art, “Art, in What’s interesting . The . ele . The , trans. Ben Ben , trans. ------63 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

64 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 Era Program The McGurl’s Mark foundin to be much-discussed those as such insights, historical more read be alongside should textured account general Perhaps essay’sfor this the aforementioned aporias. up makes part in of fetishization, levels general and oftion particular invoca suggestive the especially and practice, of creative constructions sensitive) narration of literary ideologies begins to seem possible. to seem begins ideologies of literary sensitive) narration (but historically antihistoricist materialist, but read afuture together, to challenge, seeks Society/Text” “Art, that ideology humanist very the 14 14 13 and Adorno, Benjamin, Lukács, early Marxism, school Frankfurt that for granted 1970s, taken it the In was or German. French, English, in available 1975 in it been if had debates of time its Marxist “Western”the have influenced might text how this speculate only can We of (economic) superstructure. relations (ideological) and ing base debate determin about the Marxist traditional on the afterthought an more than with us provides of Problemi-Razprave collective editorial the “ a Taking entities. external as other do not relateto each society and Art S autonomy.of literature’s relative particularity more tothe neuter radical labor, better the craft archaic tion. contesta political and production artistic between relationship rocky the now helpunderstand us can that terms the are these that convinced suppression, its I’m and notsubversion at works when all it survives force of literary buried (105).bolic” how quite this to know wishes One sym social of the organization bourgeois the “subversive within action produce could that negativization” “textual of residual any shorn cally ideologi neutralized, recast, are themselves texts literary, the in footing foundits has ideology humanist Once effects. retroactive has of craft, fetish particular of the afterimage ideological producedthe as erature materialist theory of the signifying practice signifying of the theory materialist ami Khati ami . 14 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2011). Press, University Harvard MA: (Cambridge, Writing Creative of Rise the and Fiction Postwar Era: Program The McGurl, Mark 2017). Press, University Northwestern IL: (Evanston, Present Critical the and Theory, Literature, Formalism: Speculative my in problem fraught this through think to I attempt Tom Eyers is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Duquesne University. Duquesne at Philosophy of Professor Tom Associate is Eyers This movement from general to particular and back again, with lit with again, back and to particular movement from general This 13 Literary sociology such as McGurl’s tends to be entangled with with McGurl’s as entangled such to be tends sociology Literary Nonetheless, the recognition here of the endurance of fetishized of fetishized endurance here of the recognition the Nonetheless, b ” (112) as its starting point, point, ” (112) starting its as ------Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 literature to an inquiry about the conditions of what “Art, Society/Text” conditionsof Society/Text” what about “Art, the inquiry to an literature theof question technology—opens scientific and technique social both gle.” strug literary the in strategist the is critic “The stated, had Benjamin before, years Walter (103). fifty Roughly struggle” duced this by splitintro the with marked kernel very its not is in which heritage,’ gle conditions the strug in of class practices—occurs of ‘artistic’ domain whole the indeed reads: “Today, ‘literature’—or text what we call of point reference. geographical its with ­coincided never “Western” adjective the that indicating Marxism,” “Western of history of adifferent part is Yugoslavia in context political its and of Problemi-Razprave case the constellation, of this light In Freud. Jacques of Lacan’s with rereading and Althusser of Louis Marxism structuralist so-called the were incompatibleHorkheimer with 16 16 15 In 1934 Benjamin wrote: 1934In Benjamin form. content artistic and political between relationship external of an fantasy bourgeois rely on the cannot thought Materialist structure.” “super ideal an and “base” of areal lines the along separated not be can struggle literary conditionsof this the that understood Benjamin Already art. and of literature realm the in struggle butclass is tion universal-humanistic ‘human essence,’ ‘human no ‘human no is universal-humanistic . There 15 University Press, 1999), 770. 1999), Press, University Harvard of Press Belknap MA: (Cambridge, Smith Gary and Eiland, Howard Jennings, Writings Selected in Producer,” as Author “The Benjamin, Walter 460. 1996), Press, University Harvard of Press Belknap MA: (Cambridge, W. Jennings Michael Writings Selected in Street,” “One-Way Benjamin, Walter The literary technique of works— technique literary The of works. technique literary the with words, directly other in It concerned, is of time. its of production relations literary the within work has the function the concerns directly question This in them?” position its is “What to ask, like Iwould of time?” its of production relations of aworkthe to attitude the is “What asking, than Rather to propose another. or atlike rate before any question, Iwould it, of this it is revolutionary?”—instead them, at overthrowing it aim does Or it is reactionary? it accept them, Does of time? its production of of relations awork to the attitude the is “What ofInstead asking, Reflecting on the material conditions of literary productions, the productions, literary conditions of material the on Reflecting This literary struggle does not designate another field field of conten another not designate does struggle literary This in German, indicating indicating Technik German, in , vol. 1, ed. Marcus Bullock and and Bullock Marcus ed. 1, , vol. , vol. 2.2, ed. Michael W. Michael ed. 2.2, , vol. 16 ------65 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

