G v n : I. C nt rf t M n
rr d
a s a e y eggy Kamu
e U i e si y o C icago ess C icago a o o I .
acques e i a is d r t r & t d a e Eco e es au es E u es e Scie ces Socia es. e as ec u e a aug wi e y oug ou e U i e S a es a Eu o e. eggy Kamu is o esso o e c a com a a i e i e a u e a C nt nt e U i e si y o Sou e Ca i o ia. S e is e e i o o A rr d d r.
o e o e e e ces ii e U i e si y o C icago ess, C icago 606 e U i e si y o C icago ess, ., o o © 2 y e U i e si y o C icago o ewo x A ig s ese e . u is e 2 i e i e U i e S a es o Ame ica
0 00 8 6 4 2 4 2 h f th K n
IS (c o : 0 226 4 2 h M dn f E n n: A G ft th t r nt 4 O igi a y u is e as nn r t t p , C E i io s Ga i ee,
0 e a e use i is u ica io mee s e "C nt rf t M n " I: t f b mi imum equi eme s o e Ame ica a io a S a a ( au e ai e, ai e o Mo e i e o I o ma io Scie ces— e ma e ce o a e o i e i a y Ma e ia s, A SI .48 84.
4 i a y o Co g ess Ca a ogi g i u ica io a a "C nt rf t M n " II: G ft nd C nt r ft, Ex nd r v n ( d l r a th S o y o e e ica io 08 e i a, acques. [ o e e em s. . a ausse mo aie. E g is ] Gi e ime. I. Cou e ei mo ey acques e i a. . cm. "Cou e ei Mo ey," y C a es au e ai e o ows . 2 a s a io o : o e e em s. . a ausse mo aie. i c u es i iog a ica e e e ces. . au e ai e, C a es, 82 86 . S ee e a is. 2. Mauss, Ma ce , 8 2 0. Essai su e o . . Gi s i i e a u e. 4. Gi s. I. i e Q2 .S6 4 2 84 .8— c20 2 0 t n f r n
i es o o e wo ks y acques e i a a a e eque y e e e o i e o es wi e ci e i e o m is e e ow W e e ossi e e ci a io wi is age e e e ces o o e o igi a e i io a e E g is a s a io i a o e
Dissemination: La Dissemination ( a is e Seui 197 ; Dissemination, a s a a a o so (C icago U i e si y o C icago ess 19 1 Glas: Glas ( a is Ga i ee 197 ; Glas, a s y o ea ey a ic a a ( i co U i e si y o e aska ess 19 Grammatology: De la grammatologie ( a is Mi ui 19 7 ; Of Gramma- tology, a s Gaya i C ak a o y S i ak ( a imo e o s o - ki s U i e si y ess 197 Margins: Marges—de la philosophic ( a is Mi ui 197 ; Margins of Phi- losophy, a s A a ass (C icago U i e si y o C icago ess 19 Me'moires: Memoires—pour Paul de Man ( a is Ga i ee 19 ; Me- moires—for Paul de Man, e a s Ceci e i say o a a Cu e E ua o Ca a a a eggy Kamu ( ew Yo k Co um ia U i e si y ess 19 9
Pat ages: Parages ( a is Ga i ee 19 The Post Card: La Carte postale: de Socrate a Freud et au-dela ( a is Ga i- ee 19 ; The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond, a s A a ass (C icago U i e si y o C icago ess 19 7 Psyche: Psyche, inventions de l'autre ( a is Ga i ee 19 7 Spurs: Eperons, les styles de Nietzsche ( a is a ma io 197 ; Spurs:
ii i I o e o e e e ces
Nietzsche's Styles, a s a a a a ow (C icago U i e si y o C icago ess 1979 Truth in Painting: a Write en peinture ( r : amma io 197 ; The Truth in Painting, a s Geo ey e i g o a Ia Mc eo (C i- cago U i e si y o C icago ess 19 7 Writing and Difference: L'Ecriture et to difference ( a is e Seui 19 7 ; Writing and Difference, a s A a ass (C icago U i e si y o C i- cago ess 197
r rd
W e e o e co si e s e e s i a a y es o i s " ogica " oce- u e—I s ou say aporia—this wo k o ows a a ec o y a co e- s o s ai u y o e o e I o owe i e i s i e sessio s o a semi a gi e u e e same i e i 1977-7 a e Eco e o ma e Su e ieu e i a is a e e yea a Ya e U i e si y A so wi e e ce io o ce ai o es a a ew e e o me s e is i u- io o e ou c a e s e o uces e y m o e e e ick I es Ca e e ec u es e i e e a e U i e si y o C icago i A i 1991 O a occasio I i ac a em e o o ma i e e iscou se i s o ose i 1977-7 a w ic s i a a a icu a sig i ica ce o me I was i e cou se o is semi a a I ga e mo e ema ic igu a io o a se o ques io s w ic o a o g ime a o ga i e emse es a ou a o th gi Was a e ici o ma i a io f is ques io ossi e? W a mig e i s imi ? e o ema ic f e gi suc as i a sig a e i se o me o im ose i se o me u o a oi eac e e e ecise y a e imi o i s o ma i a-
1 C w e e e i is a ques io o e proper (a o ia io e o ia io e a - o ia io eco omy e ace e ame a es ecia y e rest, o cou se w ic is o say mo e o ess co s a y u a so mo e e ess y a i e oca u a y o e gi o a y i Writing and Difference, 1 7 133 151 19 395 3 / 5 9 1 1 9 ; Grammatology 157 /1 7 ; Dissemination, 15 1131-3 ; Margins 7 / ; S u s 9 /1 ; "Eco omimesis" (i Mimesis: des articulations, e i e y Sy ia e Agaci ski e a [ a is Au ie - amma io 1975]; a s ic a K ei Diacritics, vol. 11 o [19 11 71/11 u i is es ecia y i Gins, 9 / a assim a i Trial: in Painting, 3 57 313 3 333 39 1 7 7 1 91-9 3 5- 9 a is eme aye a mo e o ga i i g o e I o ewo
io a so o i e me ia y s age a mome o assage e emises o is u u is e semi a emai e im ie i o e way o a - o e i a e wo ks a we e a e o e i o e may u i a way o e ques io o e gi w e e i a ea e i i s ow ame as was o e e case o y mea s o e i issocia e mo i s o s ecu- a io es i a io o e omise o sac i ice e "yes " o o igi a y a i ma io o e e e i e io e comi g o e "come " As is o ema ic e ecame i asi e I wi o gi e a y e e mi e e e - e ce e e I e cou se o e c a e s a o ow I wi ake e i e y o s eci yi g ce ai o ese e e e ces some imes i o e o s a e myse a e e o me a ea y h f th K n o ose e sew e e O ie e o iso ie e y e emes o s ecu a io es i a- io o e omise The Past Card e e e o e semi a "Gi e ime" a sig a e i s o comi g u ica io ( 3 / 3 See as we "Comme e as a e ê e- ga io s" i Psyche (" ow o A oi S eaki g e ia s " a s Ke ie e i Lan- E ig a guages of the Linsayable: The Play of Negativity in Literature and Literary Theory, e Sa o u ick a Wo ga g se [ ew Yo k Co um ia U i e si y ess 19 91 5 7/ 9 7; a " a mai e ei egge (Geschlecht 11 " a so i Psyche ("Geschlecht ei eg- e Ki g akes a my ime; I gi e e es o Sai -Cy o w om I ge s a " a s o ea ey i Deconstruction and Philosophy: The Texts of wou ike o gi e a Jacques Derrida, e o SaI is [C icago U i e si y o C icago ess 19 7] 5 7/ 175-7 I is a woma w o sig s o is is a e e a om a woma o a woma Ma ame e Mai e o is w i i g o Ma ame i o is woma says i e ec a o e Ki g s e gi es a o i gi i g a o e s ime o e gi es a o e a i a o e gi es is i ime a o e gi es a o e s ime I is ue a s e w o is k ow o a e ee e i ue ia mis ess a e e e mo ga a ic f o e Su Ki g ( e Su a e Ki g e Su -
1 Ma ame e Mai e o s se e ce is ema ka e e oug o a e a ac e e a e io o e Littre. e e a e ose w o wi e su ise e a s o see me e oke the sec e wi e o a g ea ki g a e egi i g o suc a ec u e owe e Ma ame e Mai e o seems o me o e e em a y o o y ecause om e osi io as woma a "g a e ame " s e oses e ques io o e gi ime—a e es S e w o aye e o e o ouis (I s "su a o co scie ce" was a e same ime—a is co igu a io is a e y o ui ous—a ou aw a e e y igu e o e aw e o e s e ecame u o e ea o e Quee e mo ga a ic wi e o e Ki g (a us e c u e om a o e i es a ig s; e wo mo ga a ic says some i g o e gi a e gi o e o igi i is om ow a i rnorganegiba. gi o e mo i g s e a e e Su Ki g ack o is u ies as us a ( y es a gi g im om Ma ame e Mo es a w ose o egee s e a ee a as Ca o ic ki g ( y es o i g aus- e i y o e cou y e cou agi g e e secu io o e o es a s—e e oug 2 I Ch pt r On h f th K n I
Ki g wi e e su ec s o ese ec u es Ma ame e Mai e o e i e e Ma ame e Mai e o is writing, a s e says in writing a s e o say i e e e i e a y a s e was giving a e ime u a e a gi es e es W a is e es ? Is i e es ? S e gi es e es w ic is e Ki g was taking i om e (" e Ki g akes a my ime" E e i i e o i g si ce i is e es o a ime co ce i g w ic s e as us i o me mi a mea s e same i g o e wo oes o equa e o e W a e co es o e s e as o i g o i e si ce e Ki g akes i a om s e gives, o e a is o ime u e rest, e es o e ime "I gi e e e A ye we mus u e sco e is a a o e e oug e Ki g akes es o Sai -Cy o w om I wou ike o gi e a " u as e Ki g takes i a a her ime s e seems o a e some e as i s e cou e u e c a ge om e e e es y a goo ogic a goo eco omics is o i g " e Ki g akes a my ime " s e says a ime a e o gs o e e e o e S e ca o o ge take e ime S e as o e e a ye s e gi es i aca u ow ca a ime e o g? W a is i to have time? I a ime e o gs i says o o e I gi es w a i oes o a e a o mu a w ose a ia io s a e is ecause e wo lime esig a es me o ymica y ess ime i se a e o e e y e Ecrits acco i g o e i a a a sce e a mo a i y o i gs wi w ic o e i s i wi w ic o e i s e o m o ime ime as e woma i asmuc as s e is su ose y e i e o e a us form. I is a ma e e o e i gs o e oes in the meantime [ce e a ] o e i gs o e as a o e s is osa during [ e a is ime e e o e as ime oes o e o g o a yo e as suc o e ca o mo e take i i se s e e se was aise a Ca i is —a y e i g e su o o e e oca io o e a give i ime a ea y egi s o a ea as a w ic u oes is is i c- E ic o a es S e w o ook so muc ou e o e w a o e a o give a take, io e wee aki g a gi i g e e o e a so e wee ecei i g a gi i g o e e aw o e e ame o e Ki g o e egi imacy i ge e a was a so e go - e a s e wee ece i i y a ac i i y o e e e wee e ei g-a ec e e ess o e oya as a s a omo io s e o ou owe o e o ec io o a e a ec i g o a y a ec io A a e y a acco i g o commo ogic Ma ame e Mo es a e us s o w e e we s ou a e egu W e s e was a o eco omics o e ca o y e c a ge o e ca o y ake o gi e y way o c i s e e e ie ce e i e i Ma i ique a e a e Co s a was a es e as a me o ymy w a is in ime a is i ee w a Ma ame e Mai e o cou e ei e E e y i g i e i e seems o ea e mos aus e e e mos igo ous seems o want to say o a ce ai su ace o e e e A ye e e oug a e mos au e ic s am o cou e ei mo ey e Ki g akes i a om e a oge e is ime o w a e e i s u e " o i o e is o gi e w a o e oes o a e " (" a i ec io e a cu e " i ime s e as some e a emai e a is o o i g si ce i is eyo Ecrits [ a is e S ll, 19 ] 1 ; "W a is us gi e o e O e o i a w ic there is since s e gives it. A is o e y w a e/s e oes o a e si ce o im/ e as we ei g is acki g is e e y i g a emai e a is o i g u a w a is ca e o e u i is a so a e a ig o a ce" (i i 7 ; " is i i ege i is e e esse ia y w a s e gi es that very thing. e Ki g akes a s e o e O e us ske c es ou e a ica o m o e gi o some i g w ic i oes gi es e es e es is o e e is e es a is gi e o a gi es i se o a e ame y w a is ca e i s o e" (" a sig i ica io u a us " i i 91; E oes o gi e i se o someo e ecause as e e yo e k ows Sai -Cy is " e Mea i g o e a us " a s acque i e ose Feminine Sexuality: Jacques Lacan o e o e a i is a o e a o mascu i e Sai -Cy is a— e y emi- and the "hole freudienne," e ose a u ie Mi c e [ ew Yo k o o 19 5] e symme y o ese o mu ae w ic seem o co ce o e in general, is i e u e w e e u o is " o - a i g-i " a ea s ame y e woma prod matrem a th ma iluoact castrationern (Encore, o o Le Seminaire de !argues Lacan, e acques- O e o o e as suc a is o say e O e as e i e o a w ic i A ai Mi e [ a is e Sei 1975] 3 o use a a e o mu a but o e w ic aws gi es is i icu o e cei e i e wi awa w e e y i is su s i u e o e oge e e y we is w o e eco omy e u i g e o e Ecrits: ei g o e same ma w ose a i u es s e c e is es I i is e case a ma ma ages o sa is y is ema o o e i is e a io - e i e e ce o " e o y i e e ce ei g" o ga i es a e issymme ies a a y e s i o e woma o e e e a e sig i ie o e a us co s i u es e o is age w ic e us emem e co c u es as o ows "Co e a i e y o e ca ecise y as gi i g i o e w a s e oes o a e—co e se y is ow esi e g im se e easo o a ea u e w ic as e e ee e uci a e a w ic agai gi es o e a us wi ow u i s sig i ie i e o m o a e sis e i e ge ce a measu e o e e o eu s i ui io ame y w y e a a ces e iew a owa s "a o e woma " w o ca sig i y is a us o se e a cou s e e is o y o e i i o is e c ea y i ica i g a e co cei es o i as mascu i e w e e as a i gi o a os i u e We s ou o owe e i k a e in a u e" ( 95/ - 5; a s mo i ie y e o i i e i y w ic e a ea s o e co s i u i e o e mascu i e u c- e e essio " o gi e w a o e oes o a e" is ou i ei egge (i a icu- io is e c usi e o e ma o i o e ooks mo e c ose y e same e ou i g a i " e A a ima e agme " [" e S uc es A a ima e " i Halzwege] u is o e ou i e woma e o y i e e ce ei g a i e case e a so e sew e e ; see e ow c a 4 I Ch pt r On h f th K n I
i e— ace a c a i y a i s i u io mo e e ac y a foundation o Ma ame e esi e o gi e wou e e same i g a so o au o ogy u may e as e Mai e o s Sai -Cy is e ame o a c a i a e i s i u io o e e u- we e au o ogica esig a io o e im ossi e May e e im ossi e ca io o im o e is e you g a ies o goo ami ies I s ou e e i e e im ossi e may e—i gi i g a aki g a e a so e same— e same e e a o ou was a e o e o e a e ime o i i acco a ce wi e same i g w ic wou ce ai y o e a i g e ec a e wis a e the death of the King i 1715 Wou we say e a e ques io o e es a o e es o gi e ime is sec e y i ke o a O e cou accuse me e e o maki g a ig ea a a w o e history ou o ea o e ki g? wo s a ges u es a emai e y c ea W e Ma ame e Mai e o us e es w ic is o i g b t h h th r is e e e ess oes o says a e Ki g akes her ime i is ecause s e is g a o gi e i o im gi e i se o someo e u o a ou a io o you g i gi s And it never gives a akes easu e om i e Ki g akes o i g om e a gi es as itself enough, the rest: "I gi e e es o Sai -Cy o w om I wou ike o muc as e akes A w e s e says "I gi e e es o Sai -Cy o w om gi e a " S e e e ge s e oug o gi i g is es a s e oes o a e I wou ike o gi e a " s e o e s e se u o e co es o e a ou a A w e s e w i es Ma ame e Mai e o a s e wou ike o gi e a daily eco omy co ce i g e eisu es a c a i ies e wo ks a ays o o e mus ay a e io o e literal w i i g o e letter, to the letter of her a "g a e ame" somew a o e w e me y e o iga io s o e o e letter, is e e is a mos u a s a a e; i e ies e c a ge om a guage o wo s s e w i es as e se se o e u i ka e a e im ossi e owa a guage e us u e sco e e ac a we a e ea i g wi a e e si ce w ic my ea i g wou a e u e em i e i ec io o gi i g- aki g i gs wou o e sai i e same way i a i e e co e So w e s e o ime a e es S e i o mea o say a you wi say w i es a s e wou ike o gi e all [elle voudrait e ou donned, s e a ows W a i yes s e i [Et sib wo equi oca io s o e i s a e le ca e a e so a o ou (i a i e e A i [Et si] w a s e w o e mea o say a e w a wou a a e osi io je voudrais tout le donner, I wou ike o gi e i a a is a o i o o su ose? ow w e e o e asis o w a a w e ca we ea is i ca e a article ( e o e e wo tout, w ic is us omi a i e I wou e e agme as I a e o e? ow cou we e e i e i as I a e o e ike o gi e all, a is e e y i g a wou e e i s equi oca io e w i e s i es ec i g i s i e a i y a i s a guage? seco equi oca io tout o le tout ca e u e s oo o e e o time (a o w ic e Ki g akes om e as we as o e rest o ime o e ime a o w a ese s i se e e occu yi g i us o o e es a o w a ese s i se e e ikewise occu yi g i is ase e s o e ea e i - i i e sig o u sa is ie esi e Ma ame e Mai e o says o e co e- s o e a e e y i g ea es e some i g o e esi e e wis is o u i e o a ai e ei e y w a s e a ows e se o ake om e Ki g o e e y e es a s e gi es—i o e o make a present o i i you wi o e you g i gi s e esi e wou e e e w e e s e would like, i e co i io a o gi e w a s e ca o gi e e a a es o e es o w ic s e ca o make a ese o o y akes i a om e ei e e Ki g o Sai -Cy is es o e es o ime o w ic s e ca o make a ese a is w a Ma ame e Mai e a (as o e mig ca e esi es a is i u w a s e wou esi e o o e se u so as o e a e o gi e i [pour le pouvoir donner]—for e owe o gi i g [ ou le pouvoir de dormer], e a s so as o gi e e se is owe o gi i g S e acks o acki g ime s e acks o gi i g e oug S e acks is e o e ime a is e o e a a s e ca o gi e— a s e oes k ow w a o o wi u is es o e es o ime o a ime a mo eo e is o i g a a e o gs o e y o o o e is es o e es o ime a is e w o e o e esi e esi e a
6 I Ch pt r On h f th K n I
Let us begin by the impossible. circulation can lead one to think that the law of economy is the- To join together, in a title, time and the gift may seem to be a la- circular—return to the point of departure, to the origin, also to the borious artifice. What can time have to do with the gift? We mean: home. So one would have to follow the odyssean structure of the eco- what would there be to see in that? What would they have to do with nomic narrative. Oikonomia would always follow the path of Ulysses. each other, or more literally, to see together, qu'est-ce qu'ils auraient The latter returns to the side of his loved ones or to himself; he goes voir ensemble, one would say in French. Of course, they have nothing away only in view of repatriating himself, in order to return to the to together and first of all because both of them have a singular home from which En partir duquell the signal for departure is given relation to the visible. Time, in any case, gives nothing to see. It is at and the part assigned, the side chosen [le parti pris], the lot divided, the very least the element of invisibility itself. It withdraws whatever destiny commanded (moira). The being-next-to-self of the Idea in could give itself to be seen. It itself withdraws itself from visibility. Absolute Knowledge would be odyssean in this sense, that of an One can only be blind to time, to the essential disappearance of time economy and a nostalgia, a "homesickness," a provisional exile longing even as, nevertheless, in a certain manner nothing appears that does for reappropriation. not require and take time. Nothing sees the light of day, no phe- Now the gift, if there is any, would no doubt be related to economy. nomenon, that is not on the measure of day, in other words, of the One cannot treat the gift, this goes without saying, without treating revolution that is the rhythm of a sun's course. And that orients this this relation to economy, even to the money economy. But is not the course from its endpoint: from the rising in the east to the setting in gift, if there is any, also that which interrupts economy? That which, the west. The works and days, as we said a moment ago. in suspending economic calculation, no longer gives rise to exchange? We will let ourselves be carried away by this word revolution. At That which opens the circle so as to defy reciprocity or symmetry, the stake is a certain circle whose figure precipitates both time and the gift common measure, and so as to turn aside the return in view of the— toward the possibility of their impossibility. no-return? If there is gift, the given of the gift (that which one gives, To join together, in a title, at once time and the gift may seem to be that which is given, the gift as given thing or as act of donation) must a laborious artifice, as if, for the sake of economy, one sought to treat not come back to the giving (let us not already say to the subject, to two subjects at once. And that is in fact the case, for reasons of the donor). It must not circulate, it must not be exchanged, it must economy. But economy is here the subject. What is economy? Among not in any case be exhausted, as a gift, by the process of exchange, by its irreducible predicates or semantic values, economy no doubt in- the movement of circulation of the circle in the form of return to the cludes the values of law (Nomos) and of home (oikos, home, property, point of departure. If the figure of the circle is essential to economics, family, the hearth, the fire indoors). Nomos does not only signify the the gift must remain uneconomic. Not that it remains foreign to the law in general, but also the law of distribution (Heinen), the law of circle, but it must keep a relation of foreignness to the circle, a relation sharing or partition jpartage], the law as partition (maim), the given without relation of familiar foreignness. It is perhaps in this sense or assigned part, participation. Another sort of tautology already im- that the gift is the impossible. plies the economic within the nomic as such. As soon as there is law, Not impossible but the impossible. The very figure of the impos- there is partition: as soon as there is nomy, there is economy. Besides sible. It announces itself, gives itself to be thought as the impossible. the values of law and home, of distribution and partition, economy It is proposed that we begin by this. implies the idea of exchange, of circulation, of return. The figure of And we will do so. We will begin later. By the impossible. the circle is obviously at the center, if that can still be said of a circle. It The motif of the circle will obsess us throughout this cycle of lec- stands at the center of any problematic of oikonomia, as it does of any tures. Let us provisionally set aside the question of whether we are economic field: circular exchange, circulation of goods, products, talking about a geometric figure, a metaphorical representation, or a monetary signs or merchandise, amortization of expenditures, reve- great symbol, the symbol of the symbolic itself. We have learned from nues, substitution of use values and exchange values. This motif of Hegel to treat this problem. Saying that the circle will obsess us is I I Ch pt r On h f th Ki g I 9 another way of saying it will encircle us. It will besiege us all the while Aristotle, but are calling attention to the ontological import which that we will be regularly attempting to exit [la sortie]. But why exactly this filiation has in principle for the Hegelian logic. 4 would one desire, along with the gift, if there is any, the exit? Why desire the gift and why desire to interrupt the circulation of the circle? There would be more to say on the figure of the circle in Heidegger. His treatment is not simple. It also implies a certain affirmation of the Why wish to get out of it [en sortir]? Why wish to get through it [s'en sortir]? circle, which is assumed. One should not necessarily flee or condemn The circle has already put us onto the trail of time and of that circularity as one would a bad repetition, a vicious circle, a regressive or sterile process. One must, in a which, by way of the circle, circulates between the gift and time. One certain way of course, inhabit the of the most powerful and ineluctable representations, at least in the circle, turn around in it, live there a feast of thinking, and the gift, the history of metaphysics, is the representation of time as a circle. Time gift of thinking, would be no stranger there. That is what Der Ur- would always be a process or a movement in the form of the circle or sprung des Kunstwerks (The Origin of the Work of Art) suggests. But this the sphere. Of this privilege of circular movement in the representa- motif, which is not a stranger to the motif of the hermeneutic circle either, coexists with what we might call a delimitation of the circle: tion of time, let us take only one index for the moment. It is a note by the latter is but a particular figure, the "particular case" of a structure Heidegger, the last and the longest one in Sein and Zeit. Some time of nodal coiling up or interlacing that Heidegger names the Geflecht in ago I attempted a reading of it in "Ousia and GraminO: Note on a Note Unterwegs zur Sprache (On the Way to Language). from Being and Time." 3 Since this Note and this Note on a note will be If one were to stop here with this first somewhat simplifying rep- part of our premises, it will help to recall at least the part concerning the absolute insistence of this figure of the circle in the metaphysical resentation or with these hastily formulated premises, what could one already say? That wherever there is time, wherever time pre- interpretation of time. Heidegger writes: dominates or conditions experience in general, wherever time as circle The priority which Hegel has given to the 'now' which has (a "vulgar" concept, Heidegger would therefore say) is predominant, been levelled off, makes it plain that in defining the concept of the gift is impossible. A gift could be possible, there could he a gift time he is under the sway of the manner in which time is ordi- only at the instant an effraction in the circle will have taken place, at narily understood; and this means that he is likewise under the the instant all circulation will have been interrupted and on the condi- sway of the traditional conception of it. It can even be shown tion of this instant. What is more, this instant of effraction (of the that his conception of time has been drawn directly from the temporal circle) must no longer be part of time. That is why we said 'physics' of Aristotle. I. . . .1 Aristotle sees the essence of time "on the condition of this instant." This condition concerns time but in the nun, Hegel in the 'now' [jetzt]. Aristotle takes the nun as does not belong to it, does not pertain to it without being, for all that, oros; Hegel takes the 'now' as 'boundary' [Grenze]. Aristotle more logical than chronological. There would be a gift only at the understands the nun as stigmê; Hegel interprets the 'now' as instant when the paradoxical instant (in the sense in which Kierke- a point. Aristotle describes the nun as tode ti; Hegel calls the gaard says of the paradoxical instant of decision that it is madness) 'now' the 'absolute this' [dos 'absolute Dieses']. Aristotle follows tears time apart. In this sense one would never have the time of a gift. 1 tradition in connecting khronos with sphaira, Hegel stresses the In any case, time, the "present" of the gift, is no longer thinkable as 'circular course' [Kreislatif] of time. [. .1 In suggesting a direct a now, that is, as a present bound up in the temporal synthesis. connection between Hegel's conception of time and Aristotle's The relation of the gift to the "present," in all the senses of this analysis, we are not accusing Hegel of any 'dependance' on
n nd , i isio c a e ; as quo e i M r n , 39- 11 3 I M r n . 3 -3 0 Ch pt r On h f th K n
e m a so o e ese ce o e ese wi o m o e o e esse - e am e a g ou a commu i y a a io a c a a i e—i a y ia k o s i e i e ace o is iscou se i i s G fl ht, i e k o case a su ec i e ica o i se a co scious o i s i e i y i ee o a G fl ht o w ic ei egge says ecise y a e ci c e is seeki g oug e ges u e o e gi o co s i u e i s ow u i y e a s o y a igu e o a a icu a case a i sc i e ossi i i y a ecise y o ge i s ow i e i y ecog i e so a a i e - a a gi is ca e a ese a " o gi e" may a so e sai " o make i y comes ack o i so a i ca ea o ia e i s i e i y as i s a ese " " o gi e a ese " (i e c as we as i E g is o o e y e am e is wi o e o us us a e a c ue a i guis ic c a ce e us su ose e a i e io - o-gi e Some "o e" wa s o o l . esi es o gi e Ou commo a guage o ogic wi cause us o ea We sai a mome ago " e us egi y e im ossi e " y e e i e ace o is a ea y com e o mu a as i com e e We im ossi e w a oug o e o a e u e s oo ? wou e o com e e i y sayi g "some o e — (A i e s- o-gi e I we a e goi g o s eak o i we wi a e o ame some i g o o C some "o e" i e s o gi e o gi es "some i g" o "someo e o ese e i g e e e im ossi e u o y wi i s ame o o e " is "some i g" may o e a i g i e commo se se o wi some ame o gi e a u e s a i g o o o i k is im os- e wo u a e a sym o ic o ec ; a ike e o o e o ee si e i g is im ossi e i se o say we a e goi g o " ame" is may e a co ec i e su ec ; u i a y case A gi es o C ese ee e a s a ea y o s i o say oo muc o i is e a s e ame o e eme s i e ica o emse es o o e way o a i e i ica io ame a is goi g o i i se u i ques io I o e am e e wi emse es ook ike w a is esu ose y e e y gi e e gi we e im ossi e e ame o ou "gi " w a e i guis o o e gi o e ossi e o e e o e gi e e acco i g o ou e g amma ia e ie es e ecog i es o e a ame wou o e a commo a guage a ogic i seems a is com ou s uc u e ame A eas i wou o ame w a o e i ks i ames o wi is i is e sa e o ice a i o e o say is I mus a ea y su - e u i y o a mea i g a wou e a o e gi U ess e gi ose a ce ai ecom e e sio o w a ft mea s I su ose a I we e e im ossi e u o e u amea e o e u i ka e a k ow a a you k ow w a " o gi e " "gi " " o o " " o ee" u ess i is ga e wee e im ossi e a e i ka e a ime - mea i ou commo a guage As we as " o wa " " o esi e " " o sio o e s u w e e th r gi —a e e w e e th r e io o i e " is is a u sig e u e ec i e co ac e wee us i is= e am e ime w e e t v ei g a ime ( bt d S n o bt e sa e o w a is a e i g e e ame y a you acco e d t, o say i i a way a a ici a es e cessi e y w a wou e o gi e some a e io a some mea i g o w a I myse am oi g ecise y a ce ai esse ia e cess o e gi i ee a e cess o e y gi i g o e am e a ec u e is w o e esu osi io wi e- gi o e e esse ce i se mai i is e sa e a eas o th r d t a we acco eac o e W y a ow n I th n th t th ft th p bl ? A w y is i e ai o goo ai a we e eac o e e e i i a i e w i e e e a ma e ecise y o th n n , as i i ki g e wo th n n , we we e o a gue a isag ee a ou e e y i g I is y maki g is ou i s i o y i is is o o io o e im ossi e e e a - ecom e e sio (c e i o ai e ici a o e ca au o i e ou ci g i se —as oug i e uci e o i ui io i e uci e a so o ese o s a e e o owi g a iom I o e o e e o e gi gi o e ce io u gme e e ie ce scie ce ai —o y o e a- e e some "o e" as o gi e some " i g" o someo e o e wi - sis o th igu e o e im ossi e o e asis o e im ossi e n ou w ic "gi i g" wou e mea i g ess I o e wo s i gi i g th f r f th ft? i ee mea s w a i s eaki g o t amo g ou se es we i k i e us su ose a someo e wa s o esi es o gi e o someo e mea s e i is ecessa y i a ce ai si ua io a some "o e" I ou ogic a ou a guage we say i us someo e wa s o e- gi e some " i g" o some "o e o e " a so o is a ea s si es someo e nt nd t v some i g o someo e A ea y e au o ogica i goes wi ou sayi g a seems o im y e e i e com e i y o e o mu a a ea s o mi a e I su oses a su ec e m i e e i i io w ic is o say i e i es o i g a a U ess a a e a co s i u e su ec w ic ca a so e co ec i e— o e isc ee i o uc io o "o e" a o " i g" a es ecia y o
2 C a e O e h ime o e Ki g
"other" ("someone other") does not portend some disturbance in offered to each other, but even of the values or the symbols that are the tautology of a gift that cannot be satisfied with giving or with involved there [qui s'y engage,' t ] 5 and the intentions to give, whether giving (to) itself [se dormer] without giving something (other) to some- they are conscious or unconscious. Even though all the anthropolo- one (other). gies, indeed the metaphysics of the gift have, quite rightly and justifi- For this is the impossible that seems to give itself to be thought ably, treated together, as a system, the gift and the debt, the gift and here: These conditions of possibility of the gift (that some "one" gives the cycle of restitution, the gift and the loan, the gift and credit, the some "thing" to some "one other") designate simultaneously the con- gift and the countergift, we are here departing, in a peremptory and ditions of the impossibility of the gift. And already we could translate distinct fashion, from this tradition. That is to say, from tradition it- this into other terms. these conditions of possibility define or produce self. We will take our point of departure in the dissociation, in the the annulment, the annihilation, the destruction of the gift. overwhelming evidence of this other axiom: There is gift, if there is Once again, let us set out in fact from what is the simplest level any, only in what interrupts the system as well as the symbol, in a and let us still entrust ourselves to this semantic precomprehension partition without return and without division [repartition], without of the word "gift" in our language or in a few familiar languages. For being-with-self of the gift-counter-gift. there to be a gift, there must be no reciprocity, return, exchange, For there to be a gift, it is necessary [il font] that the donee not give countergift, or debt. If the other gives me back or owes me or has to back, amortize, reimburse, acquit himself, enter into a contract, and give me back what I give him or her, there will not have been a gift, that he never have contracted a debt. (This "it is necessary" is already whether this restitution is immediate or whether it is programmed by the mark of a duty, a debt owed, of the duty-not-to [le devoir de-ne- a complex calculation of a long-term deferral or differance. This is all pas]: The donee owes it to himself even not to give back, he ought not too obvious if the other, the donee, gives me back immediately the owe [il a le devoir de ne pas devoir] and the donor ought not count on same thing. It may, moreover, be a matter of a good thing or a bad restitution.) Is is thus necessary, at the limit, that he not recognize the thing. Here we are anticipating another dimension of the problem, gift as gift. If he recognizes it as gift, if the gift appears to him as such, namely, that if giving is spontaneously evaluated as good (it is well if the present is present to him as present, this simple recognition suf- and good to give and what one gives, the present, the cadeau, the gift, fices to annul the gift. Why? Because it gives back, in the place, let us is a good), it remains the case that this "good" can easily be reversed. say, of the thing itself, a symbolic equivalent. Here one cannot even We know that as good, it can also be bad, poisonous (Gift, gift), and say that the symbolic re-constitutes the exchange and annuls the gift this from the moment the gift puts the other in debt, with the result in the debt. It does not re-constitute an exchange, which, because it that giving amounts to hurting, to doing harm; here one need hardly no longer takes place as exchange of things or goods, would be trans- mention the fact that in certain languages, for example in French, one figured into a symbolic exchange. The symbolic opens and constitutes may say as readily "to give a gift" as "to give a blow" [donner 1411 coup], the order of exchange and of debt, the law or the order of circulation "to give life" [donner la vie] as "to give death" [donner la mart ], thereby in which the gift gets annulled. It suffices therefore for the other to either dissociating and opposing them or identifying them. So we perceive the gift—not only to perceive it in the sense in which, as one were saying that, quite obviously, if the donee gives back the same says in French, "on percoit," one receives, for example, merchandise, thing, for example an invitation to lunch (and the example of food or payment, or compensation—but to perceive its nature of gift, the of what are called consumer goods will never be just one example among others), the gift is annulled. It is annulled each time there is restitution or countergift. Each time, according to the same circular . We wi a s a e n r a ious y as o i o e, o commi , a a e y as o e gage. e e a e e we wi i se e e c e m as a emi e a n r, h h ring that leads to "giving back" ["rendre"], there is payment and dis- a so commo y mea s o se i mo io (as i " o e gage a mec a ism" , e ici s , charge of a debt. In this logic of the debt, the circulation of a good or a is, e ge, oke e c a ge i a n nt, a omise o ag eeme . I ma ks of goods is not only the circulation of the "things" that we will have e e y e sym o ics o e a e i a is co ce e wi oug ou . ( a s. 4 I C a e O e e ime o e Ki g meaning or intention, the intentional meaning of the gift, in order for the signification of gift, she loses it, there is no more gift. Conse- this simple recognition of the gift as gift, as such, to annul the gift as quently, i e e is no gift, there is no gift, but if there is gift held or gift even before recognition becomes gratitude. The simple identifica- beheld as gift by the other, once again there is no gift; in any case the tion of the gift seems to destroy it. The simple identification of the gift does not exist and does not present itself. If it presents itself, it no passage of a gift as such, that is, of an identifiable thing among some longer presents itself. identifiable "ones," would be nothing other than the process of the We can imagine a first objection. It concerns the at least implicit destruction of the gift. It is as if, between the event or the institution recourse that we have just had to the values of subject, self, con- of the gift as such and its destruction, the difference were destined to sciousness, even intentional meaning and phenomenon, a little as if be constantly annulled. At the limit, the gift as gift ought not appear as we were limiting ourselves to a phenomenology of the gift even as we gift: either to the donee or to the donor. It cannot be gift as gift except by declared the gift to be irreducible to its phenomenon or to its meaning not being present as gift. Neither to the "one" nor to the "other." If and said precisely that it was destroyed by its own meaning and its the other perceives or receives it, if he or she keeps it as gift, the gift own phenomenality. The objection would concern the way in which is annulled. But the one who gives it must not see it or know it either; we are describing the intentionality of intention, reception, percep- otherwise he begins, at the threshold, as soon as he intends to give, tion, keeping, recognition—in sum, everything by means of which to pay himself with a symbolic recognition, to praise himself, to ap- one or the other, donee and donor, take part in the symbolic and thus prove of himself, to gratify himself, to congratulate himself, to give annul the gift in the debt. One could object that this description is back to himself symbolically the value of what he thinks he has given still given in terms of the self, of the subject that says I, ego, of inten- or what he is preparing to give. The temporalization of time (memory, tional or intuitive perception-consciousness, or even of the conscious present, anticipation; retention, protention, imminence of the future; or unconscious ego (for Freud the ego or a part of the ego can be "ecstases," and so forth) always sets in motion the process of a de- unconscious). One may be tempted to oppose this description with struction of the gift: through keeping, restitution, reproduction, the another that would substitute for the economy of perception-con- anticipatory expectation or apprehension that grasps or comprehends sciousness an economy of the unconscious: Across the forgetting, the in advance. non-keeping, and the non-consciousness called up by the gift, the In all these cases, the gift can certainly keep its phenomenality or, debt and the symbolic would reconstitute themselves for the subject if one prefers, its appearance as gift. But its very appearance, the of the Unconscious or the unconscious subject. As donee or donor, simple phenomenon of the gift annuls it as gift, transforming the ap- the Other would keep, bind himself, obligate himself, indebt him- parition into a phantom and the operation into a simulacrum. It suf- self according to the law and the order of the symbolic, according fices that the other perceive and keep, not even the object of the gift, to the figure of circulation, even as the conditions of the gift— the object given, the thing, but the meaning or the quality, the gift forgetfulness, non-appearance, non-phenomenality, non-perception, property of the gift, its intentional meaning, for the gift to be an- non-keeping—would have been fulfilled. We are indicating here only nulled. We expressly say: It suffices that the gift keep its phenomen- the principle of a problematic displacement that we would have to go ality. u keeping begins by taking. As soon as the other accepts, as into more carefully. soon as he or she takes, there is no more gift. For this destruction to The necessity of such a displacement is of the greatest interest. It occur, it suffices that the movement of acceptance (of prehension, of offers us new resources of analysis, it alerts us to the traps of the reception) last a little, however little that may be, more than an in- would-be gift without debt, it activates our critical or ethical vigilance. stant, an instant already caught up in the temporalizing synthesis, in the swi or the cum or the being-with-self of time. There is no more gift 6. O is su ec , see aca s "Semi a o e u oi e e e — a e ea i g as soon as the other receives—and even if she refuses the gift that she I o ose o i i " e ac eu e a yè i è," es ecia y a ou e ci c e o ea o ia has perceived or recognized as gift. As soon as she keeps for the gift io o e gi i e e ( h t C rd, . 464 . 4 6 . . 6 j C a e O e e ime o e Ki g
It permits us always to say: "Careful, you think there is gift, dissym- of repression, and to the symbolic order. The thought of this radical metry, generosity, expenditure, or loss, but the circle of debt, of ex- forgetting as thought f the gift should accord with a certain experi- change, or of symbolic equilibrium reconstitutes itself according to ence of th_ tr .---- nd r or h in the sense in which we have tried the laws of the unconscious; the 'generous' or 'grateful' conscious- to approach it elsewhere.' ness is only the phenomenon of a calculation and the ruse of an And yet we say "forgetting" and not nothing. Even though it must economy. Calculation and ruse, economy in truth would be the truth leave nothing behind it, even though it must efface everything, in- of these phenomena." cluding the traces of repression, this forgetting, this f r tt n f th But such a displacement does not affect the paradox with which ft cannot be a simple non-experience, a simple non-appearance, a we are struggling, namely, the impossibility or the double bind of the self-effacement that is carried off with what it effaces. For there to be gift: For there to be gift, it is necessary that the gift not even appear, gift event (we say event and not act), something must come about or ) that it not be perceived or received as gift. And if we added "not even happen, in an instant, in an instant that no doubt does not belong to 1 t n or pt," it was precisely so that the generality of these notions the economy of time, in a time without time, in such a way that the (of t n and especially of p n could cover a wider reception, forgetting forgets, that it f r t t lf, but also in such a way that this sense, and acceptation than that of consciousness or of the percep- forgetting, without being something present, presentable, determin- tion-consciousness system. We had in mind also the keeping in the able, sensible or meaningful, is not n th n . What this forgetting and Unconscious, memory, the putting into reserve or temporalization as this forgetting of forgetting would therefore give us to think is some- effect of repression. For there to be gift, not only must the donor or thing other than a philosophical, psychological, or psychoanalytic donee not perceive or receive the gift as such, have no consciousness category. Far from giving us to think the possibility of the gift, on the of it, no memory, no recognition; he or she must also forget it right contrary, it is on the basis of what takes shape in the name ft that away l n t nt] and moreover this forgetting must he so radical that one could h p thus to think forgetting. For there to be forgetting in it exceeds even the psychoanalytic categoriality of forgetting. This for- this sense, there must be gift. The gift would also be the nd t n of getting of the gift must even no longer be forgetting in the sense of forgetting. By condition, let us not understand merely "condition of repression. It must not give rise to any of the repressions (originary ., possibility," system of premises or even of causes, but a set of traits or secondary) that reconstitute debt and exchange by putting in re- defining a given situation in which something, or "that" [" p"], is serve, by keeping or saving up what is forgotten, repressed, or cen- established (as in the expressions "the human condition," "the social sured. Repression does not destroy or annul anything; it keeps by condition," and so forth). We are not talking therefore about condi- displacing. Its operation is systemic or topological; it always consists tions in the sense of conditions posed (since forgetting and gift, if of keeping by exchanging places. And, by keeping the meaning of the there is any, are in this sense unconditional), but in the sense in gift, repression annuls it in symbolic recognition. However uncon- scious this recognition may be, it is effective and can be verified in no better fashion than by its effects or by the symptoms it yields up 7 o e am e i t ndr ( a is es emmes 19 7; C nd r , a s e u- kac e [ i co U i e si y o e aska ess 1991 a e o e e s i e sec i g [ ll d nn ] for decoding. wi i a e oi w e e ecise y a ce ai "i y a a" [ e e is e e] i e sec s wi So we are speaking here of an absolute forgetting—a forgetting e gi i g o e gi ( 57 a assim/ that also absolves, that unbinds absolutely and infinitely more, there- O cou se is u co i io a i y mus e a so u e a u ci cumsc i e I mus fore, than excuse, forgiveness, or acquittal. As condition of a gift o e sim y ec a e w i e i ac e e e i i s u o e co i io o some event, condition for the advent of a gift, absolute forgetting should co e o some o imi y o ami y ie e i ge e a o s eci ic (amo g uma e- i gs o e am e o e e c usio o o e am e "a ima s" Ca e e e a y gi no longer have any relation with either the psycho-philosophical cate- th n th f l ? u as e gi e e ee oug th t th f l ? As o e u - gory of forgetting or even with the psychoanalytic category that links co i io a i y e oke y ewis y e i h G ft: I n t n nd th Er t f f r p forgetting to meaning or to the logic of the signifier, to the economy rt ( ew Yo k i age ooks 19 3 i is e ici y imi e o gi s amo g c ose
8 Ch pt r On h f e K n w ic o ge i g wou e i e condition of the gift a e gi i e e gi a e o o em o a si gu a i ki g o o ge i g I condition of forgetting; o e mig say o e mo e o ei g o o ge - ac o ge i g ays a esse ia o e a a ig s i wi e e y i g i "mo e" a "mo e o ei g" i o e o g o a o o ogica mo eme o is o y a o e u o ei g (Sein) w ic is o i g g amma a is e cee e y w a we a e yi g o a k a ou e e si ce i is o si ce i is o ei g (Seiendes), a is ei g- ese o a is gi a o ge i g u suc is e co i io o a e wo s ese - ei g Me a ysics wou a e i e e e ei g (Seim) as a we wi e usi g e e o a e wo s gi e i ou a guage— ei g- ese / ese - ei g o y o e asis o ecise y a e- a is i guis ic o em e us say a e is o em o a guage i e e a io o ime w ic e-i e e a io g a s a a so u e e o e i guis ics wi a u a y e ou o sessio e e i i ege o e ow- ese o e em o a ecs asis ame ese o ge i g a gi wou e e o e e eac i e co i io o e a is w y e a sce e a ques io o ime (a wi i i a ew o e is a ea y u s us o e a o e o owe o a a icu- e is e ia a a ysis o e em o a i y o Dasein) was e i i ege a a ea i g e e o e e u o the a o e Weg o Bewegen o i o o a ee a o a io o e ques io o ei g ow as we ( a o mo e a o g a a o cu a a w ic ea i g ow e e k ow is mo eme a co sis e i i e oga i g e ques io o ma ks e s e a ei egge oes o is i guis om oug ei g wi i e a sce e a o i o o ime was o i e u e e oug o w ose a we a e e oug as a o as mo e- (e e oug Sein find Zeit was a e a e e i s a a e e me a o g a a is ecise y w a is e a e o a forgetting a oug ei egge a i u e is i e u io o ce ai i icu ies ei egge oes o ame as a syc o ogica o syc oa a y ic ca e- i ke o e a guage a e g amma o me a ysics u a e go y u as e co i io o ei g a o e u o ei g is u e o owa a u e u o u i g (Kehre). A e is u i g i o ei g o o e mea i g o ei g was o es a owe o ei eg- wi o e a ma e o su o i a i g e ques io o ei g o e ge o e asis o a ques io o ei g ose egi i g wi e ques io o e Ereignis, a i icu wo o a s a e (e e o o ia- i s a o Sein and Zeit, i e a sce e a o i o o e ques- io a is i se a a e om a mo eme o is- o ia io Enteig- io o ime e e ici a io o ime us o ms e o i o o e nen). is wo Ereignis, w ic commo y sig i ies e e sig a s ques io o ei g as ques io o ese ce e i s i e o Sein mind owa a i ki g o a o ia io o o e- o ia io a ca o Zeit says o is ques io a i " as o ay a e i o o i io fin e u e a e o a o e gi So om ow o i wi o e a ma e Vergessenheitl. E e oug i ou ime Iunsere Zeit I we eem i o- o su o i a i g oug a u e y ogica i e sio e ques io o g essi e o gi e ou a o a o me a ysics agai " ei g o a o Ereignis, u o co i io i g em o e wise o e y e e we mus e co e wi e mos e imi a y a mi ima e o e o e wi e o e ei egge some imes says a ei g se ec io wi i e ei egge ia a ec o y; we wi imi ou se es (das Seyn, a a c aic s e i g a a em s o eca e wo o a o si ua i g a w ic i ks e ques io o ime o e ques io o mo e i ki g— e ke isc —mo e is Ereignis. A i is i e cou se o is mo eme a ei g (Sein)—which is o w ic oes o e is as ei g ese / ese ei g—is sig a e o e asis o ie s e a i es a mos o e c ose e a i es W ic is o say a i is o w a i is e gi o c aims o e u co i io a is is w a e i e a u e o o ga o a io i gs ou O e o ese s u ies eco s a e so w o o a es a ki ey o is mo e oes o wa a y g a i u e om e ecause s e a o e im i e i s ace A o e w o 9 See o e am e the Beitrage u Philosophic Worn Ereignis), Gesamtausgabe o 3 o a es o is o e i sis s a e a e s ou o ee ei e i e e o g a e u c a e ie ic -Wi e m o e ma ( a k u am Mai 19 9 A e c " ose w o i e ei c ose ess o e eci ie " o es y e "a e ca e u o make i a s a io o 7 as ece y ee o ose y ea G eisc i Rue Descartes, a c ea a e gi is o co i io a " ( 9 Ea ie i a ee oi e ou a i i issue i e " es G ecs" ( 13 egi i g wi e i s ages o e Vorblick, a ac some i g comes ack a e e gi i a es i u io akes ace e gi wou ce ai Ereignis is e i e as e u o ei g [die Wahrheit des Seynsl. " è e es e e e ess cease o e a gi om e mome is e u wou e i s "e ici co - l'Ereignis [Das Seyn ist das Er-eignisr (11 7 7 ; o agai " ê e es (es e s esse - i io " ( 9 cie comme l'Ereignis [Das Seyn west als Ereignisl" (I 0, 3 20 C a e O e e ime o e Ki g 2
This is played out around the German expression es gibt, which, gibt"], what "Being" means, which—It gives [das—Es gibt moreover, in Seth und Zeit (1928) had made a first, discreet appear- what "time" means, which—It gives [das—Es ]. Accordingly, ance that was already obeying the same necessity.w We translate the we try to look ahead [vorblicken] to the It [Es] which—gives idiomatic locution es gibt Seth and es gibt Zeit by "il y a l'etre" in French [gibt] Being [Seth] and time [Zeit]. Thus looking ahead, we be- and in English "there is Being" (Being is not but there is Being), "il y come foresighted in still another sense. We try to bring the It a le temps," "there is time" (time is not but there is time). Heidegger [Es] and its giving [Geben] into view, and capitalize the "It." " tries to get us to hear in this [nous doer:era y entendre] the "it gives," And after having thus written the "It gives Being" and "It gives or as one might say in French, in a neutral but not negative fashion, time," "there is Being" and "there is time," Heidegger in effect asks "ca donne," an "it gives" that would not form an utterance in the the question of what it is in this gift or in this "there is" that relates propositional structure of Greco-Latin grammar, that is, bearing on time to Being, conditions them, we would now say, one to the other. present-being/being-present and in the subject-predicate relation (S/ And he writes: P). The enigma is concentrated both in the "it" or rather the "es," the ' "ca" of "ca donne," which is not a thing, and in this giving that gives First, we shall think [in the trace of: each] Being in order to but without giving anything and without anyone giving anything- think It itself into its own element [um es selbst in sein Eigenes zu
Lnothing but Being and time (which - are nothing). In Zeit und Seth denken]. (1952), Heidegger's attention bears down on the giving (Geben) or the Then, we shall think [in the trace of: mull] time in order to gift (Gabe) implicated in the es gibt. From the beginning of the medi- think it itself into its own element. tation, Heidegger recalls, if one can put it this way, that in itself time In this way, the manner must become clear how there is, It is nothing temporal, since it is nothing, since it is not a thing (kein gives [Es gibt] Being and how there is, It gives [Es gibt] time. In Ding). The temporality of time is not temporal, no more than prox- this giving [Geben; in this "y emir" qui donne says the French imity is proximate or treeness is woody. He also recalls that Being is translation; in this "there Being" that gives, one might say in not being (being-present/present-being), since it is not something English], it becomes apparent [ersichtlich] how that giving [Ge- (kein Ding), and that therefore one cannot say either "time is" or "Be- ben] is o be determined which, as a relation [ Verliiiitnis], first ing is," but "es gibt Sein" and "es gibt Zeit." It would thus be necessary holds [half] the two toward each other and brings them into be- to think a thing, something (Sadie and not Ding, a Sache that is not a ing [und sie er-gibt; by producing them or obtaining them as the being) that would be Being and time but would not be either a being result of a donation, in some sort: the es gives Being and gives or a temporal thing: "Sein—eine Sache, Aber nichts Seiendes, Zeit—eine time by giving them one to the other i so a as it holds (halt) Sache, aber nichts Zeitiiches," "Being—a thing in question, but not a them together in a relation ( Verhöltnis) one to the otherli being. Time—a thing in question, but nothing temporal." He then In the very position of this question, in the formulation of the pro- adds this, which we read in translation for better or worse: ject or the design of thinking, namely, the "in order to" (we think "in In order to get beyond the idiom and back to the matter order to" [ um . . . zu] think Being and time in their "own element" [Sache], we must show how this "there is" ["es gibt"] can be [in sein Eigenes, in ihr Eigenes]), the desire to accede to the proper is experienced [erfahren] and seen Ierblickenl. The appropriate already, we could say, surreptitiously ordered by Heidegger accord- way [der geeignete Weg] to get there is to explain [elucidate, lo- ing to the dimension of "giving." And reciprocally. What would it calize: eriirten] what is given [gegeben] in the "it gives" ["Es
ei egge , On nd n , a s. oa S am aug ( ew Yo k: a e a 0. We wi come ack o is oi muc a e , i e seco o ume o is wo k, ow, 2 , . . w e we a oac a ea i g o On nd n a e a e e s. 2. I i .
