Anda di halaman 1dari 9

HlderlinsInsistence,ortheInsistenceoftheLiteraryintheTheologico Political BartPhilipsen(Leuven,Belgium) 1. Ifthereisaninsistenceofthetheologicopoliticalincontemporaryphilosophy whichisthefirmpremiseandsubjectofthisconference,canwethenalsospeakof aspecificinsistenceoftheliteraryinthepersistenceofthetheologicopolitical?In whatwaycantheliterarycontributetoreflectionsontheambivalentrelationsof insistenceandresistancethatexistbetweenreligionandpolitics,andtoquestionsof heteronomyandautonomythatareattheheartofthehistoryofmodernityandthe storyofsecularizationasaspecific,problematicreadingofthathistory?Howmuch literatureisactuallynecessaryinordertocometotermswiththeabysmal ambivalenceofthetheologicopoliticalorhowmuchliteraturecanwedispensewith ?Andfinally:howmuchifanyHlderlindoweneed?Alotofquestionstobegin with,morethanIcandealwith,letaloneanswerinthefollowing20minutes.

inutes. Mylistofquestionsisalsoechoinganothernottooremotetheoreticaldebate betweenPhilippeLacoueLabartheandAlainBadiouthatfunctionsasthehidden backgroundofthispaper.LetmejustsaythatthedebatewastriggeredbyBadious ManifestoforPhilosophy(1989),inwhichheclaimedthatthetimehadcometo unsuturephilosophyfromits(exclusively)poeticcondition,andtoendtheAgeof thePoetstowhichphilosophy,accordingtoBadiou,hadsurrendereditselfatleast sinceNietzsche.Philosophy,forBadiou,wastoputanendto(andIquoteLacoue Labarthesinterpretationofthisclaim)thesuturingtothepoliticalofphilosophys suturingtothePoem1. PhilippeLacoueLabartherespondedtothisprovocativethesis(whichismuchmore complicatedthanmyrsumsuggests)withatleastthreetextsofhisown.Ineachof themHeideggersreadingofHlderlinisconfrontedwithWalterBenjaminsearly essayTwoPoemsbyFriedrichHlderlin.TheCourageofthePoetTimidity, writtenintheWinterof19141915.LLinsistsineachessayonthetheologicopolitical
1

Lacoue-Labarthe: HeideggerandthePoliticsofPoetry,UrbanaandChicago,UniversityofIllinois Press2007(originalinFrench2002),p.23.

stakesofbothHeideggersandBenjaminsreadings,thelatterbeingforLLthe deconstructionoftheformer,thedemythologizationofHeideggerstheologico poeticalsubtext.BenjaminsHlderlinreadingmakesapparentthepoemsinsistence onitselfaspoetry,thatis:poetryasitsownpurelyintransitivedestinyandasthe couragetoleavebehindothermythologicalandpoliticaldestinations,inorderto finallybecomeproseastheultimatemodeofthepoemsspeakingthetrueabout thePoem.Poetrythenbecomesaformofwriting,saysLL,thatseesitself compelled()totakeleaveofthehymn,toquitit.TosayliketheRimbaudofA SeasoninHell:Adieu.(HPP,p.57) ThesingularityofthenameHlderlinisnotmeanttosingleoutHlderlinsworkas theoneandonlyoreventhemostexemplarylocuswheretheinsistenceoftheliterary inthetheologicopoliticalbecomesmanifestbutitdoesstressthefactthatthe insistenceoftheliterarytakestheformofasingularization.Imightaswellhave referredtoKafka,orCelanortocontemporaryauthorslikeCoetzeeorSebald,and eventhiscanon(ifitisone)isallbutexhaustive.Whattheseauthorsseemtohavein commonis,attheveryleast,thefactthatphilosophersandespeciallythosewho focusontheologicopoliticalaswellastheologicoethicalquestionsliketoresortto theirtextsinordertodemonstrateorelucidatespecificpoints.Thematteratstake thoughisnotinthefirstplaceliteratureasatertiumcomparationisoranimaginative bridgebetweenpoliticaltheoryandtheology.Inanalogywiththepoliticalor,forthat matter,thetheologicalorthereligious,theliterarydoesnotcoincidewithacanonof literarytexts,institutionsorpoeticaltechniques,motivesetc.Wehavelongbeenused tounderstandingtheconceptofthepoliticalasarticulatingadifference,orevena diffrancewithorwithintherealmofpoliticsthepoliticalisnottheabstractand generaldenominatorthatencompassesallaspectsofpolitics,butinsteadgestures towardaquasitranscendentalspacethatisalwaysalreadyretreating(andIamof coursereferringtothereflectionsofamongothersLefort,LL,andNancy),a spacethatengendersandatthesametimeresiststheinstitutionalizing,organizing forceofthepoliticalorder.Thesamecouldbesaidaboutthatotherforcethatis religionanditsimaginationofanothersortofcommunity,ofwhichtheology(inits dogmaticform)isthediscourse,andthetheologicalthatwhichinitsturnrefersto thequasitranscendentalspaceofthereligious,theretreatingcanvasof transcendence,aheavenlywithdrawalandinsistenceasopposedtotheworldly