66 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 to that which is reflected? is which to that external not practice—is as a signifying language is, reflection—that of the medium if other each “reflect” tion”: society and how do art here “reflec is term key The dialectical. and but internal one-sided, and external never are they of co-determination; relations always are tion of determina Relations (technology). science applied and of production (infra)structure more simply material another by notare determined production cultural and textual, art, in practices Signifying meaning. or cultural messages, content, political for artistic medium neutral external an as appear can language social, from the excluded tutively consti is materiality this forces; because but precisely technological its and the social field of to the not is external of language materiality The culture. and literature, of art, realm the in practices touted signifying attrib is that idealism “culturalist” the and of technology materialism “crude” the of both perspectives to overcomewe need reductive the words, of works”). other In technique “literary of the terms in Benjamin by (addressed of signification techniques its and social of the realm the in practice the signifying of effects material the account flipside, its into when taking grasped be only can life of social aspects on all has technology that effects material the versa, vice sciences).applied And and of labor,forces organization theoretical (, sphere of the productive in of technology effects material from the off cut is not structure) as order, language (symbolic the social field of the in signified practice.” Whatis of “signifying terms in addresses ety, the impossible “correct” reflection of its totality, first has to be has to first totality, of its reflection impossible “correct” ety, the of soci truth the Rather, mirroring. of logic linear symmetric low the tion of truth is not areflec art in the society of “reflection” The truth. at own its it to exist. is if to “kill” needs society the which of that truth the but rather itself, society of the truth not is the ety represses society the which ofmedium that contentthethe social is in which medium, itits own “reflects” that butrather it“reflection,” not is bare its that fact the through the society about “truth” the content, delivers the social “reflects” a“work of for art,” example practice, signifying the way this In If art reflects society, then the mode of this reflection does not fol reflection this the mode of then society, reflects art If at its truth own arrives itself In other words: it is only in this “reflection” that society arrives arrives that society “reflection” words: this other in In it only is , it is rather a reflection through which the reflected the reflected which through areflection , it rather is . (107) . The truth about soci truth . The ------Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 tion” and hence “recognize a historically specific class position” class (104). specific ahistorically tion” hence and “recognize “‘absent,’ their ‘negative’ them determina in cent love poem,” to detect inno an in life, still impressionistic in themes, ‘neutral’ most “the with to come has to terms thus domain this into inquiry Amaterialist tion. produc of art universality and neutrality seeming for the tice—allows culture). and literature, art, of fields the in distortion (ideological economic relations)“superstructure” nor the political- by governed as reality (social “base” the reducible to neither is that repression an original of mark the bears objectifications those in “reflected” content is that Thereby, social the practices. cultural or other literature, art, of objectifications the by articulated tent, of con repressed level at the or knowledge—but sense, meaning, nal of exter medium aneutral as treated of repression—language medium the in itself not manifest does repressed the manner: distorted and adisplaced place in takes repressed of the return The meaning. tent, of con container aneutral as language rendering practice, signifying of the materiality repression—repression of the original of an truth the expresses reality”) social mirrors/reflects (“arts reflection of linear the idea sense, this In and so forth. artifacts, cultural art, by “reflected” be can that reality reality—a of social constitutive is exchange, cative organon as concept of language idealist ‘reality,’ is first constitutedthe social field of or the Social, ‘content,’the this field of which the i.e. through act “very the designates rather, it content to its or mistake; not is illusion simply an external form empty and medium aneutral as of language treating and practice recognition). social and positioning individual langage and parole of relations order differential (the symbolic the forcesoperative within the into inquiry its and structuralism linguistic by analyzed effects, material has that materiality of a nonempirical efficacy the strates demon Language conception of language. to amaterialist point tion of reflec medium the and practice signifying of notions the words, the other In reflection. thetrue concept to of rise give could reflection, of uneven medium opacity, the of this materiality the opaque. Only and asymmetric, but biased, or transparent, not neutral thus is tion of reflec medium Slovene The Society/Text”: of literature). “Art, case the (in of reflection medium specific at the order in repressed to arrive This original repression—of the materiality of the signifying prac signifying of the materiality the repression—of original This signifying of the materiality from the However, abstracting such , the subject of enunciation and the enunciated, or enunciated, the and of enunciation subject , the , as an instrument of communi instrument an , as ” (106). The ------67 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

68 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 18 17 he insists, language, Rather, class. of one particular superstructure of the part as ­ideology not is language that 1950, in he declared writings, oneIn last of his proposed. himself Stalin that of language theory materialist historical relations. of social “base” material the infrastructure, the in but also superstructure the in only not relations of productive medium neutral the becomes language differently, Put of production. medium universal sense, this in and, external an to be but appears superstructure of ideologies the to the no longerbelongs language of mediation, medium aneutral “base.” As and of fields “superstructure” the capable of mediating exchange, capitalist moneyin form the like almost mediation, sal of univer medium the becomes Language position. class and struggle of devoid class of trace any become auniversal it can medium, tral treatedas a neu is Oncelanguage Realism). (Socialist art in reflection symmetric economy the their and in relations