22 Ch pt r On h f th K n I 2 mean to think the gift, Being, and time pr p rl in that which is most the verb "give," the locution d nn (for example, when it is said in proper to them or in that which is properly their own, that is, what French of a purulent body). All these motifs and a few others find they can give and give over to the movements of propriation, expro- themselves woven into a narration, into a narration of narration or priation, de-propriation or appropriation? Can one ask these ques- into a passion of narration. We will have to recognize that the ques- tions without anticipating a thought, even a desire of the proper? A tion of r t (narration) and of literature is at the heart of all those we desire to accede to the property of the proper? Is this a circle? Is there are talking about now. Lucette Finas's novel knots all these threads any other definition of desire? In that case, how to enter into such a into the absolute idiom, the ff t of the absolute idiom, which is a circle or how to get out of it? Are the entrance and the exit the only proper name ( nn is a proper name in the novel), a proper name two modalities of our inscription in the circle? Is this r l itself in- without which perhaps there would never be either a narration effect scribed in the interlacing of a G fl ht of which it forms but one figure? or a gift effect. Even though we do not meet Heidegger in person in These are so many threads to be pursued. this novel, it is hard to resist the impression that he is hiding behind The only thread that we will retain here, for the moment, is that of a series of men's proper names whose initial, with its German asso- pl . Whether it is a matter of Being, of time, or of their deployment nance, is H. in presence (An n , the bt plays ( p lt , says Heidegger, in the This detour was meant first of all to remind us that the forgetting movement of the Entb r n, in that which frees from the withdrawal we're talking about, if it is constitutive of the gift, is no longer a cate- [r tr t], the withdrawal of the withdrawal, when what is hidden gory of the p h . It cannot be unrelated to the forgetting of Being, I shows itself or what is sheltered appears. The pl ( p l also in the sense in which Blanchot also says, more or less, that forgetting marks, works on, manifests the unity of the three dimensions of time, is another name of Being. which is to say a fourth dimension: The "giving" of the bt t As the condition for a gift to be given, this forgetting must be radi- belongs to the play of this "quadridimensionality," to this pr p rn cal not only on the part of the donee but first of all, if one can say of time that would thus be quadridimensional. "True time lauthentic here first of all, on the part of the donor. It is also on the part of the time: d ntl h t]," says Heidegger, "is four-dimensional [v r donor "subject" that the gift not only must not be repayed but must d n n l]." This fourth dimension, as Heidegger makes clear, is not be kept in memory, retained as symbol of a sacrifice, as symbolic not a figure, it is not a manner of speaking or of counting; it is said of in general. For the symbol immediately engages one in restitution. To the thing itself, on the basis of the thing itself ( d r S h and not tell the truth, the gift must not even appear or signify, consciously or only "so to speak." This thing itself of time implies the play of the unconsciously, as gift for the donors, whether individual or collective four and the play of the gift. subjects. From the moment the gift would appear as gift, as such, as ' Faced with this play of fours, of the four, as play of the gift, one what it is, in its phenomenon, its sense and its essence, it would be thinks of the hand dealt by this game [l d nn d j n], of the locu- engaged in a symbolic, sacrificial, or economic structure that would tion "ca donne" (it gives), of the French imperative "donne" that, annul the gift in the ritual circle of the debt. The simple intention to given by grammar to be an imperative, perhaps says something other give, insofar as it carries the intentional meaning of the gift, suffices than an order, a desire, or a demand. And then one thinks of l d t , to make a return payment to oneself. The simple consciousness of the of the woman who has been soliciting us since the epigraph, of all the gift right away sends itself back the gratifying image of goodness or questions of language that are crossing, in German and in French, in generosity, of the giving-being who, knowing itself to be such, rec- the locutions bt and d nn . Thinking of all that and the rest, we ognizes itself in a circular, specular fashion, in a sort of auto-recogni- will also evoke a very fine book by Lucette Finas" which interlaces all tion, self-approval, and narcissistic gratitude. these motifs: the l , the play of the four [ tr ] and of cards [ rt ], And this is produced as soon as there is a subject, as soon as donor and donee are constituted as identical, identifiable subjects, capable . o e ( r : S l, 6 . of identifying themselves by keeping and naming themselves. It is 24 C a e O e e ime o th n I 2
even a matter, in this circle, of the movement of subjectivation, of the subject of the Kula, a kind of "grand potlatch" practiced in the Trobri- constitutive retention of the subject that identifies with itself. The be- and Islands and the "vehicle for busy intertribal trade [extending] coming-subject then reckons with itself, it enters into the realm of the over the whole of the Trobriand Islands," Mauss writes: calculable as subject. That is why, if there is gift, it cannot take place between two subjects exchanging objects, things, or symbols. The Malinowski gives no translation of kula, which doubtless means question of the gift should therefore seek its ace e o e any relation "circle." Indeed it is as if all these tribes, these expeditions to the subject, before any conscious or unconscious relation to self of across the sea, these precious things and objects for use, these the subject—and that is indeed what happens with Heidegger when types of food and festivals, these services rendered of all kinds, he goes back before the determinations of Being as substantial being, ritual and sexual, these men and women,—were caught up in subject, or object. One would even be tempted to say that a subject a circle* following around this circle a regular movement in time as such never gives or receives a gift. It is constituted, on the contrary, and space. "kula ring." (Pp. 21- in view of dominating, through calculation and exchange, the mas- * Note: Malinowski favors the expression tery of this hubris or of this impossibility that is announced in the 22; emphasis added) 15 promise of the gift. There where there is subject and object, the gift Let us take this first reference to Mauss as a pretext for indicating would be excluded. A subject will never give an object to another right away the two types of questions that will orient our reading. subject. But the subject and the object are arrested effects of the gift, I. The question of language or rather of languages. How is one to arrests of the gift.iAt the zero or infinite speed of the circle: legitimate the translations thanks to which Mauss circulates and trav- - Tf the gift is annulled in the economic odyssey of the circle as soon els, identifying from one culture to another what he understands by as it appears as gift or as soon as it signifies itself as gift, there is no gift, what he calls gift? He does this essentially on the basis of the longer any "logic of the gift," and one may safely say that a consistent Latin language and of Roman law. The latter plays a singular role discourse on the gift becomes impossible: It misses its object and al- throughout the essay, but Mauss also takes German law into account, ways speaks, finally, of something else. One could go so far as to say which is the occasion for him to remark that a "detailed study of the that a work as monumental as Marcel Mauss's The Gift" speaks of very rich German vocabulary of the words derived from gehen and everything but the gift: It deals with economy, exchange, contract gaben has not yet been made" (p. 60). This question of the idiom, as (do ut des), it speaks of raising the stakes, sacrifice, gift and counter- gift—in short, everything that in the thing itself impels the gift and the annulment of the gift. All the gift supplements (potlatch, trans- . is ci c e o e "Ku a i g" is e oke a e g y . y e (The Gift, . . gressions and excesses, surplus values, the necessity to give or give a e egi i g o a c a e a is i se i e " e Ci c e" a a o e s wi ese back more, returns with interest—in short, the whole sacrificial bid- wo s om W i ma : " e gi is o e gi e , a comes ack mos o im—i ca o ding war) are destined to bring about once again the circle in which ai . ." I a a e c a e , we wi e oke o ce agai e sce e o e gi a e e , o as i is s u ie scie i ica y, u a e as i is i s o a assume o e ie y they are annulled. Moreover, this figure of the circle is evoked literally e c socio ogis s. e us o e e e, w i e ci i g e wo k o Ame ica s w o a e by Mauss (literally in French since I am for the moment setting aside "i e e " o Mauss, a ey e e is c ai o e e i a ecessa y a a a an essential problem of translation to which we will return). On the o ica ma e . y e o es a Mauss s essay was e " oi o e a u e" o a e esea c o e c a ge o e as a ce u y. Ci i g as we aymo i a C au e e i S auss, e ecog i es a a icu a e o Ma s a Sa i s, o a y o e c a e 4. Essai s a le don, forme archaique de l'echange i Ma ce Mauss, Sociologic et Anthro- i e " e S i i o e Gi " i Sa i s Stone Age Economics (C icago: U i e si y o pologre ( a is: esses U i e si ai es de a ce, 0 The Gift: The Form and Reason for C icago ess, 2 , w ic o s Mauss s h G ft o e a "gi ," "a ies a igo ous Exchange in Archaic Societies, a s. W. . a s ( o o : ou e ge, 0 . age e e explication de texte" o i s sou ces, a si ua es "Mauss s i eas i e is o y o o i ica e ces o e a s a io , w ic as occasio a y ee mo i ie , wi e i c u e i i oso y." "I was oug Sa i s w i i gs," says y e, "that I i s ega o see a e eses i e e . e ossi i i y o my ow wo k, a I am muc i e e o im" ( . . 26 I Ch pt r On h l th K n I 2 we s a see is i i se a ques io o gi i a a e u usua se se gi a ea s o sig i ies i se i i e is s o i i is ese y as gift, as a amou s o ei e e gi o a guages o e gi o a guage w a i is e i is o i a u s i se e us go o e imi e e seco y e o ques io ca o e se a a e om e i s u o e gi (i s ei g o i s a ea i g suc i s as h i so a as i i s wi es ge e a i y I wou amou o aski g o ese i e ec I gui es e i e io a sig i ica io o e mea i g- o-say su ices W a a w om is Mauss a ki g a ou i e e ? W a is e o a u e gi e u o e gi is equi a e o e o -gi o sema ic o i o o a ici a io a au o i es im o ga e to- o e o - u o e gi is o osi io o ious y e ies com- gether o com a e so ma y e ome a o i e se so s w ic e o g mo se se a is w y i is caug i e im ossi e o a e y si - to i e e cu u es w ic ma i es emse es i e e oge eous gu a ou e i e o wi ou o o a i a a o - i a guages u e e u ique a su ose y i e i ia e ca ego y o O e o e a Mauss emi s us a e e is o gi wi ou gi u e e sig o "gi "? W a emai s o ema ic is o o y o wi ou i wi ou o iga io o iga u e; u o e o e e unity o is sema ic o i o a is e esume i e i y o a a e e is o gi a oes o a e o u ie i se om o iga- mea i g a o e a es as ge e a a s a o o equi a e u e io om e co ac e c a ge a us om e i e y e is e ce o some i g ike the gi a is e commo e e e u a e a w a wou e a gi a u i s e co i io o e o is sig a is i se u ce ai I w a Mauss emo s a es o e gi ame y a i o a ea as gi a it o e e is sig i y way o e o e is i ee a e e y gi is caug i e ou o wa - o-say as gi ? A gi wi ou wa i g wi ou wa i g- o-say e co ac o usu y e o o y e u i y o e mea i g "gi " a i sig i ica gi a gi wi ou i e io o gi e? W y wou we emai s ou u u o e y o esis a gi i g wou a e a s i ca a a gi ? a w ic is o say w a ? meaning a one mea i g i is s i e ossi i i y o a e ec i e e is- I o e wo s w a a e we i ki g w e we equi e simu a e- e ce o a e ec ua io o a e e o e gi a seems e c u e ous y o e gi a i a ea a a i o a ea i i s esse ce i ow is o ema ic o e i e e ce (i e se se a we e oke w a i as o e i w a i is o e i w a it wi a e a o e (i ea ie e wee " e gi e is s" a " e e is gi " is e e as we i s to i en einai o i i s quidditas)? a i o iga e a o o iga e? k ow e oye o e e a oac e y Mauss o mo e a i seems a i e a o e a o w ic i is gi e ? W a oes " o gi e" o e o my k ow e ge y e a o o ogis s w o come a e im mea o say? A w a oes a guage gi e o e o i k wi is o e e o im Ques io s o is y e s ou e a icu a e wi wo ? A w a oes " o gi e" mea o say in the case o a guage o e ques io s a co ce e me a i guis ic o me a-e o ogica o i ki g a o mea i g- o-say? co ce ua i y o ie i g is iscou se e ca ego y o o a i y (" o a I so a e s (but is "i so a e s" oes o ame e o u- socia ac " e o i ica eco omic a u i ica i eo ogy o ga i i g i ous a e s uc u e o is im ossi e gift is a so a o e- e c assi ica io a e e a ua io o e am e e o e a e mi s i g— a gi es i se o e oug o e co i io o ei g o i g Mauss a e e (i is es ecia y a e e a ese e a ua io s a e ( o ese - ei g o ei g- ese --a o ime w ic e e i o e y ec a e o say a "segme e " socie ies—I o-Eu o ea w a is ca e i s " u ga " e e mi a io om A is o e o ei eg- socie ies oma socie y e o e e we e a es Ge ma ic socie ies ge is a ways e i e i e a a o ia o a e e a o ia o w a is u o e w i i g o e Edd , I is socie y u o e w i i g o i s wi ou ei g o w a is e e ese o w a is o y sca ce y a "c ie i e a u e"—we e o es i w ic i i i ua s we e " ess sa im y O ce agai e us e e o a e e s o a y ose o A is- ess se ious ess mise y a ess e so a a we a e E e a y o e a a e ci e i "Ousia a r ," egi i g wi e ou a eas ey we e o a e mo e ge e ous mo e gi i g a we ook o e Physics, w ic says i e e o e ic ase o i s iscou se a e" ( 1 dia ton exoterikOn logtin, a ime "is o a a o o y sca ce y a E e y i g us seems o ea us ack owa e a a o o e im y is [o s ouk estin e moils kni amudrcisl." Suc is e a o e ic f a o ia o a uc ea o osi io i e o m o e "i e " I e f t—th "w a oes o ass" o "w a oes o a e "—o ime I C a e O e e ime o e Ki g I 9 defined on the basis of the nun, of the now, as peras, limit, and as one at least to think—to think the singular or double condition both stigme, the point of the instant. "Some of it has been and is not [gegone of the gift and of time. kai ouk esti], some of it is to be and is not yet Imellei kai oupo estuil. What th r t give, uniquely, would be called time. From these both infinite time [apeiros] and time in its incessant return What there is to give, uniquely, would be called time. [aei lambanomenos] are composed. But it would seem to be impossible What there is to give, uniquely, would be called time. that what is composed of things that are not should participate in For finally, if the gift is another name of the impossible, we still being [ousia]." 1 think it, we name it, we desire it. We intend it. And this even if We will not analyze here the context and the situation of this or because or to the extent that we never encounter it, we never know proposition called exoteric. Let us take it simply as a marker in the it, we never verify it, we never experience it in its present existence history of an aporetics that will become law and tradition: From the or in its phenomenon. The gift itself—we dare not say the gift n t moment time is apprehended on the basis of the present now as gen- lf— ll never be confused with the presence of its phenomenon. eral form and only modifiable or modalizable in such a way that the Perhaps there is nomination, language, thought, desire, or intention past and the future are still presents-past and presents-to-come, this only there where there is this movement still for thinking, desiring, predetermination entails the aporetics of a time that is not, of a time naming that which gives itself neither to be known, experienced, nor that is what it is without being (it) [sans l'etre], that is not what it is lived—in the sense in which presence, existence, determination regu- and that is what it is not, which is to be it without being (it) [qui est de late the economy of knowing, experiencing, and living. In this sense l'etre sans l'étre]. one can think, desire, and say only the impossible, according to the
If it shares this aporetic paralysis with the gift, if neither the gift measureless measure [mesure sans mesure] of the impossible.' 7 If one nor time exist as such, then the gift that there can be [qu'il peut y avoir] wants to recapture the proper element of thinking, naming, desiring, cannot in any case give time, since it is nothing. If there is something it is perhaps according to the measureless measure of this limit that t that can in no case be given, it is time, since it is nothing and since in is possible, possible as relation without relation to the impossible. One any case it does not properly belong to anyone; if certain persons or can desire, name, think in the proper sense of these words, if there is certain social classes have more time than others—and this is finally one, only to the immeasuring extent [dans in mesure demesurante] that the most serious stake of political economy—it is certainly not time one desires, names, thinks still or already, that one still lets announce itself that they possess. But inversely, if giving implies in all rigor that itself what nevertheless cannot present itself as such to experience, to one gives nothing that is and that appears as such—determined knowing: in short, here a gift that cannot make itself (a) present fun don thing, object, symbol—if the gift is the gift of the giving itself and qui ne peut pas se faire present]. This gap between, on the one hand, nothing else, then how to give time? This idiomatic locution, "to give thought, language, and desire and, on the other hand, knowledge, time," seems to mean in common usage "leave time for something, philosophy, science, and the order of presence is also a gap between leave time to do something, to fill time with this or that." As usual, it gift and economy. This gap is not present anywhere; it resembles an intends less time itself and properly speaking than the temporal or empty word or a transcendental illusion. But it also gives to this struc- what there is in time. "To give time" in this sense commonly means to give something other than time but something other that is mea- sured by time as by its element. Beyond this historical hardening or 17 O e si gu a mo a i y o is "im ossi e " e mi me o e e o Psyche sedimentation, perhaps the idiomatic locution "to give time" gives (" syc e I e io s o e O e " i Reading de Man Reading, e W a Go ic a i say Wa e s [Mi ea o is U i e si y o Mi eso a ess 19 91 26 60 o Memoires, 5 /35 a o L'Autre Cap ( a is Mi ui 1991 O e 1 A is o e Physics 1 17 -1 a i A New Aristotle Reader, e Ack i s a ge g amma o is "sa s " c " as" i Parages, 5 ; o a o e "sa s ( i ce o i ce o U i e si y ess 19 7 1 e e " c n t n, 1/ 13 3 C a e O e e ime o e Ki g I 31
u e o o is ogic a o m a a ogous- o Ka s a sce e a ia ec- k i e o sim y e o gi g o e ci c e e gages i i a se s o i s ic as e a io e wee i ki g a k owi g e oume a a e mo io W a is e gi as e i s mo e o e ci c e? A ow oes e ome a e a s is a a ogy wi e us a e a s i as a i co ac i se i o a ci cu a co ac ? A om w a ace? Si ce esse ia e a io o e o em o "gi i g- ime " w e ? om w om? We a e goi g o gi e ou se es o e o a e gage i e e o o a is e co ac e wee us o is cyc e o ec u es ( eca i ki g o e i ki g a so o a sce e a i usio o e gi o a Mauss s essay The Gift as i s emises i is wo k a a o i o e o i k e gi a theory of the gift is owe ess y i s e y a y o e co ac a o swo ai 1 esse ce O e mus e gage o ese i is i ki g commi o ese o E e i e gi we e e e a y i g u a simu ac um o e mus i gi e i oke s o ai Igagesl, a wi o e s e so isk e e i g s i render an account o e ossi i i y o is simu ac um a o e i o e es uc i e ci c e O e mus omise a swea e e o esi e a im e s owa is simu ac um A o e mus a so e e o i ki g o e i ki g a so o a sce e a i usio o e gi a accou o e esi e o e e a accou is ca o e o e s ou o e a sim e e o uc io o Ka s c i ica mac i e y (ac- agai s o wi ou e principle of reason (principtum reddendae rationis), co i g o e o osi io e wee i ki g a k owi g a so e e i e a e i s e e i s imi as we as i s esou ce O e wise o u ei e is i a ma e o e ec i g a mac i e y as o - w y wou I commi myse —maki g i a o iga io o myse — o as io e I a y case we a e im ica e i i i a icu a ecause s eak a o e e a accou ? W e ce comes e aw a o i- o a w ic commu ica es i is ia ec ic wi e o em o ga es o e o gi e e e as o e e e s a accou o e gi ? I o e ime o o e si e a o e mo a aw a o ac ica easo o e wo s o answer i e o e s i o a gi a ca s o e eyo a o e si e u e e o o i k e g ou ess g ou o is quasi- es o si i i y? A a o i s o e o o gi e w oe e does not know " a sce e a i usio " s ou o e ei e —i i is goi g o e how to give? ma e o thinking—a so o a o i g a ai u a ica io a sim e "I wi e e o gi e im e i e i u e o is ca cu a io " co - mo eme o ai i e ace o a w ic e cee s e imi s o e - c u es e a a o o " a ausse mo aie" (Cou e ei Mo ey e e ie ce k ow e ge scie ce eco omy—a e e i oso y O ie s o y y au e ai e a we wi ea oge e Was e e oac - e co a y i is a ma e — esi e eyo esi e—o es o i g i g is ie i e ec o o a i g known how to give? a is o e ai u y u a so as igo ous y as ossi e o o e i u c io o o e ques io s wai i g o us e e is "Cou e ei Mo ey" e o e o e gift ("gi e" ["donne"]) as we as o• e i u c io o As we we e ea i g e o acco is s my ie ca e u y e o e o mea i g ( ese ce scie ce k ow e ge Know s i w a se a a e is c a ge; i e e ocke o is wais coa e gi i g wants to say, know how to give, k ow w a you wa a wa s i e sma go coi s; i e ig sma si e coi s; i is o say w e you gi e k ow w a you i e o gi e k ow ow e e ouse ocke a a u o e ies a i a y i e gi a u s i se commi you se [engage-toil e e i commi me is ig e u a si e wo- a c iece a e a sc u i i e e es uc io o e gi y e gi gi e eco omy i s c a ce wi a icu a ca e o i a y e o e u i g o e ci c e y e gi i e e is a y "W a a si gu a y mi u e is i u io " I sai o myse oes o ea o a sim e i e a e e e io i y a wou e a sce - We e cou e e a oo ma w o e ou is ca wi a e a wi ou e a io I is is e e io i y a se s e ci c e go- em i g a -1 k ow o i g mo e isquie i g a e i g i is is e e io i y a u s e eco omy i mo io I is is e e io i y a engages i e ci c e a makes i u I o e mus render an account ( o scie ce o easo o i oso y o e eco omy 1 See Geo ges a y La Foi Mt*, Etude sociologique du probleme du contrat et de la o mea i g o e ci c e e ec s i w ic a gi ge s a u e is formation du lien contractual (L'Annix Sociologique, 19 a Mauss "U e o me a - accou - e e i g equi es a o e ake i o accou a w ic c e e e co a( c e es ace " Revue des Etudes grecques, o (19 1 3 -97
S
2 C a e O e e ime o e Ki g
mu e e oque ce o ose su ica i g eyes a co ai a o ce some me i i k owi g a o e is; e mos i e a a e o ices o e se si i e ma w o k ows ow o ea em so muc is o o e i ou o s u i i y 19 umi i y a so muc e oac e i s e e some i g e o owi g ee c a e s wi mai ai a co s a e a io o e c ose o e e o com ica e ee i g o e sees i e ea - e e o is e some imes y e e i g o i i ec y ea e s w o i e eyes o a og ei g ea e wis co su i a a y mome may o so y u o i g e age a e My ie s o e i g was co si e a y a ge a mi e a e o is ook I sai o im "You a e ig ; e o e easu e o ee i g su - ise e e is o e g ea e a o cause a su ise " "I was . C a es au e ai e, O vr pl t , o . , e . C au e ic ois ( a is: i io e cou e ei coi " e ca m y e ie as oug o us i y eque e a eia e, , . 2 r Spl n, a s. ouise a ese ( ew Yo k: ew imse o is o iga i y i ec io s, 0 , . 8 a s a io mo i ie . e e c e o " a ausse mo u i o my mise a e ai a ways co ce e wi ooki g aie" is i e e ow, p. . o oo a wo o c ock (w a a e aus i g acu y is a u e s gi o me e e su e y came e i ea a suc co uc o my ie s a was e cusa e o y y e esi e o c ea e a e e i is oo e i s i e e a s e e o ea e a ie co seque ces isas ous o o e wise a a cou e ei coi i e a s o a egga mig e ge e Mig i o mu i y i o ea coi s? Cou i o a so ea im o iso ? A a e kee e a ake o e am e was e a s goi g o a e im a es e as a cou e ei e o o assi g cou e ei mo ey e cou e ei coi cou us as we e a s e e ge m o se e a ays wea o a oo i e s ecu a o A so my a cy we i s cou se e i g wi gs o my ie s mi a awi g a ossi e e uc io s om a ossi e y o eses u e a e su e y s a e e my e e ie y e ea i g my ow wo s "Yes you a e ig ; e e is o swee e ea- su e a o su ise a ma y gi i g im mo e a e o es o " I ooke im squa e y i e eyes a I was a a e o see a is eyes s o e wi u ques io a e ca o I e saw c ea y a is aim a ee o o a goo ee w i e a e same ime maki g a goo ea ; o ea o y ce s a e ea o Go ; o wi a a ise eco omica y; i s o o ick u g a is e ce i ica e o a c a i a e ma I cou a e a mos o gi e im e esi e o e c imi a e oyme o w ic a mome e o e I assume im ca a e; I wou a e ou some i g i a e si gu a i is amusi g imse y com o- misi g e oo ; u I wi e e o gi e im e i e i u e o is ca cu a io o e mea is e e e cusa e u e e is h M dn f E n n ,
t is to dream while strolling along, like the two friends in "Counter- feit Money"; it is to sleepwalk in the vicinity of the impossible. Perhaps what was said or told the last time sounded a little mad. How is one to speak reasonably, in a sensible fashion, that is, acces- sible to common sense, of a gift that could not be what it was except on the condition of not being what it was? On the condition of not being or appearing to be the gift of anything, of anything that is or 2 that is present, come from someone and given to someone? On the condition of "being" a gift without given and without giving, without h M dn f E n n: presentable thing and act? A gift that would neither give t lf, nor give itself h, and that could not take place except on the condi- A G ft th t r nt tion of not taking place—and of remaining impossible, without di- alectical sublation of the contradiction? To desire, to desire to think the impossible, to desire, to desire to give the impossible—this is ob- At the same time we are thinking the impossible, and it is at the viously madness. The discourse that orders itself on this madness same time. cannot not let itself be contaminated by it. This discourse on madness What does "at the same time" mean to say? Where could one ever appears to go mad in its turn, l and t p . Al as well because place oneself in order to say "at the same time"? And to say what is it claims to render an account (the demand to r nd r nt that we meant, for example in some language or another, by "at the same mentioned at the conclusion), to render account and reason (r dd r time"? r t n of that very thing, the gift, that demands an unheard-of- It is as if we were looking for complications, for d d t rz accounting since it must not conclude in either a balancing of income h r as we say in French, literally, for noon at two o'clock, and as if and expenses, in an economic circle, or in the regulated rationality of we wanted to show that we were given to, and even gifted at, tracking a calculation, a metrics, a symmetry, or any kind of relation, which is the impossible. That is what the narrator of "Counterfeit Money" says to say in a l , to stay with this injunction of the Greek term, which when speaking of the "exhausting faculty" that "nature" has given means at once reason, discourse, relation, and account. It is l and him as a "gift." To look for noon at two o'clock is to torment one's n that, as we saw, are sent into crisis by the madness of the mind trying to find that which, by definition, cannot be found where gift—but perhaps as well t p . At p , as we know, means that one is looking for it and especially not at the moment one is looking which is not in its place (noon at two o'clock) and thus it means the for it. At no v n nt, at no d r d nt [moment vouluj can extraordinary, the unusual, the strange, the extravagant, the absurd, one reasonably hope to find, outside any relativity, noon at two the mad. Only an t p and t p madness, p rh p (a certain p rh p o'clock. This contradiction is the logical and chronological form of the or b will be both the modality and the modality to be modified p bl simultaneity of two times, of two events separated in time or our meditation), could thus give rise to the gift that can give only and which therefore cannot be given t th t . To look for the on the condition of not taking place, taking up residence or domicile: impossible is that form of madness in which we seem to have en- th ft b , f th r n . closed ourselves up to now. It is true that looking for "noon" is not This madness, let us recall, would also be that of a forgetting, of a just any madness and it is not looking for just any moment; perhaps given and desired forgetting, not as a negative experience therefore, it is to dream, at whatever time and always too late (at two o'clock it's like an amnesia and a loss of memory, but as the affirmative condition already too late), of an origin without shadow, without dialectical of the gift. How, without madness, can one desire the forgetting of negativity, in the solar course on the basis of which we calculate time; that which will have been, like the gift, a gift without ambivalence, a
4 6 I Ch r r h M dn f E n n : gi a wou o e a ph r n o a oiso e ese (G ftl ft eco s i u e ogica y a io a y a u i g e e cess a i se as u a goo a goo a wou o e a o ec (a goo gi e as a we u e sco e a e co c usio o e ece i g c a e e ai s i g u e goo o e gi o gi i g o o a io i se ? ow oes e ci c e makes i u wi ou e gi es i i s mo eme a mo e- o e esi e o ge i g? ow oes o e esi e o o kee ? ow oes me a e ci c e a e i g ca e e com e e o a u o e esi e mou i g (assumi g a o mou o wo k a mou i g Wh n e i icu y i k owi g w om a w a o e is a ki g oes o amou o kee i g—a e e we ouc o w a emai s o a ou Is ma ess e eco omic ci cu a io a u i g e gi i ou e u a oi a e o em o mou i g o e e a io e wee equi a e ce? O is i e e cess e e e i u e o e es uc io ? gi a g ie e wee w a s ou e o -wo k e o -wo k o o make a o e i ica i e a e imi a y a ea o h G ft, we e gi a e wo k o mou i g ? ow oes o e esi e o ge i g wi i a e em a y agme om i i w ic ma ess is ame o e o -kee i g o e gi i im ici y e gi is e a ua e as E oki g i i assi g a i e o m o a a e ("ma y" Mauss goo i ee as e e y o igi o w a is goo o e goo a o seems o e qui e u awa e o w a e is ami g a w e e o e ca a ue? s i ca o e i g y e ame o gi a a o e i g y e ame i ke o e ou e i ( ou e iga u e ou e s ic u e o e c a ge ou e o iga io o i k a u i k a so u e y us o a so e a Mauss is esc i i g e o a c e s eaks o i i e y as "gi s o o gi e y gi i g is ma ess is a e mo e ma e e a e c a ge " u e e e asks e ques io as o w e e gi s ca ma e i g a i esieges easo a i s wo o e s so o s eak emai gi s o ce ey a e e c a ge A o g n t b l as us s eci- om e i si e a e ou si e I is a o ce easo a u easo ie a " e e a e o a c es e e yw e e As i Me a esia i ecause i a so ma i es s a ma ess o e a io a l i se a is a co s a gi e-a - ake " is a e e essio a so i E g is ma ess o e eco omic ci c e e ca cu a io o w ic is co s a y i e o igi a is a s a e " o e e ece oi " So a s a i g " ake" y " ece oi " Mauss co i ues " e o a c t lf, so y ica 1 I a o e o " a o s a macy" (Dissemination, 15 -51/131-3 e su ec e ome o a a e same ime so c a ac e is ic o ese i es o w ic is e e o e ei g co i ue e e I a a ea y ci e is o e o Mauss s n n th r th n e sys em o gi s e c a ge " ( 35 (We u e - Melanges Ch. Andler, S as ou g 19 We a e aske w y we o o e ami e sco e "i se " is wo a ma ks e assu a ce a e ce ai y e e ymo ogy o gift, a s a io o e a i dosis, i se a a sc i io o e a o e as ouc e e esse ia o e y o a i e i ia e i g G eek dosis, ose ose o oiso is e ymo ogy su oses a ig a ow co es o i g o a o e ame o a c ; we a so u e sco e e Ge ma ia ec s a e ai e a scie i ic wo o a commo y use i g ocu io "is o e o e a " I co i ms o ce agai e i e i ica- w ic is co a y o e usua sema ic u e Mo eo e o e wou s i a e o o y a qui i y o is assu a ce e ai e c oice o e wo gift o is a s a io a e i e se i guis ic Mauss oes o wo y e oug a ou is i com a i i i y e wee a oo a as weig e o e se se o gi o is wo i ce ai Ge ma ic a guages i a y e a i a es ecia y G eek use o dosis o mea oiso gi a e c a ge o a ou e ac a a e c a ge gi is o y a i s ows a wi e A cie s as we there was associa io o i eas a mo a o a a is a a u me o e gi y u e sco i g is we o u es o e ki we a e esc i i g o mea o say a th r n e c a ge gi O e ca o e y e We com a e e u ce ai y o e mea i g o gift wi a o e a i ph n n n, o a w ic ese s is ecise y e ome a as- venenum a e G eek philtron a pharrnakeni; o e s ou a so a (c êa ec o e c a ge gi s u e a a e isi e co a ic io o Melanges de la societe linguistique, o 3 1 venia, versus, venenum, om a- nati (Sa sk i o gi e easu e a gewinnen, win. ese wo a ues—gi a e c a ge—mus e o ema i e W a mus e i e oga e i seems is ecise y is ei g- oge e e C as we G o ia Goo wi a e a The Poison in the Gift: Ritual, Prestation, and the a - e-same- ime e sy esis e symme y e sy a o e sys- Dominant Caste in a North Indian Village (C icago U i e si y o C icago ess 19 e e o e may o ow a i e es i g iscussio o Mauss o e su ec o e gi a em e n a oi s oge e wo ocesses a a e y ig s as e ( o - eci oca ece io o e dan ( 9 C o is su ec Glas a The Post Card. 3 I C a e sec io 3 " e Ame ica o wes o o a C e i " 33 8 C a e wo e Ma ess o Eco omic easo i com a i e as a o e gi a a o e c a ge Ca o e s eak o iga o y t l t r t r [em asis a e ] y e i i io wi ou a y seco oug s o some i g a wou e " o e e e a mea s a e i commo a is i u io o v , o a a - o e " i " t lf," " a e sys em o gi s e c a ge "? isma a o e akes away ca o e eci oca e imme ia e y e sy o is sys em as we s a see i a mome as a esse - " ime" [a e essio a Mauss u s i quo a io ma ks o ia e a io o t , o a ce ai e ay o a ce ai d f rr lld ff r n ou awa e o e o scu e c a ac e o is o io a e ac [ i e e ] i ime e "i is o e o e a " akes o a i s e ie a e ea e wo ime i is o ou a ma e i e o- w e ig a e is Mauss ma ks a i e e ce " e o y i e e ces moge eous e eme o c o o ogy o a mo e com e a a e " e is goi g o o e is i e e ce is ecise y a o e qua i a i e y mo e e e oge eous s uc u e o e ay o i e a x v . A esse ia e agge a io ma ks is ocess E agge a io o ma u a io o o i e a ce] is ee e o e o m a y ca o e e e a ea u e amo g o e s s i ess a seco a y ea u e cou e -se ice e o io o a t l t r t r [em asis e o em o e gi as o o wi i s a u e a is x v n a e agai ] is us ogica y im ie w e i is a ques io o dv n , pr r x r t d. A o a i g e e ie ce a wou o e ayi g o e u i g isi s [r ndr d v t : a i e es i g e - e i e e o e pr r , o some immo e a io i o e wo s a essio i e e c i iom a isi is a ways e ai o e- mo e a e measu e gi wou o e a gi o gi e a us o u e e e w e i is e i s ] co ac i g ma iages a some i g o e a ca cu a e i s e u i e c a ge e mos mo - a ia ces es a is i g eace a e i g games o egu a e es gi mus ass eyo measu e Mauss co i ues co es s ce e a i g a e a i e es i a s e e i g i ua a o o i ic se ices [r ndr l rv : a equa y i e es i g e - e o a c is o e o e a e sys em o gi s e - essio is a guage o es i u io is ecessa y e e o c a ge e o y i e e ces a e i e io e ce e agge a- se ices a o e "gi es" o e i s ime] "s owi g eci - io a a ago isms i a ouses o e o e a a o e oca es ec " [a i gi e essio ]—a e i gs a a e o e y a ce ai ack o u i ica co ce s a i a sim e e c a ge a e same ime as o e i gs a ecome i - mo e u a s uc u e a i Me a esia es ecia y wi e c easi g y ume ous a a ua e as ese socie ies ecome wo o e a io s e i gi a e ai a " (I i ic e ( 3 A e o e esc i i g is e agge a io o e I ia s i a assage e e m " e m" marks a mark: It is the limit of a due date, e w e e ecise y "ma ess" wi e ame a w e e a eas wice ca e ce o a a i g ue [6 ht n ]. I us im ies ime e i e a e ques io o e e ico wi a ea i e i a e Mauss s ays a mo- a se a a es ece io om es i u io I Mauss s iew e t r me o ge wi e Me a esia s o e o y esia s so as o esc i e o ms e o igi a a esse ia ea u e o e ft. e i e a o is o e ci c e e egu a ci cu a io o w a e i sis s o ca i g e ay o ea i e a ows Mauss o ass u o ice o e a co a ic- ft , a e o e aye y t i is ci cu a io e ecisi e co - io e wee gi a e c a ge o w ic I a e i sis e so muc a ce s e e a e ose o "c e i " a " e m" (i e se se o e e m w ic ea s o ma ess i e case o w e e e gi mus emai o a oa o a e i e o a c o eig o ci cu a e c a ge as we as w e e i is u e i o a e c a ge u ess i is e gi i se a oes e u i g e i e- Gi s r l t [em asis a e ; ow ca gi s ci cu a e?] as we a ce ma ke y e e m " e m" is com a a e e e o a gua ai a e see i Me a esia a o y esia wi e ce ai y a n rd f , agai s e ma ess o e gi Mauss is o a a o - ey wi e eci oca e ei "gua a ee" [ r t : a so secu- e e a ou s eaki g o e c a ge gi s; e e e i ks e e is gift i y e osi ] is i e i ue o e i g gi e [we wi come only i e c a ge owe e e n , e sy esis e sys em o e ack o is] w ic is i se a "gua a ee " u i e e y os- sy a a oi s oge e gi a e c a ge is em o a —o mo e si e o m o socie y i is i e a u e o a gi o im ose a ecise y em o i i g— i e a ce e e ay o e e m o e e m
40 C a e wo e Ma ess o Eco omic easo 4 o e ay a is oca es a y "a e same ime " e i e i y e wee backward or archaic type, compels the present that has been received to be gi a e c a ge wou o e imme ia e a a a y ica I wou obligatorily reciprocated? What force is there in the given thing that causes a e i e ec e o m o a a priori sy esis a sy esis ecause its recipient to pay it back?" ( 3 i equi es em o i a io a a priori—in o e wo s ecessa y— O e ca a s a e as o ows e gi is o a gi e gi o y ecause i is equi e a e ou se y the thing itself, ame y y e gi es o e e e i gives time. e i e e ce e wee a gi a e y o ec o e gi y e o ce o e i ue a wou e i e - e e y o e o e a io o u e a sim e e c a ge is a e gi e o i e e is i seems e mos i e es i g i ea e g ea gui i g gi es ime There where there is gift, there is time. W a i gi es e gi ea o The Gift: o ose w o a ici a e i e e e ie ce o gi is ime u is gi o ime is a so a ema o ime e i g mus a cou e gi e equi eme o es i u io "a e m " a e e- o e es i u e immediately and right away. e e mus e ime i aye " ue a e " e equi eme o e ci cu a o y i e a ce is in- mus as e e mus e wai i g—wi ou o ge i g [l'attente—sans scribed in the thing itself a is gi e o e c a ge e o e i is a oublil. It ema s ime e i g u i ema s a e imi e ime co ac a i e io a ges u e o i i i ua o co ec i e su ec s ei e a i s a o a i i i e ime u a ime e e mi e y a e mo eme o gi /cou e gi is a force (a " i ue o e i g e m i o e wo s a y m a ca e ce e i g is o in ime; gi e " says Mauss a o e y imma e o e i g o i a y case i is o i as ime o a e i ema s o a e o gi e o o ake a e e e as suc y e o o s a o ees Mo e y a mys e- ime—a ime as y m a y m a oes o e a a omoge- ious o ce e i g i se ema s gi and es i u io i equi es eous ime u a s uc u es i o igi a i y e e o e " ime " " e m " " e ay " "i e a " o em o i a io e e gi gi es ema s a akes ime e i g gi es e- ecomi g- em o i a io o em o a i a io e a ima io o a eu- ma s o akes ime a is o e o e easo s is i g o e gi a a omoge eous ime y e esi e o e gi a e es i u- wi e i ke o e—i e a — ecessi y o a ce ai a a i e [recit] io i e a ce w ic (is o i g is (i e i g i se I is (gi e o o a ce ai oe ics o a a i e a is w y we wi ake accou i e i g i se I (is e i g i se I i e a ce e i g (i - o "Cou e ei Mo ey" a o e im ossi e accou [compte-rendid se I wi ou a y i g o e I se o i g a is au e ai e s a e e i g as gi e i g e gi e o e gi e a s o ma io o em o a i a io i o em o i a io wou a i es i i a i es o y i a a i e A i a oema ic simu ac um e e mo eme o is esi e o e gi /cou e gi I wou e o a a i e e o e i g o The Gift i sc i es e i e ig a a i sc i e i upon [a m me] e gi e -e c a ge i g is ema "o oem om e Sca i a ia Edda" o w ic o e s a a ( 5 is o e i g is ema o e m a em o i a io wou e e ma e o s a ou e y s uc u e o e i g e i g wou ema imi a ime a o ce e ma k o e ma gi — a is e measu e a se s a I is e e o o eg [ask o some i g] ou a y—a em o a i y A e i g wou e a i g a is a o sac i ice oo muc ( o e go s] A ese gi e a ways e ec s o e i e u i wou a e i s " i ue" o i s esse ce o i g o y i is ema I is e e o o i g a y o e i g e ema aw s i w a is ca e e gi -cou e -gi W a is a i g a o e ca a k a ou i i is as io ? a e we a o s e oo muc o i ( wi a e o e cou e is ques io i o eyo i s ei egge ia Mauss ma eu e s a o ious y wi is o io o ime o e m e mo a i y u i seems o e ose i a ce ai way a e e y o e i g is seeki g i i e is i c i e ai o e gi a w ic is i guis es o The Gift, ig a e e e i i io o a og am a e quo a io e a e om c e i e o ayme as ese a e e e mi e y o a oe ic e i e ig a (W y mus o e egi wi a oem w e mo e Wes e aw o eco omy I c i ici i g e oca u a y o ce - o e s eaks o e gi ? A w y oes e gi a ways a ea o e e ai au o s Mauss ies o es i u e so o s eak e a ue o gi o
gift of the poem, e don du poeme as Ma a me says? e e a e e i s " ese ma e" a o " ese e ai " w e e o e s wa e o e- wo s i i a ics "What rule of legality and self-interest, in societies of a sc i e e same o e a io o e c a ge wi i e es as a u e y eco- 42 i C a e wo e Ma ess o Eco omic n 4 nomic, commercial, or fiduciary operation, without needing in the Finally, with the sole difference of a distancing in time and of the least to have recourse to the category of the gift. For it might seem interest of usury, the t is at once, "at the same time," given-given tempting to get rid of the mysterious and elusive character of this and giving-giving. value of gift. And since we are saying with such insistence that it is To substantiate these remarks, let us consider a certain lexical ma- impossible, why not denounce it as an illusion, even a sophism or neuver by Mauss. We will give or take two examples of it. paralogism, as well as a pseudo-problem that reason would require r t x pl . This example can interest us as well for the relation us, in good logic, to evacuate? Does it not suffice in fact to describe between the d t and the ft, a relation that Mauss does not thema- scientifically the objective exchange of values with usurious supple- tize.' On the question of the credit demanded by the thing in the ment, in short, the logic of credit, of interest rates, and of repayment potlatch among tribes of northwestern Canada, a note quotes Boas: due dates? By reintroducing the word and the category of gift where other authors attempt or are tempted to get by without it, Mauss "In all his undertakings, the Indian trusts to the aid of his would like to bring off several operations (and this is one of the ad- friends. He promises to pay them for this assistance at a later mirable things about his essay: it seeks to match the stubbornness of date. If the aid provided consists of valuable things, which this impossible non-thing that would be the gift with a certain stub- are measured by the Indians in blankets, just as we measure bornness of its own): (1) to succeed in maintaining an originary speci- them in money, he promises to pay back the value of the loan ficity of the process of gift in relation to cold economic rationality, to with interest. The Indian has no system of writing and conse- capitalism, and mercantilism—and in that way to recognize in the gift quently, to guarantee the transaction, the promise is made in that which sets the circle of economic exchange going; (2) to succeed public. To contract debts on the one hand, and to pay those in describing the symbolicity that runs throughout cold economic rea- debts on the other, constitutes the potlatch. This economic sys- son, to render an account of religious, cultural, ideological, discur- tem is developed to such an extent that the capital possessed sive, esthetic, literary, poetic phenomena that are inseparable from by all the individuals associated with the tribe far exceeds the the process of the gift and that organize it from within this t t l l quantity of available valuables that exists; in other words, the f t which Mauss makes the very object of sociology (here it would be conditions are entirely analogous to those prevailing in our necessary to evoke his critique of a certain economism in Marx and own society: if we desired to pay off all our debts, we would the whole context of the C lz r d S l , and so forth); (3) to suc- find that there was not nearly enough money, in fact, to settle ceed in understanding the at least relative homogeneity of all human them. The result of an attempt by all creditors to seek reim- cultures, whatever may be the type or the level of economic and ju- bursement of their loans [that is, together and immediately] is ridical functioning; (4) to succeed in making credit, time, "term"—or a disastrous panic that the community takes a long time to re- the supplementary differance (the "return-more-later")—into a de- cover from." (P. 11, it 131) mand, an nt r t f th th n t lf, thus an interest that cannot be Let us notice first of all, in passing, this allusion to writing. To derived from anything other than the thing, an interest of the given repeat the, in our view, very problematic expression of Boas, "the thing, of the thing that calls for the gift, of the given "it" or ( is Indian has no system of writing." We thus see a certain relation shap- not in Mauss's vocabulary): not the of d nn ( ll, t t , there ing up between writing or its substitute (but what is a substitute for is) but of the d nn , of the given it, although the thing's require- writing if not a writing?) and the process of the gift. The latter is ment that it be given-returned allows one to dispense with the dis- perhaps not determined only as the content or the theme of a piece tinction between the t of t v and the t of the v n. The given t of writing—accounting, archive, memoirs, narrative, or poem—but will have required that t gives. The t is giving-given, giving-giving. 4 already, in itself, as the marking of a trace. The gift would always be
is is a so a co oquia e essio i e c a mig 4. a is, d r nt d r nt. _ I ake e i e y o e e i g e e o S h bb l th, p r l C l r: ( a is: Ga i ee, e a s a e : ai s ai , i.e., you gi e me is a I gi e you a . ( a s. 86 , i a icu a . 2 , 08.
