Les violences du modèle : Édouard Louis Vukušić Zorica, Maja
Studia Romanica et Anglica Zagrabiensia,
12/2020, Letnik:
65, Številka:
-
Paper, Journal Article
Le titre, délibérément ambivalent, annonce que l’analyse va procéder à deux temps : en premier lieu, partir du lien entre les dernières années de la vie1 de Marquis de Sade, qui meurt à Charenton le ...2 décembre 1814, et la période de l’Empire. Dans une société marquée par la censure, il établit paradoxalement, au sein d’une maison de fou, un empire, celui de la liberté des passions sous l’égide du théâtre écrit, créé et mis en scène. De ce rapport entre l’asile et le théâtre, qui sous-entend le « pouvoir psychiatrique » foucauldien, dans cet empire des passions, naît une certaine scène, dans le sens ranciérien du terme, scène de la métaphorisation contemporaine. A l’effondrement du modèle de la théâtralité spécifique du roman libertin correspond ici l’interprétation de Sade de l’écrivain croate Ivo Brešan dans son roman Prokletnici (Les Maudits), à travers la métaphore de la société croate en transition, et celle, américaine, de la pièce de théâtre de Doug Wright, Quills (Plumes) et sa métaphore de l’écriture. Le bilan est vacillant.
Rousseau’s musical and musicological œuvre is a great platform to show that the metaphor, especially the metaphor of war is, for him, at the same time both active and destructive, both fruitful and ...fatal, that, even though used in the context of art, has nothing to do with it. During all his “wars”, the ghost that trails him is representation. Even his new musicology, the anthropology of music, cannot handle the problem. Rousseau's example also demonstrates the uncertainty of this use of the metaphor in musicological and theoretical discourse. His Music Dictionary, published in 1767, announces one eminently technical, lexicographic work, a set of definitions of terms in alphabetical order that is an open field in which everything can be found, as Valéry would put it. Meanwhile, music shows that it “knows” better, though it persistently refuses to determine the nature of this knowledge. If we understand music as language, we try to give meaning to the sensory, which is possible only through representation (Lacoue-Labarthe). That is why Rousseau's great struggle, even if he overpowered all his opponents, from Rameau to himself, always necessarily fails. But Rousseau is one of those who have managed to fail fabulously. For him, the secret remains intact, the music of the world, mourned after, a tune that has been lost in advance. There is only a trace of his attempt, his fantastic failure, his work in and on music. His obligatory recitative, singing, a voice whose cry clearly condemns both psychology and biography. Fortunately, with Rousseau, the metaphor, both the one of war and the one of language, is sung.
Feminist readings of Michel Foucault (The History of Sexuality, Discipline and Punish) and Pierre Bourdieu (Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste; Masculine Domination) raise the ...question of the possible combination of different discourses (philosophy, sociology, politics, ideology and activism) when dealing with the category of “sexuality” and “gender”. It seems as if one were considered not having said enough, and the other having said too much. Criticism is embodied by those two very different figures of disobedience in a way to encourage the creation of new schemes of politicisation, new forms of culture, discourse and language indifferent to gender (Foucault). Bourdieu’s intentions are more pragmatic, his ethos much less aesthetic than Foucault’s. Foucault’s antiquity is Bourdieu’s Kabylia, the sign of the socialisation of the biological and the biologisation of the social. If Foucault’s analysis ruptures, limits and changes, Bourdieu’s analyses the stereotypes and the self-explanatory. Two “bad husbands” (Fraser) and bad “gurus” show that thinking about activism outside the framework of personal convictions and daily politics is very difficult, if not impossible. When confronted with feminisms, both of them underline the problem of thinking about a plural phenomenon that is both critical theory and political practice. Foucault once said that he always wrote only fiction. Literature may well be one way to outgrow these divisions, as the only potentially all-conquering language; not as its own mystification, nor as the pathos of a possible future, but as a fiction which disables the classification of doubles: fiction and non-fiction, truth and history, narrative and storytelling.
PDF