social of transparent tasy fan Stalinist the concerns but also culture, and literature, of art, cepts con bourgeois of the to acritique not is limited insight materialist This In this vein, he declares that language language that he declares vein, this In Ibid. Pravda in 1950, 2, August and 4, July 20, June published First .marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1950/jun/20.htm. https://www 2000), House, Publishing Languages Foreign (Moscow: of Problems and Marxism in Linguistics,” in Marxism “Concerning Stalin, Josef all the classes of society. classes the all society, entire the serving equally but in classes, of other riment det to the one class serving not in consists people, between course of inter ameans as role of language, functional Hencepeople. the whole of the common language the as society, ofmembers that common to all society, for the language asingle as created was official of the ourselves to remind it instructive is context, this In the superstructure. More, it is practically unlimited. More, it practically is superstructure. the of sphere broader of more the action and comprehensive than man’s far is of fields embraces all activity, which of language, sphere reason of the action . For this superstructure. to the base from the and base, to spheres the of work, his from production all in activity other his all but with man’s activity, productive with not and only directly, man’s activity productive with connected is 17

. 18 ------Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 more recent theories of the “general intellect” of the more recent theories in reverberations critical its and capitalism cognitive of contemporary fantasy to the points also society—but entire of the reproduction and production the serving instrumentally mediation, of social medium sal univer and infinite, immediate, an as language is, productivism—that spheres and of life.” activities human access to all direct it has because economy, the “capablement, replacing money capital of and entirely up Groys Stalin’s sums argu itBoris as is, (superstructure), ­ideology guage is not external to either that form or to the “general intellect” of “general intellect” or to the form that to either not is external guage of language that is realized in a socialist, .” communist asocialist, in realized is that of language economy. capacity market the Clearly, this it precisely is eliminating thereby immediately, and directly superstructure and base to connect capacity the possesses “language mediation: of universal medium immediate sense, this in and, neutral the as treated is Language 22 22 21 20 19 value.” of surplus- production of the apillar as system, labor, ahierarchical as of wage today, itself, aperpetuation as manifests intellect general The form. determined ahistorically index, ahistorical has animal human the of faculties and cognitive communicative the generic most to profit) to work (and “Putting writes: Paolo As Virno capitalism. “post-Fordist” of so-called imperatives prescriptive the force,ductive transcending 2004), 66. 2004), Semiotext(e), Angeles: (Los Casson Andrea and Cascaito, James Bertoletti, Isabella trans. Life of Forms Contemporary of Analysis an For Multitude: the of AGrammar Virno, Paolo works/1857/grundrisse/ch14.htm) https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/ VII, (Notebook process.” life real the of practice, social of organs immediate as also but knowledge, of form the in only not produced, been have production social of powers the To it. degree what with accordance in transformed been and intellect general the of control the under come have itself life social of process the of conditions the hence, degree, what to and production, of force a direct become has knowledge social general degree what to indicates capital fixed of development The fied. objecti knowledge, of power the hand; human the by created brain, human the of organs are They nature. in participation human of or nature, over will human the of organs into transformed material natural industry; human of products are These etc. mules self-acting telegraphs, electric railways, locomotives, no machines, no builds “Nature Grundrisse the of Machines” on “Fragment so-called the In text. later the Kapital Das of text the became later what of draft early 1857, an from Grundrisse Marx’s in apassage to back relates term This Ibid. 61. Postscript Communist The Groys, Boris Groys’s reading of Stalin not only reveals the fantasy of Stalinist of Stalinist fantasy the notGroys’s reveals only of Stalin reading nor to (infrastructure) base reducible to is neither language If 22 This historically determined form is the commodity form; lan form; commodity the is form determined historically This I. Marx dropped the term “general intellect” in in intellect” “general term the dropped Marx I. , vol. , trans. Thomas H. Ford (London: Verso, 2009), 2009), Verso, Ford (London: H. Thomas , trans. 21 as a decentralized pro adecentralized as , Marx states: states: , Marx 20 - , - - 19 - -

69 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

70 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 as they express themselves through individual struggles, but more as struggles, individual through themselves express they as processes socio-political of waves vast tidal the in along Marlowe, swept Philip not Chandler’s as critic or literary historian social contemporary of the problem. Think of interpretive sort from any exempt all tidbits, “factual” of little full place supposedly archive,” amystical ation on “the fix credulous embarrassingly and ­conjoined to aStone totemistic, Age, itself finds theory of all rid to be desire liberal and impulse critical pre- the wherein disciplines, historical the in as studies literary in true as is This positivism. old, generalized quite fact but in a rejuvenated, to above all methods—and or “data-mining” quantitative, critique,” “post reading,” of “surface guise the in of “theory-lite”—whether to a sort both as one returning moment figures contemporary our 80s, 1970s and the in of point “theory” high Far from the arts. ences, the sci philosophy, history, social the humanities: theoretical of the larly particu and production, knowledge of human major disciplines other of the to that similar apredicament in exists today studies Literary Gavin Wal of repression. medium the place in takes “literally” struggle of mode repression. This this change and to designate name another is struggle Class disappear. of repressionniques making and of tech grasping presence