44 C a e wo e Ma ess o Eco omic e s 4 the gift of a writing, a memory, a poem, or a narrative, in any case, dangerous than this "unconscious sociology," as Simiand has the legacy of a text; and writing would not be the formal auxiliary, the termed it. For example, Cuq still states: "In primitive societies, external archive of the gift, as Boas suggests here, but "something" only the barter regime is conceived of; in those more advanced, that is tied to the very act of the gift, act in the sense both of the sales for cash are the practice. Sale on credit is characteristic of archive and the performative operation. a higher phase in civilization. It first appears in an oblique form Boas concludes that, in the potlatch, the Indian wants both to pay as a combination of cash sale and loans." In fact, the point of his debts in public and to invest the fruits of his labor for the future, departure lies elsewhere. It is provided in a category of rights to prepare an inheritance for his children. Now, what does Mauss do neglected by jurists and economists as uninteresting. This is after having quoted this long passage? He raises no essential objec- the gift, a complex phenomenon, particularly in its most an- tion, he judges the description to be exact, but he proposes a correc- cient form, that of the total prestation which we are not studying in tion to the vocabulary. Here it is: "By correcting the terms 'debt,' this essay. Now, the gift necessarily entails the notion of credit [em- 'payment,"reimbursement,"loan' and replacing them with such phasis added]. The evolution in economic law has not been terms as 'presents made' and 'presents repaid,' terms that Boas more- from barter to sale, and from cash sale to credit sale. It is on over ends up by using himself, we have a fairly exact idea of how the the foundation of a system of gifts given and returned over notion of credit functions in the potlatch." time terme] that have been established both barter, through This correction inverts, therefore, the direction of the definitional simplification, by drawing together moments of time earlier circle. It appears tautological, but what is at stake in this correction is dissociated, and purchase and sale, both credit and cash sale, important for Mauss. For him, it is a matter of thinking the economic as well as loans. For we have no evidence that any of the legal rationality of credit on the basis of the gift and not the reverse. The systems that have evolved beyond the phase we are describing gift would be originary. It would be the true producer of value, being (in particular, Babylonian law) remained ignorant of the credit in itself the value of values. As Valery says of spirit, the gift would be process that is known in every archaic society that still survives at once a value and the—priceless—origin of all value. For Mauss's today. This is another simple, realistic way of resolving the discourse is oriented by an ethics and a politics that tend to valorize problem of the two "moments of time" brought together in the the generosity of the giving-being. They oppose a liberal socialism to contract, which Davy has already studied. (P. 36) the inhuman coldness of economism, of those two economisms that * Note: We have failed to notice that the notion of "term" was would be capitalist mercantilism and Marxist communism. not only as ancient, but also as simple, or, if you wish, as com- Second example. Right after this, another apparently lexical maneu- plex, as the notion of cash. (P. 111, n. 133) ver objects to a sort of evolutionism. In failing to understand debt in These propositions belong to a subchapter titled "Honor and its relation to the originary gift, in failing to understand "term" and Credit," that is, two motifs that would be proper to this American deferred interest as gift effects, evolutionism ends up believing credit potlatch. The subject of credit has just been addressed. It is on the to be a late invention of very evolved societies. subject of honor that madness irrupts into the scene that, in truth, it Current economic and juridical history is largely mistaken in secretly organizes. We have made ourselves take this detour in order this matter. Imbued with modern ideas, it forms a priori ideas to arrive at this madness. The madness that insinuates itself even into of development,* and follows a so-called necessary logic. All Mauss's text is a certain excess of the gift. It goes so far perhaps as to in all, it remains within old traditions. There is nothing more burn up the very meaning of the gift; at the very least it threatens the presumed semantic unity that authorizes one to continue speak-
6. au a e y, O vr pl t ( r : i io eque e a ëia e, 60 , o . 2, ing of gift. Whereas, in the preceding paragraphs, he has shown him- . 0 8 . C . o is bj t, A tr p, . 4 . self to be so scrupulous, so demanding with regard to the name gift 46 Ch pt r h M dn f E n n 4 and the necessity of calling a gift a gift, Mauss will begin to proliferate ecnomics in which considerable wealth is constantly being ex- signs—to give signs, as one says—of a lexical uncertainty, as if his pended and transferred. On , f n d r , ll th language were about to go a little mad one page after it had insisted tr n f r b th n f x h n r v n tr d nd l b t [empha- so strenuously on keeping the meaning of gift for the gift. His lan- sis added] such trade is noble, replete with etiquette and gen- guage goes mad at the point where, in the potlatch, the process of the erosity. At least, when it is carried on in another spirit, with a gift t rr d th t lf [s'emporte lui-meme] and where, as view to immediate gain, it is the object of very marked scorn. Mauss comes to say, "it is not even a question of giving and return- (P. 37) ing, but of destroying, so as not to want even to appear to desire *Note: See especially the myth of Haiyas . . . who has lost face repayment. . . . " The trembling of this uncertainty affects the word while gambling and dies. His sisters and his nephews go into "gift" but also the word "exchange" with which Mauss regularly as- mourning, give a "revenge" potlatch, and he comes to life sociates it. Here is the passage of madness: again. On this subject it would be necessary to study gambling, which even in French society, is not considered to be a con- No less important in these transactions of the Indians is the role played by honor. Nowhere is the individual prestige of a tract, but a situation in which honor is committed and where goods are handed over that, after all, one could refuse to hand chief and that of his clan so closely linked to what is spent and to the meticulous repayment with interest of gifts that have over. Gambling is a form of potlatch and the gift system. Its spread even as far as the American Northwest is remarkable. been accepted, so as to transform those who have obligated (P. 112, n. 138 and 139) you into the obligated ones. Consumption and destruction are here really without limits. In certain kinds of potlatch, one This madness has a somewhat monstrous face, but its face or its must expend all that one has, keeping nothing back. It is a defacement is regular up to a certain point. One can recognize in it a competition to see who is the richest and also th t dl few interlaced traits. Linked to the redoubled double bind, between extravagant [le plus follement d p n r emphasis added]. Ev- the bind and the non-bind or the letting loose [dEb nd d ], this mad- erything is based upon the principles of antagonism and of ri- ness is surely double since it threatens pr r the closed circle of valry. The political status of individuals in the brotherhoods exchangist rationality as well as frantic expenditure, without return, and clans, and ranks of all kinds are gained in a "war of prop- of a gift that forgets itself: madness of keeping or of hypermnesic erty," just as they are in real war, or through chance, inheri- capitalization nd madness of the forgetful expenditure. But because tance, alliance, and marriage. Yet everything is conceived of as it wreaks havoc on the two sides of the circle, this madness manages if it were a "struggle of wealth."* Marriages for one's children to eat away at language itself. It ruins the semantic reference that and places in the brotherhoods are only won during the pot- would allow one reasonably to say, to state, to describe this madness, latch exchanged and returned. They are lost at the potlatch as in short, it ruins everything that claims to know what gift and non- they are lost in war, by gambling or in running and wrestling. gift n t . There is always a moment when this madness begins In a certain number of cases, t n t v n t n f v n nd to burn up the word or the meaning "gift" itself and to disseminate r t rn n , b t f d tr n , n t t nt v n t pp r t d r without return its ashes as well as its terms or germs. We could inter- r p v nt [emphasis added]. Whole boxes of olachen (candle- rogate this essential passage between the gift and this dissemina- fish) oil or whale oil are burnt, as are houses and thousands of tion—what I in the past defined as that which does not return to the blankets. The most valuable copper objects are broken and father, or that which does not r t rn in general.' Let us, then, try to thrown into the water, in order to crush and to "flatten" one's find the unifying principle of all the idiomatic locutions in which one rival. In this way one not only promotes oneself, but also one's family, up the social scale. It is therefore a system of law and 7. Cf. Dissemination, passim, especially "Outwork." 48 I C a e wo e Ma ess o Eco omic easo I 4 finds the noun "gift," the verb "to give," the adjective "given." Such mon sense, giving with having. One might wonder if the same a semantic center [foyer] around which an organized economy or po- semantic order governs locutions that, on the contrary, imply the lysemia would gather seems indeed to be lacking. If this lack were to transfer of what one is to the other who takes—or becomes—what is be confirmed, one would have to give up a concept of language regu- thereby given to him or her. Think of the expression "to give one- lated by deep semantic anchoring points that would authorize, for self," of the metonymies or synecdoches concerning partial "objects," example, questions of the type: What is the guiding sense or etymon the fragments or signs of what one is and which one can give as some- of the gift on the basis of which all semantic diversities, all idioms, thing one has, abandons, or lets be taken. All the figures of this tropic and all usages are diffracted? What is the consensus on the basis of are difficult to contain within the limits of a rhetoric the margins or which an implicit linguistic contract would permit us to understand "terms" of which can no longer, in principle and in all rigor, be fixed. one another, to pre-understand one another, right here, to extend Likewise, one might wonder if the same order governs locutions credit to each other when we speak of gift, giving, or given? What which imply that one gives something (a determined object, either would happen if the lack of a guiding sense or of a regulated polyse- material or symbolic, to make provisional use of this distinction) and mia were to force us to renounce this style of question in favor of a those in which the given of the donation is not an object, a material certain concept of dissemination? This concept, which would not be thing, but a symbol, a person, or a discourse. In other words, does the only one possible, would lead us to consider only usage, play, not the direct "object" of the act of "giving," does not the given of and the contextual functionings of idioms, if indeed it were still pos- the giving alter radically the meaning of the act each time? What do sible to speak of idioms in this sense, without postulating a semantic the following have in common: on the one hand, to give a ring, a regulation, a system of prescriptions inscribed in language or in the bracelet, to give something to drink and to eat and, on the other continuum of a linguistic tradition. This alternative, let us note in hand, to give an impression, to give a feeling, to give a show or a passing, would in both cases concern a sort of given of the language: play? The latter are all expressions that appeal irreducibly to the idiom what is given by the language or the language as given, as a given and in principle therefore they have only a limited translatability. language [tine sorte de donni; ou de dorm& de la longue], in other words, What is common to and what is the connection between "to give the two ways of determining the gift of the language said to be maternal time" and "to give a price" (in the sense of the auction bid: "I will or natural. give you so much for it"), between "donner une facilite" [to facilitate, This hypothesis of a dissemination without return would prevent as in a facilitated payment plan] and "give an order," between "give the locution from circling back to its meaning. It thus also con- information," "give a course, a class, and a seminar," "give a lesson"
cerns—whence this paradoxical fold—the without-return of the gift. (which is something completely different) and "give chase," "give One must say that we are constantly encouraged in this direction by signs," and so forth? Each time a structural difference of the given the experience of language each time that the words "gift," "to give," presents itself: It can be an apparently natural or material thing "given," "donation," "donee," or "donor" occur there. Not only be- (water), a symbolic thing (a ring), a person (to give one's daughter or
cause of great frontiers, great lines of demarcation that seem to set up son in marriage, to give a child, to give a king to one's country), 9 a a secure barrier between different meanings or different functionings.
For example, one might wonder if the same semantic order governs 8. e i a s e am e e e is " o e e c a ge," w ic is a u i g e essio the logic of the gift whether it is under the regime of to have or to be. a mea s o ecoy o o u o e sce . ( a s. In general, it is thought that one can give only what one has, what . O o gi e a s a e: W e is ec u e was ea i C icago, W. . . Mi c e e a o one possesses as one's own, and give it to the other who, in his or a e e ques io o e s a e i a e y i e es i g ma e a i ke i o a o her turn, can thus have it, come into possession. The very paradox of a a i e (i a u u is e e o w ic I o e o e u o e ay . I a wo , w a a e s w e " e Gi e is a e so ," e s a e w o " as o i g o gi e"? S a e y "giving what one does not have," which we have already talked is a w ic gi es ack o gi es ("W a gi es?" i Ame ica s a g u a so e i es about, has the value of paradox only because of what links, in corn- o " a a i e."
5 C a e wo e Ma ess o Eco omic easo 51 discourse (still another order of the gift: to give a lecture, to give an the one that delivers up the thing or the sense themselves, in person order; once again the nature of the discourse alters each time the or in flesh and blood, as people still say, in their immediate presence. structure of the gift). Each time, then, the structural difference of the 2. One may wonder whether this multiplicity of meanings that given seems, and we do say seems, to transmit to the operation f transmits the multiplicity of givens and refracts it in the multiplicity the giving an irremediable heterogeneity. of the to give has a sort of general equivalent which would permit In this very short list of examples, we have all the same tried to p t things in order. We distinguished, for the convenience of the presen- tation, between the orders of given (to be vs. to have; sensible, natural o si ua e e s akes o e sema ics o o a io i e ome o ogy I wi quo e e thing, if such exists in the pure state, vs. symbol, person, discourse, co c usio o e i s c a e w e e Ma io iscusses i a icu a ce ai as ec s o and so forth—all of which are problematic categories since all of them my ea i g o usse s Logical Investigations i Speech and Phenomena: determine being-given and since, thereby, the gift may perhaps efface Ca ego ia i ui io a ows o e o y o ake e measu e—w ic is om ow their boundaries). We have indeed tried to establish an order, a prin- o measu e ess—o o a io I ma ks e o e a yss o o a io wi ou cipled taxonomy, a classification (given as either to be or to have, co e i g i o e —a eas i ei egge s iew i o i usse s o e e e either thing or person, either natural, sensible thing or signifying, mos so e o e wo i e ace o e asci a io wi su e a u a a u co i io a ese ce is o ou o e o e you e ec e usse i ac symbolic thing, either thing or word, and so forth), but if you consult com e e y a e y imi ess o a io oes o seem o ea i e e s a ge- the Littre" or what is called an analogic dictionary, you would be at ess o suc a eyo -measu e [demesure], a oes o i g mo e a manage great pains to find a unifying or classifying principle for all the idi- i s e cess wi ou i e oga i g i U ess e e a eme e ays— y co - omatic locutions. We could take as guide four types of questions: e i g i o e —a ig i ace o e oa e i g o ese ce y o a io 1. In the style of analytic philosophy or of ordinary language is is o ou w e e e ques io a ises a usse cou o a swe analysis, one could ask oneself: What are the conditions (conven- e a s ecause e e e u e s oo i as a au e ic ques io W a e is gi e ? o o y "W a is it a is gi e ?" u mo e esse ia y "W a oes tional, contextual, intentional, and so forth) for the functioning of, gi i g mea w a is e ei g aye ou y e ac a e e y i g is gi e for example, an expression or a speech act that consists in, let us say ow is o e o i k e ac a e e y i g a is o y is i so a as i is it in French, donner sa parole, giving one's word (to promise or to gi e ?" I seems egi ima e o su ose a usse as i e we e su me ge swear) or donner un ordre, giving an order (jussive act) and what is y e im e a i e—a o ce ea e i g a u i a o y— o manage e su e - going on with giving in each of these cases? Such an analysis can go a u a ce o gi e s i ese ce a o oi (a eas i e Logical Investiga- tions) i qui es i o e s a us e sco e a e e e i e i y o is o a io back before speech acts, in the phenomenological style of an inten- is si e ce amou s o a mi i g ( o owi g acques e i a s esis a us- tional analysis, toward the intentional act of giving in general. On se ea i g o a io u i e oga e e e oug e a accom is e i s what conditions does it take place? What is a "donating conscious- oa e i g oes o ee i om e iso o ese ce; a e e mai ai s i ness"? and so on. This latter expression, moreover, is immediately in me a ysica e e io ei egge o e co a y " ( ; c as we and massively complicated by reason of a figure of donation that is es ecia y 7 a a u a y a e ages ca e u y e w o e constantly used by phenomenologists, beginning with Husserl, to cou se o e ook [u ess i is e ook a is ca e u y em] o e asis o a i ki g o the call as i ki g o e gi ("A e e a sce e a e- designate the ultimate recourse, phenomenology's principle of prin- uc io a e e is e ia e uc io e e uc io o a o e ca i e - 0 ciples, namely the originary donating intuition (gebende Anschauung), e es W a is gi e is gi e o y o w oe e gi es imse o e o e ca a o y i e u e o m o a co i ma io o e a ea e ea e ecause e- 1 o owi g e e e o ema ic ou i e I ie o u i ace u i g e 1977-7 cei e e ca us a ea s as e o igi a y sc ema o e wo o me semi a I wi o o e mome e e i o e o g e e o me s e a ie ea - e uc io s ecise y ecause i a o e e mi s o e o go ack o i a i i g a iscussio a wou e equi e co ce i g e im o a wo k si ce u - ema s a o e gi e o ese o e o e ca as suc — o a swe e ca in is e y ea - uc Ma io (Reduction et donation, Recherches sur Husserl, Heidegger et la e ou e se se o a a o i g o ese o i a o goi g owa i I phenomenologie [ a is esses U i e si ai es e a ce 19 9] I o e o i ica e a wou a ea y su ice o s eci y a w ic e o e o wi ou Dasein, ecei es ew e imi a y oi s o e e e ce i e s ace o is u u e e c a ge a i o e o c a e ges e ca i s o ea s i ei e e co s i u i g I o Dasein
S2 C a e wo e Ma ess o Eco omic easo I 53 translation, metaphorization, metonymization, exchange within an be/to have; thing/person; sensible, natural/symbolic; and so forth) ultimately homogeneous semantic circle. This general equivalent would be particular determinations, metaphorico-metonymic substi- would be a transcendental signified or signifier. Playing the role of a tutes. We know that the adjective "transcendental" modifies first of transcendental given, it would orient the multiplicity and furnish the all the category that surpasses every genus (transcendit omne genus), transcendental category of which all the other categories of given (to thereby making possible every other categorial determination. This great transcendentalist tradition can inscribe the transcendental given w ic is—i ecise y i ca s i e— e o e a gi es i se o e o e ca a in the present in general (the present appearing of that which appears gi es?" [ 9 -97] in the light, or else created being, the originary given of a gift which W a I a e a em e o a icu a e o e su ec o e ca as we as o e "come " comes down to and comes back to [revient a] Nature, Being, God, the e "yes " es ecia y ei i e uci e i e a i i y o e " es i e a ce" o a se i g Father—or the Mother) as well as in the phallus in general (transcen- e e mi e y e es o se a o e "gi " i ge e a wou ea me o ou o dental signifier sealing, according to Lacan, a "symbolic order" that su sc i e o e " ogic" a e ecessi y o is a a ysis guards the gift against its dissemination, which is perhaps to say, o imi ou se es e e o e mos asic sc ema e us say a e ques io i o against itself). For this tradition, which is the most powerful and the e iscussio wou emai o e a e oi o e e e mi a io o e ca o o most irrefutable, there must be a general equivalent of the given if e ema e e w e e e ci c e seems o u e wee e ca o ei g (Anspruch des Seins), e ca o e a e (Anspruch des Vaters), e imacy o w ic ei egge one is to understand what happens with the gift in general and how co es s a a "ca w ic is o e o e o e ei egge ismisses " ame y e gifts and exchanges in general (total or partial) are ordered—and, fi- o e a " e i as wi o ai o ake u " o I wi a oes Ma io w o seems o nally, what the Thing given is. For in the end, it must always be the me a so o make "the ca as suc " " e u e o m o e ca " co o m o e ca o Thing, the same thing that gives itself, even if it does so by dividing e a e o e ca a e u s o e a e a a i u wou s eak e u itself or by partitioning itself into partial objects. But the Thing is not o e a e e e e ame o e a e a i a y o e a e i asmuc as e gi es a partial object, which is why Lacan, for example, insists on the fact e ame Ma io i ee w i es "i ac e s eec a ema s is e oes o so muc that the phallus, the signifier of all signifiers, condition of every gift o ou ce a ca amo g o e ossi e o es o e a a age o some au o i y o and every exchange, cannot be a partial object." Difficult problematic o e as i e o ms the ca as suc — e ca o a swe e ca i se i e so e i e - of the partial object and the whole chain of supposed gifts (cadeaux, io o o i g o ese o i y e osi g o ese o i e ca e e i e e es as suc feces, penis, child, weapons of war). It is this problematic that we are overtake wi su ise Isu e e wi ou o e o e a y o e message e ce o talking about here, directly or indirectly. w oe e ea s i o take u [ e e] e e w oe e oes o e ec i e mo e o e ca is i ac ice e o e e sim e c aim o ei g a mo e u y " A e is 3. How is one to explain these breaks, within certain idioms i a o e "I ac e c aim is o o ge e e e e e i e ame o ei g ( u o e (French for example), between the syntax of giving (verb) and the a e ei e a es i a io o om a ei g us e u e o m o e ca a ises" syntax of the gift (noun)? From the meaning of "to give" to the mean- ( 95; 1 a e i a ici e e wo s " e e" a "su e e" i o e o si ua e i ing of "gift," is the idiom logically consistent? For example, I would a a ce some s akes a wi a ea a e o o a y i e ea i g o "Cou e ei say in French that a window "donne sur la rue," it gives onto the street Mo ey" a i g declared a i e c u es a y e e mi a e co e w y oes Ma io (understanding by that, I suppose, that it gives visual access, just as e e mi e " e u e o m o e ca " (a e e o e o e gi as ca "i e ame o e a e "? As u ique ca es i e " e ga e wee e wo ca s ( e o e C is ia a stairway gives onto, gives access to, and so forth). But it would e o e ewis " a i is "im o a o mai ai "? Is i ossi e o ea a " u e o m never occur to me (and why?) that what we have here is a gift. In any o e ca " (a i s o a mus o e esume suc a u i y? A i o e oes o w a case, I would not say literally the gift of the window or of the stair- asis? a wou s i o e om ei g o om e a e o i e a e a case. What is the significance of these breaks? Why does "giving i e e ce o e " e e " i o e ca u i a way e wee e ew a e C is ia someone up to the police" not amount to offering a gift, a generous o e e o e i e a guage o e " ea Is ae e o ou Go is o e o " (Deuteronomy i w ic Ma io e s us ey " o a e ei sou ce" ( 95 ? C gift, of someone to the police (although the latter may indeed receive a so Ma io " e o ses a que ques ques io s " Revue de Metaphysigue et de Morale, o 1 (1991 i a icu a 9 11 C " e ac eu e a e i e " i The Post Card, 5 / 7 4 C a e wo e Ma ess o Eco omic easo it as such), whereas parents who give one of their children in mar- tion "donner le jour" that elsewhere led us to explore this logic, riage or to the fatherland could more easily speak of a gift, since they which is a logic of madness but also of narration, the condition of could think that they are depriving themselves of what they give? Let possibility and impossibility of narration, in the margins of a text by us not accumulate these examples; they would be numerous but also I3lanchot titled f l d j r, h M dn f th Day. 13 different from one language to another. Let us merely draw from All these questions concern a certain madness of the gift, which is them a n l n (which is that the essential link that passes from first of all the madness of the dissemination f the meaning "gift." To the thinking of the gift to language, or in any case to the trace, will look for a unity of this meaning would be, to quote the narrator of never be able to avoid idioms) and a d bt (is it not impossible to "Counterfeit Money," to "look for noon at two o'clock." Mauss is not isolate a concept of the essence of the gift that transcends idiomatic unaware of this madness. His essay h G ft begins more and more to difference?). look like an essay not on the gift but on the word "gift." It would 4. The transcendental question or rather the question n the tran- basically be an attempt to see if one can speak of the gift, an assaying scendental gets complicated, it even goes a little mad if, among all the of the "gift" (in quotation marks because it is mentioned rather than v n , all the "things" given that we have so far enumerated, one used), an assaying, in a word, of the word "gift" to see if and how it attempts to draw a line dividing two major structures of the gift, such can be used. At the end of this essay, of these assays, a few pages at least as these are to be located in the idiom. There would be, n th before the final word, he writes the following, which leaves one won- n h nd, the gift that gives something determinate (a given, a present dering or perplexed since it comes from someone who has taken an in whatever form it may be, personal or im-personal thing, "natural" incessant pleasure in giving self-satisfied terminology lessons to the or symbolic thing, thing or sign, nondiscursive or discursive sign, and authors he has been citing: so forth) and, n th th r h nd, the gift that gives not a given but the nd t n of a present given in general, that gives therefore the ele- However, we can go even farther than we have gone up to ment of the given in general. It is thus, for example, that "to give now. We can dissolve, mix up, color, and redefine the principal time" is not to give a given present but the condition of presence of notions that we have used. The terms that we have used— any present in general; "dormer l j r" (literally to give the day, but present, gift, d — r not themselves entirely exact. It's just used in the sense of the English expression "to give birth") gives that we can find no others. These concepts of law and econom- nothing (not ever the life that it is supposed to give "metaphorically," ics that we like to oppose: freedom and obligation; liberality, let us say for convenience) but the nd t n of any given in general. generosity, and luxury, as against savings, interest, and util- To give time, the day, or life is to give nothing, nothing determinate, ity—it would be good to put them into the melting pot once even if it is to give the giving of any possible giving, even if it gives more. (P. 73) the condition of giving. What distinguishes in principle this division In place of this impossible concept and of this missing term, Mauss from the transcendental division it resembles? One perceives there then proposes only brief indications and an example, an "example," no longer the sharp line that separates the transcendental from the an example of, precisely, a "hybrid," which defies the oppositions conditioned, the conditioning from the conditioned, but rather the permitting one to construct concepts. I this significant? Here is how fold of undecidability that allows all the values to be inverted: The gift Mauss in fact continues: f life amounts to the gift of death, the gift of day to the gift of night, and so on. And we will say nothing further—it would take us into We can only give the merest indications on this subject. Let us another dimension—about the strange crossings of idioms such as choose, for example,* the Trobriand Islands. There they still those that translate "se donner la mort" by "to take one's life." This have a complex notion that inspires all the economic acts we inversion follows from the great law of the G ft ft. 2 It was the locu- have described. Yet this notion is neither that of the free,
1 See a o e o e 1 3 13 C r , a 5 C a e wo e Ma ess o Eco omic eoso I
purely gratuitous prestation, nor that of production and ex- that schism in the response or the responsibility in which some have change purely interested in what is useful. It is a sort of hybrid sought to recognize the schizopathogenic power of the double bind. that has flourished there. Here the addressee must keep the command not to keep, without * Note: We could just as well have chosen the Arab sadaqa: forgetting the request to forget: Grieve for me, therefore keep me alms, price of the betrothed, justice, tax. enough to lose me as you must. The madness of this essay: It ends where it should have begun, We will encounter later, in all its dimensions (religious, anthro- and the result is that, just as in Blanchot's Madness of the Day, one no pological, cultural, socioeconomic), the question of alms—and of longer knows according to what impossible figure an interminable whether alms is a gift. For the moment, let us not forget the fold of a supplementary question: Is that which is given, whether or not it is end is included in an interminable beginning.' 4 It is a narrative, but an interdicted narrative in this sense. As if Mauss were saying to us: alms, the content, which is to say the "real" thing one offers or of Forget everything that has been said in all the preceding pages; we which one speaks? Is it not rather the act of address to the other, for will have to begin all over again. example the work as textual or poetic performance? Along with all This madness still hesitates between the "I am talking madness" the internal perversion or madness we are talking about, is not the and the "don't go off thinking that I am talking madness even when I gift first of all the essay titled The Gift, precisely to the extent to which speak of madness." And it is inscribed in the command to forget that it would be incapable of speaking adequately of the gift that is its is uttered with every gift. But the command to forget, the command theme? Or the poem titled "AumOne"? Or very close to it, that song given to forget is a strange command, whose very structure remains of mourning which is "Don du poeme" (The Gift of the Poem)? "Au- as maddened as it is maddening. One sees it appear in "AumOne" mOne" also names "tabac," "opium," the "pharmacie," and the act (Alms) by Mallarme: of "supputer" (calculation), all of which are motifs that will stay with us. This poem went through at least four versions and several earlier Ne t'imagine pas que je dis des folies titles: "Haine du pauvre" (Hatred of the Poor Man), "A un mendiant" La terre s'ouvre vieille a qui creve la faint (To a Beggar), and "A un pauvre" (To a Poor Man).'s je hais une autre aumeine et veux que tu m'oublies. Et surtout ne va pas, frere, acheter du pain. Aumtine Do not suppose that I am talking madness Prends ce sac, Mendiant! tu ne le cajolas The earth opens up old to one dying of hunger Senile nourrisson d'une tetine avare I hate another alms and want you to forget me. Afin de piece a piece egoutter ton glas. And most of all, brother, do not go buy bread Take this bag, Beggar! you cajoled it We will not interpret this poem, not even this last line. It gives the Senile nurseling of a miser teat command, it requires, it asks that the gift not be converted into its Only to drain from it coin by coin your l . equivalent merchandise, into some useful goods (in the first two ver- sions, it was "Je hais l'aumOne utile," "I hate the useful alms") and especially into edible food, into an incorporable thing. Let us merely A un mendiant underscore the structure of an impossible command: "I want you to forget me." Like every negative command, like every interdiction that Pauvre, voice cent sous ... Longtemps to cajolas, folds back in a contradictory manner toward the subject who utters it —Ce vice te matiquait,—le songe d'étre avare? (for example, "do not listen to me," "do not read " , it engenders Ne les enfouis pas pour qu'on te sonne un glas.
1:5. O is oem a o e "g as" a comes o eso a e e e c G , 4. I i 3 a 171 /15 SS I Ch pt r h M dn o Eco omic easo
Poor man, here is twenty cents . . . Long you cajoled, dedication, which gives itself by giving nothing other than the gift in —You lacked this vice—the dream of being miserly? question with no possible oversight ( rpl bl of that performance, Don't bury them to have a l sounded for you. this "Gift of the Poem" would be given as the gift itself, enacted; it begins "Je t'apporte l'enfant d'une nuit d'Idumee!" bring you the child of an Idumean Idumea, the land of the Edom, would be A n p vr the pre-Adamic kingdom: Before Esau was replaced by Jacob, who received his blind father's blessing, the kings of Idumea were sup- r nd l , M nd nt. n t p t j l posed to reproduce themselves without sex and without woman. —C v t n t—l n d êtr r ? They were not hermaphrodites but men without sex and without nf p t n r p r l t nn n n . women. The poem is compared to a work that would have been born from the poet alone, without couple or without woman. "Horrible Take the bag, Beggar. Long you cajoled naissance" (Horrible birth), says "Don du poeme," a birth in which —You lacked this vice—the dream of being miserly? the child, that is, the poem, finds itself thus v n, confided, of- Don't bury your gold so it will sound a l for you. 1 fered—to the reader to whom it is dedicated, to its addressee or its The sadistic aggressivity with regard to the donee, the perversity donee, to be sure, but by the same token to the nurse who n h r t rn, which threatens a beggar suspected of speculating, all this already n x h n , ll v it the breast (" . . . ll n h rr bl n n : I belongs to a certain tradition. We will attempt to recognize that tra- Et t v .Y r pp l nt v l t l v n, Av l d t f pr r t l n dition and we cite Mallarme here only in order to sketch in this de- r ll n bl n h r b ll n n f r l l vr r d scent. It is for example the tradition of Baudelaire's "Counterfeit v r z r ff ?" f. . . receive a horrible birth: / And your voice re- Money" and "Assommons les pauvres," (Beat Up the Poor). This tra- calling viola and harpsichord, / With faded finger will you press the dition will have left traces in h M dn f th where one may breast / From which flows the woman in sibylline whiteness / For the read, for instance: "At forty, somewhat poor, I was becoming desti- lips famished by the virgin azure air?]) 19 tute. . . . What is irritating about poverty is that it is visible, and any- From the hand of the donor to that of the beggar, we have just one who sees it thinks: You see, I'm being accused; who is attacking seen the passage of gifts in the form of cash money. We can no longer me? But I did not in the least wish to carry justice around on my avoid the question of what money is: true money or counterfeit clothes." r Is not the gift precisely the madness of the day? ' Like money, which can only be what it is, false or counterfeit, to the extent "Aumeine," Mallarme's "Don du poeme" went through several ver- to which no one knows it is false, that is, to the extent to which it sions. One of them was titled precisely "Le jour" (The Day), and the circulates, appears, functions d nd tr n . The engima of other "Le poeme nocturne" (The Nocturnal Poem) and the "Dedicate this simulacrum should begin to orient us toward the triple and indis- du poeme nocturne" (Dedication of the Nocturnal Poem). Like the sociable question of the ft, of f r v n , and of the x . And to narrative of "Counterfeit Money" that we will take up soon, like its the question of whether a gift can or ht t r t lf against coun- terfeit money. 1 S e a e Ma a me Oeuvres completes, e e i Mo o e G ea -Au y ( a- At the end of a long note on the notion of money (pp. 93-94), is i io eque e Ia e a e 19 1 39 1 3 -3 Mauss deems it necessary to excuse himself. He does so in the gram- 17 "A qua a e u eu au e e e e ais mise a e a mise e a ceci e - mar of the magisterial "we": "We excuse ourselves for having been uyeu qu o a oi e ceu qui a oie e se oi a qu o m accuse; qui m a aque Obliged to take sides on these very vast questions, but they touch too Ia? O e e sou ai ais as u ou o e Ia us ice su mes e eme s" ( a is a a Mo ga a 1973 3- ; The Madness of the Day, a s y ia a is ( a y ow closely upon our subject and it was necessary to be clear." He does Y S a io i ess 19 1 13 1 C Parages, 3 a 7 19 Oeuvres completes, 1 3 -39 60 C a e wo e Ma ess o Eco omic easo I 6
o ask o e e cuse ; e excuses himself. I e co e o e c e i- e i i g o ei — e y as —sca e Mauss wou e e cusi g im- que e i is o e mos e i e o mu a o o i e ess W a is e se o a i g co c u e oo quick y o a i g gi e i su icie e cusi g imse o ? We o a i g ee o iga e o ake si es guarantees o is s a eme s o a i g i su icie y emo s a e W e o e is o iga e i i ci e o e oes o a e o e cuse o e- is us i ica o y easo s W ic im ies a y goo e ica s a - se ; o e as e e y e cuse as w e o e oes some i g " eyo o e s a s—a e e e goo e ica s a a s o scie i ic iscou se— co o " I is o mu a io w ic mus o e us e oo a e o e mus o ake si es u ess o e is a e o o so ei e i e a k e cuses imse o a i g ee o iga e is may seem s a ge o a a om o y maki g a owa ce o c a ce a is o w a u si ce e as a goo e cuse e oes o a e o ask o gi e ess ca o e o oug y a ici a e o co o e O e s ou o y ake Wi ou wai i g o e ea e s e y e akes e i e y o e cusi g si es a io a y o e s ou o ge i o e eyo w a a a ysis imse W a is e au e was o iga e o commi a o w ic ca justify a eyo w a ca acc e i o egi ima e e aki g o e as suc a goo e cuse? a i g " ake si es" rpris parti"] a si es; o e s ou acc e i gua a ee a egi ima e e iscou se i a i g ake si es o " e y as ques io s " e wou us a e e w ic e aki g o si es e parti is o ias is s a e O e wise ig o e cuse imse ecause ese ques io s " ouc oo c ose y" o e ays wi wo s o on se pale de tnots, as we say i e c [o e u o e su ec a i was ecessa y o e a e "c ea " I is ge s ai i wo s i e o e a ks a o o o ai ] y w ic o e u ique se e ce w ic is a o a iece o e ca o e w a e ea u e s a s a wo s i is case a e simu ac a mo ey wi ou au is I " aki g si es" o i aki g si es o " e y as ques io s"? a ue— e a ue o cou e ei — a is wi ou go ese es o O e i s as e ee i g a i is iew a socio ogis a eo e icia wi ou e co es o e acc e i i g a ue y e cusi g imse o a sc o a gui e y a i ci e o o ec i i y a eu a i y s ou a i g ee o ige o ake si es o e y as ques io s Mauss e - o ake si es s ou o e involved o committed [e gage] e cuses imse o o a i g gi e o is aki g o si es a is o e s ou o gi e a y token [gage] i e e a e o i e o em I iscou se a e ai s is aki g o si es a ki o i ucia y gua - is sce e e s ou o occu y a osi io (take a osi io as o e a ee e as o ee a e o acc e i su icie y e sig s e as says i o e o y o wi o wi is case as i e o ma i e i ea gi e o is aki g o si es e e cuses imse e e o e o seem- o w oe e wou s eak scie i ica y— o i s a ce o e gift— i g o ake e isk o gi i g us a ki o cou e ei mo ey wi ou we e o ei e gi e o ake o o make o o e s scie i ic iscou se co es o i g go ese es a piece o e a a y e s uc u e a iece i e ay [piece] o i e oes o say o cou se a i aki g si es e is u us i ie o e sce e a ac i e ay o a sce e i e ay ( e wo piece a e mo ey e gi es us is cou e ei a e is ayi g us wi i e c w ic mea s iece ay u a so coi as i " iece e wo s (w ic im ies wi ou o e a ue [titre]). o e says a mo aie " cou gi e e i e o a y ossi e iscou se o e gi A e a s i ooks as i — u is is o y a a ea a ce— e is gi i g i ee o a y ossi e gi i o e i o imme ia e y a e o say e us cou e ei mo ey o mo e e ac y a w a is e e wo se (si ce same i g o e wo " i e" ° gi i g someo e mo ey a e o e k ows o e cou e ei is o U ess Mauss is e cusi g imse o o a i g oke wi a so a ece io mo ey a we ca o k ow o e su icie y c e i e o me a i guis ic eu a i y o u i o e is a ese e u o a - ue o cou e ei gua a ee o o si ce e e a io is o es a - i g ake si es w e e e s ou o a e o e so o " e y as is e isi e o e i ia e e wee e e ms o is aki g si es a ques io s " e wou a e go e oo quick y a oo su e icia y e e e o ese " e y as ques io s " e may e ecei i g us e o e ques io s a ese e a wi e ea me a a a ysis a wou may a e e a ea a ce o ei g a e o ecei e us y ecei i g imse ayi g us wi wo s w i e a ki g a o o o ai is is i
20. We a e a em e o a a y e is wo " ike" a u i i ay i a ea i g sum w a e e cuses imse o i is o g o e o mo ey ("A Note o r l d r rd y M. . issa ( a is: Mi ui , 8 , . II, (" ig o I o i ci e co ce i g e use o e o io o mo ey" s ec io ," a s. a i Wi s, i Art & xt, o. 2, Au um 8 . 60, 62 . o Mauss is o o ose o a aki g o si es E e i i oes o 62 I Ch pt r h M dn f E n n 6
look that way, we can verify that The Gift, from beginning to end, is change. And first of all by reason or by the principle of reason: It is one long taking of sides, a continuous involvement [engagement And also necessary to render an account, it is also necessary to give con- it cannot be otherwise. A discourse on the gift, a treatise on the gift sciously and conscientiously. It is necessary to answer for [repondre] must and can only be part or party [partie prenante ou parti prisj in the gift, the given, and the call to giving. It is necessary to answer to the field it describes, analyzes, defines. That is why, that is the way it and answer for it. One must be responsible for what one gives and in which, that is the very thing he must, he owes, he ought to [il doit]: He what one receives. is first of all and from the first indebted. The theoretical and suppos- Whence a series of "il faut" worked over, as you will hear, by this edly constative dimension of an essay on the gift is a priori a piece, contradiction, sometimes going so far as to take the most ingenuous only a part, a part and a party, a moment of a performative, prescrip- and naively hypocritical form, which is also the most inconsistent and tive, and normative operation that gives or takes, indebts itself, gives incoherent, betraying thereby Mauss's predicament when he tries to and takes, refuses to give or accepts to give—or does both at the same define the right rule, the right economy: between economy and non- time according to a necessity that we will come back to. But in every economy, in the "not too much," "neither too much this nor too case, this discursive gesture is from the outset an example of that much that," "a good but moderate blend of reality and the ideal." In about which it claims to be speaking. It is part of the whole, it belongs this long litany of "ii faut," we will also underscore, among other [appartient ] to the whole process, it is part of it even as it claims to things, the words "to state," "revolution," and "return." designate only an object of that process or a part of a set that would be dominated by its discourse. Thus the mass of prescriptive (ethical, But it is not enough to state the fact. One must [il faut] deduce moral, juridical, political) "il faut" (it is necessary, one must, one practice from it, and a moral precept. It is not sufficient to say should, one ought to and so forth) that are unleashed in the last chap- that law is in the process of ridding itself of a few abstractions ter titled "Conclusion" and especially in its first subchapter ("Moral such as the distinction between real law and personal law; or Conclusions"). These "il faut" accumulate according to a regular law. that it is intent on adding other rights to the cold-hearted law Not that the "il faut" are lacking before this moral conclusion. But of sale and payment for services. One must [II faut] also say that here they are assumed in a declared fashion and are regulated by a this is a salutary revolution. law that may appear strange but that alone can account for the little First of all, we return, as return we must [il faut], to customs sentence I began by quoting. No doubt, as with every "il faut," this of "noble expenditure." It is essential [11 faut] that, as in Anglo- law of the "il faut" is that one must—il faut—go beyond constatation Saxon countries and so many other contemporary societies, and prescribe. One must—il faut—opt for the gift, for generosity, for both primitive and highly civilized ones, that the rich return, noble expenditure, for a practice and a morality of the gift ("il faut freely or by obligation, to considering themselves as the finan- dormer," one must give). One cannot be content to speak of the gift cial guardians, as it were, of their fellow citizens. Among an- and to describe the gift without giving and without saying one must cient civilizations, from which ours has sprung, some had a give, without giving by saying one must give, without giving to think (debtors') jubilee, others liturgies (of duty) such as choregies that one must give but a thinking that would not consist merely in and trierarchies, and syussitia (meals in common), and the thinking but in doing what is called giving, a thinking that would call obligatory expenditure by the aedile and the consular dignitar- upon one to give in the proper sense, that is, to do more than call ies. We should [On devra] go back to laws of this kind. Then upon one to give in the proper sense of the word, but to give beyond there must be [il faut] more care for the individual, his life, his the call, beyond the mere word. health, his education (which is, moreover, a profitable invest- But—because with the gift there is always a "hut"—the contrary is ment), his family, and their future. There must be [II faut] more also necessary: It is necessary [il taut] to limit the excess of the gift good faith, more sensitivity, more generosity in contracts deal- and of generosity, to limit them by economy, profitability, work, ex- ing with hiring of services, the renting of houses, the sale of
64 C a e wo e Ma ess o Eco omic easo 6
vital foodstuffs. And t ll nd d b n r [il faudra Bien] to pologist tends toward this wisdom, this policy, this morality of the find a way to limit the rewards of speculation and interest. d r t and of the happy medium. And as we have just suggested, However, the individual t work hi faut tr but it should be said in Mauss's favor perhaps, this "happy medium" v ll ]. t [il faut] be made to rely upon himself rather is, moreover, as impossible, as untenable, and as inaccessible as the than upon others. On the other hand, h ? t [il faut] defend two extremes, just as the role of Sancho Panza is as unlivable as that his interests, both personally and as a member of a group. Over- of Don Quixote. generosity and communism would be as harmful to himself 3. Mauss repeatedly says that one must r t rn t —. Return to and to society as the egoism of our contemporaries and the in- what? This "returning" is not a regression but a revolution. Analo- dividualism of our laws. In the M h bh r t a malevolent genie gous to the natural revolution of the Earth around the Sun, of the of the woods explains to a Brahmin who gave away too much, absolute sun at its high noon (and this is why we began by making and too injudiciously: "That is why you are thin and pale." the question of the gift turn around a Sun-King), it would bring about The life of the monk and the life of a Shylock t b [doivent] a return to man's nature, to that "eternal morality" ("This morality is equally shunned. This new morality will surely consist of a eternal," Mauss will write further on), to that "bedrock" which has d b t d r t bl nd f r l t nd th d l. (Pp. 68-69) remained closest to the surface in those societies said to be "the least advanced that we can imagine"—those societies that have been the A few remarks, since perhaps not everything goes without saying object of h G ft, its particular but also obviously x pl r object in upon first encountering these declarations: Mauss's eyes. They offer the example of a natural—and thus univer- 1. First of all, it would be wrong to consider these "Moral Conclu- sal—structure of this set in motion by the gift. That description sions" (in a final chapter that is itself titled "Conclusion") as a moral ought to hold true beyond those societies. To be sure, Mauss does not epilogue external to the work, as a taking sides that could be harm- d r tl extend his analysis to "evolved" societies, but by way of the lessly dissociated from the work that goes before. These axiomatics axis of a certain historicity and a certain exemplarity, with the ethico- were at work in ll the preceding analyses. They provided the concep- political movement of the "one must return . . . ," he assures a revo- tual material, the instruments of analysis, the theoretical organization lutionary circulation to his discourse. We must return to the x pl of the discourse. given us by those "least advanced societies" that are closer to "bed- 2. It would be rather thoughtless to laugh at the often indecent rock." We must return to the example they give us concerning the mediocrity of the mediating desire, at this median, measured, mea- gift. "Thus we can and we ought to return to the archaic and to the suring morality, this rule of the compromise and of the "good but elemental," says Mauss. moderate blend of reality and the ideal." The moderation of this d r t signals perhaps the most difficult task. Better—or worse—it We will rediscover motives for living and acting that are still announces perhaps a sort of paradoxical h br , the h br of the right prevalent in many societies and classes: the joy of public giving; measure (who ever dares to fix the right measure?) and even that the delight in generous expenditure on the arts; the pleasure in vocation of the impossible to which all responsibility and every effec- hospitality and in private and public festival. Social security, tive decision has to answer. What is recommended is not just any the solicitude of the mutuality, of the cooperative, of the profes- compromise; it is the good one, the right one. Now, from his reflec- sional group, of all those legal entities upon which English law tion and his inquiry into the gift, Mauss has learned that the p r gift bestows the name of "Friendly Societies"—all are of greater or the gift that is t d, the excess of generosity of the gift—in value than the mere personal security that the lord guaranteed which the pure and good gift would consist—turns into the bad; it is to his tenant, better than the mean life afforded by the daily even the worst. The best becomes the worst. It is because he has wage set by management, and even better than capitalist sav- understood this turnabout to be the law of the gift that the anthro- ing—which is only based on a changing form of credit. (Ibid.) 66 Ch pt r h M dn f E n n 6
We will find a surer guide back to this archaic originarity, which that, once again as epiloguing epigraph, comes to close the "Moral we have left behind or allowed to become perverted, in a non-Marxist Conclusions": socialism, a liberal anti-capitalism or anti-mercantilism. That is the morality or the politics that organizes the structure, even the theo- "Ko Maru kai atu retical telos, of this essay. As for the formal characteristic of this pro- Ko Maru kai mai found identity between the theoretical and the ethical, we could Ka ngohe ngohe" invoke a Platonic or Aristotelian tradition. However, as for its con- "Give as much as you take, all shall be very well." (P. 69) tent, one glimpses rather a Rousseauist schema. This is not only the model that will soon be reclaimed by the very one who introduces, In a note to the translation, Mauss clarifies as follows: "Rev. Taylor, not without formulating a few admiring criticisms, Mauss's essay, Te Ika a Maui, Old New Zealand (p. 130, proverb 42), translates very namely Levi-Strauss; it is already Mauss's model, even if he does not briefly as 'give as well as take and all will be right,' but the literal refer to it as explicitly as Levi-Strauss does. translation is probably as follows: 'As much as Maru gives, so much This question of the natural or exemplary universality of.the "bed- Maru takes, and this is good, good' (Maru is the god of war and rock" and the (inductive or reflexive) extension of Mauss's analyses justice)." is formulated or resolved in his very language. A question of restitu- The equivalence of the taken and the given is posed, it is a thesis tion: The anthropologist proposes to give back and to come back in a and a theme. It happens to be posed as the moral, ethical, and politi- circular manner to the good example, to return to the good inheri- cal rule: the rule of what there is but also of what is necessary [de ce tance that archaic societies have given or rather bequeathed us. The qu'il faut], of what there must he [de ce au'il doit y avoir]. The law of inheritance that is thus passed down is nothing other, finally, than what happens implies an imperative: "give as much as you take." The nature. It is nature that gives, and one must show oneself worthy of original text has a descriptive form and not, precisely, an imperative this gift. One must take and learn [ prendre et apprendre] the gift of one; yet the statement is followed by a positive evaluation that trans- nature. From giving nature, one must learn to give, in a manner that forms natural necessity into a good thing: "As much as Maru [god of is both generous and ordered; and by giving as nature says one must war and justice] gives, so much Maru takes, and this is good." The logic give, one will give it back its due, one will show oneself to be worthy, of the utterance remains complex. By posing the equivalence between one will mark the right equivalence. This equivalence (whose natu- what the god gives and what he takes, by posing this equivalence as ralist law we will find staged once again in "Counterfeit Money") is "good," one affirms the excess of the gift; one lets the gift overflow. nothing other that that of the giving-returning or of the giving-taking. The equivalence given by Maru or that he gives by his example is It is the logic of exchange or the symbolics of restitution—or one could good and this goodness of the given equivalence is in excess over the also say of the re-institution—of nature, beyond the oppositon nature/ equivalence itself. It will thus be necessary to restore, reconstitute, culture, phusisinomos, or phusisithesis, and so forth. give back, restitute the equilibrium by following the example, by re- Archaic society, the archaic, or the originary in general can be re- flecting it in imitation. We are not through with this "logic," and what placed by anything whatsoever (by X or by Chi), by nature, the mother, is more one is never through with it. father, creator, supreme being, prime mover, logos, masculine or The schema of exemplarity is all the more significant in this precise feminine possessor of the phallus: One will always find again the same place in that it poses the equivalence of the giving and taking, of the schema, one will find (oneself) back there all the time—in a circular given and the taken, but on the basis of their opposition or at least manner. And it is by setting out from the question of the "giving- their distinction. To say that one must reach equivalence and that taking" or the "giving-returning" that one accedes to all the instances equivalence is good is to recall that it is not simply given and that giv- we have just enumerated or piled up. Now, this equivalence of giving- ing is not taking. There is at the outset neither real equivalence nor taking is precisely stated in the form of a "beautiful Maori proverb" semantic equivalence: To give does not mean to take—on the contrary! 68 I Ch pt r e Ma ess o E n n I 6
But like the il taut, the on doit Lone must, one ought, one owes]— of Benveniste, "Gift and Exchange in I o-Eu o ea oca u a y " which, along with debt and duty, supposes an inequality—regulates is pair of texts will lead us back to the excuses presented by Mauss itself according to an "it is thus," there is [il y a] equivalence; this is a and then to the forgiveness refused by one of the two friends in Bau- natural law of nature, a necessity. One must therefore think this delaire's "Counterfeit Money." equivalence of equivalence and non-equivalence. Any discourse on The same unrest will never quiet down, that of the gift as well as
this problematic must then presuppose a clarity, if possible and even that of forgiveness. Ought they not—but beyond duty and debt 3-- before taking sides, concerning the values of "giving" and "taking," concerning their possible opposition or their equivalence, whether real or semantic. Now, Mauss makes a brief allusion to the fact that, in certain languages, notably in Papuan and Melanesian, there is a e e y ey say some i g a ou e Gift-gift, e oiso e gi o w ic egacies "one single term to designate buying and selling, lending and bor- a e ma e a icu a y ose e em a y egacies a a e i e ec ua egacies gi s i sum w ose oiso a mos e e ai s o ca o e cou e - oiso w ic is e- rowing," in the words of Holmes who has studied these tribes and se e i e guise o e cou e -gi ( es i u io i u e ce e a io comme a y according to whom operations that are "opposites are expressed by c i ica ea i g " e so a i e e a io " A w e a i a y says o a "i e - the same word" (p. 32). This concerns only the opposition of selling e a io " w ic a i e i o o e s o e o e om w om e i e i s a i is a and buying (and not in general that of giving and taking). Mauss " e y e so a i e e a io " o e may sus ec a e e is mo e e e a a is- notes that the uncertainty of this verbal opposition "selling/buying" ag eeme o ese a io some e om is su e y ei g is i e ike a cou e - oiso i i s u i e o y o is i u e o a i u e o is a ea y e omous i u e a is not specific to the societies of the Pacific; it is present in Chinese was e i e e a io i ques io o a ea really esu s o a ways u e e is where only a tonal difference distinguishes the two monosyllables a w ic some imes—im essi e imprimatur, mu e ous e i y o aca emic o i e- that designate the purchase as well as the sale; and in our ordinary ess mask o e mo ua y mask— i e a y o ows ea " os sc i um— u i g e language, the word "sale" ["verde] covers the sale as well as the pur- i i g o is o ume Ma ce Mauss ie e ea e wi i i M C au e e i- chase. This seems rather careless on Mauss's part: Although the word S auss s i o uc io a im essi e image o e i e aus i e wea o e i e ec- verde can cover a chain of operations of which purchase is one link, ua egacy equea e y is g ea sc o a as we as a e y e so a i e e a io o is wo k Geo ges Gu i c Paris, 12 April 1950." there is no ambiguity in ordinary language regarding the opposition 22. L'Annee sociologique, o 195 ; e i e i Problemes de linguistique generale between selling and buying, but that little matters here. What matters ( a is Ga ima 19 ; Problems in General Linguistics, a s Ma y E i a e Meek more is this possibility of an effacement, inside and outside of lan- (Co a Ga es a U i e si y o Miami ess 1971 guage, of the opposition in general, and singularly of the opposition 3 A o e o m o e same a o ia is ought-to without owing, duty without duty between giving and taking. There would be, there should be an [ e oi sa s e oi esc i es a e gi o o y owes o i g emai s o eig o e ci c e o e e u mus o answer to i s ow esse ce mus o e e e w a equivalence between what one gives and what one takes, between i as o e ame y a gi O e imme se ques io (a o ce e ymo ogica sema ic the given and the taken, but also between the meaning of giving and i oso ica a so o o w a oes o oes o i k u y o e we wi e e the meaning of taking. This is the logical lever of two, almost con- o o y o e we -k ow e s o ie sc e ei egge a so o u c ose o temporary texts that each have a very different relation to the essay ome o e a a yses o Emi e e e is e (Le vocabulaire des institutions europêennes The Gift. I mean first The Introduction to the Work of Marcel Mauss, [ a is Mi ui 19 91 o 1 c a 1 " e em u e e e " a c a 17 "G a ui e e eco aissa ce " 1 1 C as we C a es Ma amou s a mi a e " ese a- by Levi-Strauss. It opens the 1950 volume of Sociologic et Anthropologic io " o e e y ic co i u io s i c u i g is ow (" e e e e oi a s e oca- in which Mauss's essay was reprinted. One should remember that u ai e sa sc i e a s a e see a ma ique" co ec e i Lien de vie, noeud model, Mauss died during the printing of this volume. ' The other text is that Les representations de la dette en Chine, au lawn et dans le monde indict' ( a is E ESS 19 e ques io o e " a se mo ey o a ue sac i ice" is e oke e e i e a io o " es Mo aies e a eso e ie e a o io e es i o ame a " y ou C i - 1 is ac is eca e i e os sc i um (a o ce e ao i a y a a y co - a g ( 1 C aussi C a es Ma amou " a eo ogie e a e e a s e Ama - e io a a Geo ges Gu i c w o was e i ec o o e co ec io a o esso is e " i Purusartha " a e e" ( a is E ESS 19 a e So o e a s o 1 A i 195 o e o ewo a e Se em e 19 9 e ese ques io s a e a so ee a oac e i The Post Card, o a y a e egi - se e a i es o is os sc i um ese e o e quo e I ei as io e a s i - i g o " o S ecu a e—o eu — ( 7 i O e i issocia e ques io 0 C a e wo deprive themselves o a y secu i y agai s e cou e ei o a y mis- us ega i g cou e ei mo ey so as o ese e e c a ce o ei g w a ey ought to be, u oug o e eyo u y a e ? A gi a wou c aim o co o mo ey a ese e i se om a y simu ac um wi a s i e a gi o a ea y a ca cu a io c i gi g o eca i g o e— aï e y some imes wi au o i y— o e eassu i g is i c io e wee e a u a a e a i icia e au e ic a e i au e ic e o igi a y a e e i e o o owe ?
