understanding poststructuralism Understanding Movements in Modern Thought Series Editor: Jack Reynolds Th is series provides short, accessible and lively introductions to the major schools, movements and traditions in philosophy and the history of ideas since the beginning of the Enlightenment. All books in the series are written for undergraduates meeting the subject for the fi rst time. Published Understanding Existentialism Understanding Virtue Ethics Jack Reynolds Stan van Hooft Understanding Poststructuralism James Williams Forthcoming titles include Understanding Empiricism Understanding Hermeneutics Robert Meyers Lawrence Schmidt Understanding Ethics Understanding Naturalism Tim Chappell Jack Ritchie Understanding Feminism Understanding Phenomenology Peta Bowden and Jane Mummery David Cerbone Understanding German Idealism Understanding Rationalism Will Dudley Charlie Heunemann Understanding Hegelianism Understanding Utilitarianism Robert Sinnerbrink Tim Mulgan understanding poststructuralism James Williams For Richard and Olive It is always about who you learn from. © James Williams, 2005 Th is book is copyright under the Berne Convention. No reproduction without permission. All rights reserved. First published in 2005 by Acumen Acumen Publishing Limited 15a Lewins Yard East Street Chesham Bucks HP5 1HQ www.acumenpublishing.co.uk ISBN 1-84465-032-4 (hardcover) ISBN 1-84465-033-2 (paperback) Work on Chapter 3 was supported by British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Designed and typeset in Garamond by Kate Williams, Swansea. Printed and bound in Malta by Gutenberg Press. Contents Acknowledgements vii Abbreviations ix 1 Introduction: What is poststructuralism? 1 2 Poststructuralism as deconstruction: 25 Jacques Derrida’s Of Grammatology 3 Poststructuralism as philosophy of diff erence: 53 Gilles Deleuze’s Diff erence and Repetition 4 Poststructuralism as philosophy of the event: 79 Lyotard’s Discours, fi gure 5 Poststructuralism, history, genealogy: 105 Michel Foucault’s Th e Archaeology of Knowledge 6 Poststructuralism, psychoanalysis, linguistics: 133 Julia Kristeva’s Revolution in Poetic Language 7 Poststructuralism into the future 153 Questions for discussion and revision 167 Further reading 171 Publications timeline 174 Index 177 contents v Acknowledgements I should like to thank Th e Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland for its generous funding for research in Paris libraries. La Bibliothèque du Saulchoir, Paris, provided a stimulating research environment and a wonderful research resource. Work on Chapter 3 was supported by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. Material from Chapter 3 was presented at the Experimenting with Intensities Conference (May 2004) at Trent University, Canada, with travel funded by the British Acad- emy, and at the Writing/History: Deleuzian Events Conference (June 2005) at the University of Cologne. Chapter 4 was presented in part at the Department of Political Science, Carleton University, Canada. I am grateful for their support and very useful feedback. Chapter 1 was presented at the Graduate Visiting Speaker Series, Department of English Literature, University of Edinburgh. Parts of this book were also presented at the Research Seminar in the Philosophy Department, University of Dundee. Th e University of Dundee funded sabbatical leave for this project. Kurt Brandhorst, Claire Colebrook, Nicholas Davey, John Drummond, Penny Fielding, Lily Forrester, Rachel Jones, Beth Lord, Valentine Moulard, Aislinn O’Donnell, Keith Ansell Pear- son, John Protevi, Dan Smith, Michael Wheeler, Frédéric Worms and many others challenged and helped me in conversations and through their research. At Acumen Steven Gerrard, Tristan Palmer and Kate Williams made this a much better book through their careful editorial advice. My undergraduate and postgraduate classes and tutees gave me the opportunity to try out many parts of this work in a sympathetic but critical environment. Th ey prompted ideas in ways that can never be acknowledgements vii traced fully, but that are the lifeblood of academic work. I am grateful to all friends, students and colleagues for their comments and help, but claim all errors and imprecision as mine all mine. A work owes more than could ever be quantifi ed to the time, love and spaces that others make for it, should anyone be foolish or crude enough to try. In all of these, my immeasurable debts are to you, Claire. viii understanding poststructuralism Abbreviations AK Foucault, Th e Archaeology of Knowledge (London: Routledge, 1989). D Derrida, “Diff érance”, in Margins of Philosophy, A. Bass (trans.), 1–28 (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1984). DR Deleuze, Diff erence and Repetition, P. Patton (trans.) (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995). DF Lyotard, Discours, fi gure (Paris: Klincksieck, 1971). HRS Deleuze, “How do we Recognize Structuralism”, in Desert Islands and Other Texts (1953–1974), M. Taormina (trans.), 170–92 (New York: Semiotext(e), 2003). OG Derrida, Of Grammatology, G. C. Spivak (trans.) (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1974). PS Deleuze, Proust and Signs, R. Howard (trans.) (London: Con- tinuum, 2000). RPL Kristeva, Revolution in Poetic Language, M. Waller (trans.) (New York: Columbia University Press, 1984). TD Lyotard, Th e Diff erend: Phrases in Dispute (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1988). WPU Deleuze, “What Prisoners want from Us”, in Desert Islands and Other Texts (1953–1974), M. Taormina (trans.), 204–5 (New York: Semiotext(e), 2003). abbreviations ix one Introduction: what is poststructuralism? Limits and knowledge Poststructuralism is the name for a movement in philosophy that began in the 1960s. It remains an infl uence not only in philosophy, but also in a wider set of subjects, including literature, politics, art, cultural criti- cisms, history and sociology. Th is infl uence is controversial because poststructuralism is oft en seen as a dissenting position, for example, with respect to the sciences and to established moral values. Th e movement is best summed up by its component thinkers. Th ere- fore, this book seeks to explain it through a critical study of fi ve of the most important works by fi ve of the movement’s most important think- ers (Derrida, Deleuze, Lyotard, Foucault and Kristeva). Th e principle aim is to respond to two powerful criticisms of poststructuralism: fi rst, that it is wilfully and irretrievably diffi cult; secondly, that it takes on positions that are marginal, inconsistent and impossible to maintain. Th e fi rst idea that allows for an answer to these points is that the limits of knowledge play an unavoidable role at its core. Th is is the common thread running through poststructuralism. It explains why structural- ism had to be added to, since the structuralist project can be summed up as arriving at secure knowledge through the charting of diff erences within structures. According to poststructuralists, this security missed the troubling and productive roles of limits folded back into the struc- ture. Knowledge cannot escape its limits: “It is not surrounded, but traversed by its limit, marked in its inside by the multiple furrows of its margin” (D: 25). introduction: what is poststructuralism? 1 So “limit” is not used in a specialist sense here, for example, in math- ematical terms, or as the upper or lower limits of measurable quantities. Instead, it indicates relative security and stability within a given envi- ronment, where the boundaries are seen as less dependable than the centre. For poststructuralism, the core is not more reliable, signifi cant and better known than its limits or outer boundaries. Th is is because the clear distinction of core and limit is not possible. Th e criticism of this distinction takes poststructuralism well beyond structuralist views, even though the former owes much to the latter. Structuralist knowledge is open to change when the observed structures change. However, despite this openness to change, in noting a repeated pattern of signs the structuralist scientist hopes to arrive at some secure understanding. For example, in charting the repeated patterns of daily life (wake–work–eat–sleep) we can begin to understand the relations between each element (their order and place). Th ere could be limits to such patterns (sleep–sleep–play–sleep) but these would be exceptional moves away from a normal pattern. Th e idea is that knowledge should start with the norm and only then consider the exception. Th e norm implies a deviation in the defi nition of the exception. If there is an ethical and political side to this distinction, it is that truth and the good are in the norm, although many disagreements are possible as to what makes the norm. Poststructuralism folds the limit back on to the core of knowledge and on to our settled understanding of the true and the good. It does this in a very radical way. Th at is, the limit is not compared with the core, or balanced with it, or given some kind of tempering role, in the sense, for example, of a majority listening to minorities. Rather, the claim is that the limit is the core. What does this strange claim mean? It means that any settled form of knowledge or moral good is made by its limits and cannot be defi ned independently of them. It means also that any exclusion of these limits is impossible. Limits are the truth of the core and any truths that deny this are illusory or false. Th e truth of a population is where it is chang- ing. Th e truth of a nation is at its borders. Th e truth of the mind is in its limit cases. But is the defi nition of a limit not dependent on the notion of a prior core? You only know that sleep–sleep–sleep–drink is deviant because of the dominance of wake–work–eat–sleep. No; the autono- mous defi nition of the limit is the next most important common thread in poststructuralism. Th e limit is not defi ned in opposition to the core; it is a positive thing in its own right.