Writing beyond Reason: Literature, Counterinsurgency and Sovereignty in Contemporary Latin America by Christian Kroll A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Romance Languages and Literatures: Spanish) in the University of Michigan 2012 Doctoral Committee: Professor Gareth Williams, Chair Associate Professor Paulina Alberto Professor Cristina Moreiras-Menor Associate Professor Daniel Noemi to the ghosts that haunt these pages— dead and alive; known and unknown. to sybelle, my daughter— hoping that you would never need to tell me to stand less between the sun and you ii Acknowledgments & Agradecimientos …only through time time is conquered Sometimes one just gets lucky. I ended up in the Department of Romance Languages and Literatures at Michigan by a concatenation of very fortunate events, and was even luckier to be able to share time, space, ideas, conversations, seminars, projects, cafés and beers with such a wonderful group of people. Writing a dissertation might be a solitary endeavour but the dissertation itself never is. So, in order of language… At the University of Michigan, I want to thank the Department of Romance Languages and Literatures and the Horace Rackham Graduate School for making this dissertation possible through their financial support; the International Institute for helping me navigate the sometimes nightmarish waters of immigration bureaucracy; the Office of Financial Aid, whose Child Care Subsidy Program does make a huge difference; and the Graduate Employees Organization (GEO) for their crucial work and awesome support. I also want to thank the Department of Urban and Regional Planning for first making me feel at home in Ann Arbor and, specially, Prof. Gavin Shatkin, who introduced me to the rigors of academic research and first taught me that without the right question you can never have an interesting answer. A warm thank you, too, to the wonderful and helpful staff of the Romance Language and Literatures Department, particularly to Carin Scott, Annette Herbert, April Caldwell, Linda Burger, Carissa Van Heest, Beth Humbert and Mindy Niehaus-Fukuda. iii In Spanish… Un profundo agradecimiento a mi comité de tesis: pocas veces tiene uno la suerte de conocer excelentes profesionales que a su vez son excelentes personas. Gracias por sus cruciales seminarios y por su generosidad al compartir ideas, experiencias y conocimiento; por la hospitalidad y la amistad; y, sobretodo, por cultivar y transmitir ese ambiente de respeto mutuo, confianza y camaradería que hacen único al departamento y única la experiencia de andar por sus pasillos. A Gareth: gracias por tu ejemplar integridad académica y compromiso con el pensamiento crítico, por el comentario preciso y certero, el que abre posibilidades, y por tu generosa ayuda a lo largo de estos años. A Cristina: gracias por tu tenacidad, empuje y pasión por lo que haces y por cómo lo enseñas. A Daniel: gracias por compartir tu vasto saber literario y tu pasión por la literatura, los detallados comentarios, las conexiones para mí ocultas, las noches de tertulia y el realismo. A Paulina: gracias por abrirte a la lectura estas páginas y sumarte a un barco ya zarpado. Además, a Jaime Rodríguez-Matos: por tu amistad de los últimos años, el amor a la música y, sobretodo, por compartir la duda perpetua sobre este nuestro quehacer cotidiano. Y también a Kate Jenckes, Javier Sanjinés, Alejandro Herrero y Jarrod Hayes por sus seminarios y presencia, a Juli Highfil por confiarme 308, y a Olga Gallego y Andy Noverr por darme la oportunidad de enseñar español y, de paso, haberme permitido recordar que son la literatura y la crítica lo que me apasiona. A Nico Cabrera, por la amistad y la casaca desde mi primer día en Ann Arbor. A Alejandro Quin, Federico Pous y Marcelino Viera—gracias por la amistad, las discusiones, las ideas, los proyectos, las alegrías y desencantos: sin ustedes, todos estos años no hubieran sido lo mismo. Y también a Roberto Robles, Diógenes Costa-Curras, Manuel Chinchilla, Talia Dajes, David Collinge, Gabriel Horowitz, Andrea Fanta, Ofelia iv Ros, Javier Entrambasaguas y Mara Pastor—a todos ustedes y a mis demás compañeras/os del departamento: gracias por su curiosidad intelectual, por su apertura al intercambio y crítica de ideas, por compartir proyectos y fiestas; en suma, por hacer de la vida en Ann Arbor precisamente eso: vida. A mis brothers en Guate que son, quizás sin saberlo, parte fundamental de este trabajo y las inquietudes que lo motivan: Alex Iriarte, Alejandro Paz, Juan Pablo Ríos y Julio Fonseca—gracias por la amistad de años que continúa en y desde la distancia. A mis queridos viejos: gracias por su apoyo enorme e incondicional, su profundo amor y cariño, y por haber sembrado de alguna manera en mí la semillita de la curiosidad y la duda. A mi hermano Gustavo, su