absence, of an the displaced of the analysis an into translates critique Hence,is repressed. ideology of signification process of this materiality once way the external aseemingly in signify able only is to language that demonstrates practice this into inquiry The practice. signifying of the level at the operative relations material the is, itself—that medium linguistic account of an the gives thought overcome and once materialist criticized be only can infrastructure), (social “base” of the mediations social or neutralizing ture” “superstruc of the domain the universalizing either of language, tions misconcep complementary of labor. (communicative) These medium universal and aneutral as of notions language productivist in part counter its finds culture and literature, conceptsof art, to bourgeois Stalinism. by envisioned society communist of the medium universal and infinite, immediate, or the post-Fordist multitude the The idealist notion of language as a neutral medium that gives rise rise gives that medium aneutral as notion of language idealist The Sami Khatib is Visiting Assistant Professor in the Department of Fine Fine of Department in the Professor Assistant Visiting is Khatib Sami k er Arts and Art History at the American University of Beirut. of University American the at History Art and Arts ­ ------Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 critical role that it would arrogate to itself, arrogate it role would that critical post not the occupies studies literary in knowledge today, mainstream successors, predecessors its by but its by not importantly, superseded: largely been psychoanalysis)—has turalism, poststruc Althusser, after culture theoretical (a Marxist new inheritors to its from structuralism passage the is, period—that postwar of the cultures intellectual the with sequence associated the essence, today at core? its Whatlies In reaction. of political era to an it corresponds regression; amethodological not is only of analysis object the as trivia misrecognition). or ideological duplicity human slightest core the even to discover dewy-eyed to his shaken always and comes to light, that apparent “fact” newest the “solve” ready problem to rashly always the with assistant, naive Poirot’s and credulous hopelessly Hastings, Captain Christie’s of character the in expressed more even perfectly surely are ers” read “surface and “postcritics” sordid phenomena worst of these (the and appalling most the to even charm bourgeois cheerful and a warm give that interpretations tidy on to fixate questions political and social general all ignoring Poirot, fastidiously Hercule Christie’s Agatha 23 signifying practice signifying aproperly “ how to think up own: its as take must analysis cultural field of the in position critical) ent (and truly coher any problem unresolved that basic, of the us reminds text the all, Above of relations. earlier an into achievements from its backward fall to knowledge’s) literally to regress, capacity (andtory’s theoretical of his us it reminds today, because to pursue but also directions and problems us capable of giving it remains moment—not because only current our in so fresh appears Problemi-Razprave journal of the editors force of thought. driving the as resurrected contemplation been has aesthetic bourgeois in interference an as of resentment theory the which in position cal bourgeois of “consensus.” of politics bourgeois aliberal- to perfectly corresponding contemplation, and detachment aesthetic aristocratic 18th-century of impersonation excellent an itis that is said be can that best the which of 2015), Press, Chicago of University (Chicago: Critique of Limits The Felski, Rita by conclusions “logical” to its taken been has work Latour’s field, literary the In humanities. contemporary the in reigns that empiricism liberal incoherent the of much for origin of point clear a Latour, Bruno of work the of influence widespread the example, for See, The gradual replacement of the historical process with microscopic microscopic process with replacement historical of the gradual The In part, this is why the classic 1975 text “Art, Society/Text” by the the by Society/Text” “Art, 1975 text classic why is the this part, In ” (112)? 23 , so to speak. In other words, other In , so to speak. but rather a sort of pre asort but rather materialist theory of the of the theory materialist criti ­ - - - - - 71 71 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

72 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 lem in a particularly apt formulation: aparticularly lem in would begin by refusing this bifurcated system itself in favor in of acon itself system bifurcated this refusing by begin would dehors grand the in always placed content firm material ofa in signification ofnotions simple reflection transfer. of this experience the foreverby altered space of thought, original content its into displaced back this displacing before once again them, underpin that factors political and social transversal to the themselves the questions expose as to so fields concentric into determinations from one of structural set derived questions transposing ments, of displace set aradical but instead of “multidisciplinarity,” sort rary tonot create acontempo serves history and spheres politics, of theory, the between triangulation the which in enterprise, theoretical Marxian to the centrality its and itself of displacement question the else all problem above concern would This posed”? directly are questions these “not are solvable where that level at questions the with deal always precisely, it what mean, to does move itself: theoretical this clarify and problematics. fields other into of tools analysis the displaces one that standpoint, problems, but own from aparallax its world’s) of literature’s (ordefinition “literary” accepts the that of view not from apoint we begin that is of us such—demands as of culture broadly,thestratum literature—more What significations. its within appear that forms social of the historicity from the exempted is gory cate when that especially of “literature,” category aesthetic bourgeois of the or stability givenness the in of abelief means by interrogated critically be cannot that symbolic of the realm ideology, general the and signification, of inscription, problems terms in formal poses end, and begin might athing of such boundaries wherever the “literature,” that it this: is impasses, new their and studies literary of contemporary text If there is a basic point that demands repeating today in the con the