o e e is i Ma o eu o i s i k o e " es o ime" o e gi e c Gifts, "C nt rf t M n " I: 31 / t f b ( d l r , nt r f M d rn f
o e as o e o o e s gua o ecog i e e cou e ei mo ey gi e y a ie
" i au ie i e su ses ga es ou eco ai e a ausse mo aie que o e u ami " o o e e a ac Splendeurs et miseres des courtistitzes, i a c a e i e "Ce que c es que es i es" (W a os i u es A e om a I "Comme aime es i es" ( ow os i u es o e O e s ou eca a eas e imme ia e co e o is wa i g a a so s eaks a ou e " i e - a y c i ic o o ay" Wome w o e e i e a Es e a e so io e y e u- ia e eac a a so u e i i e e ce co ce i g me s e e a a - ea a ce ey a e o u ike e i e a y c i ic o o ay w o i se e a ways ca e com a e o em a w o a ai s o a o ou ack o co ce wi e o mu as o a e as ea so ma y wo ks e sees so ma y o em ass y e as su e e oug so ma y c ima es e as see so ma y ays e as w i e so ma y a ic es wi ou sayi g w a e i ks w i e e ayi g so o e e cause o a i a o o is ie s i s a is e mi ies a e eac es a s a e o isgus wi e e y i g a ye e co i ues o u ge I wou ake a mi ac e o is w i e o o uce a wo k us as u e a o e o e ema s a o e mi ac e e o e i ca owe i e ea o a
1 a is Gamie 19 p. 4 .
2 Oui e ee "Cou ie ei Mo ey" I I
cou esa . e o e a e ma e s o is ies , w o a ea e o I is ntr d t n t t r W r f M r l M , 2 e i S auss i si ua es a e s e e ou o a ai i g y u a a , seeme so os i e o e a isc ee a es ec u c i ique. E e i o e su oses a i oes oo gi , o w om a ea a ce cou e i e, a s e oug s e o ake away wi o e a w a i gi es wi e o e , is c i ique was ess e o ec o some so ici u e a e ecessa y su ec o may s i oiso e i a ge e osi y o e i u e. A w a e i some o . Wi ou ei g a e o is i guis e wee smoo a ki g S auss u s i ques io Inl t n ] wi is ig y am i a e se i e es a e a m o c a i y, o o e as o e o o e s gua o ecog i e e cou e ei mo ey gi e y a ie , s e e as i s e we e ei g e i e c aws o a mo s ous a e ocious i a 2. a s. e ici y ake ( o o : ou e ge & Kega au , 8 e quo e as sages om is a s a io wi occasio a y e mo i ie . We wi e e e e i a swe ow o e a e a i g soa e o e ea o a o g ime i i ec io e ea i g o ose o is i o uc io i Wr t n nd ff r n , e ig , s e sai ese wo s i a oice i e wi a a m: "I oug o e . 40 • 2 8 . ies s we e su ose o co so e us, a you a e ki i g me " . o e am e: eyo is imme ia e co e , o e s ou a so ea e sce e i w ic e e e o u io a y c a ac e o h Gi is a i se s us o a a . e ac s igu es o o gi e ess, o ime e e e ("I i we e o y is mo ey e s e i u s o wa a e o ew isco e ies. wo yea s e o e (. . .] So w a is u e wi e e is ime, is o ce .. ." , o e "cu e i ma " w o e r o e e ao i a y owe o ose iso e e ages o e essay, "ca ose is sig agai i s uck y a ig a is oo ig ," o " ea s," a w ic ook a i e as i ey a e s i i e a s age, wi ei e y o o e "Gi e i o me " a Es e says o e ies w e aski g im i ac u a osi io o im essio is ic o a io s a (usua y com esse i o a c i i o a e e , a a e a is e i is e : "S e g a e e ma , co e e is ca a a a us a wa s e e i s i e e u i io , w ic ga e s Ame ica , a wi kisses s e ma e use o a e ki e is e ices o e ca esses, I ia , Ce ic, G eek o Ocea ia e e e ces seemi g y a a a y, a ye h G ft wi ou ee i g e u i a sai y ou ou i g o g a i u e s e a is e e ea es ames o a ways e e a i g y? ew a e ma age o ea w o e gamu o e emo io s a Ma e a c e esc i e so we w e eca im, sai o im, oug e swee e e ases, a ousa imes o e : i g is i s ea i g o esca es: e ou i g ea , e o i g ea , e G v t t i as ma y i e e o es ... mi oo e wi e im e ious, oug o ye e i a e, ce ai y o ei g Co c usio : " i a y i is A a i u e i o Mo a i y." ese a a ecisi e v nt i e e o u io o scie ce. e ies , as ame a a i g gi e i o is s ow o a ec io , W a a e e i a essay, o e i s t i e is o y o e o ogica i ki g, was a a e o was ma e o a sce em i ica o se a io a us e Es e away s a y a s e sa ow , as ame as we , o f r t t , e socia ceases o e o g o e e sai o e : "You a e s i a cou esa ." A e co y u e e e o eac ee e ea i ies. o e omai o u e qua i y—a ec o e, cu iosi y, ma e ia o r l z n esc i io ack i is e . ike c i a as o y o e wis i mi , Es e o o sc o a y com a iso —a ecomes a sys em, amo g w ose a s co i o ake e eyes o e ace o e e w e e e a e was. ec io s, equi a e ces a i e e e e as ec s ca e isco e e . (Intr d t n, . 8
I is i u e, e am i a e ce o w ic sig a s e mos a ica c i icisms a w ic as i s equa o y i e am i a e ce we o e ea ie ( . 68 6 , . 24 i Gu i c s os sc i om, we a e em asi e e wo s v nt, f r t t , a r l z n so as o eca wo ce a ocuses o ou e ec io . e i s , a c assica ques io , co ce s e e e as " i s ime," o o y i e su e a ea a ce, sai o e is o ica , o a i o so ica iscou se o scie i ic co igu a io ( o e am e i e case o Mauss, as e i S auss sugges s , u a so a w ic i i ci e i ks suc a e e o e ossi i i y o a gi , a is, o a i e io o o a i e e io a i e u s e co i uous c ai , e og am, o e eco omy. e seco ocus, a ou "mo a i i g," ecause e i s ques io a ways ge s com ica e , ecise y i Mauss a co a y o w a e i S auss sugges s, y a mo a i a io a i is im ossi e o se a a e—we wi come ack o is— om e "scie i ic" co ce . We wou o e em e o see i is o y a esi ue o o scie i ici y e o e a e some "e is emo ogica eak," u ecise y, a is is w a i e es s us e e i e mos co sis e as io , a o e co 4 I C a e ee "Cou e ei Mo ey" I 175 gesture of filiation is nothing less than the cause or more exactly the peoples who sometimes behave like sociologists. And against this il- thing [chose] itself. His critique tends to eliminate with a wave of the lusion of theory (of spontaneous, subjective, illusory theory in the hand the difficulties regarding the question of the thing. For a logic of sense in which Freud could speak of the "sexual theory" of children), the thing, insofar as it would include the substantial power, the in- against this theoretical projection, whether it be Western or indige- trinsic virtue of the gift and the call for the countergift, Levi-Strauss nous ("indigenous or Western, theory is only ever a theory" [p. 48]), substitutes a logic of relation and exchange which causes all difficul- Levi-Strauss proposes what he calls an "objective" critique that will ties to vanish and even the very value of gift. permit one "to reach the underlying reality." He defines this under- What is the lever of this critique? Precisely the fact that in a given lying reality as an unconscious, more exactly as a set of "uncon- linguistic idiom "antithetical operations are expressed by the same scious mental structures" (p. 49). These unconscious structures can word." Levi-Strauss recalls that Mauss "does not fail to note" this be reached, he tells us, through institutions and "better yet, through fact, but "he does not make as much of it as he should" (p. 49). If he language." And it is in the name of the recourse to the unconscious, had done so, he would not have needed the notion of hail, that virtue of the "objectivist" recourse ("objective" critique) to the unconscious of the thing which carries out the synthesis between two antithetical that he is going to make a search of language, of the treasury of lan- operations. "Hau" is unnecessary to produce the synthesis because, guage and linguistic features so as to find the objectivity that interests according to Levi-Strauss, the antithesis does not exist. This antithe- him and that he thinks is going to protect him from illusory theories. sis would be a kind of phantasm or illusion of ethnographers who "Hau," writes Levi-Strauss, often reflect or reproduce in their theory the theories of indigenous is a product of indigenous reflection; but reality is more con- spicuous in certain linguistic features which Mauss does not fail to note, although he does not make as much of it as he im ica io e wee e ossi i i ies o e e e o iscou se (scie i ic o o o should. "Papuan and Melanesian," he notes, "have one single i e io a o e gi Mo eo e i e mo a i i g o e is i ge e a easy e oug term to designate buying and selling, lending and borrow- o i e i y i ume ous iscou ses a i e e mi e co e s i i some imes e o es ing. Operations that are opposites are expressed by the same e e y i g u mo a i y i se i emai s i icu o say w e e e imi is aw a word." That is ample proof that the operations in question are igo ous a s a imi e wee r l d t a e mo a i i g iscou se o e su - ec o mo a u y as we as e wee o e am e a scie i ic ask e th o scie ce far from "opposite"; that they are just two modes of a selfsame a mo a i y i ge e a Is mo a i y a se om is e oca io o " u y" y mea s reality. We do not need hate to make the synthesis, because the o w ic e i-S auss us i ies is c i icism o Mauss i a a ag a w e e e igu e antithesis does not exist. The synthesis is a subjective illusion o l d n a l d r Ico ui e e co uc eu ei sc i es e e ou i g mome o of ethnographers, and sometimes also of indigenous people e c socio ogy i e a sca e o e omise a a e egacy o Moses? W o who, when reasoning about themselves—as they quite often wi a e ee e G ea awgi e e ea e o is ew scie ce? A w a is e e a io e wee gi aw omise e e a io a agme s? W y is i a e e e do—behave like ethnographers, or more precisely, like sociolo- ike e gi —i e e is a y—ca o gi e e i e ce o i se u o y omise i se ? e gists; that is, as colleagues with whom one may freely confer. us ea When I endeavor to reconstruct Mauss's thinking in this W y i Mauss a a e e ge o ose imme se ossi i i ies ike Moses co - way, without recourse to magical or affective notions (whose uc i g is eo e a e way o e omise a w ose s e o e wou use by Mauss seems to me to be merely residual), some may e e e o ? I am im e e [n nd t ] o seek e easo o om reproach me for drawing him too far in a rationalist direction. a y wis o c i ici e u ou o a u y o o e e mos ui u as ec o is My reply to such a reproach is that Mauss took upon him- i ki g e os o i ia e Mauss mig a e ee e ec e o o uce e self, from the very start of his career, in the Outline of A Gen- we ie -ce u y socia scie ces t tnr Or n : e e a e gui e i es this same effort to understand social life [f l nd t r ] o i u i as o y come o e e ea e i agme e o m eral Theory of Magic, e e mus e some c ucia mo e somew e e a Mauss misse ou (I i as a system of relations, which is the lifeblood of The Gift. 5; em asis a e (Pp. 49-50)
6 C a e ee "Cou e ei Mo ey" I I
By eliminating or moving into a secondary role what he calls "af- In the logic of this discussion, Levi-Strauss thematizes the concept of fective" notions, whose intervention would remain "residual" (and "floating signifier," f "supplementary symbolic content," the appeal everything that is at stake seems to consist here in this residue, that made by linguists to the "zero phoneme" which would come along is, in a remainder that no one knows what to do with), Levi-Strauss to resolve all the contradictions produced when one has recourse to has no trouble privileging the logic of exchange and relation in order primitive notions of hau, wakan, orenda or mana as mysterious forces to eliminate the question of the thing. And let us recall here the prin- inherent in the thing. We have elsewhere insisted on this value of ciple guiding us in this reflection on the gift: To reduce the latter to supplementarity, 4 and it is indeed a question of resorting to a "sup- exchange is quite simply to annul the very possibility of the gift. This plemental symbolic content" (p. 64), to the "distribution of a supple- annulment is perhaps inevitable or fatal. No doubt its possibility must mentary ration" (p. 63), to the addition of a "supplemental quantity" always remain open. Still one has to deal with this annulment, still ( 7 so as to give (the word is Levi-Strauss's) himself "the illusion of one has to render an account of the law of its possibility or its process, squaring his account." The account that has gotten unbalanced (but of what happens or can not happen in the form of the gift, to the gift why? by what? and why must it be "squared"?) is that of a "comple- and by way of the gift; still one must not treat the question of the mentarity"—without "supplementarity"—and of a complementarity thing, of the gift of the thing, and of the thing-gift as a false problem that would condition "the exercise of symbolic thinking." ("That dis- one need merely expose to the fresh air of reason for it to be snuffed tribution of a supplemental ration—if I can express myself thus—is out like a candle or, inversely, for it to dissolve in the transparent light absolutely necessary to ensure that, in total, the available signifier and of an Aufkiiirung of relational logic. the mapped-out signified may remain in the relationship of comple- Since we are interested in legacies and before quoting several more mentarily which is the very condition of the exercise of symbolic think- statements by Levi-Strauss that I will qualify here as exchangist, lin- ing" jp. 63; emphasis added].) The logic of this statement, it seems, guisticist, and structuralist, let us underscore once more the historic can hardly be criticized. Like the supplemental ratio that comes "in importance of the role that such statements played in the formation total" to complete or complement the totality of the whole, it belongs of the paradigm or, if you prefer, of the episteme or the themata of to reason itself, to the rationality of the principle of reason. Without French structuralism in the 60s (all these categories remaining for me criticizing it for a moment, one must note that if it intervenes in the the names of problems rather than secure concepts). In the conven- constitution of the symbolic, it is as the substitution of exchange for tional code of the history of ideas or the history of intellectuals, one gift. In total, there is no gift as concerns reason, not even as concerns would say that the "influence" then being exerted on Lacan and Fou- a practical reason. There is no reason for there ever to be the least cault, Barthes or Althusser, is easy to decipher here: gift. The gift, if there is any, must pass beyond the whole. Before all or after all. Not that it is opposed to reason o to anything whatso- The only way to avoid the dilemma would have been to per- ever—not at all, through and through [du tout, du tout au tout]'—but ceive that the primary, fundamental phenomenon is exchange perhaps it passes them by so that something may come to pass, in- itself, which gets split up into discrete operations in social cluding something like reason, including everything Itout]. life.. .. Here as elsewhere—but here above all—it was neces- sary to apply a precept Mauss himself had already formulated in the essay on magic: "The unity of the whole is even more 4. "S uc u e, Sig a ay i e iscou se o e uma Scie ces," Writing and real than each of the parts." But instead, in The Gift, Mauss Difference, . 422 .. 288 . I a a a ogous se se, emo Gui ie i as iscusse e strives to reconstruct a whole out of parts; and as that is mani- a io a is e a i ism o e i S auss a is ea i g o Mauss. e w i es: " ê i S auss se e e sco e o e osi i e oo q uick y," La route des marts ( a is: festly not possible, he has to add to the mixture a supplemental su s a i is s a e Seui , 80 , . 2. quantity which gives him the illusion of squaring his account. A e a i e y, is as ase cou e a s a e : o a i is opposed o easo This quantity is hau. (P. 47) o o a y i g w a soe e —o e w o e, o e w o e o e w o e . ( a s. .
1 I C a e ee "Cou e ei Mo ey" I
The apparently, elliptically rationalist gesture that attributed to come from "to take." To tell the truth, notes Benveniste, "the problem Mauss the idea that "all social phenomena can be assimilated to lan- seems insoluble if we seek to derive 'take' from 'give' or 'give' from guage" (ibid.) did quite a lot, let us emphasize once more, for the 'take.' But the problem is wrongly put" (p. 272). hegemonic institution of French structuralism as a linguisticism in the Benveniste then proposes to resort to syntax rather than to seman- 60s: "all social phenomena can be assimilated to language" is what tics. DO would "properly" mean, he says, neither give nor take "but Mauss would say according to Levi-Strauss; "the unconscious is struc- either one or the other depending on the construction." Analogy: in tured like a language" is what Lacan will say. English, "to take something from someone" means to take something In responding also, very differently it is true, to this problem of that belongs to someone, prendre quelque chose 0 quelqu'un, whereas equivalence between giving and taking in The Gift, the article that "to take something to someone" means to deliver, to give something Benveniste published at about the same time, "Gift and Exchange to someone. Thus chi in itself would mean only "to take hold" (not to
in Indo-European Vocabulary, " calls Mauss's essay a "now classic" take but, more originally, to take hold) and sometimes one takes hold study. Can what Mauss describes in archaic societies be verified in in order to offer, sometimes in order to keep, each language having the ancient societies of the Indo-European world? That is the ques- made "one of the acceptations prevail at the expense of the other." tion. It is difficult to have access to these ancient societies by reason u in the very logic to which Benveniste resorts, does this variation of the state of "usable documents" and uncertain and imprecise ac- or this syntactic decidability resolve all the problems, even supposing counts in the "evidence." With a gesture that up to a certain point that one could distinguish clearly syntax and semantics in this fashion resembles that of Levi-Strauss in its attention to "unconscious mental and that all the same problems did not return in "to take hold" and structure," Benveniste then proposes to seek the unconscious in lan- in syntactic operators of the type "to," "from," "of," and "for"? This guage. Might there not be in the vocabulary of the Indo-European syntactic decidability can function only against a background of "se- languages facts that are "all the more valuable for not having run the mantic ambivalence," which leaves the problem intact. Benveniste risk of being distorted by conscious interpretations" (p. 271)? Out of seems to recognize this: the very interesting material he then assembles, Benveniste begins It seems, then, that the most characteristic verb for "to give" with that verb from the root do—which means "to give" in "most was marked by a curious semantic ambivalence, the same sort Indo-European languages." But at the heart of this certainty concern- of ambivalence affecting more technical expressions like "buy" ing an assured constant an uneasiness arises when it is established and "sell" in Germanic (Germ. kaufen:verkaufen) or "borrow" that the Hittite verb dri signifies not to give but to take. Since it is dif- and "lend" in Greek (daneizO : daneizomai). "To give" and "to ficult to believe that the Hittite dei is a different verb, one is prompted take" thus proclaim themselves here, in a very ancient phase of to wonder whether the "original meaning" of do was not "to take"; Indo-European, as notions organically linked by their polarity this original meaning would have been maintained in Hittite or even and which were susceptible of the same expression. (Ibid.) in certain composites such as the Indo-Iranian a-da, which means to receive. But that still leaves the question of how "to give" could have How is one to treat e e is i guis ic e ome o ? W a is lan- guage? For one must ask oneself not only what use can be made, what type of necessity can be drawn from this philological analysis, to what " o e ec a ge a s e oca u ai e i o-eu o ee " i r bl tn d l n t type of history and objectivity it belongs, what epistemological prob- generale. e e is e imse e e s o is a ic e (w ic i c u es "a mo e e ai e lems it poses and so forth—all of which are serious questions that a a ysis " e w i es "o e oca u a y o e gi — i C a e 5 o Vocabulaire des Benveniste does not address in this article. Perhaps first of all, how- n t t t n nd r p nn , ( 7 i e "Gi a E c a ge " I is e e e ess e ever, must ask oneself, in a manner that is in some way abso- case a the g ea ic ess o is c a e as we as o e wo succee i g o es (" o - one e e e ece oi " a " os i a i e" is o a oge e ake u i e a ic e we lutely preliminary: What is the relation between a language and a e co si e i g e e giving-taking in general? The definition of language, of a language, as 80 C a e ee "Cou e ei Mo ey" I 8
we as o e e i ge e a ca o e o me wi ou a ce ai e- must not o y ask o ese i some i g c ose o a u ous wo e a io o e gi o gi i g- aki g a so o a i g ee i o e ow it is ossi e a o gi e a /o o ake a e sai is way o a [ n ] e e i a a ce I ou e a io o a guage o e am e o • way n a a guage u o e mus a so emem e i s o a a a - ose a guages ca e a u a o ma e ia o i ioms we a e i a - guage is as we a e ome o o gi -cou e gi o gi i g- aki g- a ce i o e i a e a io a bl us o i k e gi a o a o e c a ge A e i icu ies o omi a io o w i i g i e e ea e e is e s ow e ms " e e y ame o gi i e o m oa se se a e a so i icu ies o se - ami g o se -w i i g [se n w ic is e mos co s a oug ou mos o e I o-Eu o ea r, É r r ]. E e y i g sai i a guage a e e y i g w i e a guages" ( 73 a i is a ma e e e o o y ce ai a guages a ou gi i g- aki g i ge e a pr r ld f ld b o a guage a a o y "mos o e I o-Eu o ea a guages " a d is " o e w i i g as gi i g- aki g Gi i g ld b , d n o aki g o y e am e o is" ( 7 a ( om w ic comes n , a aki g o gi i g u is wou a so come ack o o i se e aw ecise y ik? p rt r i e c sig i ies o o gi e a o e o o y o a guage o w i i g u owa e e i ge e a o a e a s a e (i i —a o is em asi es s i u e e u ge cy eyo i s i guis ic o ogoce ic c osu e eyo i s a ow o o a o iga io E e e o e s eaki g o some gi o i isio [p r commo mea i g W a e oes e "come" o is "come- ack" t ] o a guages i is o i sig i ica a o e s eaks o a guage mea ? a is o e o e ques io s owa w ic we a e ea i g I as a gi e as a sys em a is ecessa i y e e e o e us a we wi o sim i y i gs; i wi e ace o i agi a e a e o e s a ecei e om ou o a u ame a assi i y ( e i iom—o e ia- e imi s a wi e ou e e ess y o o y e sema ic am i a- ec [M nd rt]— ei egge s eaki g o e ei is o o y e ce o w ic e e is e s eaks u a so e am i a e ce o e gi e ma e a o gue u a so i ee i e i s ace e mo e o as goo nd a as gi a oiso (G ft ft . e o gue a guage gi es o e o i k u i a so s ea s s i i s A e d , e e is e eca s o e e am es " o ake " i Ge ma away om us w is e s o us [ ll n ffl ], a wi aws e n n (Go ic n h n, is see o e a e o e G eek n n wi es o si i i y a i seems o i augu a e; i ca ies o e o e y o 0 w ic we ega Eac o e G eek ou s a we a s a e y gi o ou ow oug s e e e o e we a e a o ia e em We wi ese o w ic e e a e a eas i e (d , d , & r n, r , M n , sim y eca is ecessa y a we -k ow sc ema i s i ci e a u c io i a e y si gu a as io A o g e way e e is e quo es i s sco e w ic o ou e e s a eyo a guage i e s ic a assage om e p (1 5a 1 i w ic A is o e s eaks o e se se o e s oke i iom o a e ua i y i ge e a dt r as a d n p d t , a gi a o o ce wou o equi e es- e uce o i s a es o ma i y e s uc u a i ci e o is com- i u io e im o a ce o is a usi e ci a io is i u eyo ica io w ic is su eme a y a o igi a y o igi a i y su e- measu e I a ou ces e i k e wee e eco omy o e o e me a y is a a sema ic am i a e ce a e sy ac ico-sema ic a o ia io e o ia io e a o ia io a e comi g o o em o gi i g- aki g a e o si ua e o y wi i a guage e comi g- ack o e e e as es i u io o eyo es i u io i e wo s o a guage o e e eme s o a e ua sys em a guage is Er n o i e Ent n . 8 a so a e am e o i as is a y e ua e e mi a io I s o o e But let us stay a w i e wi e e eme i icu y o is equi a e ce Or this am i a e ce o e gi i g- aki g I gi i g is o sim y e co a y o some i g o e a aki g i e gi is o o a y o - . " ie Mu a is ic o ie S ac e e Mu e , so e ug eic u u o eig o aki g i i is o e e co a y o i e we a e o ake o ie Mu e e S ac e," "S ac e u eima ," i r W nd l, t hr ft z r n 0 e gi h G ft is o com ica e o y ecause i is a so a essay o G b rt t v n C. j. r h rdt (Mu ic , 6 . C . as we b , r fr nd ( u i ge : eske, . e e ei egge i e oga e ia ec (M nd rt as e "sec e sou ce" o e e y e e o e a guage, e o igi om w ic we a e gi e e e y i g 8. i ke o a o e gi , o e b t, o e e e a o e a o ia io , is a is s e e e y e s i i o e a guage (d r Spr h t . "W a oes e s i i o o ema ic o sym o ic es i u io is e e o e , i a icu a a ou ei egge , a au e ic a guage co cea ?" ("Was i g e Geis ei e ec e S ac e?" ( . . oug ou h r th n nt n , o a y . 20 . 28 . 82 C a e ee "Cou e ei Mo ey" I
e "wo " a e a e " i g" "gi " us im yi g as we a e Mo ey"—we a e a oac i g i s ow y—says e ca o o gi e is a ea y sugges e i isi e quo a io ma ks i e i e w ic es- ie ig a e a e wo "gi " is a ways ci e me io e u ow e e I a e s mo eo e (a i sayi g "i a e s" o e a ways sim- use e com ica io oes o e e o y o a wo co ce i g i ies i gs a i e u we wi come ack o e mea i g o ese w ic i is u c ea u e w a co i io s i a y o e cou e e a a e y a ea o y e cou e s w e we o ow e s o s ake y ig u y use i The Gift com ica es i se gets taken up [se A e ] i "Cou e ei Mo ey" a Mauss s se e ce is e as o a o g o e i s ow i e a com ica io gi i g i se o e a essay o e gi o e o e o ges o e essay a a o e a ea s a i e w ic i is a so i u a essay o aki g E e oug i is gi e to be o o a o e is a oge e u usua e i e o is o e is "A Note o as a essay o e gi i ca e ake as a essay o aki g O ye i ci e co ce i g e use o e o io o mo ey " e o e ea - agai e e oug i akes i se o a essay o e gi i gi es i se i g is i e e e s o e ee ages (1 -1 a es o s o e i ac i u as a essay o aki g We o k ow i we s ou o ec io s o ose w o wou ike o e ai e s ic se se o e o- ake i o w a i akes i se o e o as i gi es i se o o w a i io o mo ey a e wo "mo ey " a a e same ime i k e gi es i se si ce w a i gi es o e o i k o o ea is a gi i g mea i g o "eco omic a ue" o e eme ge ce o mo ey i e s ic mus e equi a e o aki g W ic oes o mea " o ake o ese se se a is o e mome w e " ecious i gs emse es o " a " o gi e o ese o " come ow —o come ack— o e i i sic o ms o wea a sig s o ic es " we quo e Mauss "we e same i g ea y ma e i o cu e cy [nionnayees], a is es e [till-6es], e- I o e wo s w a we o o ye k ow is w e e we s ou e so a i e e ac e om a e a io s i s wi a y ega e i y ake i s i e o ega e e [argent comptantj. w e e co ec i e o i i i ua o e a e s a e a mi s em o as we a e ema ke a is comes ow o comes ack o u e ques io ose i is way " co i ues Mauss "co ce s e title, o e ques io o e i e as ques io o c e i a o e o y e a i a y imi a mus e ace o e use o e wo i e as ques io o cou e ei mo ey I my iew o e o y e i es i is way a seco y e o mo ey— is e y o g em o i i g e ou as wi e a s e eca e was ou ow " su ose o e ai a i e ase o Mauss s e e cuses imse o is o e ies o us i y e e e sio o e o io o mo ey a a i g ee o ige o ake si es o e y as ques io s A so as a ue ea i g e as a title "A Note o i ci e co ce i g e use o e cuse is aki g si es i co i io s w ic a e suc a e ca o o e o io o mo ey " i ea s wi e e y title o mo ey a gi e imse e mea s o us i y imse o a y e a s " u ey wi e ques io o w e e mo ey mus e as o e says i e c ouc e y c ose y u o ou su ec a i was ecessa y o e c ea " tffree, i a e 9— and i a e y e S a e—i o e o ea i s i e as e e e o e assumes o is ow accou e aki g o si es a e mo ey E e y i g u s a ou is a ue o i e a e i e o i o eme [!'engagement]. u e as e wi w ic si es a e ee a ue I sum i is a ma e o k owi g w e o e is ig o (e i e ake mus e us i ie com e sa e gua a ee e i o eme o us i ie i ami g money, true money i o osi io o o counter- mus e a io a i e o s o e u y a accou o a logos. O e mus feit money u o non-money. Mauss ca s mo ey w a is o ec o s say e ai i wi goo easo s ("i was ecessa y o make i gs c ea " is o ue mo ey a e c aims a i is i u ue mo ey a i a " ey we e oo c ose y e a e o ou su ec " ey we e oo is u y au e ic mo ey a i g e ig o e i e o ue mo ey c ose y e a e so o e a o ake si es a o emai i i e e ; e e i i is o i a e o i e e e e ess is a e sa ies wou u i aki g si es o e a o e easo a e I is e sys em o o say a is o - ue mo ey is cou e ei mo ey ca cu a e a o e cessi e ge e osi y o e o i a e gi o e goo e e wee ea i y a e i ea se o i e "Mo a Co - . I.e., es e " o asce ai e amou o co s i ue i a mi u e," om e c usio s"; i is is "eco omic a a ise " is ges u e w ic co sis s e c "t tr , i e, qua i ica io , i e ess o a oye go o si e " (OE . I e c , o wi i g " a a ise eco omica y" a e a a o o "Cou e ei a t tr is a so a s ock, o , o secu i y. ( a s.
