<<

Prof. Dr. Christian Moser (Universidade de Bonn) Graduate Seminar: Barbarians – Modern Renegotiations of an Ancient Concept (Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, October 2016)

The notion of „barbarism‟ and the figure of the „barbarian‟ have played an important role in Western thought and been a constant part of our vocabulary since Greek antiquity. Within the age-old history of their usage, the terms „barbarian‟ and „barbarism‟ have always been regarded as being part of a dichotomous structure. „Barbarism‟ is defined in opposition to „civilization‟ or its equivalents. In this opposition, the „barbarian‟ supports the superiority of those who assume the status of the „civilized‟. „Barbarism‟ reinforces the discourse of „civilization‟ by functioning as its negative offshoot and antipode. As Reinhart Koselleck argues , this binary structure is characterized by an inbuilt asymmetry. It seems to draw a clear line between a „good inside‟ and a „bad outside‟, between a „we ‟ that assures itself of its superior value by pitting itself against an „other‟ who is denied the achievements of civilization. The notion of „barbarism‟ figures as one of the most steadfast and semantically saturated concepts in Western discourse, and it seems to be rooted in one of the most rigid hierarchial oppositions this discourse has ever produced.

In the eighteenth century, however, the semantics of barbarism undergoes a significant transformation, which destabilizes the hierarchical opposition. The spatial concept of barbarism (inside vs.outside) is temporalized. Attempts are made to differentiate between „savage‟ and „barbarian‟ people. Barbarism is conceived of as a transitory phase that mediates between the savage state of nature and the state of civilization. Barbarism thus acquires the value of a third term that irritates the binary opposition between the savage and the civilized, between nature and culture. These attempts are undertaken within different discursive contexts: social theory and cultural history, philosophy, ethnography, aesthetic theory and literature.

The aim of the seminar is to analyze how the shift in the semantics of barbarity manifests itself in modern culture. It proceeds from the hypothesis that the destabilization of the dichotomy between barbarism and civilization opens up new possibilites of recasting the „barbarian‟ in ambiguous, experimental or even positive terms, as it can be found in the writings of philosophers such as Friedrich Nietzsche, Walter Benjamin, as well as in the works of literary modernism and the avantgarde.

Preliminary Syllabus:

1st Session (Monday, 17 October, 2016): Introductory Talk; Conceptual History of Barbarism; Semantic Shift of Barbarism in 18th- Century Cultural Theory Texts: a) required reading:

 Reinhart Koselleck: The Historical-Political Semantics of Asymmetrical Counter-Concepts  Montesquieu: The Spirit of the Laws (1748, chapters XIV, XVII and XVIII)  Adam Ferguson: An Essay on the History of Civil Society (1767, chapters I.1-4, II, IV)  Jean-Jacques Rousseau: On the Origin of Language (ca. 1760, chapters I, IX, XX)

b) recommended reading:

 Friedrich Schiller: On the Aesthetic Education of Man (1795, Letters 1-15)

2nd Session (Wednesday, 19 October, 2016): Barbarism and Empire Texts: a) required:

 Constantine P. Cavafy: „Waiting for the Barbarians“ (1904)  : “The Great Wall of China”  J.M. Coetzee: Waiting for the Barbarians (1980, chapters I and IV)  Michael Hardt & Antonio Negri. Empire. Cambridge/MA an London 2000, pp. 213-218.

b) recommended:

 Franz Kafka: “An Old Manuscript”, “

3rd Session (Friday, 21 October, 2016): New Barbarians, Left and Right Texts: a) required:

 Friedrich Nietzsche: Beyond Good and Evil (1886, no. 257); On the Genealogy of Morals (1897, chapters I.11, II.17)  Filippo Tommaso Marinetti: “Manifesto of Futurism” (1909)  Walter Benjamin: „Experience and Poverty“ (1933), „The Destructive Chracter“ (1931)

b) recommended:

 Carl Schmitt: The Concept of the Political (1932, chapters1-3, 5-6, 8)  Michel Foucault: „Society Must Be Defended“. Lectures at the Collège de France, 1975/76 (excerpts)