in today repeating demands that point abasic is there If (103) posed. directly are questions wherelevel these therefore not are solvable at up the “literature” by opened tions ques The symbolic. social effects—the its and practice nifying problem of asig it—the and—through problem the is of language of literature regressive question the behind hidden fact in What is prob the describe authorsSociety/Text” of “Art, the outset, At the In contrast to the outmoded 18th-century materialisms, with their their with materialisms, 18th-century outmoded to the contrast In problem how is to fundamental the say that even Here we might , a materialist theory of the signifier signifier of the theory , amaterialist ------Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 tout court tout canon intellectual “Western” the or perhaps language, English ago, ageneration the demonstrated comprehensively moment of deconstruction acertain as Aware that, on “world literature.” writing contemporary than trend opportunistic “positing” or “supposing” ( or “supposing” “positing” comes completed to be by thus of capital system theoretical The logic. economic a“pure” to be assumed if it as be could to function made is history, contingent purely and of avolatile aproduct is ity, which commod labor power the relations, of exchange form of the outset very capital’s words, in from the interior? other presupposed In strictly be never can which that precisely is commodity, which labor power of the presence the presupposing process, without repeating and acyclical as acircuit, as itself form value of relation self-expanding How the could of capital. drive logical the role within acentral given is accumulation), primitive so-called (the encounter of acontingent form the accident in of labor-power ahistorical product commodity, The the exteriority.” “internal an itself is that external” from a“relation of being constituted world is of social how our understanding clearest the us to give tem sys social-theoretical Marxian of the advantage Itpresupposition. the is of and relation supposition of the understanding to Marx’s one linked write: authorsSociety/Text” of “Art, The forms. of social process, a materiality historical the and practice of social ality materi but to the realm, physical empirical, not to the only linked cept 24 24 as its historical point of point departure. historical its as crete relations that are “pre-posited” or ( “presupposed” “pre-posited” are that relations crete University Press, 2016), particularly chapters 4 and 5. 4and chapters 2016), particularly Press, University Duke NC: (Durham, Capital of Perversion Sublime The Walker, Gavin see relation, this On In the contemporary university, there has scarcely been amore been scarcely has there university, contemporary the In We might best conceive of this relation of “internal exteriority” as as exteriority” of relation “internal conceiveWe best of this might (105–6) constituted. art, in “reflected” then is tent,” which exteriority “sign,” as to “appearance,” appear internal an is etc.) art allows only which (exteriority, practice to social relation its in for art typical is which external, of relation being very words, this other or in tice, prac social to the a“sign” as internal is side.” art contrary, the On other “the be on would content, which some social reflects a sign “on one side,” asign is the such that and art that It case not is the , so that only through this exteriority is the “social con “social the is exteriority this through only , so that setzen ) within its own development the con development the own its ) within 24 , exists in a peculiar relationship relationship apeculiar in , exists voraussetzen ) ------73 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

74 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 more generally to ‘culture,’ i.e. to ‘its own’ organization of the social social of the own’organization to ‘its i.e. to ‘culture,’ more generally and struggle, class its to support to literature turn it will state nation its loses once the that “It clear quite is light: following the in problematic of world literature current the see we should globalization, achieved now, else of asupposedly era the movement. all Above in ical ideolog of this experience for the excellence par vehicle the is literature of and community, form existing previously any economy undermined commodity site the wherein very at the installed is belonging national of sentiment the arts, or the of culture realm the through general: in society of capitalist characteristic of displacement sort the through cally work ideologi it always must itself, as discovered be never can nation 25 25 of potatoes.” asack form a sack in potatoes as ( of homonymousaddition magnitudes a“simple into amalgamated themselves discover could if they as viduals indi discrete imagination the in together suturing belonging, national of sentiment of impossible relation the this to enabletion precisely Brumaire Eighteenth from The (109). lines reference famous With here to the nation” of the sack the in apotato as way imaginary an in himself nize to recog individual it thereby enables the representation—and political sphere of the in performs state the as function same that performs literature society, civil the “In apt formulation: aparticularly contains Society/Text” “Art, point, this On earth. of ends the to the language of national regime the merely extends nation, to the subordination its of studies literary cure would that asalve than “world rather literature,” that sense this in is language—it of national regime ated from the dissoci be never can that afunction of literature, function ideological language. English of the principle organizing the under century 20th of the experience ofaesthetic varieties the attempt to subsume final a field, cultural the in such as relation colonial of the gasp last the perhaps is sense, this in “World literature,” alifeline. as trade in stock their see today studies “worldliterature” existence, for continued its specificity traditional” ­ of “national- or ideology particularity on local its depends yet sal univer- the as itself arrogates whereby it rhetorically of substitution, (Berlin: Dietz, 1985), 96–189. 