84 I C a e ee "Cou e ei Mo ey" I 8
So w a e is cou e ei mo ey? W e is e e cou e ei the co e io a e i e does not belong to the narrative is- mo ey? W e oes o e gi e cou e ei mo ey? A w a is gi e cou se e a a o is o e au o o e i e e au o is au e- u e is i e counterfeit money? Cou e ei mo ey mus e taken ai e; e au o su ose o e ea is e au o o e ook W ic o ue mo ey a o a i mus give itself o co ec y i e oes o mea o a a a e i e w ic oes o e o g o e mo ey a a i e ic io o o e a a i e mome o e ic io is o eig is was a o g i o uc io wi ma y e ou s o a chef d'oeuvre o a y a a ic io I is as ic i e as ee y c ose o invented y au e ai e A ou is e y s o " eci " ea i g e i e "Cou - y e au o ( u is e s o i a i y co si e a ea au o s ca e ei Mo ey " we wi say e y i e a i s We a e aye o a o c oose ei i e a a ese a e a o e ook o e s o y e e o ime wi i si ce e egi i g o ese ec u es a we a e goi g i e i e is o a e eme a iece omoge eous wi e es o e o ea i o ce agai We wi ake i a i s wo a I wou say ook O e may a so say a ou e i e o e ook w a we a e sai a mos wo o wo First of all [ a o ] we wi sim y skim i s a ou e i e o is ie a a i e e e oug i o y e i es a borders, w a is gi e as e ame a e sys em o e ges ma gi s sma iece o i imi s ose o a a a i e a esem es i ma y o i s ea u es oe s So w a ca "Cou e ei Mo ey " e i e "Cou e ei Mo ey" " u oi e e e " 1 Amo g a ese o e o ami g ea u es mea ? W a oes i gi e i se o a is w a oes i make i se ou e e is e o e e i s wo e i e e i e is " a ausse mo - o e? ow ca o s ou we ake i ? I s ace a i s s uc u e as a aie " "Cou e ei Mo ey " a i s s uc u e is qui e com e As i e ea e a g ea i e e mi a io a a g ea ossi i i y o simu ac a i e i oes o o m a se e ce i oes o say o w a i e e s a a o e e ie ecise y o counterfeit money. e i e ca mea — i s e e e ia ai as we as i s e e e emai s e a i e y u e e - a is is generally how it is understood—naively: Here is a story mi e e e e e ia s uc u e o a i e is a ways e y icky e e about counterfeit money, u e is i e you a e goi g o e o a i is u e s oo co e io a y a e i e oes o e o g o e s o y i w ic i is a ques io o cou e ei mo ey A a mome a a i e i oes o co s i u e a e eme o e a a io a wi o is commo imme ia e ea i g a is aci i a e y so ma y o ow I is o o e o e se e ces a e a a o wi u e e es a is e a so i co e io s e i e "Cou e ei Mo ey" is w o e a a i e is si ua e i e oice o a a a o w o says I. is a ea y i i e e aye is ace I as wo e e e s (1 w a is I akes part i what e ecou s ayi g a o e i i e i sc i es ca e cou e ei mo ey a ( is e here, is s o y o cou e ei i o es i ks o i e s imse e e oug a ie o ie s i mo ey I as wo e e e s a o i e i —o i a e i as o e i- ( e a ways says "my ie " o e o e c a ac e ame y e o e a es mo ey a gua a ees i o e is cou e ei mo ey i se e w o is goi g o gi e cou e ei mo ey for ue u e a a o is o e is e a a i e a as cou e ei mo ey as i s e e e o o au e ai e o cou se a i goes wi ou sayi g acco i g o a a e co e is s o y a ou cou e ei mo ey is i s i i- sio e e ge e s ma y o e e isce ces i ua y o i i i y o i is i e is ou e i i e e s a e same ime o e i g a o 0. O e i e, as we as i ge e a o e es o a e o e s o e e , we o ce agai e e o ea ie wo ks, o a y o The Truth in Painting, The Post Card (i e a a i e o e e o e a a i e w a is e co seque ce? a icu a " e ac eu e a e i ê" , Parages, " ê uges— e a a oi," i f lt d i s o a eca a e i g—as cou e ei mo ey—is o a i g higer ( a is: Mi ui , 8 " e o e e aw," a s. A i a o a i Kafka and the Contem- ike a y o e ; i is a sig a a i co ec y i e sig a sig wi ou porary Critical Performance: Centenary Readings, e . A a U o ( oomi g o , I .: I a ue i o wi ou mea i g e e a a i e is a ic io a a ia a U i e si y ess, 8 . As o e e y imi e u sig i ica a a ogy e wee ic io o ic io a ic io o e su ec of fiction, e e y ic io o "Cou e ei Mo ey" a " e u oi e e e ," ecise y as co ce s e gi , we ic io I is a ic io y au e ai e e i e a w i e y au e- wi come ack o i mo e a o ce. u l t us o e ig away a coi ci e ce a o e wou ike o i k is " i i g" o oe, i o e ca e e say a a ou a coi ci e ce: e ai e u i is a ic io a u s a a a i e o i au e ai e s a com e e e o " e u oi e e e " was u is e o e i s ime i a ou a u i e mou o a ic i e a a o w o is o au e ai e a w ose w ose i e was sim y The Gift. iscou se is o i i ci e assume y e au o e a e the 86 , Ch pt r hr 4 "C nt rf t M n " I I 8 a ways esume au o is o esume o assume e ema ks o cou e ei mo ey " I (I e i es i se a "au o ames" i se u
e a a o is o esume o ake em o is ow accou o as 1 wi ou sayi g so wi ou sayi g I (o e wise i wou o o i i o e says i e c o r nt pt nt, a ace a ue o mo e a o e o o i i mus o say so; a i o e o o o i i wou we a e a e o say i Cou e ei mo ey is e i e o e i e e ( i e- e ic i e a a i e is u o wa (as o - ic i e pp dl soi- ess i e o e i e e i e is e i e o e e u oes i gi e isa ] o - ic i e y a ic i e a a o a is o e w o c aims o i s i e y sayi g I am cou e ei mo ey? o si ce cou e ei o e ic i e i e ic io sig e y au e ai e is a a i e e- mo ey is o y cou e ei o e co i io o o gi i g i s i e cou s e s o y o a ic io o a ic i e mo ey o a mo ey a oes 4 e i e o "Cou e ei Mo ey" is may e cou e ei mo ey o a e a i e i s egi ima e a au e ic i e is "s o ie " e- Cou e ei mo ey is e e h, cou e ei mo ey As soo as i cou e a a e co e ecou s e e w o e e w ic is is w a i is ecog i e h, i ceases o ac as a o e wo a ge a i is e e as e s o y seems o e o y a o e e ame cou e ei mo ey I o y is y ei g a e o e p rh p , w a i is iece o is a ge w o e e sma e is me o ymica y a ge a is i e uci e mo a i y ake i o accou a i asmuc as e e a ge A a mome e i e "Cou e ei Mo ey" ecomes i e may e o g o i i o iga es you I o iga es you i s o a o e i e f th ic i e e I o o ge says o y e e is a s o y o wo e w a mo ey is ue mo ey a se mo ey e a se y ue a cou e ei mo ey u e s o y i e a u e is i se — e a s- e u y a se—a o -mo ey w ic is ei e ue o a se a cou e ei mo ey a ic io a ou w ic o e mig say a e imi so o a y ooki g o oo a wo o c ock e e y i g a e a a o e o e o e a ou w ic I wi say a ew wo s is w a is (w o as e a u a "gi " gi e im y a u e o e "e aus i g ca e e d d t n. y gi i g i o e ema ke e e ica io si u- acu y" o " ooki g o oo a wo o c ock" cou a e sai o e a es e e d t v o d n r mo eme a is aces e e e e cou e ei mo ey o is ie o e i e io s e a i u es o is is o i g i a e a is o e ica e o i g a is o es i e ie o e ca cu a io a a e e c a ges a a e us o oke a e es i a io o is a i e is o e uci e o e e ici e i- y e e e a is ie as imse o oke wi is cou e ei ca io e ame o e e ica ee—o o ee—su ies o mo e mo ey oo o e e ec i e e ica io a e a o ymic ame o e sig- E e y i g a wi e sai n e s o y f cou e ei mo ey (a a o y ( u i ica y i e i ia e y ci i aw e aus s e e ec i e sig- i e s o y o cou e ei mo ey ca e sai o e s o y o e a u e i e e is o e a e we wi o ow e a i e mo eme s ic i e e ea i g is i e is e is a so e coi a iece o cou - th n e a a i e "Cou e ei Mo ey " o e mome e us e ei mo ey o oki g a e e a e i g i se o is w o e t t e a eas a a e e ica io o e ook Spl n d r sce e o ece io gi o gi e ess o o - o gi e ess I is as i e ( r Spl n o w ic "Cou e ei Mo ey " i i s e y u i y i i s i e we e e e y e w ose a a i e wou i a y e u e g oss i e uci e i e i y is u a e cise mo se a iece a segme e o a o g o e o e cou e ei mo ey o e i e a e o om o cas i g i o a w o e I nn d n t t]. ow as o a w o e e age i is i icu o say w e e is e ica io o e o e is o is o I is i e is so i i a a yssa as o say a a ( e co e o a a o i I se e i e ook i sc i e e wee e ame o e e a a i e e a a i e i se as ic io as cou e ei mo ey e au o a o e i e o e o e a a e i s a a i e o I o e a a o as a se sig a u e a so o o e mus s i a a e o e e e ica io e e seems o o e o g o e sys em o su eme o "cou e ei mo ey " A w a is a ? e i e says e ic io o w ic "Cou e ei Mo ey" is u o e iece u ca i e ec "si ce I say so ma y i gs a o ce si ce I a ea o i e o e e so su e? I o e wo s ow is o e o ake e e ica io ? Is is e e as I i e a a e same ime si ce I eig e e e ce a i s i ic io ? oes au e ai e sig i as e oes e ook acco i g si ce i so a as i is ic i e my e e e ce is o a au e ic egi i- o e same mo a i y? Is i cou e ei mo ey? y w a i e mus o e ma e e e e ce we e I as i e ( u i oes o say i am ecei e i ? A ecisi e ques io w ose k o is a e mo e i icu o
88 I C a e ee "Cou e ei Mo ey" I I 8
cut [ a c e ] i a is e ica io u e s a e same ime a ques- I a e a i e co essio o make o you I is w i e agi g io e ques io o e i e e ques io o e w o e a e oug o e we ie ime a eas e amous Gaspard de a e ques io e e o e "s ice" [la "tranche"] a o "cu i g" la nuit y A oysius e a ( oes o a ook k ow o you ["trancher']. I oes so y wa i g e igu e o e Se e — e ook me a a ew o ou ie s a e e e y ig o e ca e fa- ei g o e e is a se e —o a se e i ieces o a o g e usi e mous?) a e i ea came o me o a em i g some i g a a o- segme e a ima e "w o e" o w ic ["tout entier"] au e ai e gous a o a yi g o e esc i io o mo e i e o says e wa s o e ica e o is ie W a is o e oi g w e o e a e o a mo e a mo e a s ac i e e same me o e e ica es a se e —a w o e se e o i segme s? O e cou ca use i e ic i g e o ays so s a ge y ic u esque u mo e a o e co us egi i g wi o e e s y au e ai e W o amo g us i is mome s o am i io as o o o i e a imme se o y ogic es o se o a ques io a o eame o e mi ac e o a oe ic ose musica wi ou make i si g e us ea e u i e ai is ques io o a se e a y m o yme su e e oug a ugge e oug o a a is o e ma e o si g a is ackmai e [faire chanter]. e e is e i se o e y ica im u ses o e sou o e u u a io s o e ica io i i s wo e sio s e i a o e a e a o i is e e ie e su e mo eme s o co scious ess? o y i e a a e ques io o e i e is ose y ame u I is a o e a om eque i g uge ci ies om e i e - e i a e sio u s i ace a ogic o w a we cou ca a jealousy sec io o ei i ume a e e a io s a is o sessi e i ea of the gift" a gi es o e o ea i i s mo e i y e e y i igue is o You you se my ea ie a e you o ie o o "Cou e ei Mo ey " a s a e i a so g e Glacier's s i e c y a o e ess i A is a e e y mome w e au e ai e ec a es a e same y ic ose a e isma sugges io s a is c y se s u ime as is " ea ousy " a e s eaks " o e e u " oug e og o e s ee o e ig es ga e s? o e e u owe e I ea a my ea ousy as o o A se e oussaye oug me goo o u e As soo as I ega e wo k I ea - My ea ie I se you a i e wo k o w ic o o e ca i e a o o y i I emai a om my mys e ious a say wi ou i us ice a i as ei e ea o ai si ce i ia mo e u w a is mo e I was oi g some i g (i i o e co a y e e y i g i i is o ea a ai a e - ca e ca e some i g a is si gu a y i e e a acci e a e y a eci oca y I eg you o co si e e a mi a e w ic a yo e e se u me wou g o y i o ou u w ic co e ie ce is o e s a o us you me a e ea e We ca o y ee y umi ia e a mi co i ce a e g ea es ca cu w e e e we ike—me my e e ie you e ma usc i o o o a oe is o succee i oi g e ac y w a e as se e ea e is ea i g o I o o kee e ea e s es i e ou o o wi a gi g i sus e se o e ea s o a i e mi a e a You s mos a ec io a e y su e uous o ake away a e e a a e wo a s o C " is o uous a asy wi come oge e agai ai ess y C o i i o ume ous agme s a you wi see a eac o e ca e is o i s ow I e o e a e e is e oug i e i some [ e a ] o ese segme s o ease a amuse you I a e o e ica e e w o e se e o you o oussaye
. As o e i ki g o ea ousy, e e a io e wee gi a ea ousy, a "c ê a e i e ouse " eyo ea ousy—a e e cess o ea , I e e o e ema ka e e y eggy e e ica io Kamu , " ea i g e wee e i s," I o uc io o A rrtd d r: t n th l nd ( ew Yo k: Co um ia U i e si y ess, . 2. O vr pl t , . 2 6 r Spl n, . i a s a io mo i ie . 0 Ch pl r hr "C nt rf t M n " I I
Wi ou ea o ai A ea a ai " aki g si es " Mauss seeme o e o uce e ca cu a io o w ic Co e ie o me Co e ie o you Co e ie o e e a a o i au e ai e s "Cou e ei Mo ey" as so muc ou e ea e We ca a cu w e e we ike me my e e ie you e o gi i g is ie — e ca cu a io a co sis s i wa i g o "wi ma usc i e ea e is ea i g A I o o kee e es- a a ise eco omica y"; i is as i e a a i e o w ic au e ai e i e wi a gi g o e i e mi a e ea o a su e uous ga e e i e "Cou e ei Mo ey" com e e e i a a ce a e i igue mo eme s a e ossi i i ies— o eo e ica a ac ica —o I a e soug i es e A oug owe e is wo k e- a essay o e gi i ge e a o a y essay o e gi a o a y sem i g e sc ew a e Ka ei osco e cou e us e as a em a a gi e a a i e com e e i g e essay a com e- a as e Ca a is ic a e e e s i i u ike a o e o e iece o e iece o a o e a is e e a a - age i igue; I s ou e e o e o a oac o c oss e o e s [aborder], i o e ca u i a e a au e o my mo e a io way o au e ai e s "Cou e ei Mo ey" is a e mo e i icu W o amo g us as o eame o a a icu a a oe ic om e i s a oac as we a e egu o see a egi i g wi ose wi w ic o a s a e e y ica mo eme s o e e i e e o e seems o s i away o i i e o o mu i y o mi e u u a io s o e e ie a e su e mo eme s o e i ea i e i se e e i ea i a io a ec s o e su e e ec i i - co scious ess? ea o ci cu a co i ui y o a i e u i a so com omises e i e i y My oi o e a u e was A oysius e a W a e i a i i isi i i y o e i ea ai i s e y co sis e cy as a ai co - o e o a ic u esque ays I wa e o o o mo e ac e wi i se i s u i y as ai ow w a is a o e o an ap- a a s ac i e A e om e egi i g a I was o- proach [abord] o ce e i i isi i i y o e ai is o o ge secu e? i g some i g o e a w a I wa e o imi a e a w ic e gi i e e is a y wi a ways e without o e W a oes a o e wou g o y i u w ic o my a umi ia es "wi ou " mea e e? A gi a oes o u o e i s o e s a gi me w o i ks a e oe mus a ways o e ac y w a e a wou e i se e co ai e i a e e mi a io a imi e y wa s o o e i i isi i i y o a i e i ia e trait wou o e a gi As soo as i e imi s i se a gi is ey o ca cu a io a measu e e gi o e o e wo amous i e e is a y s ou o e u e o e o e su e owa e i a y i e segme s measu e ess a e e cessi e; u i s ou a so sus e i s e a io e w o e se e 3 o e o e a e e i s a sg essi e e a io o e se a a e i e I e name [ i e] of counterfeit money, we se ou om a se e ce o ai of a o e e "wi ou " is o o y e " esi es" o e o Mauss s ("We e cuse ou se es o a i g ee o ige o ake " eyo " A co seque ce i assi g o is " ogic" o a "wi ou " si es o ese e y as ques io s u ey ouc e y c ose y u o a wou e ei e ega i e o a sg essi e W e e e e e is ou su ec a i was ecessa y o e c ea " e we wo e e cas a io a o ema ic o cas a io (as e e ica io a ou e a ou e im o o " aki g si es" i a eo e ica e a o a io a i se e e w o e a e a mig sugges e e is a io a i y e w o e o ema ic o e gi Ca o e i k e gi s eak o o e o e a e e is o gi o e e a ossi e o ema ic o w i e a ou i wi ou commi i g o ese o gi e wi ou gi i g a e gi eas oke s [gages] o sig s? e o em emai s i ac e o em u w o says e e mus e gi a o ema ic o e gi ? Ce - o k owi g w e e o e gives oke s a w e e o e gi es w e ai y o easo o a i ci e o easo i ge e a I is e ques io o e gi es oke s o sig s o simu ac a As in e us i ica io o is o easo a is aske o us e e a e o ou a ou i o ac ica as we as eo e ica o s ecu a i e easo e us ea e e u im- o o a ques io i ese e a me e y eca a i o e mus . Oeuvres completes, pp. 66 6 . a ways a gue y gi i g o e s easo s e e ca e e e a easo o 2 I C a e ee "Cou e ei Ma o I I
gi i g (i e e we e o ce agai e gi wou o o ge e a gi u e us e ai ese ge e a i e o ge ea ogica igu es A ki o scis- a ca cu a io o a e c a ge a is ea es o e a com e e y o e si a i y ca ies wi i a w ic i e ge e s as so ma y ge es o e ques io W a a e s w e o e gi es easo o e o e quand e case i e o e i ua y o i i i y As ou e e i e ames a on donne raison a l'autre, w e i o e wo s o e co ce es a e o ce e " i g" (cou e ei mo ey as i g a e a a i e o e o e is ig (a ac a a so o e u s e o e s o e o e o s o y a e e e a a i e ac ( e a a io o e a a i e o e eo e ica easo i e i ec io o e a ues o w o g a o gi e- s o y ow e " i g" i ques io e ema i e i g e o ec ess ? W a is i i a y o avoir raison [ o a e easo i e o e o a a io e i e as cou e ei mo ey is o a i g ike a y ig ]? A i e e c i iom o avoir raison de l'autre [ o a e o e ecise y i e s ic y e e mi e se se o i g; i is "some- easo o e o e i e o wi ou o e e o e ]? i g" ike a sig a e e a a se sig o a e a ue sig wi a A ese emes o mo i s a e a wo k mo e o ess isi y i e a se a ue a sig w ose sig i ie seems ( u a is e w o e s o y e sig e y au e ai e "Cou e ei Mo ey " e o e s o w ic i a y o o co es o o e equi a e o a y i g a ic i e sig we a e see o e ou o co a se o emse es i s o a o e wi ou secure sig i ica io a simu ac um e ou e o a sig o a si e o e i e ("Cou e ei Mo ey" w ic o e u s i s o e s i sig i ie e e seco e e e o e i e i o e wo s e a i e i i e y su eme a y a a yssa as io as soo as i gi es a a i e is a a a i e a ese s i se as [se donne ou ] ic i e i se o e ea We wi o ge i o e e e i a ge e a eo y O e a o e au o i a y case a u e e ame o i e a- o e e ua s uc u e y o ogy a o o ogy o i es a i g a - u e u o o e a o e a a o I is e a ic io e su ec em e o o a e sew e e " we ga e u a ew o e e ec s o o w ic is a ic i e mo ey a ic io o ic io ; a i e ecou e a eo y o is a icu a i e y easo o i s e e e ia s uc- ic io a so says e a a i e ic io i se (i i gi es o e o i k is u e a i s topos, i s si ua io as a i e sus e e i a a o e ic io y mea s o em ema ic o me o ymic u a so e e i e o e e i e i es ei e i i o ou si e i e i e "Cou e ei s ecu a igu a io e e is o e o e s ecu a io Mo ey" i i es i se i i i es i s ai y a double reference: (1) I I e ci i co e co ce i g ow e s i o i e a y wo ks e ic io e e s o w a is commo y ca e cou e ei mo ey ( aï e a i ec is a i u e o i s sig a o y au e ai e a is e i e y im ow thematic e e e ce to what is in question in the narrative); ( i e e s o y easo a y i ue o e same ig —w a is ca e e droit e a a i e i se i so a as e i e "Cou e ei Mo ey" is e i e d'auteur i e c a is e ig o e au o — is ic io aces o e a a i e e o e ame o e a a i e a as as a a e e a a i e o i e mou i e a o wi i e es o si- co e o eme a s o y a ou cou e ei mo ey A ea y ou e i i y o e au o u o cou se o e a a o e a e is imse o isu i e e i e e i es wice a e same ime e e y os- ic i e a ic io o e au o ; as o e iscou se o e a a o is i g oug e w o e a ge o i s i ecisio a i i ques io a a a i e is e i e a io s e co c usio s o is e i e a io s (co - y ayi g e wee s oke sig s a w i e sig s (o e o e e- ce i g i a icu a w e e e ca o gi e is ie w o as gi e sume esse ia ossi i i ies o cou e ei mo ey cou e e i e cou e ei mo ey o a egga we mus a ways su ose a au e- "What is a title asllike counterfeit money?" 3 5 ai e oes o y ig s ake em o e oes o ake em a ace e i s i isio engenders a se ies o o e s a i ea s i embryo. a ue o mo e a we o e us e ea e ( ic i e a a i e is y ig o uce y e ic i e a a o ; u ike e a a o e a - a i e is ic i e o y e wee au e ai e a us i o e may u i 4. C . a o e, . 8. us si ce e ic i e a a o o uces is a a i e as a ue a a- . is i i i e ays i e c o e wo g amma ica se ses o "comme" o i e a e ei co sis s e ic io —o e simu ac um o uce y mea ei e "as" o " ike." e a s a io as o ie o e e th o e ay wi a e eses a i e i a s e i gs ou is ou e ossi i i y: "Q t l e au o is is w a i seems o s a e wi e e ome o o t tr rn i f rn nn ?" mais aussi ie , e a ac e e qu u e a e ese cou e ei mo ey ( o ass o a ic io as " ue" u si ce e co - e ace au sus e : "Q t n t tr nr f nr nn ?" ( a s e io e mi s us o k ow— au e ai e a us e ea e s— a
4 C a e ee "Cou e ei Mo ey" I
is ic io is a ic io e e is o e ome o e e o "cou e ei e o ic e e o me o ymy as i e i ia e igu e o e e y i e - mo ey " a is o a a use o us a asses o e a se o e i y o igu es su oses s a e e a io s e wee e a a e ue I emai s e case owe e a e ossi i i y o cou e ei w o e is e a i e s a i i a io a ways a ea s ossi e o e su e mo ey o e ff t o cou e ei mo ey s a es e same ge e a a i a ows o e o ic a e iscou se o e o ic u as o co i io o ass o a ic io as " ue " o e su e is o es y o e a u a s a i i y is e e gi e as e e is o y t b l z t n n pr , c imi a mis ee as o ace i i e a u e "wi i " e i e a y e- a is esse ia y eca ious o e mus esu ose "o e " s uc- ome o e imi e a i s o e s y co e io s au e ai e is o u es e us o say o igi a y s uc u es u mo e com ica e a yi g e is o ecei i g O t d o i e a u e u n l f h t mo e u s a e o es We o ose e e o ca em s uc u es a r pr nt d, imagi e ecou e i a ic io ike "Cou e ei Mo ey " e e o s u y em as suc i i e a y ocesses ecause ey a e o e mo a au o e c imi a mis ee im ies yi g e i e io ecessa i y c ao ic ei e a i e "a e io i y" o ei g ea e com- o ecei e—a us k ow e ge—o y o e a o e emi i g e i y oes o sig i y u e iso e age o e cou e ei e o e e c usio o e ecei e o e e e o e e i e "Cou e ei Mo ey" n ecome i as e " u es" ( e egga o e am e o e a a o e o e is ie s o e ia o sig i y wice i o e ow so o s eak a o i i e i se co essio a ou si e e a a i e i a e e oge eous s ace e i wo e e e ia i ec io s O e o e a e e is a s o y a ou ea e a eas ece i g e same co essio ; u e ea e is o cou e ei mo ey u a so o e o e a e s o y is p rh p , " ecei e " o " u e " i e same se se as e a a o i u cou e ei mo ey (p rh p : e p rh p emai s esse ia e e e- is o -k ow e ge is o o e o e o ei g- ecei e ; i is e cause i o e o e e o e cou e ei mo ey e cou e ei e e ie ce o a r t wi ou e a r t th t r t o w ic mo ey mus o gi e i se th rt nt o e cou e ei mo ey; a we wi e u i co c usio is p rh p is a so e i e io a ime sio a is e r d t, e e us ow co si e is a a i e u y ic i e u o uce ac o ai a s uc u es a mo ey a e e ie ce o a co scious- tr n rr t v y e ic i e a a o i e ic io sig e a o ge ess o mo ey e i ue o a se e s o y is e a s cou e ei y au e ai e e e i goes a e s us e s o y o a o e ic io o mo ey a ic io a ou w ic o e ca say i i s u a e imi a a ic i e mo ey is mo ey as we wou say i e c n p d y ooki g o oo a wo o c ock ll a e a a o cou a e t tr , as o i e oes o a e i s egi ima e a au e ic i e; i sai a ou i ft d as e is y a u e w o as ma e im a ft— as o y a a se i e [f x t tr ], o a e a " a se" i e [t tl "f x"], gi wi ou w ic o e o is s o y wou e ossi e—o e e - si ce i e c a " au - i e" mea s s i some i g e se 1 is s o y aus i g acu y o ooki g o oo a wo o c ock O e su ec ( is a a e co e e s e a e same ow u y way o a o i se o i s "ow " e e s o y says ll a e a a o wou igu e a o ique y as a s o y o cou e ei mo ey o ic io o o a e sai o is ie s cou e ei mo ey o e i e io s a e simu ac um b th e ( a a i g a a io nd e ( a a e a a- l nd ( a is is wo as we wi see o is ie o e ca cu a io io e s o y makes u a a o i se i is a a a o i se i i - a e a i u es o im i o e wo s a e c e i s o im a co o a es o i e io i es e e y i g o w ic i is a a e o a e e c a ges a a e us o oke wi e cou e ei e e i e "Cou e ei Mo ey " ame em e e o e e e- mo ey I is a i e as i e a a o we e s eaki g o e "au o s o e e o e u e sma e ecomes me o ymica y a ge a i e io s " ame y au e a i e s as i au e ai e we e e a a- e a ge — a o e s a ames i Suc a ame i es e s ace o s ie as i e ese e " imse " i e ec wi ou s owi g a ime gi e a is i s i u e y a co e io a co e io imse isguise i e ai s o e ie o e a a o w om e w ic is y co e io i emo a e u is s uc u e is a e a makes s eak as i e e e a a o (i e ace o e ea e mo eme a a so o e u s a e- o e s e co e a guage o o e c i ic a a y e e ossi e mo i s a e ec s o e cou - e ei mo ey a is e e e ossi e e ec s o "Cou e ei 6. I y og a y, a " au i e" is a a i e o as a i e. ( a s. Mo ey " 6 I C a e ee "Cou e ei Mo ey" I I
"I was e cou e ei coi " e ca m y e ie as oug o aiso " a e " o e - aiso " i ese wo cases o o ge e o g us i y imse o is o iga i y o eo e ica a s ecu a i e easo ? W y is e s ecu a io a co - u i o my mise a e ai a ways co ce e wi ooki g i ues o ac oug em o o ge p l t v i e se se o s ecu- o oo a wo o c ock (w a a e aus i g acu y is a u e s a i e o ca cu a i g easo ? A a ai o easo e a o ece io gi o me e e su e y came e i ea a suc co uc o is a so a a ai o gi e cuse o gi e ess o o - o gi e ess o a my ie s a was e cusa e o y y e esi e o c ea e a o -gi o a e o a a ways im o a e gi e e i is oo e i s i e e a s e e o ea e a ie I is as i e e i o i g u ay wi i s i e—w ic wou co seque ces isas ous o o e wise a a cou e ei coi e i s o ec ; i is as i e o y o e i e e ecame e i e o e i e a s o a egga mig e ge e Mig i o mu i y i e a e ecomes e ue o y e a se- ue o y so o s eak i o ea coi s? Cou i o a so ea im o iso ? A a e o e e i s a se- ue co us i s o y as g os o a i ucia y sig kee e a ake o e am e was e a s goi g o a e im o y o c e i E e y i g is ac o ai e ome o o c e i o a es e as a cou e ei e o o assi g cou e ei mo ey c e e ce o e ie a co e io a au o i y i is e w ic e - e cou e ei coi cou us as we e a s e e ge m a s says some i g esse ia a ou w a e e i ks i e a u e o o se e a ays wea o a oo i e s ec a o A so my e ie o c e i a us o ca i a o eco omy a us o o i ics a cy we i s cou se e i g wi gs o my ie s mi a Au o i y is co s i u e y acc e i a io o i e se se o egi i- awi g a ossi e e uc io s om a ossi e y o eses ma io as e ec o e ie o c e u i y a o a k c e i o ca i a i e u i s o a oug o e o e e c e i o suc a ie ? Oug i e es is eca s a e y i e sayi g o Mo aig e s w o k ew a o e as e a a o s i seems o o ake im a is wo w e e is i a a ce "Ou sou mo es o y o c e i o ai [ r d t], ei g says "It was e cou e ei coi "? W a i e we e a e e g ea e ou a co s ai e o e w im o o e s a cies a s a e a a cou e ei e a e a a o i ks? W a i wi e simu ac um ca i e u e e au o i y o ei eac i g " " o a co essio e we e assi g o ue mo ey as a se? We wi e Acc e i e i is way a " ue" co us is s i e a s cou e ei is ques io o ow e a o e wo ie s ea i g e " o acco - mo ey; i may e a g os o a s i i e s i i o e o y a o is s " a e we wi come u o i agai ca i a ( o a i e a ea i g is a ca i a O e mig aw om is a e co seque ces ega i g e i s i u io o a o y a a co us a ega i g e e ome a o ca o i a io a o ow A so e- is e th n, is a so e iece p rh p a iece o cou e ei mo ey ga i g w a is ca e s i i e e wou e o o em o e ca o a is a mac i e o o oki g e e s i s o a e e e o e i is w o e i s i u io we e n t r l. e e is a o em ecause as e a is e e ike a a a i e o e i g i se o o i g i se o e Mo aig e says a i s i u io o y mo es "o c e i " a u e o ea i g ( is e e as ake ace a co i ues o ake ace i " e au o i y o eac i g " I ac i "Cou e ei Mo ey" as a i e gi es ime a akes i s ime i a a e y gi es i se ime u a so is i i eac e ous a a yssa e oug o say a o is a e es a co seque y om e e n e o e o e o e e ossi i i y wi ou sayi g i ( e co e o e a a i e a is e s o y o e a o e a ea o y a e e eg a wi o e e e s a a e i a a i e i se as ic io as cou e ei mo ey e 1 o e a a o commo owe e a ce ai o i ious ess o is s agi g o a a as ic i e sig a u e o e mus o e ca — e a s—a o i a su e- o a ece io Il rr ]. A e a is e a ai o o i g ess a me a y owe o cou e ei mo ey W a owe is a ? easo f e easo o e h o e easo o e v [d l r n n a d t r n n o e] W a oes "a oi aiso " mea [ o " a e easo " i e o e ig ]? W a oes " o e easo " mea . "O e E uca io o C i e ," Essays and Selected Writings, trans. o a M. ame ( e o Yo k: S . Ma i s ess, 6 , . . e e c ea s: " os e ame e [ o "gi e easo " i e o co ce e o e o e ]? W y a e ese ocu- hranle qu A c 6 i , ice e co ai e a e i es a asies au uy, se e e ca i e io s so i ioma ic a us so oo y a s a a e? W y o e "a oi - sou s au o i é e ico eco ."
8 I Ch pt r hr "C nt rf t M n " I I
e i e i e ec v n t r d, v t lf n o wa - may o ce agai e em e o ea au e ai e wi Mauss e us i g o say e o owi g ( e a s a suc wou e i s i e io o e i e e i is ace o a si io ecause e mos ema ka e "Si ce I say a ame a e omi a e so ma y i gs a o ce si ce assage i is ega makes a associa io i e same sce e e- I ook as i I am e i i g is w i e a e same ime aki g ack wi wee e Se e c a a a ce ai o e i g o o acco ow i a o e a w a I gi e wi e o e I e i e a i a i io si ce I i e w i e we a e goi g o ea "Cou e ei Mo ey" as a s o y o eig e e e ce a omi a io si ce my e e e ce as ic i e is o o acco amo g o e i igues e assage om Mauss co ce s a tr l a e e e ce o e ig o e i a y case si ce i is i ee a ce emo y a is s ea oug ou "a e I ia ci i i a io s o e e e ce u emai s i egi ima e y i e si ce i s e e e is o ec- o Ame ica " e s i i s i i s g os s a e a e a y ey a e essa i y w a o e i ks i is we e 1 as i e am cou e ei e i s gues s a e as su e i w ic ey ake a mo ey " u o ious y i oes say a o e wise i wou is- c e i i se ; i says i wi ou sayi g i i oes o say "I " "I am" o Eac c a cooks oo a e a es o acco o e e ese a- "I am o "; i o e u s e o e o assu e o osi io s o au o o- i es o e o e i es u i g e c a s es i a e e o e - am e a e e ce s om e s eec ma e y e c ie o e si io s o e y e " " o " t " o e wise e e wou o o ge e a y ossi e cou e ei mo ey u a e same ime i Se e c a "I g ee you I is goo ow cou I say o e - o e o e e o e cou e ei mo ey i mus s eak a i mus say wise? I am a oo wo ess ma a you a e emem e e e e is w a I am I o o ie o I o o ie i sayi g I ie e i e me I is goo You a e oug o e s i i s a you a e e i es i se au o ames i se u wi ou sayi g so wi ou sayi g come o si ow wi me Soo you is es wi e i e So I g ee you o ce agai you uma s w o ake e ace o "I " y sayi g i wi ou sayi g i a e e e th t is i e uci e A e w o e ay o e "I" e e acc e i s i s au o i y o sum a e s i i s e c " A w e eac c ie as ea e a as u is u we wou say a cou e ei mo ey is e i e o e i e o e i gs o o acco i o e i e e c osi g o mu a oi s e i e wi ou i e o e i e (wi ou i e e i e is e i e o o e mo a e ec o e es i a a o a e es a io s "I e e a o i s i e u i oes o ese i s i e c aims y a k you o a i g come o si ow i is sea I am g a e- sayi g "I am (some cou e ei mo ey " si ce cou e ei mo ey is u o you You a e e cou age me e essi gs o you g a a e s w o a e e oye e e a io s (a w o a e i ca - w a i is o y y o gi i g i se as h a y o a ea i g h, y o e i i i g i s i es A i asmuc as i o iga es i e e - a e i you a e equa o ose o e s i i s I is goo a you e ess o iges you o wo e agai a eas w a is goi g o a a e ake a i my es i a ( 7 -71 i e e is mo ey— ue mo ey cou e ei mo ey cou e ei ue ow is e ques io o e gi a e a i e ose i "Cou e - mo ey a u y cou e ei mo ey ei Mo ey"? W a is i a gi es e a a e y i i e a se a- A o e o e a ea y i i e i se i i e i i e a yssa su e- a e e ? W a is i a gi es e s ace- ime a e s aci g a me s e a i e mo eme o e e ica io is ace e e ea s is i e "Cou e ei Mo ey"? W a is gi e e e? W a is i e i e e i o e ease i om a ace a is e us eca ei e a i s i se v n e e? W o gi es? A o w om? W a a o i e a o e ic io (ei e "Cou e ei Mo ey" o r Spl n as w om? a w o e o sim y e e a o a ic io au e ai e s e ica io e us i s o a o o ge some i g i ia y a massi e y o - e e (i wo e sio s o "My ea ie " (A se e oussaye was ious I co s i u es e e eme a me ium o w a o e is gi e o c ea y wo ki g i a se ses o e ques io o e w o e a e i k e e ame y a is e —a a e y i i e is i o co us a s o e mo e (A oysius e a a so o u w e i i e "Cou e ei Mo ey"—is o us a v n. I is e e e o e us o e s u o eci e i g e igu e o e se e o e am e ("I w o ea i a w o e e o e egi y ecei i g i I i as e s uc- e o e a e e is e oug i e i some o ese segme s o ease u e o a gi e i is o o y ecause we a e i s o a i a ece i e a amuse you I a e o e ica e e w o e se e o you" o e osi io wi ega o i u ecause i as ee gi e o us om 00 C a e hr "Cou e ei Mo ey" I 0
the moment he published it and even if he had not published it, from But whereas only a problematic of the trace or dissemination can the moment he wrote it and constituted it by dedicating it to his "dear pose the question of the gift, and forgiveness, this does not imply friend," the presumed signatory (Baudelaire or whoever effectively that writing is generous or that the writing subject is a giving subject." signed this text beneath the patronymic and accredited signature of As an identifiable, bordered, posed subject, the one who writes and Baudelaire—for let us not be so gullible as to believe that the effective his or her writing never give anything without calculating, con- signatory of that comes down to a Charles Baudelaire, any more than sciously or unconsciously, its reappropriation, its exchange, or its we believe the dedicatee goes no further than the name Arsene Hous- circular return—and by definition this means reappropriation with saye), from the moment he let it constitute itself in a system of traces, surplus-value, a certain capitalization. We will even venture to say he destined it, gave it, not only to another or in general to others than that this is the very definition of the subject as such. One cannot dis- his "dear friend" Arsene Houssaye, but delivered it—and that was cern the subject except as the subject of this operation of capital. But giving it—above and beyond any determined addressee, donee, or throughout and despite this circulation and this production of sur- legatee (we are speaking here of an unconscious figure represented plus-value, despite this labor of the subject, there where there is trace by a "dear friend" or even by a determinable, bordered configura- and dissemination, if only there is any, a gift can take place, along tion of public and readers). The accredited signatory delivered it up to with the excessive forgetting or the forgetful excess that, as we in- a dissemination without return. Why without return? What history, what time, and what space are determined by such a "without re- 1 e us u e sco e is o eca a o y a o ema ic o e ace a us o turn"? Whatever return it could have made toward Baudelaire or issemi a io ca a ow e ques io o e gi a o o gi e ess o a ise is o is- whatever return he might have counted on, the structure of trace and ace e co ce o w i i g I is o sig a owa some i g a oge e o e a legacy of this text—as of anything that can be in general—surpasses e a i io a o osi io e wee a ( i i g s eec a a ( ea w i i g As is we the phantasm of return and marks the death of the signatory or the k ow i is o is o osi io a a G eco-C is ia a i io wi a e o e o e e non-return of the legacy, the non-benefit, therefore a certain condi- i s i e e a io o e ue e wee C is ia a ew that e e a ways is wou us tion of the gift—in the writing itself. e gi o gi e ess—i e e is a y—a e ace e some i g a oge e o e a e emes o a o osi io assi e y ecei e a That is why there is a problematic of the gift only on the basis of a eci i ous y com u si e y c e i e — y a eo oy o e am e w e i is cus- consistent problematic of the trace and the text. There can never be oma y ia o ica a some imes su ime ig omi y e w i es such a thing on the basis of a metaphysics of the present, or even of I is oug em a is a ge a o u i u e ca e Credit as e i i i e y the sign, signifier, signified, or value. This is one of the reasons we e ace e o Honor, w ic was a c i a ous sou s ee e o accom is always set out from texts for the elaboration of this problematic, texts e e y i g in the ordinary and traditional sense of written letters, or even of A as i is s a ge eo e co em e come w a may o a ways e- literature, or texts in the sense of differantial traces according to the i g i a as io e eo e o Go cou o o a y i g wi ou e i g concept we have elaborated elsewhere. And we are unable to do oth- ig away some e ec io o i s e e a is o y a ea e i i g a me ci u WO o e C is ia s a use o su ice o ai a "ac io s was o ce erwise than take our departure in texts insofar as they depart (they sepa- agai sacrificed, i a e comme ce o i us ice o igi W I I G a is i ca- rate from themselves and their origin, from us) at the departure Ides le a e o o gi e ess depart]. We could not do otherwise even if we wished to do so or e i i i e y ecisi e ic o y a as e e mi e e u i e sa e ac e thought to do so. We are no longer credulous enough to believe that e Saint a les Nils ( a is Me cu e e a ce 19 5- 19 -93 we are setting out from things themselves by avoiding "texts" simply As i e WORD—in a icu a i " ai a sac io s" — i o equi e ei e ime ace by avoiding quotation or the appearance of "commentary." The most o c e i As i e o ie e wee ai e ie a c e i we e secu e Le Sai t par les apparently direct writing, the most directly concrete, personal writ- Juils is o e y a emo e om e au e ai e w om we a e ge i g ea y o ea ing which is supposedly in direct contact with the "thing itself," this (see e ow i a icu a 13 I wou me i i is s eci ic co e a a ie a a y- sis o a y o a i as o say a ou e igu e o e au e o e " ue au e " writing is "on credit": subjected to the authority of a commentary or esus C is ( 1 ews a e a so esc i e e e as e "C e i o s o a u yi g a re-editing that it is not even capable of reading. omise a e C u c u ge o a e ee u i e " (
102 , Chapter Three "Counterfeit Money" 1 103 sis e ea ie is a ica y im ica e i e gi e ea o e o o e c a ge e u e om e c a ge a emai s om is u - age cy (a e e we a e ca i g ea e a a i y a es i es a gi c ase Monnaie, mo ey c a ge i e c a eas i is e same not to return o e o o age cy is o a a u a acci e e e a o wo (a e wo is a coi a iece o c a ge e wo says a e o o age cy; i is o y i ka e o e asis o se i g ou om o ce e mo e a y i g i ge e a a e emai e o a mo e a y partir du] e gi is oes o mea sim y a o y ea o o e a io o e am e e "mo aie qu o e " e c a ge o e e ea ca gi e o o y a " i e" ca gi e u a i e i w ic is e u s o " a e i e mo aie " sma c a ge eco omy o ea ese s i se a e s i se e e cee e ei e As o e eco omy o e a a i e a e a a i e o e ea o immo a i e ca e e gi e a y i g o y a si gu a surviv- eco omy we a e g im se e easo o w ic e gi i e e is ing ca gi e 9 is is e element o is o ema ic a y equi es a a e same ime e c u es e ossi i i y o a a- e e c e i e o au e ai e a w ic we a e a e y egu i e e gi is o co i io o e a a i e u simu a eous y o o ea e o gs o a sce e o w i i g a e e o e o e sce e o a e co i io o ossi i i y a im ossi i i y o e a a i e e gi u i ka e o a y su ec I is wi i is e cee e a e ces- eco omy o is s o y o cou e ei mo ey is u i ci cu a io y a si e sce e wi i i s es i y a i s es i a io wi ou i e i ia e emai e u a so co ai e i a emai e o c a ge a e a u - a essee a wi ou ce ai a esso a ou co us is ca e c ase o some o acco e ime o e a a i e egi s o ce e ou u i so a as i e s e s o y o a gi is co us is goi g o say c a ge is e u e a e u e a e e e i u e o a u u y a "i " i se "o " i se e e cee i g a ames i a a e cee s u o uc i e e e i u e—a a e y a eas — o e acquisi io i s ame I is goi g o e-ma k i a su eme a y abyme a a so- o a u u y o uc a is a o uc o u e co sum io a is u e issemi a io a es i es e e o e a i as es o go u u e wi ou ea i g a a e y a y emai e e wo ie s i smoke a e a a e y i ke i is sce e y e commo ossi i i y o o e am e o acco as es a o acco smoke I is o i sig i i- smoki g i o e wo s o e e i g a a u e oss o u e au- ca a e ace from which is sce e o gi a cou e ei mo ey o-a ec i e easu e e y c ose o e oice is si gu a a u a departs is w a is ca e i e c a bureau de tabac, a o acco s o o uc a is o acco I we yie e o e em a io o e a i - " i s se e ce " incipit o e a a i e w ic ea s as i o e we e esis i e o e o e i g is ea i g e a wi ou imi s we wou co i ui g a e a i e u io a we su e y a e e u e e e e e i o a iscou se o o acco—a e e e c usi e y o o- og ess o a infinite ea o e e a yss o wo ases a a e o acco a u ke ess i au e ai e Mo e a o e semi a wou s uc u a i e i y e i e a e egi i g o e a a io "As e issemi a e e e i smoke e us co ai i gs o e mo- we we e ea i g e o acco is s my ie ca e u y se a a e is me i se e a i gs c a ge " e o acco is s is o ious y e i sig ia o e sig o mo- 1 The time of woman. You wi e y quick y sus ec a i woma e i y o a " esc i io o mo e i e" o w ic au e ai e n seems o e a se om is a a i e e e c usio cou we e is e ica io o A se e oussaye says e wa s o "a y" a o - o ga i i g e sce e a ma ki g i s em o ike a c ock Wi ou e s " oce u e " u a e sig o is mo e i y e e is e o e ooki g a y u e o e mome we mig i k o a o e i - i s i u io o o acco a o ms e esse ia eco o e sce e ci i i Paris Spleen o a om "Cou e ei Mo ey " e e as we ey a e us oug some o acco ey a e us oug —o e e e e y i g a e s "amo g me " A e me s eak o e a se emse es—some o acco e w o e eco omy o e a a i e as 4 woma Woma is ei su ec ow is ace o e amo g-me we as e a a i e o e eco omy ocee s om a remainder, om is a smoki g- oom a e amo g-me is i se e i e us a smok- i g- oom Amo g-me that is to say, a smoki g- oom om e e 19. On this concept of surviving [survivance], cf. "Survivre" in Parages ("Living o e as ce u y comes a u u e e y a " ai e o mo e i e " On—Borderlines" in Harold Bloom et al„ eds., Deconstruction and Criticism, trans. u a u w ose is o y is ce ai y o o e a u s a e om e James Hulbert [New York: Seabury Press, r9791). i s se e ce o " o ai s o Some Mis esses" "I a ma s ou oi 1 I C a e ee "Cou e ei Mo ey" I I 0
a is o say i e smoki g- oom o a e ega gam i g- ouse ou e e as es esc a es ma y ises u em s e i e - ous sa s ou me we e smoki g a i ki g " " cesse e yi e oesie ou e e u a o e guise" [I is ime o ge Suc is e ame a ou -o -a-ki in ki gs a squa e o ki gs u k I you a e o o e e ma y e s a es o ime e e e ua y ese ma es a e ou ey a e smoki g i ki g a ou i oso y— u k O wi e o oe y o o i ue a you easu e] 3 u k- a consequently a ou a oi i g wome Seco a ag a seco e ess gives time u y assu i g "sa a io om ime " o gi e ime i ci i "O e o em u e e iscussio o e su ec o wome wou e e o e come ow o a u i g i Gi e ime is ime ake I wou a e ee mo e i oso ica o o a k a ou em a a ; ack o gi e ime is o ake ime a o ake i ack a oge e ea - u e e a e i e ige me w o after i ki g a e o a o e co i i g o e am e o Ma ame e Mai e o o y ime e oug o mo ace co e sa io s I ose cases o e is e s o w oe e is eg e e es ou imes ime ime agai s ime is wou e— s eaki g as o e wou is e o a ce music " e a usio o a o g wi smoke mo ey wome a u ke ess— e su ec e "a e i ki g" ea s us ack a ea y o e eco omic mo- The "good hour" of "The Purloined Letter." a e a a i e o i o u ke ess a e su e uous o e emai e a o "Cou e ei Mo ey" ocee s om a a a e y ua si ua io su e a u a ce as excessive o igi a im o a e ossi i i y o e a i is i ke o a mascu i e cou e a i i ks e wo ma e gi "A e i ki g " ma s eaks wi ou a i g a y i g o say a e s e wee em—a o o acco a is o a commo co - "commo ace co e sa io s" u e oo o e o s eec a is sum io a goes u i smoke— a is smoke a so sea s ei su e a u a e cessi e ge e ous use ess e u a u u ious a ia ce a o is o ms a sys em o ai s a ea y i sc i e i a e e- O e s ou ea e e w a o ows as we as so ma y o e e s a i io o o say a com u sio I ci es a e-ci es o e a a i e a e a e a io o e ec i e a i i y wi is o e o e am e " e i ci i s o e am e a o oe s " u oi e e e " e e o e i e " S eaki g i e i s e so i Les fleurs du mal, e i e says wou a e o e ea e a e e W a we i e e is a mo e o e au o i s mas e a e is "a ig smoke " " e suis a i e o i s a s a o ( au e ai e a a mo e a is us as ecog i a e u au eu mo mai e es u g a umeu " [I am e i e o as A oysius e a w om au e ai e says e i a s Mo eo e a au o my mas e is a ig smoke ] w a is a s ake i is mo e is ecisi e o ou o ema ic As i Amo g so ma y i e e e s o ugs a a i icia a a ise we "Cou e ei Mo ey " i i ks o ce mo e e simu ac um e ocess se ec o easo s o u e o imi y e e y ie a au o i a ia o u a e a a i e si ua io o e ci cu a io o a " em a " "E i e - ous " "Ge u k " I us i ies is e o a io y e e- o mo ey Ma ke y a assage a I a e ie o i e e e se- cessi y o eei g om ime ugs w e e a o so w e e i e o m "o wi e oe y o i ue " a e sa a io om ime o i 23. Oeuvres completes, 337; Paris Spleen, 7 ime is gi e o us i is a so counted a ou ays a e um e e ; e y mea s o a remnant o e a e a i e i a ce a a e y e ou o "c ock" is ame wice i ese ew i es a e im e a i e we accou o e e o w o y ca cu a i g ( igo ous eco omy ca aw a wou say co ce s e ou Il'heure]: "11 es eu e e s e i e i come a e e ue om i e su us- a ue o a ca i a w ic wo ks y i se u i o e s imse [se payel a si g e su e ui y a so e u u y i w ic e i i ia u u y is e oca e e e o e a w ic cu s ac oss e 20. Oeuvres completes, 3 5; Paris Spleen, 5 s ace o e es ic e eco omy ike a gi wi ou e u is so e u u y 1 O is s uc u e c " e ac eu e a e i e " The Post Card, o a y e c a - ("so e u u ies" e wo o e i s o e seco ime o e seco i e e i e "Mee i g ace e ou e Squa e o Ki gs " 511 i 3 we ake e o " e u oi e e e " u is ime as a si gu a ou e u u y e i e y o accumu a i g e e e ces o is so i is ecause e e ec io egu i e " wo o u u y o me i a io a a mee sc aum" is w i i g e ooks Semi a i e " o e — e em s" was co em o a y wi a i issocia e om w ic wi o ga i e e mee i g ace a e raise en abyme o is e i e ese wo ks o a y The Post Card, w ic as a ea y me io e e e s o i i a o e ge e a a a io e mee i g ace o e mee i g e wee e a a o (see a o e o ewo a u i is ue o e mee i g o ei i e es i e same ook; i is Oeuvres completes, 3 5; a is Spleen, 5 e e sai w e e ey i i Suc is e i e a acci e "Ou i s mee -
o I C a e ee "Cou e ei Mo ey" 0 w e e 5 " e u oi e e e " a so egi s wi is a a e y ua 3 Wh t t b ? 27 App r ntl i is e o ec o a u e a u u- si ua io (w ic as ee s ow o e i u a eas qua u e ious co sum io It pp r a is co sum io oes o mee a egi i g wi e i s se e ce e a a o esc i es us a y a u a ee o e o ga ism I is a u e a u u ious co - A a is us a e a k o e gus y e e i g i e au um o sum io g a ui ous a e e o e cos y a e e i u e a a oss v n lf oug e i - 1 -- I was e oyi g e wo o u u y o me i a io a a mee - a o uces a easu e a easu e o e sc aum i com a y wi my ie C Augus e u i i is ges i e c a e a is c oses o au o-a ec io e oice o o a i y A easu e o w ic o i g emai s a easu e e e e e e a sig s i e ack i a y o ook-c ose n tr , . , ndt, b r St. G r n. o o e ou a eas [ au e ai e a s- o w ic a e issi a e wi ou ea i g a ace i smoke I e e is v n lf some i g some a ec a es " e a u e o e eu e " o a goo ou ] we a some gi —a es ecia y i o e mai ai e a o ou si e ce; w i e eac o a y casua o - o some u e easu e—i may e a e a esse ia e a io a eas se e mig a e seeme i e y a e c usi e y occu ie a sym o ic o em ema ic o e wi e au o i a io o e gi es o e- u is a ea a ce e- wi e cu i g e ies o smoke a o esse e a mo- se o smoke a a eas is ow i pp r . mai s o e a a y e s e e o e c am e 7
I w a e e ma e o e ea s w a o ows (a w o k ows i i as 2 . e e is a ques io a au e ai e mig e a s a e associa e wi a o o ecome e su ec o "commo ace co e sa io s" amo g me i e a u e, e " ew i e a u e." I e cou se o a a a ysis o socia cus oms a , as a wome i e u i e si y a a ime w e a mos e e yo e as usua , seeks o e e y is o ica , e esc i es " i e a y u ke ess," egi i g wi qui smoki g? a ce ai y emai s w ic is a y o e o ques io a o oe, as "o e o e mos commo a mos ame a e e ome a o mo e i e." e i s e e a e "a e ua i g ci cums a ces," o e am e, e " o m ess e u I is e omise assu a ce o a emai e o em a [r t ]. us as ca io " a e " o i ica a i e a y i com e e ce" o wome , w ic e e au o s i "Cou e ei Mo ey " e w o e s o y o " e u oi e e e " om seei g i em "a y i g o e a ouse o u e si s o u u y i ems." Co ocee s om e su us- a ue o a r n nt o a su e ui y o e e- c usio : "O e mus o ou a i u e o e same a s o ma io o socia cus oms, ue (i come o i e i a ce e a a o ays o u i s s u io w ic as ma e e i e a y wo i o a c ass a a , e e o mous co sum io o w i e e a e wi e i come om a i e i a ce ea s imse o acco y e ew i e a u e." "E ga A e oe, sa ie e ses ou ages," Oeuvres o ooks " is so e u u y " A ce ai eco omy o a o a o uc- completes, o . 2, . 2 2. io a eas — o i is a ma e e e o ece io ll rr j, simu a- c um o a ea a ce— o e e cee e y e u u y o e su e ui y i o w ic e a a io e e s [ n ], a o g wi e w o e o- cess o es i u io a es i a io a o ows u we e e u - oi e e e go o i s way a come ack o o acco
i g was a a o scu e i a y i e ue Mo ma e, w e e e acci e o ou o ei g i sea c o e same e y a e a e y ema ka e o ume...." " e ac eu e a e i e," . 48 88.