esposa Anabella y mis sobrinos Mateo y Fabio: por la alegría, los churrascos domingueros en Milwaukee y el cariño que le tienen a Sybelle—de lo mejor de este año y medio escribiendo lejos de Ann Arbor ha sido verlos jugar juntos a los tres. A Heidi: por leer lo que escribo con el lápiz en la oreja; por forzarme a pararme de la silla, caminar por la nieve, acampar y ver lindos bichitos; por tu pasión por lo que haces; y, sobretodo, por tu amor, continuo apoyo y (¡muchísima!) paciencia. Y, claro, a Sybelle: por la alegría y el puro amor, por enseñarme a verlo todo con nuevos ojos y renovadas ganas; por el perpetuo recuerdo de que hay cosas más importantes en la vida que escribir una disertación. Y también por esa madurez que vale la pena, la que como bien dijo Nietzsche consiste tan sólo en redescubrir la seriedad de un niño mientras juega y, agregaría, jugar con él o, en este caso, ella. v Table of Contents Dedication ii Acknowledgements & Agradecimientos iii Introduction 1 Chapter 1. Of Friends, Enemies, Partisans and Guerrilleros: The Concept of the Political and the Logic of Fraternization 11 1.1. The concept of the political 31 1.2. Of friends and enemies 34 1.3. Of some friends and some enemies: the logic of fraternization 39 1.4. Of our friends and our enemies 46 1.5. Of partisans and guerrilleros 52 Chapter 2. Emergency Powers and the (Forgotten) Limits of Sovereignty 63 2.1. Carl Schmitt and the sovereign’s exception 70 2.2. Disobedience, resistance and the (forgotten) limits of sovereignty 79 2.3. Protection, obedience and the return of the friend-enemy distinction 92 Chapter 3. Manchay Tiempo: Adiós Ayacucho, Adiós Sovereignty 104 3.1. Searching for missing bones 107 3.2. “We are [not] the initiators!” 120 3.3. Without an order 133 Chapter 4. “I am not complete in the mind”: Senselessness, Noise vi and Sovereign Reason 142 4.1. The scriptural enterprise and the criminalization of insurgents 147 4.2. Madness and morality in Rios Montt’s Guatemala 155 4.3. A reasonable senselessness 166 4.4. Noise in the scriptural enterprise 173 4.5. Non-labor and the shift in the locus of sovereignty 179 Chapter 5. The Inconvenience of Revolution: Zapatismo, Cynicism and the Idea of Dignity 190 5.1. Sovereign utterances and parrhēsia: who should ask for pardon? 194 5.2. Ghosts, beetles and mētis 202 5.3. Mandar obedeciendo; preguntando caminamos 223 5.4. The Idea of dignity 236 Conclusion 249 Works Cited 253 vii Introduction In both countries it was clearer than crystal to the lords of the State preserves of loaves and fishes that things in general were settled forever. Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities He surveyed through the park railings the evidence of the town’s opulence and luxury with an approving eye. All these people had to be protected. Protection is the first necessity of opulence and luxury. They had to be protected and their horses, carriages, houses, servants had to be protected; and the source of their wealth had to be protected in the heart of the city and the heart of the country; the whole social order favourable to their hygienic idleness had to be protected against the shallow enviousness of unhygienic labor. Joseph Conrad, The Secret Agent In the epigraph above, Charles Dickens seems to merely be referring to the lords’ self- confidence in England and France before the French Revolution. “That things in general were settled for ever” would thus point to the blithe attitude that comes with the certainty that power and the privileges and benefits associated with it are secured, and the legal, political and economic structures preserving these privileges properly working; or, in Joseph Conrad’s words in the second quotation above, that the “whole social order favourable to their hygienic idleness” is being protected “against the shallow enviousness of unhygienic labor.” 1 Dickens’ passage thus seems to allude to the comfort found in knowing that everything one is and has, one will still be and have tomorrow; that expectations are the logical and undisputed outcome of previous experience; that there is no reason to worry either in the present or in the future. In brief, Dickens’ passage seems to be alluding to the carefree and content awareness that comes from “deservingly” holding power, from being, in a word, sovereign. Yet, we know better. The passage appears on the novel’s first page; by the end, revolution has given way to terror, the lords are no longer lords, the preserves no longer theirs. Given its ironic undertone, the passage seems thus to point to the ever-present tension and, sometimes, actual conflict between those who believe to have the (divine, economic, social, political and/or cultural) right to the state preserves and those who disagree: the satiated lords and the hungry many, the friends and the enemies.