1985), Dietz, (Berlin: Bonaparte Louis des Brumaire 18. Der Gesamtausgabe Marx-Engels 99–197; 1979), Progress, (Moscow: Bonaparte Works Collected Marx-Engels Marx, Karl In part, this trend tends to ignore or downplay the properly social- or to ignore downplaythe tends trend this part, In , the literary in this way is conceived as a device of conceivedsignifica is way adevice as this in literary , the The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Louis of Brumaire Eighteenth The 11, , vol. gleichnamiger Größen gleichnamiger 25 Precisely because the the because Precisely , Abt. I, Bd. 11, 11, Bd. I, , Abt. ), much ------Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 political. of the domain the in right-opportunism and ultra-leftism between from that not dissimilar nexus scientism—a positivist and idealism liberal between we face, impasse one conditionedanexus by ceptual con out way momentonly of the the is current our in centrality their today. horizon To their renew within fundamentally we remain that formalization— and of structure questions the through than culture of analysis ideological the and of knowledge politicality access to the have no other thesestill we concepts, with finished from being far that, becoming. ness but of their complete not of their aspect from the taken articulations, of structural process accumulated the more than nothing itself is said, be it might History, “structure.” versus of “history” posing naive and ahistorical this to do with whatsoever nothing having and of linguistics, realm the in Saussure following form, adifferential as structure emphasize to precisely was advance structuralist The notion. rigid regressive and completely are avoided favor in of a of advances structuralism the (113)— forms” ‘particular’ to its indifferent and concreteness, historical to real indifferent type,’ ‘ideal of an generality “a as mere abstract taken structure— of definition this in that out authors point precisely the Poetry Modern of Structure The a certain globally shared aspect of their project. of their aspect shared globally a certain suggest propose, we might authorsSociety/Text” of “Art, the that tice” exotic? of the ahint spiced up with narrative, character liberal theand good, foremost loves first “world literature” level, cultural the on that it surprise is any consensus, capitalist of the geopolitics the and personhood, of legal sanctity sphere, the joy contractual of of the the us to convince tries (109). world once the bourgeoisie again symbolic” As 26 26 Badiou, “The Autonomy of the Aesthetic Process.” Aesthetic the of Autonomy “The Badiou, as translated (1966): 77–89, 12–13 marxistes-léninistes Cahiers esthetique,” processus du literary—“L’autonomie the of configuration ideological the within materiality of cept acon to linked closely 1966, of text early Badiou’s Alain second, and 2017); forthcoming Verso, (London: Possibility of Centre the Towards Marx: in translated Ihave which 1990), Das Marx’s of tures” struc “differential Ko¯jin Saussurean the to precisely 1974 devoted early, work Karatani’s First, Society/Text”: “Art, alongside read profitably be could problems similar addressing but places divergent from texts two here, areading such undertake Icannot Although This newly classic text of 1975 teaches us over forty years later later years over of forty 1975 us teaches text newly classic This In thinking through the “materialist theory of the signifying prac signifying of the theory “materialist the through thinking In Gavin Walker is Associate Professor of History at McGill University. McGill at History of Professor Associate Walker is Gavin — Marukusu sono kano¯sei sono Marukusu chu¯shin no Ko¯dansha, (Tokyo: , then recently translated into Slovene, into translated recently , then 26 Citing Friedrich’s Friedrich’s Citing - - - - - 75 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

76 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 28 28 27 andsubjectivity. ficity, scienti conceptions of language, impoverished impose orientations ical philosophy, philosoph other whose toward prejudices of analytic forms rigid by largely are dominated discipline, the of guardians official those of institutes, amajority one hand, the On miserable. rather seem might present. of the diagnostic acritical with to begin do so, it necessary is theory.In order to of contemporary way to the deadlocks avoid efficient an as economy serve may of political critique the and psychoanalysis, structuralism, between alliance consideration to the further Giving picture. aglobal than Society/Text” “Art, editorial Problemi-Razprave to the Ipropose less aconcrete response pages few following the In S invention of an ever-new outside the university discourse. ever-new of university invention an outside the conceptual perpetual the with contrasted is institutions of academic tower ivory old the of in the reproduction and Preservation thought. of living examples paradigmatic to offer seem alized noninstitution the life, of all stripped is logicism and whose scientism of philosophy, image predominant to the contrast In others. amongst materialisms, new to various accelerationisms and realisms speculative from orientations, alternative of aproliferation we find discipline of the losophies, accompanied by an underdeveloped theory of subjectivity. theory underdeveloped losophies, an accompanied by phi these “postcritical” in abstractions financial even and technology, of science, fetishization presence of the strong the of thought—hence, modes aregression into to precritical turn quickly can beyond critique Theof philosophy.movetasks the complicated significantly which economy or psychoanalysis, of political critique the as such spring off notably idea, agood when is it comes materialist to its of critique history the with breaking It questionable whether is politics. in Marx ontology and in to move beyond Kant striving postcritical, as selves amo T amo which it unknowingly adopts not only its fetishizations but also its resistance to critique. to resistance its also but fetishizations its only not adopts itunknowingly which from production, capitalist on modeled is production conceptual that likelihood the with us confront orientations philosophical nonconventional apparently these of lifespans short the breaks, radical of cases exemplary being from Far overproduction. of logic the resembles suspiciously perspectives philosophical new of proliferation the addition, In capitalism. neoliberal of voice philosophical the as seen be can philosophy analytic feudalism, of thought official the was scholasticism as just scholasticism— medieval to compared sometimes is philosophy analytic that wonder No For a pessimistic viewer the contemporary situation in philosophy philosophy in situation contemporary the viewer For apessimistic Many of these self-proclaimed new orientations