As we wi see, e same ogic o e e e , sai o e o a c a ce "mee i g" o e "acci e " (apparently a ea o y, e a s u e ic a e is ou a wo k i "Cou e ei Mo ey." e a a ogy is oo s iki g o e o e ooke . 2 . I i ., . . 48 . 26. The Short Fiction of Edgar Allan Poe, e s. S ua a Susa e i e (I ia a o is: o s Me i , 6 , . 22 26. "C nt rf ll M n " II 0
O e may be tempted to subtract tobacco from economy, from the circulation of labor and production, income and surplus-value, from the accumulation of capital, from money in the form of currency or non-currency. From all of that one may be tempted to subtract, purely and simply, tobacco—or rather the act of smoking and inhaling, the experience, the enjoyment and the expenditure of that which, one could say, goes up in smoke. But one can also resist this temptation 4 as one resists an appearance. This could be shown on several regis- ters. We will indicate only a few titles or types. "C nt rf t M n " II: A. First of all, the psycho-analytic register, to use a somewhat simple designation. By way of the relation to the object one holds G ft nd C nt r ft, Ex nd r v n between one's fingers or one's lips, by way of inhalation, oral interior- ization or incorporation, by way of the diverse stimuli of the central ( d l r nd th St r f th d t n nervous system (for example, those that favor imagination, speaking or writing, that induce or proliferate substitutive operations, that re- constitute or entail the circulation of an auto-affective fantasmatics, o mo e a e uism a e e ca e o cou e ei where and so forth), the demand and the enjoyment can correspond to an e e is o ge ui e— us as e e ca e o a ess w e e e e is aim, can belong to an end-oriented system. They can accomplish real o goo ess— e e ms ei g u e y e a i e u because e e ca e or symbolic functions. These functions are essential to the economic o cou e ei w e e e e is o o igi a oes i i a y ma e o ow or even ecological balance of certain psychic organizations. There is a a u emo s a e o igi a e is s" w a ig s ou we a e o a k o cou e ei a a ? no gratuitous expenditure, no superabundance, no overflowing of —E A oe Marginalia pure luxury in all this, unless one redetermines luxury so as to rec- ognize in it an essential economic function. (Let it be said in paren- theses that it is difficult to make a connection here between smoking O ce i my ese ce e ques io was aske W a is e g ea es and counterfeit money without at least evoking the case of Freud. easu e o o e? Someo e a u a y es o e o ecei e—a some- Perhaps one day, in the wake of certain work, for example that of o e e se o gi e o ese — e a e sai easu e o i e — e Nicolas Abraham and Maria Torok, we will have to map intersec- o me se sua e ig o umi i y A ese i y mi s we e s eak- tions that go from Freud's cigar, "the only and the best companion i g ike e Imitation of Jesus Christ.—Finally e e was a im u e of his life," to his mouth cancer, and to certain stories of counter- u o ia w o asse e a e g ea es easu e o o e was o o m feiters in the shadows of a family genealogy; the spectres of these ci i e s o e a e a forgers would have come back to haunt him in a good many ways, As o me I say: e so e a su eme easu e o o e ies i e to a certain patient of ce ai y o oi g evil. — o ma a woma k ow om i a a om couc o couc u i o e comes i e i is ou a se sua e ig a patient, a certain analysand of Freud's analysand—for instance — au e ai e Journaux in times, " usees" the author of Les Faux-monnayeurs, Gide, who was, they say, in analysis with someone analyzed by Freud, Eugenia Sokolnicka. Here it would have been necessary to study Les Faux-monnayeurs from the perspective of its formal structure (literary, narrative, and so forth) and the relation of this structure with the story of counterfeit
08
0 Gu e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II I
money.' Let us locate in passing here the space of a complex task: a sort of journal, 1, that presented itself as an instrument in the To study for example, in so-called modern literature, that is, contem- fight to defend poetry. Its first issue proposed an anthology of poe- poraneous with a capital—city, p ll , metropolis—of a state and with tries of tobacco. It bore the subtitle "Poets and Tobacco" and con- a state of capital, the transformation of monetary forms (metallic, tained some sixty classical and modern texts; but its principal title fiduciary—the bank note—or scriptural—the bank check), a certain marked in an ingenuous way the extent to which the poetics of to- rarification of payments in cash, the recourse to credit cards, the bacco does not expend itself at a pure loss and above all does not let coded signature, and so forth, in short, a certain dematerialization of itself be disseminated in smoke. This title was: "La Poesie ne part pas money, and therefore of all the scenes that depend upon it. "Counter- en fumee" (Poetry does not go up in smoke). Indeed, in this case it feit Money" and x rn nn r belong to a specific period in goes up so little in smoke, it keeps itself and keeps itself so well from this history of money.) going up in smoke that on the back cover there is an ad for G t n B. Second type of analysis: n in the narrow sense, the Int rn t n l and, on the title page, the editors thank the S t ( e politico-economic exploitation of smoking, the production and specu- French national tobacco company) for its support: "We thank the lation in the tobacco market and the drug market in general. The S t , whose help, whose dynamism, and whose wealth of archival state-owned b r d t b still r pr nt the modern form of this documentation allowed us to produce this special issue of 1." commerce, at least in the retail market and in a modem French t . Even better than that, the authors of this volume wanted to respect So as to put the obvious economic dimension of this market in rela- the rules of the institution, the copyright and the legislation govern- tion with the poetics of smoking that interests us at present, we will ing authors' royalties and those of their legatees, the nt dr t, as take just one example. There is, as everyone knows, a poetics, a tra- one says in French. Thus, on the second page of the volume, even dition and a genre, a thematics of smoking. One day there appeared before the title page, one could read the following: "Bibliographical credits: Despite our research, it may be that we were unable to iden-
. I Les monnayeurs du langage ( a is: Ga i ee, 84 , a ook a ic y e e o s e tify all the nt dr t of the quoted poems. In that case, we ask them c a e i e " u misma iques" om is ea ie ook (Economic et synrbolique [ a is: e to contact us so that we may fill in the lacunae for which we apolo- Seui , , ea ose Gou o oses a ea i g o es faux-mormayeurs and o Gi e s gize." Truly, then (this is the whole question of the legacy and the amous mise en abyme. is is o ica ea i g is o ga i e i a icu a a ou a se o bequeathed trace), poetry does not go up in smoke—not for every- is i c io s a Gou c e i s o Gi e s u c e, e eco omis C a es Gi e: (I. go o one. It happens that the publishers of this remarkable volume call si e mo ey "wi u i i sic a ue" 2. e ese a i e a e mo ey, e co e as if they wanted to pay tribute i i i y o w ic is assu e y e S a e . i ucia y a e mo ey, wi o ce ai gua themselves Ed t n d Ch r h M d a ee 4. co e io a a e mo ey o " ic i e mo ey," o co e i e a se a a with this title to the smoker-narrator of "Counterfeit Money" who is i e a e . Gi e s o e wou ma k, o as a sym om a as a w i i g a eco s forever occupied "a chercher midi a quatorze heures," looking for e e e , e eg a a io o ic io a i a io o a i e a y a guage a (a e Wo noon at two o'clock. Wa a e a si io o o co e i e mo ey a o a i e a e is o o ge C. Thirdly and consequently, the reinscription of tobacco in the "com a a e o go mo ey" ( . 2 . Wi ou ques io i g ei e e i e es o is economic cycle of exchange—contract, gift/countergift, alliance— y o esis o e ecessi y o yi g o i oi e g ea es ossi e is o ica i e e ia io , o e wo e s e e e ess ow a o e ca c e i e o ose eak ( e necessarily follows the incessant movement of r ppr pr t n f n x wee "go a guage" a " oke a guage" a i s analogy wi a " is o ica in relation to the system of simple natural need and to the circular
rupture i a i e a y e io i a io (" oma ic ea ism," o a, ugo, o o e si e, Ma equivalence between so-called natural need and the labor or produc- a m , a e y, Gi e, a a ew o e s o e o e si e, e si e o a " u ame a tion a corresponds to it. But this excess in relation to so-called c isis" o " e a guage o i e a u e, i i s e a io o ei g" . 800. oes o is natural need does not mean that the passage to the symbolic sus- y o esis e o a u a i e a e ic io a i e go mo ey, a is, o co i m a o a s a e co e io , e e y o e a "Cou e ei Mo ey" i e oga es o ique y? pends the economic movement. Tobacco is a symbol of this symbolic, A a o e a : w e e wou o e si ua e "Cou e ei Mo ey" i is is o ica sc ema? in other words, of the agreement [ n nt], of the sworn faith, or A i s au o ? the a ia ce a commi s the two parties when ey s a e e wo 2 I C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II I
fragments of b l tz, when they must give, exchange, and obli- honest gentleman. Do you not see, as soon as a man takes gate themselves one to the other. Tobacco symbolizes the symbolic: It some, how bl n l he acts with everyone and how d l ht d seems to consist at once in a consumption (ingestion) and a purely he is t v it away right and left wherever he may be? He does sumptuary expenditure of which nothing natural remains. But the not even wait to be asked but anticipates people's wishes, be- fact that nothing natural remains does not mean, n the contrary, that cause verily tobacco inspires feelings of honor and virtue in all nothing symbolic remains. The annihilation of the remainder, as those who take it. jEmphasis added.] ashes can sometimes testify, recalls a pact and performs the role of One must recall that tobacco, which had been introduced in France memory. One is never sure that this annihilation does not partake of a century earlier, was forbidden by Louis XIII to be sold and was offering and of sacrifice.' denounced by the pietists. The offering and the use of tobacco give Is there an essential relation between the seduction that attracts access to honor and virtue by raising one above the pure and simple one into an alliance, desire as desire for tobacco, and a certain work economic circulation of so-called natural needs and productions, above of mourning linked to the incineration of the remainder? If such a the level of the necessary. It is the moment of celebration and luxury, relation exists, how is it to be determined? This is one of the questions of gratuity as well as liberty. If one may accredit without reservation that will concern us from now on. It has been taking shape for a while such a distinction (which, once again, we will be careful not to do now. To go no further than the n p t and the first lines of a text, here), tobacco seems to open onto the scene of desire beyond need. remember this opening of Moliere's rn n. Sganarelle is holding a So as to register his disappointment, Michel Serres briefly links this tobacco pouch and says: motif of tobacco in n with Mauss's essay.' One should also Whatever Aristotle and al] of Philosophy might say, there is note, and Serres does not, that beyond generalities on the gift, Mauss nothing to equal tobacco: It is the passion of gentlemen and whoever lives without tobacco does not deserve to live. Not only does it please and purify the human brain, but it also 4.
teaches the soul virtue and with it one learns to become an ow o e h G ft a you wi o ai o e isa oi e . You wi i e e i e es a com e sa io , a ms a a que , e su eme aw a ic a es e ci cu a io o goo s i e same way as a o wome a omises, 2. Si ce o acco is co sume ei e i e aw o " a u a " s a e o i e cooke eas s, i es, a ces a ce emo ies, e ese a io s, i su s a j : you wi s a e, e i S auss assig s i a "me a " o "u a cu i a y s a us, i o osi io o e i e e aw a e igio , es e ics a eco omy, magic a ea , a e ai "i a cu i a y s a us o o ey: " e mos commo me o o co sumi g o acco a ma ke , i sum: d . Was i ecessa y o wa e o ee ce u ies aces e a e , co a y o o ey, o o e h th r d o cooki g u b nd t. I is o e e u a u e eye o e aci ic o ea s ow y om o e s w a we a o co sume i e aw s a e, as is o ey, o e ose o i e i o e o cook i , as is ea y k ew o ou se es, o go o e seas o wi ess a c aic sce es, e same e case wi mea . I is i ci e a e , so as e smoke us e ease ca e i a e ." a we e ese e e y ay o e a ks o e Sei e, a th C d r n , r n t A h : Intr d t n t a S n f M th l , l , a s. o a o a e is o ac oss e s ee ?" (" e o e om ua ," Cr t 2 0, Ma c o ee Weig ma (C icago: U i e si y o C icago ess, , . 8. e u a ,, 68, . 26 . cu i a y gi es ise o oce u es a , as ega s ei esu , a e ei e pl nt r ( e i ci e a io o ea e s a o acco o ppl nt r (i ci e a io a e s ake U ess i is ake , is isa oi me wi h G ft, ecause i ei e says o gi es (c . . 2 2 . e " i o a o e a as a e o o acco i e sys em" comes a a y i g o e ca o i i o e s ow ackya , a s a es e i si e o a ecog i io icu a y om e f t a i u i es co a ic o y a ues. "O y o acco wo y o e o e a i ee a is e as se e ce o e same a ag a : " u wou we ame u i es a i u es a a e ge e a y i com a i e" ( . 2 c . as we . 6 . O is e e a e ee a e o ea Mo ie e wi ou Mauss?" I we a o s eak o isa oi am i a e ce, see a o e, c a . 2, . . me e e (w ic we o e ie e we o , ou s wou o co ce e ac a some . O ese o ems, o e mus om ow o r f r (a I o e o o so i mo e o e o o e , a ome o e sew e e, a ee e i s o isco e w a e e is o e e ai e sew e e o e ece a u ame a ook y ea uc a cy, n p n & sai a ou th gi , u a e a ei e Mo ie e o Mauss, a o om, as e e sai l t ( a is: Ga i ee, , o a y o th c a e s i e " i sac i ia e" a " o a y i g a ou e gi t lf. A w a we a e yi g o e ai e e is w y e e is n a e su ime." (nth i a . 4 Ch pt r ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II explicitly takes account of the offering of tobacco. He does so pre- symbolizes in fact the symbolic, namely here alliance and contract, it cisely after the passage on the Serpent clan that I quote once again to does so b t n n (note that we say between men, apparently b underscore this time how the experiences of mourning and gift, the t n n, both in the sense of humanity and of masculinity, and of evocation of food (the cooking of food and the preparation of tobacco) a humanity better represented, as always in this exemplarist logic, and of ghosts or spirits are linked in the same time and on the same by the example of men than by that of women). Since we are think- scene: ing of Mauss's Indians, who have just come on stage, feasting and at In the tribe of the Winnebago (the Sioux tribe), the chiefs of the peace, we note that Baudelaire also wrote, in imitation of Longfellow clans very typically give speeches to their fellow chiefs from ("Imite" de Longfellow" is the subtitle of the poem and thereby poses other tribes; these speeches are very characteristic, models of the question of mimetic rivalry that we noticed with Aloysius Ber- the etiquette widespread in all the Indian civilizations of North trand and Poe), "Le calumet de la paix," "The Peace Pipe" ("De- America. Each clan cooks food and prepares tobacco for the bout, it alluma comme un divin fanal,/ La Pipe de la Paix . . . / representatives of the other tribes, during the clan's festival. Et lentement montait la divine fumee .. ." [Standing, he lit like a Here, for example, are excerpts from the speech made by the divine beacon,/ The Peace Pipe [ . . . ]I And slowly rose the divine chief of the Serpent clan: "I greet you. It is good. How could I smoke . . . ]).. say otherwise? I am a poor, worthless man and you have re- But let us insist on tobacco for reasons that are more strictly inter- membered me. It is good . . . You have thought of the spirits nal to "Counterfeit Money." You would in fact miss one of the surest and you have come to sit down with me ... Soon yoeir dishes means of access, if not the most visible, to the stakes of this duel if will be filled. So I greet you once again, you humans who take you overlooked the contract or the alliance between the narrator and the place of the spirits, etc." And when each chief has eaten, the one he repeatedly calls "my friend"; if you therefore situated the and has put offerings of tobacco into the fire, the closing for- center of this story, in conformity with its appearance, between the mula points to the moral effect of the festival and of all the beggar and the one who gives him the counterfeit money, in other prestations: "I thank you for having come to sit down in this words, who ff r or h ld t to him money without v n him any- seat, I am grateful to you. You have encouraged me . . . The thing, in any case without giving him anything that is legally or le- blessings of your grandfathers who have enjoyed revelations gitimately r d t d. There is here a scene of gift and forgiveness, of (and who are incarnate in you) are equal to those of the spirits. a gift that seems to give nothing and of a forgiveness that is finally withheld. Double annulment, double circle and double annulus of It is good that you have taken part in my festival. (Pp. 70-71) 5 the annulment. The agonistic scene is invested with a powerful li- You will no doubt find such a long detour to be excessive, espe- bidinal charge between the narrator and his friend, within or on the cially on the subject of an elliptical allusion to the tobacconist's in the basis of a friendship, a transference, an alliance, a contract—of which first line of "Counterfeit Money." Why this digression? Is it because tobacco seems to give the key. It does so b f r ll: It seems to be there a digression—wandering or risky promenade, apparently without before the beginning. Before the first act, before speech, there is, method—marks the step of the two friends in "Counterfeit Money" there was, there will have been tobacco. That is the point of d p rt r , and no doubt the rhythm of every incalculable scene of the gift? Or o wit, the first partition or sharing [p rt ] everything comes out of can the digression be justified by the fact that Baudelaire often paid it, everything issues from it, everything is born of it, as from the l attention, in other narratives, to the symbolics of tobacco or more of which it is already the origin, and one can only d p rt from there, exactly to tobacco as symbol of the symbolic itself? If, then, smoking that is, proceed from there, that is, leave it in the distance: "As we were leaving the tobacconist's .. ." 5 O e i i a io o e S i i s y o acco smoke o e S i i as o igi o o- acco c e i-S auss From honey to Ashes, 3 - 9 a 3 Oeuvres completes, 1 3
6 I C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II q
A e aya e a s a a se wi ess ea e e s a i g e co - i g i o e umi i y o n ( Wi w a iso e a a ou us a e ac o e swo ai om e f r t t p ey ake ea i g e o ac- suc i gs u sue a ow i e u e s oo " 7 co is s ei s e s ei gai ei eam u a io a e e y me o e e i o uce e i i i a ama a e a a e y omo- s o y o is ea e e e aya W e ce a ea i g y o esis W a se ua ue a is aye ou o o y i e s o y u i e a a i e is sus ec e accuse co em e is o so muc e ac i se o "Cou e ei Mo ey" (gi e a e e is o gi wi ou e os- ame y e ecei a co sis s i icki g e egga e e oug si i i y nd e im ossi i i y o a im ossi e a a i e " o e e a - is ac i ac occu ies e ce e o e a a i e I u i wou ou ce e i a y w o au s is ue as i eggi g o a ace e e e aya o e a a o y is ie a emai s u o gi e i i e e agai is e cou e oi o a o e a a i e i is oo Mo e e ac y a e aya is u ge a is e o e u o gi a e y ma s i e a u e o "Assommo s es au es" ( ea U e oo e o e w o says "I " w ic is oo ic y com e o e me e y ouc e u o e e a o u i w a e oes e e aya co sis ? W a is i a y o " e ou ou u au e" ( e oo C i s oy u " es yeu u o gi e ? W a a e e easo s a uce o e u gme ? is e- au e" ( e Eyes o e oo We a e a ea y ea i a ea y n mai s o scu e I is o scu e o o y ecause i is e y i icu o i [d ft vu], i o e may u i a way I e i a ag a o e e mi e u ecause e e y co i io s o e e mi a i i y ca o "Cou e ei Mo ey " w e ey mee e oo ma i is is su i- e gi e i e ( o ma a ema ic s uc u e o is sce e e ea- ca i g eyes e mu e a accusa o y e oque ce o ose eyes " o e so i g a cu mi a es i o - o gi e ess o a o -gi is icky; o se si i e ma w o k ows ow o ea em " i is is ook a us i y i se i co okes a w o e i oso y w ose ig oo ( e s eaks e a so u e ema o w ic e "o e i g o my ie " a su wi ou s a ow is e y e i ica I is o e a a o —a o o e i g a a e y wi ou gi eig e a a swe I " e Eyes o o e egga a si e wi ess— a e " ie " as ai e o gi e e oo " is ook is mu i ie y ee a a e a wo c i e y gi i g cou e ei mo ey (assumi g a eas a e i w a e is ow c i e w om e is " aki g ou o some e e i g ai " sai e ie wou a e ai e o kee is omise e wou e e y u i i g e o e o " u semai " e e oo e as i a e ecei e someo e a use someo e s co i e ce i im e- aye — u e aye w a a w om? o y o a swe a ques- . As a s a e i Dissemination; e e c e ea s as o ows: io o e mus ake some is a ce om e ce e o a a a i e Que que e e e ce, mieu , e e s e a o a oi e e ei u g a oeu e, co w ose a c emy mi es so we o ack o mea i g as Ma a me mig sis e ai A e e e, sa s ou eau, es ma i u a io s, oiso s, e oi is a e sai es e ics wi o i ica eco omy "c e i " "ca i a " a au eme qu e ie e ies, ou co i ue a a sim e i e ige ce. Comme "mo ey" ("A ce ai e e e ce owa e e i c a o a o y o e e is e ou e a a ec e c e me a e que eu oies, e ou , oi i u que i oso e s e i i wou co sis o aki g u agai wi ou e o e esoi , a sa oi es e ique u e a e aussi eco omie o i que: c es , e cette isee emie e, i ci a eme , que a c imie u e g o ieu , a i e u ace e ma i u a io s e oiso s coo e ow i o some i g ou e ecu seu . ou ce qui A meme, u comme au e u se s, a a o e a ecious s o es so as o co i ue oug s ee i e i- ( a a i io , mai e a e a ou e, o e e es i ue au omai e socia . a ge ce Si ce e e a e o y i a wo a ways o e o me a e- ie e u e, qui e e o , i e i oso a e: mais e e a o ce, a s a i a ce, sea c i o w ic ou ee i u ca es— ame y es e ics o o e si e e u u credit, ece a e capital ou e e uisa A umi i e e monnaie! A ec a a so o i ica eco omy—i is i ci a y o is a e aim a que eso e se c e c e ce a, au ou e ous e que eu com is a c emy was e g o ious as y a ou i g ecu so E e y i g Ma a me, "Magie," Oeuvres completes, . 400 em asis a e . " e ou e a o ce s oo ou u e o ack o mea i g io o e cu e Sessio " (i Dissemination) is i sc i e , mo e e ac y i se e , e wee wo agme s a a i io o e masses s ou e es o e o e socia omai o is i e u e quo a io ( . 8, 8 2, 286 o w ic i o oses, i e ec , i e i e a , a ea i g. e u s o e eami g o go o ce ca e e i oso a u i 8. C . Parages, i a icu a egi i g i e su c a e i e " a ausse mo o es a ows i i a ce e u u e r d t, ece i g p t l o e uc- aie," . 22 .
I C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II r 119
"Cou e ei Mo ey " e e is e ook o e oo ; e e oo e e is esc i io o e ca a i s u u y y a ai e o mo e i e e wi e gi ; e e oo e e is e a a o wi someo e e se; a e e o ma a ea s ( e is a ou o y wi is wo c i - e e oo e e is a i k e a ia ce e wee e a a o a some- e a i e oy a a o e oo weak o wa k e x s a e a o e o e ; e e oo e e is o e a o is o e a e usa o e wo o e s A is s o y o e eye a so akes accou o e gi e— e i o y o gi e a e io o ese ooks o e oo ; e e oo o e s eyes e a a o a e co c u es e e is a e usa o o gi e ess—e e a e o e a o e a - a o o e o e w o ees om e oo ma s ook a e ec s is o o y was I mo e y is ami y o eyes u I e a i e ema ese a e so ma y i a ia e eme s ea u es commo o as ame o ou g asses a eca e s oo ig o r i s I o a a i es e i e e ce i o e ca u i us is o e o e u e my ga e o ook i o you s ea o e o ea my oug a se ua i e e ce e o e a e a y o e a a o is sym- i em; a as I u ge my eyes i o you eyes so eau i u o ic a e is a woma Wi is woma o w om e is ou y a so cu ious y so ose g ee eyes i a i e y Ca ice a o e e goes i o a ca a o e ace o sum ua y co sum io ; i s i e y e Moo you sai o me " ose eo e a e i su - a e e o ows e sce e o w ic we wi ea o y e o e s e a e wi ei eyes o e wi e as coac oo s Cou you e egi i g a e e A o e o ma i e e ce esi es a ask e o ie o o se em away?" e e ose ua i y as a a e as is e omose ua i y o e o e a - So you see ow i icu i is o u e s a o e a o e my swee a ge a ow i commu ica e oug is e e e- a i e is a e a a o e o e w o says , e s e s o y o e su e— e is u y a a a o w o summa i es a ese s w a a - wee eo e w o o e eac o e i° e e — u is a essee e a essee o e a a io e a a- e us e ace ou s e s e us go ack o w a i ks e e e o ee is z w om e o es o i you e e w om e a es a o e gi o gi wi ou e a e o a e e o e e wi ou e w om is ime h ddr h lf i o e o ec a e is a e a su ise o a gi W a a e s o e egga a o e ie o e is o e e o m o e a a i e is e e e a os o e i e se se a a o w a i e ec asses o comes o ass e wee em seems o o e iscu si e mo e a o e o oca i e i e e a io a i s g a ce o co s i u e e ce a e e o e a a i e u e pp r nl n d r , i e ie s So You wa o k ow w y I a e you o ay? I wi ce ai y e e cussio o is ges u e w e e says o e a a o "I was e cou - e a e o you o u e s a a o me o e ai i o ium a nf n you si ce you a e 1 o e ie e e mos e ec e am e o e ei coi " e i ac a e es is ake u wi a so o i e- emi i e im e mea i i y a a yo e cou e e mee io mo o ogue o i a e e i e a io y e a a o e a e We a s e a o g ay oge e w ic o me a seeme s eaks i e i s e so e a ways oes so e s eaks co i uous y a some imes e ema ks i as i s eaki g ou ou i a s o We a u y omise eac o e a a ou oug s t h lf, t w a e is sayi g t wou e s a e i commo a a ou wo sou s e ce- i e oice o e am e w e e says " W a a si gu a y mi u e is i u io I sai o myse " o wou e u o e—a eam w ic a e a as o i g h lf: o igi a a ou i e ce a a i g ee eame y e e yo e e esse ia mo eme o e a a i e as suc w a makes i a - o o e cou say o y o w a e a - o ea i as ee ea i e y o e a ce e e s i s f ll, a e e i g a i e i e you wa e o si ow i o e s o e a a o A w a a e s o im is w a occu s i is [l r o a ew ca o mi g e co e o a ew ou e a s i i - ie s i w a e a s a ie s i so as o su ise i e e wi u e u a ea y g o ious y is ayi g i s u i - pr ndr ]. u s i mo e ecise y e e e oes o oi ow o w a e a s e a a o a a ec s is ie s i I akes e o m o a is e s e o s . me i a io n th v nt a a me i a io a is o e em om ea-
9 Oeuvres completes, pp. 317 - 1 ; Paris Spleen, 5 ; a s mo i ie 1 Oeuvres compii2tes, 319; I i 53 a s mo i ie 20 I Ch pt r r "C nt rf t M n " II 2
so i g a s ecu a io —a infinitum. e a a o s ecu a es o a (" I was e cou e ei coi e e ie ca m y as oug o us i y s ecu a io o is e e w ic co sis i g i a gi ( e gi o some imse o is o iga i y" i e ie a o ecou e w a a mo ey a proves [s a e e i o e ca u i a way o e cou e - i u a e e i e w i e seemi g o oas a o co esse ei cou we e e e ec o a s ecu a io a e ge e s i i s o made e u o i g wou a e a e e o e a a o u i a ca i a i i g as io o e s ecu a i e e e s e e e i a o e a a io W a e e e e se o wis e mo i a io we sum is w a u ges e "I" o ask imse "W a is a e i g o may a i u e o e ie w e e e s e a a o e u (a me?" "W a as us a e e ?" a "W a is a e e ?" W a oes we wi come ack o is we a e e e y easo o i k a e " o a e " [arrived mea ? Ca o e c ea e a e e ? Ca o e make wa e o o uce a e ec o e a a o is e ec had I e ai ] history, make a story, ca o e make i ge e a o e asis o wi e o a e o e a a o o o e ie s i a i ks im o e a - e o a simu ac um e e cou e ei mo ey? e a a o says to a o I was a ma e o "c ea i g a e e " a so o a si e o i gs himself, a a ce ai mo ime a e egi i g o is s ecu a io e si e o e a a o O e a y ee s o us i gs e y a i " suc co uc i my ie was e cusa e o y y e esi e o c ea e is i ec io o imagi e a a e ee a o e wi e egga e a e e i is oo e i s i e " ie wou o e a s a e o e e e cou e ei mo ey; e o y u w a asses a w a comes o ass oug a mo eme o i i in the presence of the narrator a i o e o provoke e a a o transference, is a e e e as been c ea e i e i e o e a a- wi is co essio o a co essio is a e ce e o is ci cu a io o imse ; i as a ec e e a ic o relation i se e a io as a - o is eco omy a co essio wi ou e e a ce a wi ou me cy a i e a a a io a is c ea u i s o a e e a io between u a co essio i w ic e gui y o e ( e so-ca e o su ose e a a o a is ie gui y o e e accuse co i es y co i i g e u i e ie - W a a e s oug w a comes o ass a e s o the a a- a a o Confiding himself us (i e ame o u o o ie s i o a o is e a io o ie s i o e u a e o a so e e o e e gives imse o e su e e e e s a eas o gi e imse o o e i ca a e o o gi i g im o gi i g im is o gi e ess o ow- make a s ow o imse Ise donner en spectacle], o ese imse o i g e e e a e o e wi a e perhaps o oke y o e i g iew o gi e imse o e o u gme u we wi see a e a - cou e ei mo ey e a a o e s us i e ec (a o e mus ea a o oes o wa o ake a y accou o is gi a i a y case e i i e ac o a a io a e a i e co e o e s o y o e wi o es o wi o gi e ess I e ie soug o o oke e a a i e o make use s i o ese ee ca ego ies is is w a is a a o w a i e wa o us im o o? A ow? e a s we a e i g o me; is is w a is a e i g o us o my ie a wi see esumi g a is a e e is a y i g o see a a e o me. I ca o gi e im my o gi e ess i u I o o owe im relation ( e e ce e e e ce i e e ce i e a ce a s e e ce o is o gi e ess I oug e e o e use o gi e i o im—a we i e a a io is o e e o say e sayi g i asmuc as i wi o s om om a ecause y o ea y gi i g to this poor ma e as o seei g gi e to me. Gi e w a ? e ques io is e aye y oo ma y e ou s So some i g a e s a e e akes ace W e e oes i ake a uses o a si g e a imme ia e es o se o measu e u o i ace? W e e oes i a e ? o w om oes i a e ? I w a oes ig away o e mome e us sim y y o e i i o e ocus o i co sis ? a w ic a e s e e is o e co e o a s o y ose e e e a isks emai i g i e ackg ou o e s o y a e e s a a a a i e e a io ge e a y e o s W a a e s a - e e o e a a i e e s o e a a io o e e eme s o e a a io i se egi - e e e akes ace i e s uc u e aye s o e a a io i i g wi e ic io o i s su ose su ec O e ge e a y i ks e a ic o e a a i e e a io a i ks e a a o o is ie a a a i e iscou se e o s e e s a a e ake ace ou si e o e e e e a io as i k o as e igio o ie s i e wee em i a e o e i a a i e e a io so o e i ks oes o ecou a so akes— e wee em— e ma i es o m o e a a i e e a- i se ; i e o s a co e a is gi e ou si e i a e o e i e e io I e ie a o o e a a o w a a i ac a e e we mus kee i mi a w a a e s a e s o e a a o
22 I pl r r "C nt rf t M n " II I 2
a o e a a io ; w a a e s o okes e a a o a e ecessa y co i io e og amme e ec e cou e o wou a a io ; e com o e s o e a a io a e a wi ou w ic e o e i e as ei e a gi o as a e e as equi e y a ecessi y e e o ou wou o ake ace I is as if e a a i e co i io a is o sema ic o e ome o ogica a is w y e co i io we e e cause o e ecou e i g as if e a a i e o uce commo o e gi a e e e is a ce ai u co i io a i y (Unbe- e e e i is su ose o e o I is o e co i io o e a a- dingtheit: e us ea e is Ge ma wo sus e e e e; i says some- i e a e ecou e e e wou a e ake ace a i wi a e i g a ou e i g [Ding] a e o - i g; we s ou mo eo e ake ace As cause a co i io o e i g [chose], i is e a - ea i a e ei egge e u i o ei egge e e e a e a i e a gives e ossi i i y o e ecou e i g e ossi i i y gi e e e as gi e gi as e e mus e i u i e u mo i- o e s o y as s o y o a gi o o a o gi e ess u a so a y e a e — o e am e isi e es e ey a e ecisi e a ey mus same oke e ossi i i y o e im ossi i i y o gi a o gi e ess e e o e ea e a ic i e u e co i uum o a a a i e a "I wi e e o gi e im " co c u es e a a o e us o e i ass- e e e ess ey ca I o ey mus e u e o e o causa i ies i g I e e y si ua io w e e the ossi i i y o a a io is e co i- i a i s a ey mus i a i s a a a si g e ow i g i o io o e s o y o is o y [de l'histoire], o e is o ica e e o e e a io uck c a ce e a ea o y tukhe, wi e ee om o e ice oug o e a e o say a e co i io o k owi g o e esi e o ow wi e o o s gi ow [coup de don]. e gi a e e e k ow (epistemê, is o ia rerum gestarum, Historic) gi es ise o is o y o ey o i g e ce e a s i ci es o iso e a is i - i se (res gestae, Geschehen, Geschichte), w ic cou com ica e i o ci es wi ou i ci es I a y case i e gi o e e e i e co a ic i a y ma y a gume a io s o e ege ia o ei eg- e e o e gi mus emai u e ai a e y a sys em o e icie ge ia y e a a ways seem o equi e e i e se o e ( o Historie causes i is e e ec o o i g; i is o o ge a e ec a a e e wi ou Geschichte), a oug i is ue ey o so o y a e a i g i e e a e as I wou say i e c a i o se ses o e wo i s i eg a e e ossi i i y o a a io o o e e a io o k ow- des e ec s de don, gi effects: o e am e e a ea o y e e s c ea e i g i o a o e e e y e gi o cou e ei mo ey a o w ic i sum o a e s Suc wou e e gi e ime suc wou e e gi e s ace suc a e s ecu a i g wou e e s a ge s aci g s uc u e o "Cou e ei Mo ey" om A ye —e ec s o u e c a ce wi e e o m a gi a as e e mome e wo ie s—o w om o e is e a a o — ake mea i g o a gi i i e sema ics o e wo "gi " i seems im- ei is a ce o e om e o e u i s o a oge e om e ie a e o a i g age cy ee y as e i e io o gi e a o acco is s S aci g ey ea e i e same s e u i a s e a i is a ima e y a wa i g- o-gi e a i s o a y a wa i g- o- mus a so e a oge e o e is s e sca s e ime o e s o y i say e i e io - o-gi e o e gi i s mea i g o gi W a wou a ocee s om a gi e mome o a gi e mome gi e i w ic I ga e wi ou wa i g o gi e a wi ou k owi g e e mus e e e —a e e o e a ea o a a i e a e e a I am gi i g wi ou e e ici i e io o gi i g o e e i o a a i e— o e e o e gi a e e mus e gi o phenomenon s i e o myse ? is is e a a o i w ic we a e ee e gage of gift o e e o e a a i e a is o y A is e e e e o om e egi i g e e is o gi wi ou e i e io o gi i g co i io a co i io o e e mus emai i a ce ai way u o e- e gi ca o y a e a mea i g a is i e io a —i e wo seea e e gi ike e e e as e e mus remain u o eseea e se ses o e wo a e e s o i e io as we as o i e io a i y u emai so wi ou kee i g i se I mus e i se e s uc u e owe e e e y i g s emmi g om e i e io a mea i g a so y e a ea o y; i mus appear c a cy o i a y case i e as suc ea e s e gi wi se -kee i g wi ei g ke i i s e y e - a e e e as e i e io a co e a e o a e ce io a is a - e i u e W e ce e e igma ic i icu y o ge i is o a i g so u e y su ise y e e cou e wi w a i e cei es eyo e e i e ess [evenementialiie]. e e mus e c a ce e cou e e i s o i o o a ici a io —w ic a ea y a ea s e ome o ogi- i o u a y e e u co scious ess o iso e a e e mus e ca y im ossi e W a e e e case may e wi is e ome o- i e io a ee om a ese wo co i io s mus —mi acu ous y ogica im ossi i i y a gi o a e e a wou e o eseea e g acious y—ag ee wi eac o e 24 , Ch pt r r "C nt rf t M n t , 2
is e eme o tukhe su e im oses i se i "Cou e ei Mo ey " e us e u o e ace o is sce e we cou say o e sce e i e-ma ks i se I we e ie e e a a o is ie cou o y a e o e c ime oug ou is a a io is i ac e oye as a is- ee "e cusa e" ( e o e w o says "I" oes o seem o is i guis cou se o i c imi a io o ec imi a io A c ime mus a e ake ema ica y e wee e cuse a o gi e ess " y e esi e o c ea e ace a e e "; e wou e e cusa e y e esi e o o y o o uce e tukhe o e gi e us say a e e a a e y a ea o y e e a e e a ca o e o esee om i s causes o co i io s ou o o e o e i g comes o ema k a o e tukhe w ic ece i g i a si g e s oke o uck u o "c ea e" a e e e co seque ces o ma e i ossi e u is co i io o ossi i i y wi e e e a su - w ic a e u o eseea e icie cause e e e co i io akes e o m o a e e o c a ce encounter wi e oo ma "We e cou e e a oo u i o my mise a e ai a ways co ce e wi ooki g mee i g e ma w o e ou is ca wi a em i g a " o oo a wo o c ock (w a a e aus i g acu y is a u e s gi o me e e su e y came e i ea a suc co uc o As we we e ea i g e o acco is s my ie ca e u y my ie s a was e cusa e o y y e esi e o c ea e a se a a e is c a ge; i e e ocke o is wais coa e e e i is oo e i s i e e a s e e o ea e a ie s i e sma go coi s; i e ig sma si e coi s; i is co seque ces isas ous o o e wise a a cou e ei coi e ouse ocke a a u o e ies a i a y i e i e a s o a egga mig e ge e Mig i o mu i y ig e u a si e wo- a c iece a e a sc u i i e i o ea coi s? Cou i o a so ea im o iso ? A a e wi a icu a ca e kee e a ake o e am e was e a s goi g o a e im "W a a si gu a y mi u e is i u io " I sai o myse a es e as a cou e ei e o o assi g cou e ei mo ey We e cou e e a oo ma w o e ou is ca wi a e cou e ei coi cou us as we e a s e e ge m o em i g a se e a ays wea o a oo i e s ecu a o A so my o i g wou a e o i g wou a e ake ace wi ou a cy we i s cou se e i g wi gs o my ie s mi a is "e cou e " wi ou e c a ce oo ma wi ou is e cou - awi g a ossi e e uc io s om a ossi e y o eses e o o u e We a e a s a i g tukhe e e y " o u e " is c a ce W i e a ki g o imse w i e e ec i g—a e w o e a a i e is oo ma is e o u e o e s o y A a e y o i g wou a e caug i e ec o o is mi o — e a a o s ecu a es o e a e e — ei e e ges u e o e gi o e co essio o s ecu a io ike a ai e o mo e i e e s ecu a es o w a ca e a gume o e e use o gi e ess—wi ou e good fortune a e o ca i a i a ca i a u i g e age o mo ey mo e e- a u s e egga i e a o e ie s a ie s wi a cise y i e age o a ue as mo e a y sig e ci cu a io o e o u e w o a e a ei is osa a eas e c a ge om a u - cou e ei mo ey ca e ge e e e o a " i e s ecu a o " e c ase a emai e o mo ey o o ious y—a i is i o e o ay ea i e es o a ue wea Cou e ei mo ey ca ecome ue wi i a we a e a s a e tukhe y " o u e"— e s akes a e ca i a Is o e u o ca i a e i asmuc as i o uces i - ose o c a ce o the luck of the draw [sort] (fors, fors fortuna) a e es wi ou a o y working all by itself as we say cou e ei esi es o e is w o e essay o gi a o gi e ess o e is mo ey? Is e e a ea i e e ce e e e wee ea a cou e ei w o e a em a gi a o gi e ess e a e ( fors), e o e o - mo ey o ce e e is ca i a ? A c e i ? E e y i g e e s o e e y a esi e e e a o m e ge e a co i io o e sce e ac o ai a e c e i we we e a ki g a ou i e wake o Mo - a e si ua e o ou e e e o e e a ea o y o e e e c ea e aig e is e y au e ai e ea s i e ec wi e e a io s perhaps (perhaps: fors, forte; forsan, forsit, forsitan, fortasse) y e o e - amo g ic io i ge e a i e a y ic io a ca i a ism suc as ey i g o cou e ei mo ey e e e o e e a ea o y o e e cou e mig e o og a e ac i g ou a sce e i e ea o e mo e wi e oo ma y c a ce o y uck ( forte). ca i a E e e o e ese wo o ui ous co i io s o ese co i io s o 1 C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II 127
o ui y o e mus su ose a ake i o accou a o e a a o- u i a a e u e ec e u o eseea e ma e i a isco i uous ge e i i ia co i io I a ea s wi e i s a ag a w e i is way wi e a o a as ece e i I is gi e g a ui ous y a a ques io o ese wo i e s w o a e ea i g e o acco is s a o ui ous y as i y c a ce e cou e a e a ei is osa e oug mo ey o a is is i s co i io is e social condition o e wo a e s I is gi e o em o e we - u i o my mise a e ai a ways co ce e wi ooki g o o u e o e su icie y a o e y a e o e uck o e aw oo a wo o c ock (w a a e aus i g acu y is a u e s gi o e a e o e isio gi i g away e su us e su eme o o me e e su e y came e i ea a suc co uc o my e su e ui y ike Augus e u i i " e Mu e s i e ue ie s a was e cusa e o y y e esi e o c ea e a e e Mo gue" ( e is " e uce " o " o e y" u i es com o a y o i is oo e i s i e perhaps e e [ fors, forte] o ea e a - c e i " y cou esy o is c e i o s " a ca e e o e imse e ie co seque ces isas ous o o e wise a a cou e ei u u y o ooks " e wo ie s a e o ecessa i y ic u ey coi i e a s o a egga mig e ge e ca a o e u u y o gi i g a ms As o i g is sai a ou e U e e sig o is perhaps a e e e oye a e u o eseea e o igi s o is wea o o e co i io s o is socia co i io co seque ces o e e e o oke y is ie s cou e ei mo ey e e y i g a e s as i i we e a u a as i a u e a eci e is is u i y o o u e a a u e o e uck o e aw (fors) a e o gi g o socia c ass o u e is a u e I gi es gratis o ose w a gi es ge e ous y at birth, to the nascent being ( o a u e e a s w o a e e g ace o ecei e om i is gi i gi es em a gi a o e a io is a a ia ce a omi a es e w o e iscou se o e gi es em e w e ewi a o gi e is u i y o a u e a o u e a a o a o okes e e e mos a a o ica e ec s Si ce we is ema ke a e i e e w e e a a o co esses " u i o a e a ki g a ou a a o e us eca e e a au e ai e a my mise a e ai a ways co ce e wi ooki g o oo a wo a e o e i e a s o y " e a a o e e aume e " ( e a a o o c ock (w a a e aus i g faculty [i o e wo s gi e is gi e ] o A ms a a some o is e i o s co si e is o e i ac e i a u e s gi o me e e suddenly came e i ea a suc co uc i s i e o "Cou e ei Mo ey " A ese a a o es a e o- o my ie s a was e cusa e o y y e esi e o c ea e a g amme y e co ce ( e is o y o e co ce o a u e a e e " (I u e sco e is e a io e wee e g a ui ous ess o i s o a o phusis. e is o y o is co ce o a u e as a esse - e gi a e i u i e su e ess o e i ea ia e a io o e gi A is i wo ways a u i i g o igi a y I is a u e e a as gi e im is gi o o u e I as a o uc i e phusis, a u e ca e on the one hand e g ea ge e - ma e im e gi o is gi o wo ki g i a e aus i g ma e o ous a ge ia o o o w ic e e y i g e u s wi e esu seek w a ca o e ou i e ace w e e i s ou a u a y e a a o a u e s o e s (a aw [nomos, thesis], ee om socie y ou a u e as e owe im wi is gi o ooki g o w a mi a so o come ack o a u e a e s i a u e itself in differ- oes o a u a y occu i i s ace So e e is a so o cou e - once; a on the other hand, e us say a e a Ca esia e oc a u e a u a gi o a u e o ook o a is o i e oga e ques io e- ca e e o e o so-ca e a u a ecessi ies—i o osi io e- ma esi e agai s e a u a e e cy is uck is c a ce o cise y o a aw (nomos), ee om socie y is o y mi a so i gi es im y o ui ous g ace e w e ewi a o go a a e y o So e a u a is o ce agai e e e o e gi u is ime i agai s a u e a i icia y a i icious y a o ious y y wo ki g a e o m o e gi e We ca o go eyo is ou i e e e 1 O e e e is a su eme a y a a o o is a u a gi o e cou e - a u a A e e o a a o ious co ce a io o is mi com- e e y occu ie "wi ooki g o oo a wo o c ock " a i ea 1 is " ogic" a is "a o e ics" o e gi e e e oy ose o i e a ce e ques io o e gi was i sc i e i e e a o e is i e (" i e a ce " i Mar- comes o im "su e y " I oes o come a ou as ui o is a o gins, 7/ I eca i g e ei egge ia ema k (" e gi o ese ce is a o e y o A o ia i g [Die Gabe von Anwesen ist Eigentum des Ereignensj," Zeit and Sein, 11. C " e ac eu e a e i e " in The Post Card, 515 / 711 1 was i e es e e i u e sco i g a " e e is o esse ce o i e a ce " a "i 2 I C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II I 2 may a so a y e co ce o pr d t n wi a o ph . ike a o e e ce a i e e ce W e e is e ue e e e o "Cou e ei a o o wo k e co ce o o uc io ca some imes e o ose Mo ey"? W a is i o e e o mo ey o o a mo e a y sig ? A o e e i e ( os -"Ca esia " se se o a u a i y a some imes w e mo ey ge s ema e ia i e (c ecks c e i ca s co e sig a- as we o e a ue o gi e o uc is o e gi e a o uc- u es a so o w a ecomes o e ac o gi i g o e am e i g seems o e c u e o a io u is o e p nK n o ph i s o o e oo ma i e s ee ? W a is "c e i " i is case a o ci e a e o a io o w a gi es i e o igi a y o uc i i y a Mo aig e o ce agai ? W a is ai ? W a is c e i i i e a u e? Ca e ge e s causes o g ow o i c ease i gs o ig a owe i g? o e e e s o y o mo ey? A wi is s o y a ici a e o o i Is i o w a gi es o m a y i gi g i gs i o e e ome - i e a u e o some so ? Ca o e quo e mo ey? Ca o e quo e a a i y o e ig u ei s o e e o s e u f th t h h i gi es? c eck? W a is i wo ? O e e y i g i gi es a o e ac a i gi es? I is o a i g A ese ques io s a e e e o e i e wo " o u e " a is o uc io o u e ( a e c a ce uck o s o ui y a ecessi y f r , f rt n . U e e ea i g o e a ea o y a makes se se a a e o o ose ; o e co a y ey a e a ie is e c a ce wi w ic o e is o a owe o ay i us a y way ow is o e o e a e wi ega o is o igi a y o uc i i y w a soe e e e is a i e es i g coi ci e ce o e mig ca i a c a ce a ecessi y o o a i g a u e? a is e ques io — o omo ym i is e ome o ook ace sim y wi i a si g e a - a ysica a a e ica ques io e us say—o e e y "Cou e - guage o imi i s e egesis I wi kee as s ic y as ossi e o e ei Mo ey " e a a o i gs is es o se o i a ossi e e- imi s o au e ai e s e u o wi ou a i g i s eca e wo s o se u gi e y a u e wi e acu y o " ooki g o oo a i gs n th n h nd, e o ema ic a om a o e oi o wo o c ock " e wi a so a e e a o a e e ques io is e a o a- iew we a ie o e a o a e i a e a ea s i e c e om- io makes se se o y w e e e e o a sc eme o as Ka mig o ymic i e " o s"; 3 n th th r h nd, e ac a e e e o e say o a sc ema a e a es o uc i e a u e o mo a a u e y e gi mus a ways kee i s s a us o i ca cu a e o u o eseea e x p i e me ia y o e gi O e su ec o e e igma ic u i y o o - t n (wi ou ge e a u e wi ou og am a e e wi ou co - u e ( om f r a o uc i e o o a i g a u e e us o e wi - ce ow e e is a e c wo o s w ic a so comes om e ou awi g a y co c usio s om i a e e c ic io a y ttr a i ( is ime om f r , ou si e e e io o a a e a is i se e e s f r , f rt n o f rr (f r , f rr i G eek ph n w ic mea s o ea o uce ( o e am e ui o c o s fr ] . a so mea s "I . " o s," e ace au rh r d l h x l p , y ico as A a am a Ma ia e o " i e se se o ecou o r l t n (l t , e a ici e o o ok ( a is: Au ie amma io , 6 " o s," e ace o h W lf M n M W rd, f rr , e a io as a a i e o e a io as . A we ee o a s. a a a o so (Mi ea o is: U i e si y o Mi eso a ess, 86 . e e agai , oi ou a is o ema ic o cou e ei mo ey ca ies us a i is a ma e o e imi s o a o ema ic o a o ia io —a e ques io o e ca ies us ack i cessa y o e ea o e g ea ques io s o e - gi wi e e e se a a e om a o mou i g: Sea i g e oss o e o ec , u a so ma ki g e e usa o mou , suc ma eu e is o eig o a ac ua y o ose o e ocess o i o ec io . I e e o kee e ea a i e, i ac f ( v n d , u i is o y i o e (is a w ic o o y cou e e e a o ia e i e h o i s ame o i s o e use, i a ecessa i y equi oca way, o o e e ea as a i i g a o me, a ea i g, u a so a w ic ea e s e au o i y o e h i ge e a ...." ea v n , oug e ocess o i o ec io , as a e s i so ca e W ic is, i e ec , w a is ei g sai e e a ou e gi , a us o e mus esi a e o ma mou i g. e ques io cou o cou se e aise as o w e e o o o say: a ou e gi t lf. e " ecessi y o a u u e i i e a y" was e ema ke : " o ma " mou i g ese es e o ec th r (a i i g e so ea i si e " i e a ce is o a s ecies o e ge us nt l l d ff r n . I e gi o ese ce is me. is ques io —o e ge e a a o ia io o sa ekee i g o e o e as e o e y o A o ia i g, i e a ce is o ocess o o ia io i a y se se th r— n a ways e aise as e eci i g ac o , u oes i o a e same w a e e . I is ei e osi io (a o ia io o ega io (e o ia io , u a e ime u e e y i e i aws e wee i o ec io a i co o a io , o e . e ce i seems— u e e, a e , we a e ma ki g e ecessi y o a u u e i i oug a esse ia a i e uci e am igui y? e us gi e is ques io a e a y— a i e a ce wou e o mo e a s ecies o e ge us Er n a ei g." c a ce o e e ose . ( . 6 i ii c . assim, o a y . 26 ii 0 I Ch pt r r "Cou e ei Mo ey" II
a homonym of the noun f r that signifies "door"), and which means significant of these sentences ought to wring cries of protest today "with the exception of," "except." It has nothing to do with the Latin from all the champions of liberal democracy. (We will emphasize in word fors that means chance, fate, or fortune. Well, it happens that passing certain words, for reasons that seem to speak for themselves.) Baudelaire, in a prophetic or apocalyptic passage from of which we will quote only a few fragments, reserves the status of absolute What is not a prayer? Shitting is a prayer, according to what x pt n not for the gift but for money. At the end of the world, which the d r t say when they shit. is near, when "supreme evil" will win out, a "pitiless good sense" [ • • • n t r ll [Baudelaire's em- "will condemn everything, x pt [f r ] money." The only thing that Man, that is to say everyone, is so will be saved from perdition in this sinking world, the only thing that, phasis] depraved that he suffers less from the universal debase- since it is not a thing, will keep some credit in the eyes of this implac- ment than from the establishment of a reasonable hierarchy. able good sense of tomorrow, in a mechanized and "Americanized" The world is coming to an end. The only reason it might en- world, says Baudelaire's anger in what he himself calls an "hors dure is that it exists. How weak this reason is compared to all d'oeuvre," is money. What has to be condemned in the advent of those that announce the contrary, particularly this one: What industrial capitalist society is democracy and "progress." Baudelaire does the world have to do henceforth under the sun? [ . . . ] does not differentiate between "universal progress" and "universal A new example and new victims of the inexorable moral laws, ruin." And he condemns them n th n f th p r t, but of the spirit we will perish by that by which we thought to live. M h n of evil which he opposes here to the evil of progressism or to the will have A r n z d us to such a point, progress will have triumph of historical optimism in industrial (capitalist and demo- so thoroughly atrophied the p r t l part of us that nothing cratic) society. Here are these fragments which we will read, up to the within the sanguine, sacrilegious, or anti-natural reveries of the "smoke" of a certain "cigar," while asking ourselves how Baudelaire's utopians will be comparable to its positive results. [ . . . . ] But admirers (and that includes all of us, doesn't it?) accept, would accept still this will not be th pr v l. or would silence today such (spiritualist and demonic) invectives Human imagination can conceive, without too much trouble, against democracy, progress and, finally, human rights." The least republics or other communal states, deserving of some glory if they are led by sacred men, by certain aristocrats. But it is not n v r l r n r n 4. W o wou a e o aug a au e ai e s a i e gia e o o ia, i ee ac especially through political institutions that ism? A w o wi us o eu a i e is ge oci a assage om Mon coeue mis nu: "A v r l pr r —f r th n l ttl tt r — ll become manifest. ice co s i acy o o ga i e o e e e mi a io o e ewis ace. ews, Librarians It will be through the degradation of feelings [d r ]. Need a wi esses o e Redemption" (Oeuvres completes, . 06 ? e ami is ea y o see I say that what little remains of politics will struggle painfully i is assage a "gau oise ie" o a a k Ifacetiet "Gau oise ie . . . Ce i e co i ue i in the clutches of general animality and that those who govern is i ec io ( ace ious assassi s " (Das Passagen-Werk, e . o ie ema [ a k will be forced, in order to sustain themselves and to create a ghost u am Mai : Su kam e ag, 82 , . 80 . W ic co i ms a Ce i e was a ea y e cusa e a a o a e, s e e e y i e a u e a a guage, o a i g o e a sai wo se i gs a so ma y o e s w om ume ous osecu o s o ay o o a ow o ge away wi a y i g, o easo s a ca e a a y e . C au e ic ois, e i o o e Oeuvres completes, co esses a " is assage is o e y easy o i e l t t b sai — o e e mi a e e ews w o we e e wi esses o is e em io . e ." W ic oes o e e im om co c u i g wi co i e ce: "A y [c a ge o ] A y a i Semi ism is o e ismisse " ( . . O , is a so? Wou e i o y e e a i Semi ism is o e ismisse ." As i is y o esis, w ic mus e ci e in extenso, co sis i o osi g o e e mi a e o y e wi esses? A e e is o a i Semi ism we e e e oge eous wi e oo s o a i Semi ism a us as i oce i is ega i a ? C au e ic ois oes o i eg a y ci e e assage o w ic e e e s. e e i as e i o y wi w ic au e ai e is e e c e i e ( a k e e, i o y e e . ic ois is: "Go is a sca a —a sca a a ays o [Dieu est un scandale—un scandale qui comme s: " e e is ow we u e s a i : Gi e a Go is a sca a (e o o io rapporter ( . 660 . "E e mi a io o e ewis ace": e i ea, i a y case, was o o Fusees, . 660 a us a sca a e i ca a e e eeme , i is ecessa y—i o ica y, so ew i Eu o e. o was i e so e o e y o a i Ge ma y.
132 Chapter Four "Counterfeit Money" II 133
of order, to resort to means that would send shivers down the Scansion, cadence of the events f f rt n , chances, strokes of luck spine of our present-day humanity, which is, however, so hard- that rhythmically punctuate this story of gift and forgiveness, or hearted?—So the son will flee the family, not at eighteen years rather this step, this pas de don and this pas de pardon: to Everything is but at twelve, emancipated by his greedy precocity; he will flee done and everything happens while walking. We have resorted to the it not to seek heroic adventures, not to deliver a beautiful maiden Greek word, indeed to the Aristotelian concept of t h , in opposition imprisoned in a tower, not to immortalize a garret by sublime to automaton. Tukhe designates in general a chance when the latter thoughts, but to begin a business, to get rich, and to compete with derives its meaning with regard to a human finality, intention, or in- his vile papa—founder and shareholder in a newspaper that will tentionality. Is it by chance that Aristotle chooses the example of credit spread enlightenment and would make the Siecle of the day look to illustrate this difference? The creditor, going to the market in the like a henchman of superstition. —Then, errant women, the de- agora, who runs into his debtor by chance and gets his debt repaid, classe'es, those who have had a few lovers and whom one some- thinks that there is tukhe in it, finalized chance, whereas automaton times calls Angels, by reason of and in thanks for the thought- designates chance in general, spontaneity without intentional impli- lessness, which is the light of chance, that shines in their logical cations. It is true that Aristotle does not always respect this distinc- existence, logical like evil—so these latter, I say, will be no more tion. 17 We had to privilege this Aristotelian concept of tukhe for than pitiless good sense [sagesse], a good sense that will condemn reasons essential to the structure of the gift and the pas de don, the everything, except money [fors l'argent], everything, even the gift step/no gift. For in that structure chance is constantly, in advance errors of the senses! [Baudelaire underscores these last words]. even, re-finalized, re-intentionalized and regularly reappropriated by F.[ . . . ]—These times are perhaps very near; who knows if they a teleology: the desire to create an aleatory event, the benevolence of have not arrived and if the coarsening of our nature is not the nature in the gift that the narrator has the good luck to receive from only obstacle that prevents us from appreciating the milieu in it, and so forth. And even the first event—the first stroke of luck, the which we breathe! encounter with the poor man—however aleatory it may be or may As for me who feels sometimes in myself the ridiculousness appear to them, takes on meaning from an expectation and a project. of a prophet, I know that I will never find there the charity of a The friend had prepared his coup, his coup of the false gift. In the physician. Lost in this ugly world, elbowed by the crowds, I am distribution, the "singularly minute distribution" he made of his like a wearied man whose eye can see behind him, in the depths change, he had first of all sought out, recognized, then separated the of the years, nothing but disillusion and bitterness, and before counterfeit coin which "he had scrutinized with particular care." So him only a storm which contains nothing new, neither lesson nor he was waiting for the kairos, the right occasion, the casus, the chance suffering. In the evening when this man has stolen from destiny or the falling due; he was anticipating it and knew that it would indeed several hours of pleasure, lulled in his digestion, forgetful—as far be the case. In advance, he imagined what would doubtless not fail to as possible—of the past, content with the present and resigned present itself. to the future, drunk on his sang-froid and his dandyism, proud of not being so low as those who are passing by, he says to himself, 16. These locutions can be translated either "step of gift" and "step of forgiveness" while contemplating the smoke from his cigar: What does it matter or "no gift" and "no forgiveness" (Trans.). to me where all these souls [consciences] are going? 17. Metaphysics, A 3, 984b. On these dimensions of the aleatory, notably in certain I think I have veered off into what those in the trade call a of their effects on the Baudelairean text, we refer to "My Chances/Mes Chances: A Ren- hors-d'oeuvre. However, I will keep these pages—because I dez-Vous with Some Epicurean Stereophonies," translated by Irene E. Harvey and Avital Ronell, in Taking Chances: Derrida, Psychoanalysis, and Literature, ed. Joseph H. want to date my anger." Smith and William Kerrigan (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984); "Mes Chances: Au rendez-vous de quelques ster6ophonies epicuriennes," Confronta- 15. Oeuvres completes, pp. 665-67. tion 19 (1988). 4 I C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II I
O e o e a ca o e s eak o c a ce ega i g e e cou - ogy or is o y e i ea es e ocke o a i is e sa e i e a e - e wi a oo ma a is wi is a so u e ema a ca e c usio Acco i g o a s uc u e a a ogous o a o e ph r , ea (" o a se si i e ma w o k ows ow o ea em" i e o i co o a io wi ou i o ec io a wi ou assimi a io e "su ica i g eyes" a i ei "mu e e oque ce"? e e cou e e u sio o e egga kee s e ou si e wi i a assu es a i e - wi e oo ma gi es ise o e a a i e a e a s qui e i y y e c usio e e ce io ma e ( o s o a i e io c osu e o sim y e oo ma imse e ese s e e y is e y ema c e e e i a e o o is e cou e is o mo e a c a ce a ai i e I a ce e socia co s o egga s as k ow a ma e o se se o t t n, o mo e a ea o y a e o e i g e us say e a s o ma io s s I i s wea a e e i i s su e a u a ce e ea o e e o e a wou gi e au e ic mo ey a o e co e i e a y ea me o e eme o a ms u i g e au e ai ea o o o e simu ac a is e cou e is e a s o mo e a ea o y a Ma a mea e io as a s ic e a io wi e s a e o e me i- e ea a ms is a u e gi a is e em om e ma ke sym o ic ca o u a io i e ci ies a cou ysi es o a ce ai ca i a is ca cu a io a sac i icia a a e socie y a a e e mi e s age o i s i us ia i a io om is oi E e yo e k ows a e e cou e wi a oo ma a wi a o iew as we r Spl n o oses a ic u e o M d rn f , o e oo b r (si ce e e y oo ma oes o ema a e e y e- mo e ci y a s ee s o o acco s o s a ca a e s t th ntr n ma oes o eg is e e a so u e y a ea o y i a gi e socia t h h (f r o e o e comes u o egga s is is e case o " ea s ace e egga occu ies a e e mi e ace i a socia o i ico- U e oo " which cou e ea as a symme ica cou e oi o eco omic a sym o ic o o ogy e oes o wo k In pr n pl , "Cou e ei Mo ey " u a so as a o e t r f th . We wi a e eggi g o uces o i g o wea o su us- a ue e egga o e sa is ie wi i i g a ew i es om i "As I was a ou o e e e ese s a u e y ece i e e e i g a co sumi g age cy a pp r ntl use ess mou O e mus i ee say as a ways pp r ntl , o i ac e ca ay a o e o sym o ic me ia io i a sac i icia 8. O e a s o ma io s o is s a us i e eig ee ce u y a o w a e ca s " e ew i isio " ("l n v p rt l, see e a a yses o Mic e oucau i s uc u e a e e y assu e a i is e sa e e icaci y I a y case is t r d l f l l , 2 e i io ( a is: Ga ima , 2 , es ecia y e as o o e o o uc i e wo k i the c ea io a ci cu a io o . 422 . A ge so e a es ow, i 0, e o e was omu ga e " o a es a e wea e co sumes a es oys su us- a ues u e ac a egga s i e ea m" w i e e e i g em om " ou i g" i o a is. e : "I e oes o wo k a oes o o uce oes o mea e is i ac i e a is, a e egga s we e e ease a e a i g ee a es e a e e o owe e e egga as a egu a ac i i y o e e y co es i es socio- se i ious we a e see we r i u a e wi em i e s ee s a o e mai oa s" (quo e y oucau , . 42 , i co ec io wi e ecomi g eco omic, e e o o ogica ecessi ies A oug egga s a e o e asse s y o aga- eco omis ic, o is i e e a io a o is o i ics o o e y "I ige ce ecomes o s ei i i e a ies a e aces w e e ey a e o e a e o a eco omic i g," e w i es, . 428 . O e e as a o i e a io o s eec es a i i e e assem e ( ecause o e aces a e o i e o em o e - ia i es aime a ei se i g, as we say o ay, e "a e o ie oo " o "mis o u e" am e o ay ce ai mi e-c ass ui i gs a s ee s i ce ai i o e cyc e o o uc i e wo k, so as o e e e o e ia o e ca i a o e e gy eig o oo s se e e y es ic ei oma ic e a io i co o - o i a e. o e y ecomes a ca i a i a e c e i i e— eci oca se ice o e mi y wi e o ici g o is e y we egu a e socia s ace e s a e a e i i i ua , e o me ei g e e y au o i e o o e e a e o wo k. "Me ici y is e ui o o e y, w ic i se is e esu o acci e s occu i g ac i i y o egga s may e o e mos i e se ki e e i i emai s ei e i e cu i a io o e a o i e o uc io o ma u ac u i g, o i e o - a o i g a seems o o uce o ma e ia wea I is i a y ise o commo i y ices, i a e cess o o u a io , t ." ( isso e Wa i e, quo e case egu a a o e e o e oi a e egga s es a e as o e y oucau , . 428 o is: "Mis o u e may e ega e as a i s ume , as a ee co si e e —a some imes esig a e i a a e y me a o ic owe , si ce i oes o es oy o e s s e g a is s e g may e use o e as io —as a o essio a s a us o a socia u c io A o g wi a a age o e s a e, e e o e a a age o e i i i ua w o is o ce o make use o i " (Coqueau, quo e y oucau , . 4 . I , e Aca emy o C Io s su a o ma me a e i que s—c imi a s o ie es—wi w ic Ma e ecei e mo e a u e es o ses o i s o ose essay com e i io o i is o o ui ous y associa e is socia ca ego y i i s a o o - e o ic: " e causes o me ici y a e mea s o e a ica i g i ." 6 , C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II
a ca a e a egga e ou is a o me a ooke a me wi o e a uma i y a s ou u i e a me " ( ook is quasi- o ose u o ge a e ooks w ic i s i i mo e ma e o i a mag- o essio a egu a i y as a ways gi e ise o o i ica o icies O e e i e s eye i e e g a es wou o e u o es " e e ea i s a o e sig o a i e e is e ce o e igious o e s ca e e ays e eye a e e o ows a i e io me i a io o e oices me ica s me ica mo ks a so o o e A ge o Soc a es a o is " o i i i g emo " e o e u is is o e ace o go o i o a e ess iscou se ow- "g ea a i mi g" emo w is e i g a o e i e ea o e a - e e ecessa y i may e o a ms a eggi g e us e ai me e y a o w o a acks e egga e eye o his egga "Imme ia e y I a o ma ai y easo o ei e y ma gi a i y y easo o ei ea e u o my egga Wi a si g e u c I c ose o e o is eyes e e io i y i e a io o e ci cu a io o a o a o e o uc- w ic ecame i a seco as ig as a a " e egga e ge s io s o wea y easo o e iso e wi w ic ey seem o ack u a cou e a acks aimi g is ime a o eyes (" e e- i e u e eco omic ci c e o e same egga s ca sig i y e c e i iga u e imse a me a ocee e o gi e me wo a so u e ema o e o e e i e i guis a e a ea e u - ack eyes " Co c usio que c a e i s o e gi is " i s " is mo eo e sugges e i Wi my e e ge ic ea me I a us es o e is i e a e au e ai ea si ua io s o " ack" o "a ic io " ( o acco a co o is i e "Si you are my equal! ease o me e o o o e a a o o " ea U e oo " goes ou i o e s ee "wi a s a i g my u se A emem e i you a e ea y i a - g ea i s " e o e u i g i o e egga a e e a ce o e o ic w e a y o you co eagues asks you o a ms you "ca a e " e egu a i y o is socia i egu a i y eac ime ei - mus a y e eo y a I a e us a e pain o yi g sc i es eggi g a a ms i a sac i icia s uc u e Sac i ice wi a - ways e is i guis e om e u e gi (i e e is a y e sac i ice ou o you ack " o oses a o e i g u o y i e o m o a es uc io agai s e si ua io was i e e e o e e age o i us ia ca i a ism w ic i e c a ges o es o o cou s o a e e i ame y a su - i e Mi e Ages o e am e ( i k o e egga s i Notre Dame us- a ue o a eas a amo i a io a o ec io a a secu i y de Paris), i e se e ee a eig ee ce u ies A ea y ow- ow as soo as a ms a eggi g a e ma ke y some i s i u io a e e e e was a e e sio co ce i g a socio- o i ica a socio- egu a i y y a ace a s a us a o o-socio ogica assig me a u c- o essio a o em o ai e s eaks o e "e ic s" a we e "gi e io i is o o ge encountered y c a ce e e cou e is o o ge ou " i o e o "e i a e e i e o essio o egga s a e y ea a c a ce mee i g I u a ms u i s a egu a e a egu a i g o essio a sus ai s i se i s i e o e aws o e oi a u c io ; i is o o ge a g a ui ous o g acious gi so o s eak o e may cou wo u e ousa aga o egga s i e ki g- w ic is w a a u e gi mus e I is ei e g a ui ous o g a- om [ e e o e a census was ossi e w ic e a s is i guis es cious We a e o is i guis i g e e e wee eco omy a sym o ic e s a us o egga s om a o o ay s " ome ess"I " o is e- u e wee e eco omy o so-ca e ma e ia wea ( o uc io o essi e se e i y o o ai e o e cou o ose a assage om a nou- co sum io o ma e ia goo s a e so-ca e sym o ic eco omy velle Heloise: e e e s a e o egga is esig a e as a so o As soo as a msgi i g is egu a e y i s i u io a i ua s i is o o ou i e o e socius a e ou a io o e socia co ac o ge a u e gi —g a ui ous o g acious u e y ge e ous I e- a s ou u i e a me "I o e me e y co si e s e s a e o e comes esc i e og amme o iga e i o e wo s ou egga o e a a e a om a i g a y i g o ea om i o e [lied. A a gi mus o e bound, in i s u i y o e e binding, i s e e o y a w ic ou is es i us e ee i gs o i e es o iga o y o o igi g A ms ca e ou ei e y mo a o iga io o y e igio y a aw— a u a o osi i e mo a o e igious; a 19 Oeuvres completes, 359; Paris Spleen, 1 -3 a s mo i ie e oem e so cou e ia e o a ms a is co em e o ay a ms o e was i s u is e os umous y i 1 9; e ma usc i e s wi e se e ce e e i o e oo o e C u c ("A n ►" . e ecc esias ica "W a o you say o a ci i e ou o ?" o ice o e a mo e is c a ge wi e o ga i e is i u io o 13 I Ch pl r ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II 139
alms. Laws, therefore, transform the gift or rather the offering into their eyes open wide as coach doors"), nor the narrator in "Beat Up (distributive) justice, which is economic in the strict sense or the sym- the Poor!" when he punches the beggar in the eye. bolic sense; they transform alms into exchangist, even contractual A beggar always looks threatening, incriminating, accusatory, vin- circulation. dictive in the absolute of his very demand. This demand comes and One may understand, then, why Mauss situates his remarks on comes back from the other. You must pay, in other words "give," so alms within a long chapter, or rather a long general "Note" on sacrifice as to acquit yourself with regard to the spirit, the ghost, the god, or which is entitled "The Present Made to Humans, and the Present all that comes back. You must pay, you must indeed pay and pay well Made to the Gods." Within this long note (pp. 14ff.), before the "Note [il faut bien payer] so that it comes back without haunting you or so on Alms," one finds a whole inventory of gifts made to men in view that it goes away, which amounts to the same thing. In any case, you of attracting the benevolence of nature or the gods, in order to se- must get in its good graces and make peace with it. Whence the insti- duce, appease, conciliate natural or supernatural powers, or contract tution of alms. Among the Hausa of the Sudan, in order to avoid the an alliance with them. He writes: spread of fever when the guinea-corn ripens, one must give presents of this wheat to the poor. Sometimes children play the same role The purpose of sacrificial destruction is precisely that it is an as the poor; they are also excluded from the process of production act of giving that is necessarily reciprocated. All the forms of and commerce. ."Generosity is an obligation," says Mauss, "because potlatch in the American Northwest and in Northeast Asia Nemesis [both distributive justice and the enforcing power of ven- know this theme of destruction. It is not only in order to dis- geance] avenges the poor and the gods for the superabundance of play power, wealth, and lack of self-interest that slaves are put happiness and wealth of certain people" (p. 18). In these conditions, to death, precious oils burnt, copper objects cast into the sea, the gift obeys a regulating, distributive, compensatory principle that and even the houses of princes set on fire. It is also in order to naturally is transmitted by very complex psycho-symbolic relays. The sacrifice to the spirits and the gods, indistinguishable from Nicomachean Ethics (Book IV) analyzes liberality, prodigality, magna- their living incarnations, who bear their titles and are their ini- nimity (megaloprepeia), and sometimes avarice as well in the liturgies tiates and allies. (P. 16) (letourgiai), that is, in the payments imposed on rich citizens who There is also a kind of purchase from the gods, the gods who know must outfit a fleet, a cavalry corps, a choir or a "theory" (for Delos or "how to repay the price of things." In a more developed form, this Olympia). Aristotle points out that the magnanimous man does not notion of purchase sometimes precedes that of ordinary commerce. It spend for himself but for the common good. His gifts bear a certain is in this perspective of sacrificial commerce that Mauss situates his resemblance to votive offerings, although the same gifts are not ap- "note" on a kind of alms that would be part of this same process, the propriate for the gods and for men, for a temple and for a tomb. There process of a calculated sacrifice. As marginal people excluded from are different sorts of largesse, of gift, of present. Through all this one the process of production and circulation of wealth, the poor come to sees at work a whole ethic of the happy medium, of good measure, represent the gods or the dead. They occupy the place of the dead of median-ness (mesotes), of justice as balance. But it remains implied man or the spirit, the return of the ghost, that is, of an always immi- that giving is better than keeping or taking. The excess of liberality nent threat. Perhaps that is what neither the narrator's mistress in (prodigality) is worth more in principle than the avarice of the "cumin "The Eyes of the Poor" can bear ("Those people are insufferable with cutter" (kuminopristes) who saws a grain of cumin in two rather than give it whole. He is someone who "would shave an egg" as we say in French. O e Eu o ea equi a e s o e o a c c Emi e e e is e " o e e On the subject of this justice of alms, Mauss cites the Arab sadaka
e e " " o e & a ge " i Le v l l r d n t t t n n l r p nn , o 1 or the Hebrew zedaga. The one and the other prescribe giving to the o a y 7 poor. After a brief allusion in his "Note on Alms" (pp. 17-18), Mauss 40 Ch pt r r "C nt rf t M n " II 4 comes back to this at length in his "Political and Economic Conclu- vently as the individual interests of their members or even their sions." Thus, as we have already seen, he accredits, under the head- corporations. These fine speeches, it is true, are adorned with ing of morality, the spirit of that socialism which, as a good manager many metaphors. However, we must state that not only mo- of its own generosity, as a stranger to mercantilist rationalism and to rality and philosophy, but even public opinion and political individual profit, is capable finally of giving time, of giving in truth its economy itself, are beginning to elevate themselves to this "so- time—a crucial distinction here since the "exchangist producer ... cial" level. We sense that we cannot make men work well un- wishes to be rewarded, even if only moderately, for this gift:' less they are sure of being fairly paid throughout their life for work they have fairly carried out, both for others and for them- The very word "interest" is itself recent, originally an account- selves. The exchangist producer feels once more—he has al- ing technique: The Latin word interest was written on account ways felt it, but this time he does so more acutely—that he is books against the sums of interest that had to be collected. In exchanging more than a product or his labor-time, but that he ancient systems of morality of the most epicurean kind it is the is giving something of himself—his time, his life. Thus he wishes good and pleasurable that is sought after, and not material to be rewarded, even if only moderately, for this gift. To refuse utility. The victory of rationalism and mercantilism was needed him this reward is to make him become idle or less productive. before the notions of profit and the individual, raised to the Perhaps we may point out a conclusion that is both socio- level of principles, were introduced. One can almost date— logical and practical. The famous Sourate LXIV, "mutual disap- since Mandeville's Fable of the Bees—the triumph of the notion pointment" (the Last Judgment) given to Mahomet at Mecca, of individual interest. Only with great difficulty and the use says of God: of periphrasis can these two words be translated into Latin, Greek, or Arabic . . . . 15. Your wealth and your children are your temptation, Homo oeconomicus is not behind but lies ahead, as does the whilst Allah holds in reserve a magnificent reward. man of morality and duty, the man of science and reason. For a 16. Fear Allah with all your might; listen and obey, gi e very long time man was something different, and he has not alms (sadaqa) in your own interest. He who is on guard against been a machine for very long, complicated by a calculating ma- his avarice will be successful. chine. . . . It is perhaps good that there are other means of 17. If you make a generous loan to Allah, He will pay you spending or exchanging than pure expenditure. In our view, back double; he will forgive you because he is grateful and however, it is not in the calculation of individual needs that the long-suffering. method for an optimum economy is to be found. I believe that 18. He knows things visible and invisible, he is the one we must remain something other than pure financial experts, powerful and wise. even in so far as we wish to increase our own wealth, whilst becoming better accountants and managers. The brutish pur- Replace the name of Allah by that of society or the occupa- suit of individual ends is harmful to the ends and the peace of tional grouping, or put together all three names, if you are reli- all, to the rhythm of their work and joys—and rebounds on the gious. Replace the concept of alms by that of cooperation, of a individual himself. task done or service rendered for others. You will then have a As we have just seen, already important sectors of society, fairly good idea of the kind of economy that is at present labo- associations of our capitalist firms themselves, are seeking as riously in gestation. We see it already functioning in certain bodies to group their employees together. Moreover, all syndi- economic groupings, and in the hearts of the masses, who of- calist groupings, whether of employers or wage-earners, claim ten enough have a better sense of their interests and of the they are defending and representing the general interest as fer- common interest than do their leaders. 42 I Ch pt r r "C nt rf t M n " II 4
e a s y s u yi g ese o scu e as ec s o socia i e we ca wi a em i g a I k ow o o i g mo e disquieting a s a succee i owi g a i e ig u o e a a ou e mu e e oque ce o ose su ica i g eyes a co ai a o ce a io s mus o ow o i ei mo a i y a i ei eco omy o e se si i e ma w o k ows ow o ea em so muc u- ( 7 -7 ; em asis a e mi i y a so muc reproach. e i s e e some i g c ose o e Ou i sis e ce o is economy of alms wi e us o ecog i e e e o complicated ee i g o e sees i e ea - i e eyes o a og sys em o a ici a io s o a i i ies a ca cu a io s a og ams ei g ea e " e "mu e" a im o i g ema o is ook w ic e a o eme io e "e cou e wi a oo ma " y e wo ie s is a e mo e im e ious im e ious ike e aw akes o e igu e is e cou e was o a u e a ea o y o u o eseea e e e ei- o a a ima a o ce oo uma a i uma e ea e og e e e ema o e gi i e ici s ca e o eig o ca cu a io e oo ma is a og o socie y e og is e a e a a ego y o socia i a sac i icia ca cu a io e e i e ema comes om e eyo o e y o e e c u e e ma gi a e " ome ess"—mo e a o e sys em w ic is w a makes i a o ce im e ious a u ea - e e o ou i e a is o e ime E sew e e au e ai e associ- a e I s i i i y o okes e ca cu a io o a ea o ia io a i a es i a mo e i sis e as io e igu es o e og a e oo simu a eous y e e s im ossi e E e i e gi o e a ms we e ma o a y i " es o s c ie s" ( e Goo ogs is is e o - au e ic mo ey u y i e a gua a ee is e e ie ce wou o u i y o e oe o e i e w a e ca s is "muse ci a i e " is o e u e o a ca cu a io o a a a e I ca o e a e o e e "u a muse " is oe s i s i a io as ai e o mo e ca i a a ack o i se wi ou se -g a i ica io o se -co g a u a io e wo o e mo e ca i a is oe is a a ima suc a a ima e parade ca esig a e a e same ime e os e a io o e o e i g brother o suc a a ima w ose a e e s a es au e ai e e o - e o a i g e i i io o e ium a s ow o o iga i y e oses "goo ogs " s ay ogs e ou cas s o socie y o e omes- a a i g o e o e sum ua y a o e o e si e e si e a ic ogs o ou geois u u y w o a e e ea " a asi es" si e acks o a ies e ow [et d'autre part, la part de ce qui pare], i Away aca emic muse I a e o ee o a e a ic o esig a es o ec io e a o o aic e e e se a goes o e u e I i oke e ie y u a i i g muse o e me o e si e E e i i we e o cou e ei mo ey e gi wou o e si g o goo ogs oo ogs ma gy ogs e ogs e e yo e u e o a a a e Wi o e say a is is ue a fortiori o e o e - kicks asi e ecause ey a e isease a ea- i e except the i g o cou e ei mo ey? Yes a o W a a e s o ce e oo poor man whose companions they are, and the poet who looks upon ma is e cou e e i is e cou e a is o a c a ce o o u a e them with a brotherly eye.'' mee i g? e e is misfortune [de i o u e] om e i s mome o is e o e w o s eaks ( e oe o e a a o o e ose oem e cou e W a ? W ose? e oo ma s o cou se u a so e wo i es imse u e e o e o e si e o ogs a e oo e ooks ie s As we wi e i y mo e a o ce a e aces ca a with the eye o e og o e oo ma So o e may su ose a i mus e e c a ge e oo ma is e e se ess e as o i g e "Cou e ei Mo ey " e is a so o e si e o e oo man, a is is es i u e o e e y i g e is e e s eec ess e a so u e e- o e o e si e o e si e o e o e ; ye i is ue a is ie ma asses y way o is mu e ga e u y e same oke e may have—who knows?—made e oo ma ic ( y e e y ay accuses e ig e s e egi s o e secu e ike e aw us ice e o ca i a is s ecu a io a es i e a ce a ca cause cou e ei im e ious o e a o e a comes om ou si e e eco omy a mo ey o ea ui a wi a as we wa e a mome ago i ace o w ic e wo ie s a e i u es i u e e oo ma e e y i g egi s o c a ge aces A e a i g e ou ce u e- as o i g o gi e e ca ema o y es i u io a ook im ac- e ogs a a a me ogs e oe o ce agai esc i es a e - a y a ose w o a e y a a w a is a e i g e wo c a ge o ooks wi e og I is s i a s o y o e eye ie s a e disquieted. "We e cou e e a oo ma w o e ou is 2t Oeuvres completes, p. 60 Paris Spleen, p. 04 ph dd d. 44 Ch pt r r "Cou e ei Mo ey" II , 4
To their baskets with them, all these tiresome parasites! tial guilt, the guilt of their situation, by permitting them to acquit Let them return to their silken and padded baskets! I sing themselves of their debt. the mangy dog, the poor dog, the homeless, roving dog, the cir- This story is thus a trial (prods), the process of a trial. The two cus dog, the dog whose instinct, like that of the poor man, the friends progress, proceed, since they continue to walk and to walk bohemian, and the strolling player, has been so wonderfully sharp- the length of the story, to the step of the story which is also the time ened by necessity, that excellent mother and true patron of wit. of a judicial procedure: incrimination, law, and judgment that end in I sing the luckless dogs, whether it is those who wander a sentence. They are before the law. Without going back over all the alone through the winding ravines of huge cities or those who, structural complications that we analyzed regarding the title, the with their blinking and spiritual eyes, have said to the abandoned dedication, the narration, the narrative, and the story, what we are man: "Take me with you, and out of our joint misery perhaps saying here of the (narrated) story is also valid for the (narrating) nar- we can make a kind of happiness." rative, for narration and textual dissemination in general. We will not We cannot devote to these "Good Dogs" the word-by-word atten- pause over this folding back and this reduplication, but one may con- tion they deserve. Beyond rhetoric, or rather exceeding rhetoric in the stantly draw out the relation between these kinds of folded back re- direction of that which puts this circle of its substitutions in motion, lations, relate them to each other or fold them back on each other. 3 this figure of the dog appears in what might be considered a long Faced with the mute eloquence of this indictment and because they meditation on justice, law, the law of the other insofar as it crosses appear together, the two friends are summoned to acquit themselves the frontier of law and first of all the frontier between the human and by sacrificing, by offering or by offering themselves; and one of them the animal, as well as between the human and the ahuman. Let us has more to offer than the other. "Has to offer" means as well "must note merely a significant paradox: The demand of the good dogs is offer" since their co-appearance [comparution] before the law—in the essential because they demand that one give to them, to be sure, and sense in which they have to appear before the eyes of the other that that one give what one has, but that one give by taking them, by taking make a limitless demand as well as in the sense in which they appear what they are and by taking them such as they are: "Take me with together, they co-appear—places them in a situation of identificatory you . . ." Once again, it would be necessary to cross the categories of rivalry. The exhibition of the offering has to shine, it has to phe- having and being, giving and taking. nomenalize itself not for the poor man or for the law but first of all The dog, the poor man, the poor dog is disquieting and compli- or also for the other, for the partner, and for the friend. And this be- cated. These things reproach and object reproche et ca objecte]. The cause, as friends, they are not only indebted with regard to the poor demand is not only an entreaty; it is also the figure of the law. The man; they owe themselves each to the other, they are indebted one with two friends are sentenced to pay, they are indebted and guilty as soon regard to the other. The comparison of their respective offerings is as it looks at them, as soon as the thing, the poor thing looks at them thus the very element of the story—as if they were giving themselves, without talking to them. They are summoned to pay and to acquit were making (of) themselves an offering one to the other or one for themselves. They must restitute and enter again into the symbolic the other, as if the poor man, the law, the third party were also but circle. They are on trial, they appear before the donee's court as be- the mediation as well as the condition of their exchange, in truth, of fore the law. With the result that in the final accounting, at the end of their bidding war, their competition, or their potlatch. But it is a pot- this trial, it will be a question of their own gratitude with regard to latch that consists less in giving more of this or that than in giving whoever accepts their damage payment and acquits them of their ini-
2 . I e c , is ea s: "o eu sa s cesse ai e e a o e e r pp rt d r pp rt , l r pp rt r es u s au au es ou es u s su es au es." e e rapporter 22. Oeuvres completes, pp. 60 6 Paris Spleen, p. 0 , tr n . mo i ie em asis as a wi e usage a se e a o i s mea i gs a e i ay e e: o i g ack, o e a e, a e . o ecou , o yie ( o i , i e es . ( a s, 46 I (h t r r "C nt rf t M n " II 4
mo e absolutely, y gi i g i [en donnant raison] o e o e y gi i g a ways i is a ai o e gi i is a ma e o taking, o aki g o e im e a a age a i ei g ig y wi i g ou o e e o e a i gi g u e co o [arraisonner], o a oo i g o aki g a [d'avoir raison en ayant raison de l'autre]. i s ema k o e a a o e o e a o o e aki g wi su ise As you a e o ice easu e "My ie s o e i g was co si e a y a ge a mi e a I sai o is taken [psis], measu e i e su - ise a a o e a o e ea- im You a e ig ; e o e easu e o ee i g su ise e e is su es i a o e caused su ise o o e ake e o e wi su - o e g ea e a o cause a su ise I was e cou e ei coi ise e i y o e s ge e osi y a y gi i g oo muc is o a e a e ca m y e ie as oug o us i y imse o is o iga i y " o o im as soo as e acce s e gi e o e is ake caug A a e y ee i g o o e se a is ie as gi e mo e a i e a U a e o a ici a e e is e i e e o e o e me cy o e e a a o a o es o is ac io ui donne raison, as e says e merci o e gi e ; e is ake i y e a o e ake im is- a is e s im e is ig u o y y is aci g e acce om o e i ee oiso e y e e y ac a some i g a e s o w a is ie as given o o e qua i y o w a e as taken o im i e ace o w ic e emai s— a i g o ee a e o o esee w a e as gi e himself, ame y easu e— e easu e o a au o- a y i g— e e se ess o e e ose e is e o e s ca c o ake a ec io e easu e e as gi e imse o o w ic e as ea e [prise], e as gi e e o e a o [prise]. Suc io e ce may e imse a e as oug o imse ( e y ea y i ks e a - co si e e e e y co i io o e gi i s co s i u i e im u i y a o a i s "You a e ig ; e o e easu e o ee i g su ise o ce e gi is e gage i a ocess o circulation, o ce i is omise e e is o e g ea e a o cause a su ise"—i o e wo s you o ecog i io kee i g i e e ess c e i u a so o ce i must be, ca cu a io s a e goo Co ce i g e easu e a e ie as owes itself to be [se oi d'etre] e cessi e a e e y su isi g The o e e imse y o e i g some i g o e o e o e e a a o violence appears irreducible, within the circle or outside it, whether it repeats as a esis o a y o esis ame y a easu e a ways as i s the circle or interrupts it. A e ec e mo e a e measu e o mea- cause i a su ise e e o e a e e e su e comi g o e su a e gi a gi o o io a e o e e e i o o e e ec o e ew o a w ic ca o e a ici a e o e ea e easu e is a - e ec s om i a easo a e gi ( a "goo u mo e a e e o ways a i s o a e easu e o ei g su ise ; a s i mo e ea i y a e i ea " a Mauss a o e wou o o ge e a gi ; e o e a a mo e i e se y qua i a i e y a qua i a i e y i is a mos i wou e a e ayme o c e i e es ic e eco omy o a easu e cause y e ac o causi g a su ise i e o e a a i e a ce a ca cu a e em o i a io o e e a I i emai s u e is o causi g i e o e e easu e o ei g su ise e g ea - a wi ou ossi e ea o ia io e su ise ames a i s a es easu e is o cause i e o e e g ea es easu e a e o e s o ma ess a ea s ime a a a i e u s e e y ca cu a io ow e cause o easu e i e o e is su ise e assio o ese a e e s uc u a a a o es e s igma a o e im os- wo e as a e o igi o i oso y ( e thaumazein as o igi a y si i i y wi w ic we ega So as o o ake o e e o e e pathos o e i oso e acco i g o Soc a es i e Theactetus, o e aki g y su ise o e u e gi s ou a e e ge e osi y o si ce i oso y as o o e cause [arkhë; 155c1] u e cause o gi e o i g a su ises a a ea s as gi nothing that presents e cause i w ic I ake e g ea es easu e is o e e cause o itself as present, nothing that is; i s ou e e o e e su isi g e oug e cause e a - owe u cause o e cause i e easu e I gi e a so o oug y ma e u o a su ise a i is o e e a ques io myself y gi i g i o e o e A i o ica i g easu e ike o acco o ge i g o e i us o a su ise su isi g e oug o e i se e o ugs o e as c ose as ossi e o e au o-a ec i e causa sui. o go e wi ou e ay A a s ake i is o ge i g a ca ies a u a y au o-a ec io is o u e; e o e a ways as some- eyo a y ese is e gi as emai i g [restarted wi ou i g o o wi i a cou i g e ime o e e ou i e cou se memo y wi ou e ma e ce a co sis e cy wi ou su s a ce o o e ia a is o say a o g e way a u i g e a s e e ce su sis e ce; a s ake is is es a is wi ou ei g (i eyo a ma e o ca as o es a e ossi e e o e e e e s imse ei g epekeina tes ousias. e sec e o a a ou w ic o e ca o o e se ge caug o ake i y e au o-a ec i e ci c e o as s eak u w ic o e ca o o ge si e ce
48 I Ch pt r r "C nt rf t n r II I 4
is a ows o e o ea a accusa io i e a a o s aise o is ess co scious y " we a e o o i g is sou e i e su ace o ie ("You a e ig ; e o e easu e o ee i g su ise e e is u e a ces a wou o o so e e i ese i o e o g o a is o e g ea e a o cause a su ise" Agai s is im ici accu- i e a y ic io ; we a e me e y a a y i g e sema ic a i e io a sa io e o e wi a e o e e imse e a a o accuses y ossi i i y o ese u e a ces suc as ey a e ea a e o is e y e i g is ie e is ig y donnant raison, gi i g us y e same su ace i se I a y case is s ows a e easu e ake y e oke o i k i you wi a a e e si y ca a ways e e i i ee ie is o e measu e y w a e is oi g o e a a o a o o o so ecessa i y sec e y co u e " o e aiso a au e " us o e oo ma is e is e a is o e sce e; i im ica es e "gi i g easo o e o e " e a a o says o im i e ec e a a o a ea es o oom o eu a i y a sai we a e o We aye you a e ig you a e ca cu a e we ; easo a io- ye — o y a o g s o —come o e e o ou su ises a e a i y ratio a e o you si e as we as logos, w ic a so mea s o s o is e o i a y w y oes e ie say "I was e accou w a cou s a w a ca e cou e o cou e u o ; cou e ei coi "? e e we can s ecu a e a e e c e i a eas you a e ake e ma imum easu e (i is o e i e e a e ee y o eses u i ac a se ies o i ume a e og os ica io s mea s—a i e e y ese co g a u a io s a a e i e e as 1 e may say i i o e o co ess a i e o e o ge i g mo a —you a e o e we ; i you a e given mo e a me i s imse e cuse o o y o is o iga i y o w ic e o e im- ecause you wa e to take e ma imum e i k e wee mo a i y ici y accuses im u a so o e io e ce e as us em oye a e a i me ic eco omy o ca cu a io o easu es im i s a owa is ie —a a e wou e e y a u I a mo- equi oca io o a y aise o goo i e io s I gi i g e easo s me a acco i g o is y o esis e co esses e e s e o gi i g i sayi g e easo o e gi i sig s e e o e gi u a e owes o is ie e i e u s e io e ce e wee e equi oca aise eci i a es e gi owa i s e a e ea s i em e a e e i e u e i i a a ce y gi i g i ac i ea i i s e y a oca y se e u o e gi u ei s o y e o - u mo ey o mo e a is ie y o e e i g i o com e i io o i s e e e o e gi imes a e ( o o ge ea e e is ime wi im I wou a e ee ou o ie s i a e ga e cou e - o mo e ei mo ey a is i su e a a so u e e ms e ga e ess a e a is w y e ie s es o se is so im e ious o eci e i g a a o o o a c a is e mos au e ic sig o ie s i E e e o e e a a o " e s " as e u s i "wi gs" o is mi W a is mo e acco i g o e y o esis o is ca cu a io e co - i e cou se o cou ess y o eses e ie a u is e a e- essio wou a e ee e cou age y e o e s aise ("You a e s o se i i se i icu o eci e a o e w ose e igma is e- ig " cise y a w ic ea es e ie o e o e " e i g" o wi gs a "I was e cou e ei coi " may a so sig i y a su us o aï e o e c e i o a e y o eses " I was e cou e ei coi e ium a oas u ess c ose o cy icism So you ecog i e ow ca m y e ie as oug o us i y imse o is o iga i y " "As goo I am a ea i g myse o e g ea es easu e; we I am e e oug o us i y imse o is o iga i y" is i s y o esis is s a e a a I oug myse e g ea es easu e a e owes a co essio e a a o co esses i is way a a sus icio a ice; you gi e me c e i u I s ecu a e e e e e a you i k accusa io o some ame was o a se om is ow i s ema ks 3 u ese s ecu a i e y o eses o o e c u e eac o e ; o om e "You a e ig " a o ige e o e o " us i y" imse e co a y ey su e im ose emse es o eac o e ey accu- e wou a e o us i y imse o a i g wa e o ake oo muc mu a e ike a ca i a o ue o ( e a s cou e ei mo ey a may easu e y su isi g e oo ma u a so is ie e a a- o uce i e es ; ey o e e e mi e eac o e i e e i sis o e o — y su isi g e a a o a y omi a i g im w e e ec a a io Eac is us i ia e a eac as a ce ai ig o e c e - gi es a "o e i g [ a ] was co si e a y a ge " e as ee ou- i e acc e i e is is e e ome o wi ou e ome a i y o y io e a e oug —so i ks e a a o mo e o ess co - cou e ei mo ey e ie s es o se a so may be cou e ei scious y— o us i y imse (W e we say a e i ks "mo e o mo ey O e ca a so c e i e ie wi ee i g i oce o a i g
0 I C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II I
gi e a cou e ei coi — o e oi a e oes o i e i om i i i y i a e ess ci cu a io as i " e u oi e e e " e e a a o —si ce y mea s o is cou e ei coi e wi ew cou e ei mo ey is e u oi e e e A e same e e as e e om e cyc e o e gi as io e ce owa e oo ma Si ce e e ci cu a io ca o y ge goi g a co i ue e ess y o e co - k ows a eas one supposes e k ows a e i o gi e a y i g i io o a e o ia io o a e a e -a o ia io a o i s o e oo ma —e e as e e im e c a ce o use e cou e ei w a i seems o e mi e e u o se o e c osi g o e ci c e coi y maki g i ( e a s ea ui i e ca i a is sys em i w ic W y oes is as y o esis co es o o e mos owe u e o e a es as muc as e a a y es i a ou w ic e s ecu a es as a mos i e es i g s ecu a io ? o i g i w a is ea a e o us muc as i w ic e s ecu a es— e e a se- o o is u e o a y e e ca e c u e o imi suc a s ecu a io as i e ie s sec e mas e y a a o a i g co scious ess mig a e secu e o im we e a o a su e gi i g i se wi ou gi i g i se I is a a ways A e is assu e is ossi e i oce ce y e a ea o y a u e o wi e ossi e a e ie is yi g a e ga e a coi o " o es e ca i a is mac i e I is way e oo ma owes im o i g a ue " ega y mi e mo ey w i e e i g o e o is a e s e us go a s e u e e cou e ei e wi a e igu e ou ow ame y e a a o o a c i is believe a i was cou e ei so as o i e imse i i i e y a wi a e gi e imse e c a ce o o o uce o im e e ec a we e see e a a io is ame esca i g i is way om e mas e y o ea o ia io e wi i suc a way a ike e a a o we a e e ie s e o s u a e igu e ou ow o eak i e i i e y e ci c e o e symme y o e a a o ica e e a we i e o e e y c e i we are obliged Co i io s au e u y to extend to him. W e e o o we ake im a is wo we a e A e e y a o e —i e se— y o esis is au o i e u o e o y is wo We a e a o ce is e o a is c e i o o e i om w ic is i c u e i e ece i g o e I is e y o esis o e is si ua io a is sec e e egga i a y case a i a y wo s io e ce A i e cos w i e gi i g e oo ma is c a ce wou a e o es e mo ey a e us w e e o o a w e e as i e e a ma w o ca o o i g a ou i e as su - (o e ime ou o wo e ie ie a so o u a is e - ise is ie o o y y e o ce o is ca cu a io s u a so y c u e e i a y is e c u e y e sec e o e ua sce e e ca m o ce o is co essio e as o o e is co ac o e wo o em a o y wo a e a ki g i a tete-a-tete. I is i a y ie s i ecause e as o e u I owe you e u I wi o e e e a a ki g a ways i o es wo a eas wo (a eas i e you e u i was e cou e ei coi Assumi g a e i e "a eas " o is "a eas wo " e s uc u e o w ic is i e- e e u a e u cou s e e Assumi g a e e is a y s uc i e e e w e i e e s i o e com osi io o as s o y- se se i s ecu a i g o i o i is a so ossi e—we wi e e k ow ogues o + oices o e e e e a there is dialogue, e e a e e is o se se i wo e i g a ou i in literature—that e ga e ca e ie a i io a e sec e is is w y i is so im o a o e ea mo ey a e oas e o is ie a e ga e a "cou e ei s uc u e o e sce e i "Cou e ei Mo ey" a e e a e o y wo coi " so as o o uce a ce ai e ec o o e egga u o e o em a ki g a e ia ogue is e o e y e accou o o y a a o Suc a ca cu a io wou e wo y o a co oisseu o o e o em (as i " e u oi e e e " a e egga is mu e cou e ei mo ey a is o a ia I is o e a a o a e wou a a e sec e (w ic is e a s o s a e w ic is s a e i a e asse o cou e ei mo ey y e i g im believe a e a e mo e o o -s a i g e wee e wo ie s is s e e e y e c ose e cou e ei coi e a a o wou s i e as we we e localized sec e o ei s o téte-a-tote. e us o o ge a i e sugges i g ea ie i e osi io o e ace o e egga is e s cyc e o w ic " e u oi e e e " e o gs as we e o e i is a us some i g a ou i e a u e a a ou e ace o belief o o credit a ques io o e sec e content o e s o y ( e s o y o e u - om w ic i is w i e o ea is ace is e o - ace o a ame oi e e e i se e s agi g o e a a io aces e a a o ( e ou -si e o e e s aci g ou o a gi e mome u i is a is ie i "so i a y co i eme " so o s eak i a sec e o- e is oca e ame o a i yc a sce e o ee us o mi us a e c u e ou e m a e osi io s ei g e c a ga e e e o 24. C . " e ac eu e a e i e," o a y . 20 4 0 2. 15 I C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II 153