understand them understand orientations new self-proclaimed ofMany these omšiC ˇ 27 On the other hand, outside the official borders official outside the hand, other the On - 28 - - - - - Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 (Althusser), return to Nietzsche (Deleuze and Foucault), while the the Foucault), and while (Deleuze to Nietzsche return (Althusser), to Marx return to Freud (Lacan), to Plato (Badiou), return return of “return”: banner the under took shape century 20th of the attempts philosophical daring most the existence, social and subjective in of capitalism absolute the anchoring about with abreak of bringing ity to compensate impossibil for seem the theory in breaks sies of radical structuralism. and psychoanalysis as such programs, research 20th-century radical economy most to the of political critique the via epistemology modern leadsfrom which of critique, history the with abreak introduce Both philosophy. analytic in that to similar thought of poverty a we find “radicalism” noise of contemporary the all behind that ished—proof undimin remain of fetishism critique the and oflogic appearance the regarding Kapital lessons 150-year-old of Das the that scandalous almost is It are located. appearances financial and technological these which within milieu devastated asimilarly Silicon Valley to discover or away from Wall Street to look miles afew one merely needs fact, In Global South. the in of of exploitation raw forms reproduction and wars perpetual the with interdependent of directly as thought be should globe the of in onepart abstractions financial and of technological apparent disconnectedness the gaze, To capitalism. acritical cialized of logic finan the misconstrues that aseparation introduces thought postcritical of contemporary gaze fascinated childishly The so forth. Silicon of Valley, and London, Wall Street, City the of capitalism: ance appear one narrow privilege they condition that the under possible only today, weare have to fight monstrosity political the to call we want ever or what capitalism, network semiocapitalism, capitalism, of financial discontinuity historical of the reproduce. Proclamations they that tion fetishiza to the blind remain philosophy in orientations contemporary of majority vast the said, Ihave already As psychoanalysis. theoretical Ljubljana of of the school practice theoretical the oriented beginning from the components that two the are which materialism, and tics dialec major features, of two terms in measured be can of thought ity radical the Fundamentally, radically. to what think it means exemplify and alternatives outlined two of impotence the the expose both that of lessons aseries contains still Society/Text” “Art, editorial Razprave Problemi- the anachronistic, and outmoded even maybe distant, In contrast to the current situation in philosophy, in fanta where situation the current to the contrast In theoretically seems nowadays that at atime written being Despite ------77 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

78 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 ophy throughout its history, from Aristotle to contemporary analytic analytic to contemporary from Aristotle history, its ophy throughout philos preoccupied has which of logic appearance, the sustains as well as precedes and of thinking real for the stands thus unconscious the of logic or words. The images either in articulation their concepts, and thoughts, fabricates and material mental orders the placements, which dis condensations and disconnections, and of connections tialization spa the surface, order of this topological but the surface, the beneath not some depth hidden observed hand, other on Freud, the expression. linguistic and of its thought superficial of laws this merely fantasmatic offered logic Aristotelian while there, stuck have remained and thought of surface the only of have scratched consciousness Philosophies such. as rationality with equated to be it prove has that tions—laws—which opera symbolic rigorous follows very unconscious the showed that order.Freud contrary, the On of cultural midst the in substance ral natu of some rejected eruption uncontrolled or an culture, and nature between link missing repressed It of the not is acontainer substance. raw instinctual and irrational not is aplace ofscious some primordial, uncon the that demonstrating rigorously in to—consisted returned insistently and forcefully most what is Lacan merit—which est Freud’s addition, In discourse. great conscious and meaningful, lated, of articu or disturbances interruptions, breaks, of disruptions, form the in itself manifests unconscious the that known It well is thinking). of real (the unconscious notion of the Freudian concepts, the other among he associates, which with and “nonrealized” as describes Lacan that on something insistence for adisrupting but rather same, of the or repetition for automatic not place” repetition stand does same the to “return the that recalled it be should one-liner, famous ofgesis this exe adetailed into place.” same to the entering Without returns always which that is real “The real: of the it afeature in recognized Lacan that Freud. and Hegel,Marx, thought: radical of modern kernel the form together taken which names, proper three toward endeavors gravitate theoretical their that noas surprise so it come should to materialism, and thought to dialectical a return doubled as internally was return seriously. Their of thought strategy and method as lesson of took“return” the Its initiators orientation. this mid-1970s perpetuated the in Problemi-Razprave Yugoslav journal the around gathered group that theoretical The others. and to Saussure, return immense an was project post–Worldentire War II structuralist When it comes to the question of return, it is worth remembering remembering it worth is ofWhen it return, question comes to the ------Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 was the true aim of the structuralist science of language. And the the And of science language. structuralist of the aim true the was of structure dissolving and To emergence,scious. becoming, the study unconthe and aphasia, children’slanguage, significantly—on as just but also—and structure, of dynamic example aparadigmatic remains no less which language, not on only poetic focused study systematic hence, dissolution; his and of becoming its state the in but rather state, formed its not in language, to study has linguistics occasions) that (repeated on several remark his to recall merely needs