cation ["au secret"]. The narrator recalls: "Indeed the locality of our truth, and whether or not he wanted to give in the "authentic" sense retirement had been carefully kept a secret from my own former as- of these terms. sociates."" But what are we saying when we say that a character in Here we touch on a structure of the secret about which literary fiction forever takes a secret with him? And that the possibility of this fiction tells us the essential or which tells us, in return, the essential secret is readable without the secret ever being accessible? That the concerning the possibility of a literary fiction. if the secret remains readability of the text is structured by the unreadability of the secret, undetectable, unbreakable, in this case, if we have no chance of ever that is, by the inaccessibility of a certain intentional meaning or of a knowing whether counterfeit money was actually given to the beg- wanting-to-say in the consciousness of the characters and a fortiori in gar, it is first of all because there is no sense in wondering what ac- that of the author who remains, in this regard, in a situation analogous tually happened, what was the true intention of the narrator's friend to that of the reader? Baudelaire does not know, cannot know, and and the meaning hidden "behind" his utterances. No more, inciden- does not have to know, anymore than we do, what can be going tally, than behind the utterances of the narrator. As these fictional "through the mind" of the friend, and whether the latter finally characters have no consistency, no depth beyond their literary phe- wanted to give true or counterfeit money, or even wanted to give nomenon, the absolute inviolability of the secret they carry depends anything at all. Assuming that he even knew it himself—and one can first of all on the essential superficiality of their phenomenality, on only assume it. the too-obvious of that which they present to view. This inviolability The interest of "Counterfeit Money," like any analogous text in depends on nothing other than the altogether bare device of being- general, comes from the enigma constructed out of this crypt which two-to-speak retre-deux-d-parlerl and it is the possibility of non-truth gives to be read that which will remain eternally unreadable, absolutely in which every possible truth is held or is made. It thus says the indecipherable, even refusing itself to any promise of deciphering or (non-) truth of literature, let us say the secret of literature: what liter- hermeneutic. Even if we assume that he himself knew in a decidable man- ary fiction tells us about the secret, of the (non-) truth of the secret, ner and that there is therefore some hidden truth (and this is yet a but also a secret whose possibility assures the possibility of literature. different order of question), there is no sense in expecting or hoping Of the secret kept both as thing or as being, as thing thought, and as to know one day what the friend did, wanted to do, wanted to say in technique. And thus of the secret beyond the reserve of these three determinations and of the very truth of these truths. What we are saying here about literature could also be said of the money that, in 5 is sec e is ee e e s i u e y easo o u i s e e e ce o a k- ess a e e e ce a e a a o oug i e i ica io e s u s a i g o e this case, it talks about and makes into its theme: As long as the oi a o o em egi o e a e ike s a ge cou e ei e s ey go so a i monetary specie [espece] functions, as long as one can reckon with its ac as o "cou e ei " o e ay ese ce e ome a i y o i ee e u phenomenality, as long as one can count with and on cash money to u o e co a y e ig e " ese ce" o e ig e u o e o - u produce effects (effects of alms, then perhaps effects of purchase and assumi g a e e ig is e co a y o is ecessa i y i isi e co i io o e- speculation of the sort the narrator himself imagines when he specu- ome a i y ese ce a u a is ay i se O e ca "make e u " r faire la veritr] ( e e essio is Sai Augus i e s o y o e e e a e ossi i i y e- lates on the possible speculations of the other on the basis of counter- mai s o e e o e o "cou e ei i g" i [la "contrefaire"]. I o e ca imagi e w a feit money), as long as money passes for (real) money, it is simply not suc a cou e ei i g mig mea as we as e si gu a ossi i i y o counterfeiting the different from the money that, perhaps, it counterfeits. There is in presence of the night, o e wou e o o ge e e y a om w a " o gi e ime" o any case no possible sense, no possible place, no possible mark for " o ki ime" mig mea eyo commo se se "I was a eak o a cy i my ie this difference, at least when the situation is framed thus, that is, in ( o w a e se s a I ca i ? o e e amo e o e ig o e ow sake; a i o the contextual frame of this convention or of this institution. But be- is hizarrerie, as i o a is o e s I quie y e ; gi i g myse u o is wi w ims wi e ec a a o e sa e i i i y wou o e se we wi us a ways; u yond this frame, assuring thereby finite possibilities of decision and we cou cou e ei e ese ce" (" e Mu e s i e ue Mo gue " 179 O judgment, other contexts are delimited and opened up in their turn. is su ec see " e ac eu e a e i " 51 / 9 They are more powerful but they are not infinitely powerful, and they 4 I Cl r ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II I i sc i e e ec s o e e e ce o ea i y a o u i co e io a o su ise e e is o e g ea e a o cause a su ise " e a e i s i u io a e ices idispositifsl. I s uc u es o e ie o c e i o e es o se "I was e cou e ei coi " as u ge e a a o e su osi io o k ow e ge As e e is o imi o is em e i g i o e s ecu a i e o s ecu a a asm o a e e ie occu ie wi o o e i o e o e e o osi io o e co e io a o e a u a ooki g o oo a wo o c ock e ie "su e y s a e e my i s i se isc e i e e e Ie us say mo e igo ous y i i s i se e e ie y e ea i g my ow wo s Yes you a e ig [vous avez imi e i i s i is e sa e c e i i e s ecu a io a i wi a - raison]; e e is o swee e easu e a o su ise a ma y gi i g ways a e o au o i e im mo e a e o es o " oug is s ecu a e e sa ["you is wou co i m i a y case a e e y i g was ei g aye a e ig "/"you a e ig " e says o im i e ec Yes yes—yes ou for e a a o i e se se i w ic i e c oses im i is pour- you a e ig (w e you sai w y I was ig a so you a e ig o soi, o -i se u a so i e se se i w ic e ie wou o a e say I am ig ; e e is o "swee e " (swee e plus dour, i s ea o o e a y o is i i a o ee for is ie e a a o to is g ea e plus grand) easu e a o su ise y gi i g im mo e a ie e a a o A e i e sce e o ie s i (0 philoi, oudeis phi- e o es o (a e e o e y gi i g e io i e gi mus a ways E e y i g a e s o e a a o e e y i g is e ica e o gi e mo e a o e e ec s So ey e eac o e ey a e ig o im I i s a i e ime sio e ime o e s o y is gi e o e e eac o e ey a e ig ey say o eac o e ey a e ig a a o o ie e owa im w ic si ua io is o acki g i in- ey co i m a ey a e ig i e a y i e e c (a o e as terest: e a a o ecou s a s o y w ose mea i g is e ica e o o e a e i e o e i e a e e ecause i is i sis e o e ea s im A a e e e o e as y is si ua io e g ea es i icu y wice " ous a e aiso " a i e e e (avoir raison i e se se o eci e i g e ime gi e as us simu a eous y ee e use o e ig o co ec a o o y o e a io a o easo a e is e ie o im ( e e is o y e ega io a o e ia y e ega i g cou mea se e a i gs se e ces i is si ua io Gi e a e ie ime wi a e ee 1 We a e ig [Nous avons raison] a is co i ms a we a e ki e a w a we a e a ki g a ou i is a s e o c e i is a reason, we a e me easo a e ei gs we e o g o e s ecies o mu e e a a i e gi es a ki s ime u o i g as ye e- e animal rationale (logon ekhon). gu We a e a ea y o se e a i is u ess i a y (wa We k ow ow o cou we k ow ow o kee accou s (logon, wi ou gi o o gi e ess me ci ess wa a ou e "I was e rationem), we k ow ow o owi g e i ci e o easo o e ai cou e ei coi " ey e c a ge o y o e se e ce a iece a i ac o make o e e accou s (rationem reddere, logon didonai), a o e seco e ie s se e ce is a ea y u e ci a io a ec o o ecou is s o y o cou i g a cu e cy; we a e me o k ow - e a a o s se e ce A y mea s o is ci a io a e c a ge ey e ge a ca cu a io u a so goo a a o s e e goo au o s o eac ack ow e ge a e o e is ig his se donnent raison l'un i e a u e a so o ; u o co ce e a e o e is ig [dormer l'autre]. o o em a e ig [ont raison]. e a a o says o is raison l'autre] is o o y o o se e a e is ig o a easo is ie "You a e ig [ Vous avez raison]; e o e easu e o ee i g o is si e; i is a so o a e e a is o o ge sim y eo e ica co s a i e o esc i i e o ack ow e ge [lei dormer acte de] is us- ice o ess a is e ac ess a o e o co ess o e s ow w o g "O ie s e e is o ie " is is e amous sayi g a i u e o A is- a e a o e s e o O i o e oes e ecog i e o e s ow o e y ioge es ae es a quo e i a mos a o e ia as io y so ma y i- e o w i e e o e as ma age o a oi i e o co ce e e is oso e s a w i e s om Mo aig e o a c o Ka o ie sc e I s i o ogica a g amma ica eci e i g a ea y oses i icu o ems o o me io e ig [lin "donner raison"] im ies a mo a a o sim y eo e ica o e a a o es o is u e a ce (a os o e o a o ism I e o e a semi a o u gme em i 19 7- e mi ima ou i e o a wo k i og ess may e ou i " e 3 Ou ca cu a io as e ai e nous avons eu raison de, i e a y o i ics o ie s i " Journal of h l ph , 11 ( o 19 we a e a easo o mea i g we a e ca ie o e ay we a e
6 I Ch pt r r "C nt rf t M n " II I
won, we a e co o e [arraisonne] y easo i g co o e e W a i ac a e s e e e wee ou wo ie s? e a a o o e e oo ma o you you se my ie W ic is o say a so seeks i s o a o make excusable a w ic is ie as us co - e ea e caug i e game o i e es you we I w o am s eaki g esse o im e a s ium a y O e cou s ecu a e ad infini- o you tum a ou e a a o s i e u e " e e ie" o is su ec a o ow a is ecise mome a e mome is s ecu a i y i- e wo " e e ie" a is oi o is e e ie is e oye as a um s a e mome a ce ai ci c e e oi s em o gi e eac o e i e mi a e s ecu a io i i se O y a e e a acci e o e easo i wi i g ou o e e o e [se dormer raison l'un l'autre en i usio o a o e cou u a s o o i O e cou s ecu a e ad ayant raison de l'autreJ, e u u e akes ace a e eaki g o e infinitum o w a a e s e wee e wo " u s" (" u i my mis- co ac a e ack ow e gme o is ca ce a io A i e u - e a e ai a ways co ce e wi ooki g o oo a wo o c ock io o e s i u i eca s o i s o e i g e s ace o a a so u e [ ] u e a e su e y s a e e my e e ie y e ea i g my e e oge ei y a a i i i e sec e e wee e wo between all the ow wo s " e e e ie is i e u e o y y e ec o comi g two's of the world. is is w a we a e goi g o see so o s eak I ey om e o e o e wo s a e eame imse a a esse a e o eac o e ey a e ig i ey a e gi e eac o e o e o e " y e ea i g my ow wo s " o ack o ime ( e e is easo i is o a i g gi e o o gi e nothing, as i e gi o e o ime i akes ime ime is acki g o e as o s o o e as o o gi e ess we e a ways destined o o a e easo o e w o g as se ec e us e ai o y a ew mo i s i o e a o c oose e wee easo a gi (o o gi e ess e gi 1 e esi e o "c ea e a e e " y e o e i g o cou e ei wou e a w ic oes o o ey e i ci e o easo I is i mo ey ca o y excuse, ca o y e e a c imi a e oyme e cus- oug o e i owes i se o e wi ou easo wi ou w e e o e a e i e e we e desire o c ea e a e e I i se is esi e wou a wi ou ou a io e gi i e e is a y oes o e e e- e goo i wou e e esi e o gi e a o w ic o i e e y o g o ac ica easo I s ou emai a s a ge o mo a i y o sim y to give more (with which) to live [ o me us a i e] i ee e wi e a s o ee om a eas o a ee om a is associ- o gi e i e (" suc co uc o my ie s a was e cusa e o y a e wi e wi o a su ec I s ou emai a s a ge o e aw y e esi e o c ea e a e e in is oo e i s life" [em asis o o e "i au " (you mus you a e o o is ac ica easo I a e ] should su ass duty i se u y eyo u y [Il e ai passer le e oi e c a ce o is e e is o imi e o e imme ia e e e i- mérne: devoir au-dela du devoir]. I you gi e ecause you mus gi e e e ce o i y e oo su ise e i I i eg a es e ossi e a ea- you o o ge gi e is oes o ecessa i y mea a every aw a o y i ca cu a e co seque ces o cou e ei mo ey We we e sayi g every "you mus " is e e y e c u e om e gi (i e e is a y a o e ca gi e o y i e measu e o e i ca cu a e; e e o e u you mus e i k a aw o a "you mus " a a e o e e mi - o y a y o esis o cou e ei mo ey wou make e gi os- a e y some ac ica easo A aw o a "you mus " wi ou u y si e o o e e e gi es ue mo ey a is mo ey w ose e ec s o e i e ec i a is ossi e I o e u sues e co seque ce o ese assumes o e ca cu a e mo ey wi w ic o e ca cou a s a ge o osi io s a i o e o s a e gi s a es wi e ecko a ecou i a a ce e e e s o e cou s o om i U - e e i ge e a a ese co i io s ( ei g ou si e- e- aw u o e- ess is o osi io e wee ue a cou e ei mo ey oses e e seea i i y "su ise " e a se ce o a ici a io o o i o e e - a i s e i e ce—w ic wou e o e o e i gs emo s a e cess wi ega o a easo ei e s ecu a i e o ac ica a so y is i e a y e e ime y is a guage as a ways ossi y cou - o o e wou a e o co c u e a o i g e e a e s y ea- e ei mo ey ow acco i g o e igu es o co ce io e ge e - so o y practical easo I a y case o e e cou e es i ie to. i g a ge mi a io ese a ea o y co seque ces a e o e ge e ic But it is e ques io o e wi ess a is ose o us e e y ime a y e ( e us u e sco e " e a ie co seque ces isas ous o " ue " ma ks e i io a e sec e o a sce e o e wise a a cou e ei coi i e a s o a egga mig en-
8 I C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II I
gender" and then further on "The counterfeit coin could just as well, sure, but neither can anything happen in the family: in the family, perhaps, be the germ of several days' wealth for a poor little specula- that is, in the sealed enclosure, which is moreover unimaginable, of tor"). The speculation of the narrator who speculates on the probable the restricted, absolutely restricted economy, without the least chre- speculation of his friend on the subject of the possible speculation of matistic vertigo. When one says that nothing can happen without a the poor devil passes by way of counterfeit money as ovular or semi- certain chrematistics, that nothing happens when a certain chrema- nal capital engendering true money. In principle, without assignable tistics is dispensed with or bypassed, perhaps one loses sight of limit. What takes shape here is the infinity or rather the indefiniteness Aristotle. This is not certain. But in any case one recalls, in passing, of the "bad infinite" that characterizes the monetary thing (true or that if khrema signals in the direction of the monetary sign, of goods, counterfeit money) and everything it touches, everything it contami- fortune, and wealth, it also signifies, and this is even its first meaning nates (that is, by definition, everything). What takes shape here is the in ordinary language, the thing and the event, the thing one is con- quasi-automaticity of its accumulation and thus of the desire it calls cerned with and the event that happens, everything of which "it is forth or engenders. This is no doubt what Aristotle had in mind when the case," in a word: the occurrence. To put it quickly: With "Counter- he distinguished between chrematistics and economy. The first, which feit Money," we are at the heart of a literary experience or experiment consists of acquiring goods by means of commerce, therefore by with all the semantic and ultra-semantic resources, the truthless truth, monetary circulation or exchange, has no limit in principle. Economy, the lawless law, the dutyless duty that are concentrated and lost in on the other hand, that is, the management of the oikos, of the home, the enigma of khrO, of khrema, of khraornai, of to khreon, and their the family, or the hearth, is limited to the goods necessary to life. It whole family: one must, to need, to lack, to desire, to be indigent or poor, preserves itself from the illusion, that is, from the chrematistic specu- and then owe, ought, duty, necessity, obligation, need, utility, interest, lation that confuses wealth with money." Of course, for Aristotle, it thing, event, fatality, destiny, demand, desire, prayer, and so forth.'s is a matter of an ideal and desirable limit, a limit between the limit and the unlimited, between the true and finite good (the economic) and the illusory and indefinite good (the chrematistic). Here, this 28. e e i wou e ecessa y o e ea ei egge s "A a ima e agme . E rl Gr limit gets blurred since the contamination we are talking about affects ( 46, i lz [ a k u am Mai : K os e ma , 0] i ei egge , a s. a i K e a a k A. Ca u i [Sa a priori h n n : h n f W t rn h l ph , family goods. By the same token, it affects the limit between a cisco: a e & ow, , i a icu a i s as ages w ic a e e o e o e the supposed finiteness of need and the presumed infinity of desire, t hr n a , e o e a y i g e se, e o e a y o e a s a io ( o e am e, " eces the transcendence of need by desire. As soon as there is monetary si y" wou ame, acco i g o ei egge , e ese ci g o w a is ese ld sign—and first of all sign—that is, differance and credit, the oikos is An n d An nd nj ( . 4 a s. . 2 . e us sim y eca o e mome a , opened and cannot dominate its limit. On the thresh hold of itself, the i a e y i e a as io , e mo i s a a e so im o a o us e e—gi , a , ogos—a e c osse a i e wo e e e. O e i s e e a ea y e o mu a w ose family no longer knows its bounds. This is at the same time its origi- aca ia uses we a a y e a o e (c a . , . 2 : " o gi e w a o e oes o a e." nary ruin and the chance for any kind of hospitality. It is, like coun- . e ft: Me i a i g o a ce ai d d n d o A a ima e , ei egge w i es: terfeit money, the chance for the gift itself. The chance for the event. W a oes gi e mea e e? [ W h t h r b n? ] ow s ou w a e e i Nothing can happen without the family and without economy, to be ge s aw i e, w a e e comes o ese ce i is u c io , e a e o gi e oi u e? [ W l d d n d r n t, b n lthnn n?I Ca i gi e w a i oes a e? [K nn b n, n ht h t? j I i gi es a y i g 2 . C . A is o e, l t , 2 , 2 8a. (I a k Egi e e s o a i g eca e is a a , oes i gi e oi u e away? W e e a ow oes a w ic is ese assage o my a e io . Mauss makes a ie a usio o i om a somew a i e e o e ime ei g gi e oi u e? ow s ou w a is ese as suc [An oi o iew ( . . C . as we Ma c S e , h E n f t r t r ( a imo e: e nd I n d gi e e oi u e o i s ese ci g? e gi i g esig a e o s o ki s U i e si y ess, 8 , . 2. A o cou se Ma , A C ntr b t n t th e e ca only co sis i i s ma e o ese ci g [i d r W d A wese s]. Cr t f l t l E n , e . Mau ice o ( ew Yo k: I e a io a u is e s, Gi i g is o o y gi i g away [G b n t n ht n r W b n] o igi a y, gi i g 0 , . a . as e se se o acce i g o gi i g o [d G b n nr Sh n d b n ]. Suc 60 I C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey II I 6 W e o e asks ti to khrema, i is as i o e we e aski g e ques io a e ei coi i e a s o a egga mig engender," " e germ o e i o a ques io s a may e e e mi e y a ossi e co - se e a ays wea " us as we as is u i a e is i c io e- e s W a is i ? W a is a e i g? W a is e ma e ? W a mus wee eco omy a c ema is ics cou ea us ack om A is o e I o? W a oes a mea ? W y? I iew o w a ? O w a o w a ? o a o I a wo eca a e Goo i e Republic akes o e e ge e ic oca u a y (" e a ie co seque ces a a cou - ea u es o e a e u a so o Ca i a gi i g ise o o s i g o i e es (tokon to kai ekgonon autou ton agathou). 9 W a i gi es i gi i g gi i g e s some i g e o g o a o e w ic o e y e o gs o im [Solches i e o i gi i g o e see i e ig is gi e om a ace a e- Geben einem anderen das gehriren, was als Gehdriges don eignet). . . e drdonai mai s wi ou ei g eyo ese ce eyo ei g i i s ese ce esig a es is e i g e o g o [dieses GehOrenlassen]. ( . 2 a s. . 4 44 (epekeina tes ousias). I "Cou e ei Mo ey " o e o e a i is A a a ysis o e same y e may e ou i a semi a o e ac i us a I wi come a ma e o ( e a s egi ima e o e wi e e k ow c i e o ( e - ack o is i a o comi g e ("G h ht I : i o o emo ogy, ei egge s Ea " . a s ea a goo i e es o uce o om a I ea o e e om 2. e hand; e I ea o e Goo om ue Ca i a o om e ue a e o We a e accus ome o a s a e e wo khreon y " ecessi y." y a we e e om a co y o e i ea om a ico o a i o o e am e a mea w a is com e i g— a w ic i esca a y mus e ] des unentrinnbare (mo e a y co e io a a a i icia sig u om a simu ac um Mtissen]. Ye we e i we a e e o is e i e mea i g e c usi e y. Khreon is om a co y o a co y (phantasm). e a asm is ecog i e as e i e om khrao, khraontai. I sugges s kheir, e a khrao mea s: I ge i o e wi some i g kelt be-handle elms], I eac o i , e e my a o a i g e owe a eas e owe a e ossi i i y—wi ou it flange danach, gehe es an and gehe Om an die Hand]. A e same ime khrao a y co o i g ce i u e wi ou a y ossi e assu a ce—o o- mea s o ace i someo e s a s o a o e [in die Hand gelvn], us o uci g e ge e i g gi i g is a asm ame y e e y ace e i e , o e some i g e o g o someo e [einhandigen end so aushandigen, iiberlassen einem Geheiren]. u suc e i e y is o a ki w ic kee s is a s e i a [doss es des Clberiassen in der nd behiilij, a wi i w a is a s e e a io o w a is ese a u es i e esse ce o ese ci g i se is e e . ( . a s. . 2 a u ique o e, a oge e i com a a e o a y o e e a io . I e o gs o e I a e a oac e is assage om a o e oi o iew, u o e w ic is a so u ique ess o ei g i se . e e o e, i o e o ame e esse ia a u e o e a e o e e e ie ce o e gi , e wee e a a e gi , i "Geschlecht a ei g, a guage wou a e o i a si g e wo , e u ique wo [das einzige mai e ei egge " i Psychi ("Geschlecht II: ei egge s a ," a s. o . ea ey, Wort]. om is we ca ga e ow a i g e e y oug u wo a esse ., i Deconstruction and Philosophy: The Texts of Jacques Derrida, e . o Sa is [C icago: o ei g is [das dent Sein zugesprochen wi . e e e ess suc a i g is o im U i e si y o C icago ess, 8 ] . o e a , a eas i e e s I was e e e i g ossi e, si ce ei g s eaks a ways a e e yw e e oug ou a guage. e o ( e Semi a o a me i es [ 42 4 ] a What Is Called Thinking? [ 2] , ei i icu y ies o so muc i i i g i oug e wo o ei g [des Wort egge ma e o "a usio , o e am e i e Ka ia s y e, o e ay o i e e ce des Sems] as i e ai i g u e y i ge ui e i ki g e wo ou [rein u e wee ig a left, o e mi o , o o e ai o g o es" ( . 82 . oug o a e eigentlichen Denkett einzebehalten]. ( . 2 s eci ie a , as as ee oi e ou o me si ce, ei egge a ma e mo e a is mo eme , a ou w ic I o me y co esse a ce ai e e i y (c . e co c u us a a usio o is, as is we k ow , i 2 o Sei end Zeit, . 0 . sio o " i e e ce," i Ma gi s, . 2 2 , co i ues so a as o th r i e same o s a e , i is co e , e ques io o e gi a e a i e a io o e gathering [Versammlung] khreopi, e logos o e ac i us, e a e Moira (th mo e a y i g (a i is o ou sig i ica a ei egge s eaks so i e o is i isio o e gi e s a e [des Erteilen des Anteils]) of a me i es ( . 6 . i g , we may a eas wo e w a ki o co s ai is u o e a a i e o 2 . The Republic, I, 06e. I a oac e is o ema ic, i a icu a om e "Cou e ei Mo ey" y e ac a e mo ey mus i ee e "gi e " om a o oi o iew o me c a ise, o mo ey, a cou e ei mo ey, i " a o s a macy," a . W a a e s w e mo ey is ema e ia i e e oug a i o o ge ci cu a es a 2: " e a e o ogos," i Dissemination, . 4 8 84. " a e a ca e, says i e o m o cas , om a o a ? W a wou cou e ei mo ey e wi ou e Soc a es [Republic, 0 a], es I ecei e you wi a a se ecko i g o e i e es Rib- a ? A a ms i e age o e c e i ca o e co e sig a u e? delon apodidous ton logos toe tokou.' Kibdeleunia is au u e me c a ise. e co e . e logos: A e oi a w ic ei egge a ea s o e si g e ame, e s o i g e (kitteleletto) sig i ies o am e wi mo ey o me c a ise, a , y "u ique wo " o ei g, e is e o a ou ce a so o equi a e ce e wee to khreon e e sio , o e o a ai — ( . 4 8 o go a o i ica eco omy, c . as we a logos: . 2 4 . 262 . 62 C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II I 6 of any chrematistics, is moreover itself produced by the narrator's calculations, he advances him all these dice throws that imply a wish "fancy" ("And so my fancy [fantaisie] went its course . . ."). But let for a gift at the heart of a calculation. But his friend does not show us not put too much faith in the series "produce, engender, give," or himself worthy of this loan, he reveals himself to be powerless to even in the ineradicable axiomatics that associates gift with the gen- honor the credit that has been advanced to him on the basis or on the erosity, with genial power, and thus with the natural and originary reserve funds of a friendship contract. That at least is what the nar- power of engendering. Would a gift that proceeds from a natural rator says he thinks and it is (perhaps) for this reason that the other power, from an originary aptitude for giving, be a gift? Simultane- will not be forgiven. He will not be forgiven because he has not given ously, we come around to dissociating the gift from generosity in a what was expected of him; he has not even returned what was thus paradox the full rigor of which must be assumed. If it is not to follow lent to him. But what proves that he does not deserve this forgive- a program, even a program inscribed in the phusis, a gift must not be ness? And does one have to deserve forgiveness? One may deserve generous. Generosity must not be its motive or its essential character. an excuse, but ought not forgiveness be accorded without regard to One may give with generosity but not out of generosity, not so as to worthiness? Ought not a true forgiveness (a forgiveness in authentic obey this originary or natural drive called generosity, the need or de- money) absolve the fault or the crime even as the fault and the crime sire to give, regardless of the translations or symptoms one may de- remain what they are? The most twisted knots of this casuistry are cipher in it. (This proposition would be of a Kantian type if the multiplied and capitalized in the last paragraph and the ending of the naturalness that has to be broken off here by the gift were merely the story. It continues the story of the eye that we have been following naturalness or the causality of the sensible world; but we are talking for a long time. It is at the moment he looks his friend in the eyes, in here about phusis in general.) The gift, if there is any, must go against the white of the eyes, that the narrator sees, believes he sees the truth nature or occur without nature; it must break off at the same blow, at of what the other had wanted to do, his "aim." But perhaps this mo- the same instant with all originarity, with all originary authenticity. ment marks the very blindness out of which arises the speculative And, therefore, also with its contrary: artifice, and so on. It is in this discourse of the narrator. In catching the other's gaze, one sees either direction that we would have a few reservations to indicate regarding seeing eyes or seen eyes, therefore visible. When one sees the other the most essential Heideggerian motifs, whether it is a matter there see, and thus the seeing eyes of the other, these seeing eyes are no of determining what is originarily proper to Being, time, the gift, or longer simply seen. Inversely, if they are seen, visible, and not see- of acceding to the most "originary" gift. 3 ing, they become invisible as seeing eyes and secrete, in this regard, We will not leave this culture in its seedling state—and it is the or encircle the spectator's blindness. Likewise, when one sees the culture of nature itself, culture as originary nature—without having eyes, when they become visible as such, one no longer sees them see, evoked, in passing (while inscribing there the same potential ques- one no longer sees them seeing. Whence the act of memory and, once tions), the solar, revolutionary and superabundant motif, the gener- again, the act of faith, of credit, of belief, even of credulity that is osity (in mourning that it cannot be in mourning and that it lacks for inscribed in the most immediate intuition of the crossed gaze. When nothing) of the Zarathustrian high noon—from Nietzsche to Bataille the narrator says that he looks his friend "squarely in the eyes," and beyond. in the white of the eyes [" dans le blanc des yeux"], when he says 3. All of this, so as to make him excusable, the narrator lends to his he saw that "his eyes shone with unquestionable candor" and that friend ("And so my fancy went its course, lending wings to my he "clearly" saw this or that, he confesses his own candor, and that he friend's mind and drawing all possible deductions from all possible believes he saw, on credit or from memory, what he says he saw, what hypotheses"). He lends to his friend, he credits him with all these he says he was "appalled to see." The place of the narrator is the place of credulity itself. It is also the place from which the moral judgment 0. C . a o e . 2 22 a c a . 4, . 8. is proffered. And this judgment is without appeal.
1 I C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II I 6
I looked him squarely in the eyes and I was appalled to see that oneself to be mean, as if knowing the harm one does were already to his eyes shone with unquestionable candor. I then saw clearly that confess it t oneself and therefore to repent. The unforgivable, the his aim had been to do a good deed while at the same time irreparable, the irremediable, that for which one cannot be acquitted making a good deal; to earn forty cents and the heart of God; is to do evil "out of stupidity." This paradox deserves a closer look. to win paradise economically; in short, to pick up gratis the cer- The narrator does not reproach his friend for meanness or diabo- tificate of a charitable man. I could have almost forgiven him the lism—that's what Kant would have called it—which consists in doing desire for the criminal enjoyment of which a moment before I as- deliberately, consciously, evil for evil's sake, n elevating opposition sumed him capable; I would have found something bizarre, to the law to the rank of motive (a possibility that Kant excludes for
singular in his amusing himself by compromising the poor; but man). 3 ' He does not even reproach him essentially for having an evil I will never forgive him the ineptitude of his calculation. To be mean is never excusable, but there is some merit in knowing that one is; the most irreparable of vices is to do evil out of stupidity. (Em- 31 O ese Ka ia is i c io s c i a icu a Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone (1793; a s eo o e M G ee e a oy u so ( ew Yo k a e & phasis added) ow 19 1 Si ce e "s u i i y" j" liaise] o w ic e a a o accuses is ie is That's the end, it's too late, there is no longer time: the narrator has ce ai y o o e co use wi es ia i y i is wo eca i g e e ow Ka si ua e ma a a ica e i i ma between bestiality and diabolism. Ma s a u a e e cy said his last word. Without appeal. The absence of appeal, in the owa e i is " a ica " si ce i co u s ma ims a ei e y ou a io a e e o e sense of the judicial sentence but also in the more general sense of e e s a e a ica io o a e i y mea s o o e ma ims e o e o e se ses the appeal to the other—that is the narrator's sententious signature. a o e ca o e ai is e i si ce se si i i y e i es ma o ee om a o i s Sententious by situation, exuding that stupidity of which he speaks o e o s eak o e i i is ega y i se se si i i y wou make o ma a a ima and which he believes he can condemn but which will always hang u o a a ma ca o make o a sg essio a i ci e o a mo a mo i e e fact a in the air around a sentence and a judgment, the narrator has the last wou e i a case a ia o ica ei g ow so Ka i ks o asse s i is a e is o suc a ei g Ka s w o e a gume a io seems o ocee om e credit word, of course, always, and that is perhaps the gravest lesson of this g a e is su ose fact. Si ce ee om emai s e co i io o e i si ce i is i - literature. Neither the beggar nor the friend, neither the absolute guis es e e ma om a ima e us o o ge i e co e a is ou s e e e plaintiff nor the accused are given the right to speak or a time to e ms i w ic Ka e i es suc a ee om ecause s ecu a i e i oso y mus speak proportionate to their right. Nothing authorizes them to file an ea e i e e mi a e e aw o a causa i y ca e ee om e aw o causa i y " y appeal. ee om" ((lurch Freiheit), e e e mi a io o ee om y e mo a aw ca e e e s ow o emo s a e ; i emai s om e eo e ica oi o iew ega i e I Let us give ourselves one more time. Let us chance a step beyond, emai s e co e a e o a e ie a c e i e e says Ka o a " e e o c e i " (Cre- and for a moment pass the friends in their stroll as they come out of ditiv): " is ki o e e o c e i [these Art von Creditiv] o e mo a aw ame y a the tobacconist's. We will not hide the fact that, even as we read, i is i se emo s a e o e e i ci e o e e uc io o ee om as a causa i y comment, reflect, interpret, it is a matter here of writing another story o u e easo is a su icie su s i u e o a y a io i us i ica io si ce eo e ica whose fictional structure cannot be radically annulled. We will treat, easo a o assume [anzunehmen] a eas e ossi i i y o ee om i o e o i o e o i s ow ee s [Bediirfnis] ("O e e uc io o e i ci es o u e ac ica then, by paralipsis everything that could be the object of an infinite easo " The Critique of Practical Reason, a s ewis W i e eck [ ew Yo k Macmi - speculation. For what does the narrator not forgive his friend? Can- a 19 5] 9 e igu e o ai o e ie a g ou s ac ica easo is e e dor? Ineptitude? Stupidity? He does not refuse him forgiveness for ese e i a i ucia y a ki g o mo e a y e o ic ( eck a s a es Credit& y the crime he has committed, for the enjoyment he has sought, for the " is so o c e e ia " w ic mus e see i w a is i a y i s i i i y o u co - double calculation by means of which he aimed to play and win on i io a i y W a e a e s o e o ic? a w ic i ks i i i y u co i io a - both scores. He would have "almost" forgiven him, he says, but not i y—a e e o ic ey go e e e— o e ie o o c e i is a so w a o i s se a a i g e o e o ac ica easo om c ema is ics suc as we i e e e i altogether (are there degrees of forgiveness?) for this criminal enjoy- a o e ment; he would have deemed there was a certain merit in knowing As o e me ia osi io o ma a e e o a ica e i as o is a so u e y 66 C a e ou "Cou e ei Mo ey" II I 6
intention or an ill will, a radical evil, a natural tendency about which of his moral conscience. In general, you do not accuse someone, you Kant would say that it has perverted an essentially good will that is do not refuse to forgive someone for such reasons. Intellectual limits exposed to the frailty of human nature. are generally considered to be an innate given of nature, a gift made No, the narrator reproaches his friend for the limits of his intelli- at birth. So, then, what does he have trouble forgiving? What does he gence and of his intellectual consciousness rather than for the limits mean by the words: "to do evil out of stupidity"? Necessarily some- thing moral and intentional, something in any case on the order of desire, if not of the will, and which would be lodged in stupidity: o igi a osi io e wee e a ima a e e i , is is i ee ac ica easo ac something on the order of the chrematistic rather than of economy, co i g o Ka , a is, w a i ks i o a u ame a a o o ogism. "Cou e ei Mo ey" oes o ecessa i y i is esc i io . o e owe o e i , o au e ai e to make use once again of this untenable but convenient distinction. i ge e a . W a is e a s sugges e e e o us is e i (u o gi a e e i , a e e Stupidity [betise] is not, in principle, the character of a beast, tine o e e o y o e a ca s o o gi e ess i e s ecies o a ia o ica " e ise," i bete. In French, no one says of a bete that it is bete. There are stupid o e wo s, a sa a ic cruelty a Ka oes o wa o ack ow e ge. Si ce we beasts [des hetes betes], for example the "bad dogs" of the bourgeois a e u e sco e eque y e com e i i e o imi y e wee au e ai e a oe, which, as we have seen, Baudelaire's analogy or anthropomorphism si ce o e ca o , o ce agai , is e se wi ea i g e e e ami s Ch rl d l r : opposes to the "good dogs," to the poor, to poets, and so forth. But A r t n th Er f h C p t l ( a s. a y a [ o o : e so, , e us eca w a e says i " e a eu ": " au e ai e w o e o e ec i e s o y ecause, the stupidity of these beasts is a human stupidity. Nothing is less gi e e s uc u e o is i s i c s r h tr t r], i was im ossi e o im o i e i y stupid, less beast-like than "dogs being beaten" and whose "tear- wi e e ec i e. I im, e ca cu a i g, co s uc i e e eme was o e si e o e filled eyes" speak the infinite demand: In this story of the eye, the asocia a a a i eg a a o c ue y [Gr t]. au e ai e was oo goo a truth of the gift—as of the eye—would be (un)veiled by the veil of ea e o e Ma quis e Sa e o e a e o com e e wi oe" ( . 4 . o su o is tears rather than by sight. Bitise, stupidity, is here, in the eyes o the asse io , w ic su oses e a s a i oo as i y e a se ce o Sa ia c ue y i oe, e ami goes o a quo a io om au e ai e o us i y e ecessi y o e u i g narrator at least, proper to man, to a rational animal that does not o Sa e i o e o accou o e i : "O e mus a ways e u o Sa e, a is, o t r l want to use its reason, that cannot will [ne peut pas vouloir] to use it n, i o e o e ai e i " ( au e ai e s o e is ake om a " is o i es a or a does not want to be able [ne veut pas pouvoir] to use it: like a ou i es o o e s a s o ies," O vr pl t , , . . A o e o e y au e man who, as Kant would say, does not have the power or the strength ai e o Sa e seems o me wo quo i g a is oi . I s ogic a ea s o e e same o want to accede to Enlightenment, that is, to human adulthood. ega i g e e a io e wee e i a k ow e ge, e i a se co scious ess, as a o e a a o w e e says, " o e mea is e e e cusa e, u e e is some me i i k owi g a o e is e mos i e a a e o ices is o o e i ou o s u i i y." I a o e i e "O es iaiso s a ge euses," au e ai e e i es sa a ism y i ge au e ai e s " i es" a wou a e e e e im om i e i yi g wi a e ec i e, uous ess, u co scious ess, e ig o a ce o misu e s a i g o se , u ess e i o e u ge i ossi e n v r o i e i y wi a e ec i e (w ic , o cou se, is o e o "make o ese i ge uous" o e " ecomi g i ge uous" is a su eme a y ia o ica ou , i o e ook e igu e o e e ec i e o e e e mi a e, e e mi e , o e simu ac um o e e cess o ea o a o om ess e e si y. As a ways, au e ai e s igu e amo g o e s wi ou co usi g i wi a y osi io o ques o i ques i iew ema k emai s is o ica . I is a so a iag osis o mo e imes, e e o mo e i o e u o e es a is e , u gme o e o me , accou o e e e e , s o y e a u e: "I ea i y, sa a ism as wo . Sa a as ma e imse i o e n n . E i o e co i ue , i quisi io , sea c , i e oga io , i qui y, o i es iga io o e co a k ew i se was ess i eous a c ose o eco e y a e i a is ig o a o uc e o i s e m, i a wo , n l d , e i ac o e mus eca a o wo oc i se . G. Sa i e io o Sa e" (O vr pl t , 2, . 68 . e same o es o is casio s a i e i ica io mus e sus e e : e i e i ica io , w ic i a ce ai "esse ia y e c ook" a i u e e " i e o e e si y" o woma w i e o C a ma e is s uc u a , o au e ai e wi e a a o o wi e ie ( o o em eau ia is a i u e a "si is e a sa a ic" c a ac e , a " ig ea e sa a ism," seem o " ay" a e ec i e e e i e i ica io o ese c a ac e s wi e e ec a Sa is u sue u e e i g y. Quo i g a e e om Me eui o a mo ("My i e ey seem o ay. ey a e o i e a y e ec i es, i a icu a ecause o e o ea a o e was i e me . I i o esi e se ua easu e I nt d O K OW" , em, e a a o , seeks a o e a o eac a mo a u gme , owe e o mo a may au e ai e a s: "(Geo ges Sa a e o e s ," a u e ies o ce "I wa e " a b is i es me i i a ecause e o e , e ie , is mo e co ce e wi wice " o k ow." ecei i g us ice o i a y case wi e e e mi i g a u , co c usio , a a u g I ow o e co si e s se ious y w a e ami esumes a ou e "s uc u e" o me o e es a is e . 68 Ch pt r r "C nt rf t M n " II 6
This man would be responsible for his irresponsibility and for not yet The stupid perversion of the friend, the "evil out of stupidity," did being adult although he is or already can be adult. He would not have not consist in doing evil or in not understanding, but in doing evil had the courage to dare to use his own understanding, first of all in while not doing all he ought to have been able to do in order to un- order to understand the motto of Enlightenment: Sapere aude! derstand the evil he was doing, but that he was doing by not doing The friend's stupidity, in the narrator's eyes, stems from the fact everything that he ought to have been able to do in order to under- that he does not want to understand and not only from his not being stand the evil he was doing, but that he was doing by that very fact. able to understand. He could understand, he ought to understand, he In this circle—or rather in the tail-biting figure of this text or this ought to have understood. However cynical or calculating he might morsel of text, of this serpent morsel—it is finally for his failure to have been in seeking the economical compromise, however deceitful, honor the contract that bound him to the gift of nature that the friend tricky, or semi-clever, however reprehensible and criminal his calcu- is accused. Nature made him the gift, as it does to everyone, in the lation might have been, it would have been almost forgivable if the present or on credit, of a present: the capital of a faculty of under- friend had at least done what he could, what he ought to have been able standing. It thus put him in debt with true money, a natural and to or could have ought to [devait pouvoir ou pouvait devoir] in order to therefore non-monetary money which is absolutely originary and au- have an awareness and a comprehension of it: therefore, already the thentic. The friend's fault, his irreparable fault called "evil out of stu- beginning of remorse. This supposes that between awareness and pidity," is to have shown that he was not worthy of the gift that confession there is a necessary connection, and that confession be- nature had given him: He has failed to honor the contract binding longs to the order of known truth or—theoretical or practical— him naturally to nature; he has not acquitted himself of his debt—of reason, all of which we have every reason to doubt. Confession does a natural debt, thus a debt without debt or an infinite debt. not consist essentially in making the other aware of something. One It is almost as if the other had not honored the credit that his friend can inform the other of a crime one has committed without that act the narrator had opened for him by "lending wings" to his mind. He thereby consisting of an avowal or a confession. The intentional mean- lent him wings, the other did not return them. Remains this enigma: ing of confession supposes, therefore, that one does not confess in The narrator occupies here the place of nature, he has represented him- order to inform, to give information or teach a lesson, to make known. o self by nature or he represents it; he takes himself for (the) nature (of Consequence: The eidetic purity of confession stands out better when his friend). Since the narrator represents as well the origin of literature the other is already in a position to know what I confess. That is why by coming here, through an "I" or a play or simulacrum, in the place Saint Augustine wonders so often why he confesses to God who of the "true" signatory, Baudelaire, we are perhaps witnessing some- knows everything. thing that resembles the birth of literature. In stricter terms (and the The friend did not do what he ought to have done in order to know difference matters): Not the (natural) birth of literature, not its origin, that he was mean, to make it known, and to confess it to himself. but the moment of a naturalization of literature, of an interpretation And it is this trial procedure that must be read, this accusation that of literature and of a literature of fiction as nature, an interpretation must be heard beneath the word stupidity since it is said to be irrepa- (perhaps) as fictive as the counterfeit money that it uses. For by put- rable as the cause of evil, of the "evil out of stupidity." Stupidity is ting on stage a naturalist and sententious narrator, by exhibiting the not a state, a character, a genetic limit, a natural, native, innate given, fiction of a naturalization of literature, Baudelaire, who is neither a a verifiable impotence. Stupidity, in this context, has the sense of a detective nor the narrator (although he is perhaps an amateur of certain rapport, it is a certain relation, a certain behavior with regard to money, that is, a connoisseur of counterfeit money, that is, an expert an intellectual power, or more generally a hermeneutic power in- regarding indiscernability in this domain), inscribes perhaps this scribed in us by nature like genetic capital portioned out to everyone naturalization in an institution called literature. Perhaps, then, he re- at birth, a kind of universal good sense or ingenium that should always minds us of the institutionality of this institution, but of an institution be available. that can only consist in passing itself off as natural. He invites us 0 I Ch pt r f r "C nt rf t M n " II
e a s o sus e a e e o a ques io e o o osi io e- Ica us a Ica us com ai s mo eo e a e is o a e o sig wee a u e a i s i u io phusis a thesis, phusis a nomos, a- e wi o gi e is ame o e e o e se u u e o w ic o e s u e a co e io k ow e ge a c e i ( ai a u e a a i s wou ike o co sig im U a e e e o gi e is ame o gi e o e s imse a ame o gi e a ame o is e ow cou e e e c aim o gi e? o k ow ow o gi e? o k ow e is gi i g a y i g w a - We a e s i sayi g perhaps. o e sec e emai s gua e as o w a soe e ? e as o se u u e a e e o e o o e ame ecise y au eIai e e a a o o e ie mea o say o o o assumi g ecause e w i es a e e y si ks o o e o om u i o e a ey emse es k ew; we ca o e su e o is e e i e case a yss Ica us oes o sig ; e com ai s [se plaint] a e ca o o e ie w o is e o e w o we su ose a o e o e e a e e i y himself [se plaindre ui- me] A gi is o sig e ; i oes a yo e seems o k ow i e ga e—a w y— ue o cou e ei o ca cu a e e e wi a ime a wou o i us ice A a e i g mo ey Ye esi es e ac a e may imse a e ee mis ake o ay a au e ai e s "mo e i y " i i s s iki g i so e ce eca s i a ousa i e e ways e aces imse o a e e mus us to i e oes e ie e i e su ime ei e e e e s i o s a i any case i a osi io o o -k owi g wi ega o e c e i e su ime s ecu a io cou e ei mo ey a o e wou egga s ossi e s ecu a io a is wi ega o e e ec s o ike o su s i u e a e "ca e u se a a io " o e o e ess c ue w a e as gi e a e e o e wi ega o e ques io o os i u i g ki i g " o e o eau y " Ica us ies o a i g "em- k owi g w a e i u ga e a us w e e e i u ga e ace e c ou s" e e w e e " e o e s o os i u es/ A e a y Suc a sec e e e s i e a u e i is co s i u e y e ossi i i y o e a e a sa is ie " ["Les arnants de prostituees1 Sant heureux, dispos e i e a y i s i u io a e ea e y a i s i u io in its ossi i - et repus"]. i y o sec e o y o e e e o w ic i oses a i e io i y a ick- e e o e we cou ooki g o oo a wo o c ock ea agai ess a e I is ke a so u e y u eaka e i io a e o y o a is wi e e e e ow a [la chute], " es ai es u e e e o w ic i is o me y a o - syc o ogica s uc u e [ca e" ( e Com ai s o a Ica us e e e a i g o - is s uc u e is o su ec i e o su ec i e e e oug i is e- ecise y—o e oem i s a so u e umi i y a us e owes s o si e o e mos a ica e ec s o su ec i i y o o su ec i a- ossi e io I is su e icia wi ou su s a ce i i i e y i a e ecause • • u ic oug a oug I is s ea o e su ace o e age 'nes yeux consumes ne voient as o ious as a u oi e e e a os ca a a k o e a c eck a Que des souvenirs de soleil. " e e o c e i "—o "a si e wo- a c iece " e e is o a u e o y e ec s o a u e e a u a io o a u a - [ • • .1 i a io a u e e mea i g o a u e is eco s i u e a e e ac Sous je ne sais quel oeil de feu o e asis o a simu ac um ( o e am e i e a u e a i is oug e sens mon aile qui se casse; o cause o e a u e a e a a o e ese s e e a a e e e o e a so iscou s a ecou s is a a u e a oes o so Et brille par I'amour du beau, muc gi e as e A a e s mo e a i gi es I extends credit. Je n'aurai pas rhonneur sublime A w e i o e s someo e e "e aus i g acu y o ooki g o De dormer mon nom a rabime oo a wo o c ock " i is so a i is u e may y o s ea — Qui me servira de tombeau. ai s ai i o a [dormant, donnant]—"lending wi gs o e mi " e us i k a ou i emem e Ica us— owa e su u e [ .] e eye o oo Wou a s o y amo g o e s e e w o e s o y my co sume eyes see o y a o is o y? I a y case a a eas a ce ai is o y o i oso y Sou e i s o e su 2 C a e ou
Beneath some unknown eye of fire I feel my wing breaking;
And burned by the love of beauty, I will not have the sublime honor Of giving my name to the abyss
That will serve as my tomb. 3
2. O vr pl t , , . 4 . is oem, w ic was a e i e e i io o 868, as ee i e e e om i e e , u i seems o me o co a ic o y, oi s o iew y e ami (i d l r , . 82 a y Mic e eguy i o e o is a mi a e ea i gs o au e ai e: " e co s e ea e ( ema ques su e co s oé ique es l r u M l ," t ( 0 , . 8. Mic e eguy is a so e oe o r nt nn nt ( a is: Ga ima , 8 :
nn nt nn nt t l f r l l'echange sans marche at l v l r d ne serait que de rechange d d n o i l n nest pas meme h r h , f n d incomparables sans mesure prise en common, un trot oil la fleur d'ail se change en re qui West pas de refus
Q l r z v d ntt r C t l t pt
Gi i g Gi i g is e o mu a e e c a ge wi ou ma ke w e e use a ue wou o y e a o e e c a ge o e gi i w ic e commo is o e e soug , a u a ce o i com a a es wi ou measu e ake i commo , a a e w e e e ga ic owe c a ges i o w a is o e use W a o you e si e o gi e I s e ges u e a cou s ( a is: GaI ima , 8 , . .