One system. unstable qua structure or better, dynamic, structural this emphasized Jakobson Roman further temporality. by marked essentially is of signs, science of semiology,general object the the sinceforto Saussure, him hence not apply does history and of opposition structure The systems. of linguistic becoming or nonteleological dynamic and instability ral tempo perpetual order the and of linguistic stabilization temporary the of aunification stands efforts core of Saussure’s very the intellectual At history. and structure one or if wishes, organization, diachronic and of synchronic intersection the of science language: of his “object” true the to recognize to evoke Saussure’sneed anagrams obsession with not does One picture. different entirely an provides of structuralism major tofigures the Areturn networks. symbolic overdetermining and monolithic in action and thought encapsulates which theory, of rigid example paradigmatic the represents “crime” of this because and event, or history, of , for arejection stands structuralism which movement. structuralist up the by opened was that horizon the in inscribed gets psychoanalysis level, epistemo-political same at the Furthermore, mode. social predominant its with production of intellectual twining inter the confronting as well as of thought, of mode production the at highlighting major attempts two economy Hegel’s and dialectics, of political critique Marx’s both encounters psychoanalysis Lacanian where is Freudo- of representation). This that is stuck, remain ophies of philos majority vast the at which level, logical the as of (insofar logic production of logic the or say onethe even could of thought, production of logic the the is psychoanalysis by highlighted philosophy. logic The 29 29 ther analysis of this connection, see the response of Sami Khatib above. Khatib Sami of response the see connection, this of analysis ther For fur Saussure. of interpretation or to, return materialist Lacan’s called be could what to it relating thereby logic, constitutive as a such as signifier the of logic the or practice signifying the of discussion its through issue this tackles text Problemi-Razprave The Today one still often hears the superficial cliché, according to according cliché, superficial the hears often Today one still 29 - - - - - 79 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021

80 a r t m a r g i n s 6 : 3 called “working through.” Again, the intellectual dynamic at stake here at stake dynamic intellectual the Again, through.” “working called Freud famously labor that process intellectual of patient the in engages thought critical acceleration, and immobility between alternative ­ pseudo- this Opposing capitalism. and life, outdoors” of subjectivity, of “great the) (fantasy the after chase which philosophies, “new” acceleration of the and nor forward, astep back astep neither take can philosophy, where thinking of analytic immobility the between suspended seem may economy. thought of political Speculative critique to Marx’s recent return to the but unrelated anything date—is to sciences human the in project systematic radical most the remains one say must program—which research structuralist to the a return Such revisiting. worth structuralism 20th-century what is makes tivity furthest). the outlook Koyré’s he pushed that materialist argue could one and of Koyré, astudent himself declared famously (Lacan temology epis of become amaterialist what could outline the providing thereby tendencies, of contradictory abattleground as science conceiving in consisted Koyré’s effort of knowledge. main accumulation the and cognition of progress scientific the to science: linked constantly are that features major ideological two challenging of thereby science, structure the overall and knowledge of production scientific of the regime the in failures and role deadlocks, the of errors, thematizes repeatedly mology Koyré’s Koyré. episte of Alexandre science: adoctrine it with providing by development of structuralism historical to the contributed cantly but who signifi structuralists, the not among counted usually is that aname recall we history, can and of structure inseparability the with phenomena. therefore rational and logical are cuts and disturbance, discontinuity, that shows firmly most Psychoanalysis of logic representation. the of language, functioning normal the to be what seems behind production of linguistic level the addresses mentioned, Ihave already as which, to Freud, of Lacan’s return core very at is the instability structural that to recall Needless body). presence of the the evoking explicitly but also being, speaking the (denoting aparlêtre call eventually would but what Lacan language, by affected be cannot thus and abody who “angel” lacks an ­aphasic)—not psychotic, (neurotic, or asubject-in-dissolution (child) becoming but asubject-in- speaker idealized not is an of language, nature the order in to study turn should to whom linguists subject, speaking This preoccupation with structural instability and forms of nega forms and instability structural with preoccupation This or instability, with preoccupation To complete structuralist the - - - - Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ARTM_a_00189 by guest on 25 September 2021 already contains amoment displacement of contains and invention already always which hence and of repetition, movement the ofis return, 30 30 and the fetishizing proceedings of “postcritical” thought. of “postcritical” proceedings fetishizing the and philosophy of analytic tendencies normalizing the choice between false the for counteracting framework crucial most the economy remains of political critique the and psychoanalysis, ofance structuralism, alli theoretical the that fact of the demonstration contemporary most a it contains of time, its amere document being than Rather nistic. . rialist but mate poetics, nor logic speculative analytic neither is method This vacillate. appearances make will that of amethod necessity ongoing the the process of so-called primitive accumulation. primitive so-called of process the and crisis, of reoccurrence the production, of mode capitalist the of intricacies the grasp fully to thought critical allows movement specific this only that indicate briefly I would From this viewpoint, “Art, Society/Text” is anything but anachro anything is Society/Text” “Art, viewpoint, From this aoTmˇicˇ Tomsˇ Berlin. Samo University, Humboldt at fellow aresearch is 30 —hence, —hence, - - - 81 Benezra | R o u n d ta b l e o n “A rt, Society/ T e x t ”