withdrawalandinsistenceofthepolitical.Besidesthefactthattheinnerunresolvable tensionsbetweenthepoliticalandpoliticsaswellasbetweentheologyandthe theologicalhavetobedealtwithandareusuallydealtwithintermsthat deliberatelyornotresorttoacertainliterarity,theinsistenceandresistanceofthe literaryastherecedingmediumattheintersectionofbothquasitranscendental spacesiscrucialandfundamentaltothesetwodiverging,perhapsmutuallyexclusive forcesthathavedeterminedthehistoryofcivilization,andinanespeciallyacuteform thestoryofsecularizationandpostsecularization.IagreewithDerridathatliterature, theliteraryperformativeisaforcethatconstantlyproducesandtransgressesand transformsitsownconstitutionallaws,producingdiscursiveforms,worksandevents inwhichtheverypossibilityofafundamentalconstitution[whetheritbeofa worldlyoraheavenlynature]isatleastfictionallycontested,threatened, deconstructed,presentedinitsveryprecariousness.2Literatureseventisalwaysalso thesuspension,interruption,virtualizationandperhapsevenperversionofthat event.Inthefaceofthoseforcesthatindependentlyofwhethertheyareaimingat aworldlyoramorethanworldlycommunityinevitablyexecuteatheological gesturethaterasesthelimitsoffinitude,thecoincidenceofoperativeandin operative,responsibleandirresponsibleperformativityintheliteraryperformative turnsthisperformativeintothepreviligedreminderoftheselimits:itisan intrinsicallyprofanegesturewithanasymptoticdrive. InhisessayState,Church,ResistanceJLNancyhasrecentlyreconnectedthe tensionbetweenwhathecallsthetwokingdoms,polisandecclesia,tothebasic problemofbeingwith,sayingthatwhatisatstakeinthistensionispreciselythe relationtothelimitthatwedesiretoviolatesinceitexposesfinitude.Butthatlimitis alsothelimitthattheotherrepresentsandthatwewanttoerasebyeithersacrificing, annihilating,swallowingtheother,orbybindingalltheotherstogetherinamodelof cosmicpoliticaltotality.Whatremainstobethought,accordingtoNancy,is beingwiththatresistsitselfandrefusestobefulfilledunderanypermanentform.(..) Whatresistsisbeingwithinitsresistancetoitsowngathering[rassemblement]. Thisresistancetouchesthetruthofbeingswith,ofthisproximityofthewiththatis foreverimpossibletoeffectuateasabeingandisalwaysresistant.Neither autonomousnorheteronomousbutratheranomicinthemutualresistanceofthe

J.D.: Acts of Literature , ed. By Derek Attridge, NY-London, Routledge, p.72

autonomousandtheheteronomous.3Iarguethatdoingjusticetothisanomaly meansdiscerningtheliteraryintheologicopoliticaldiscourse.ForthatreasonI wouldliketoturnorreturntoBenjaminandHlderlininthesecondhalfofmy paper. ItisimpossibletorenderthecomplexityofBenjaminsreadingofHlderlinstwo poems4(whichyoufindonyourcopy,bothinGermanandinEnglish)orofthe multiplephilologicalandautobiographicalcontextsinwhichitisembedded.As BenjaminwillwriteinhislateressayonGoethe,Dichtungintherealsensecanonly originatewhenthewordliberatesitselffromthespellofeventhehighesttask,that is(astheearlyHlderlinessaywantstodemonstrate),whenthepoemconcentrates onthesoleandonlytaskthatisitsinnerform,oritsdictamen(dasGedichtete,orthe poetized).InthefirstpartoftheessayBenjamintriestodefinethisdictamen,which seemstobealimitconcept,aquasitranscendentalstructureofpotentialityat oncetheproductandthesubjectofthisinvestigationsituatedbetweentheactual formofthepoem,ontheonhand,andlifeontheother.Onlyattheendofhisessay (andhewillrepeatthisinhisdissertationonromanticism)doesBenjaminquote Hlderlinsnotionsofsobrietyandofthesacredlysober,whichischaracteristic ofthelaterworkthatarisesfromtheinnercertaintywithwhichthoseworksstandin theirownintellectuallife,inwhichsobrietyisnowallowed,iscalledfor,becausethis lifeisinitselfsacred,standingbeyondallexaltation(Erhebung)inthesublime. ThisisalreadytheconclusionofareadingofHlderlinstwopoems,whichare actuallytwooutofaseriesofdifferentversionsofthesamepoem,andBenjamins rhetoricalreadingtriestoreadthemaspartofarevisionorrewritingprocessthat mirrorsanambivalentprocessofpoeticsecularization.Theearlierversionisstill caughtwithinthelogicofGreekmythology,tryingtonarratepoeticallythe constitutivemomentwhenthepoetdiesforthepoeticizedcosmos(thiswasOrpheus inanearlierversionthatBenjamindoesntreferto)thelaterversionentitled simplyBldigkeitisthenpraisedbyBenjaminasanopaquetextualuniverse organizedbytheprincipleofsupremesovereigntyofrelationshiporinner
3

2.

J.-L.Nancy:Church,State,Resistance,in: Political Theologies. Public Religions in a Post-Secular World, ed. By Hent de Vries & Lawrence E. Sullivan, NF, Fordham UP, 2006, 102-112, p. 112. 4 W.B.TwopoemsbyF.Hlderlin,in:W.B.:Selected Writings Vol. 1 1913-1926, p. 18-36.

connectedness,aprinciplethatturnseveryelementintoafunctionoftheother elements,intosignifierswithinthethewrittenandreadspaceandtimeofthepoem, whichisthepoemsultimategroundlessground,itslinguisticGesetztheit(its havingbeenposited?Boundedness,tr.Corngold).Benjaminsreadingfocuseson thesubtleshiftsinarticulationsofdependenceandofpositing,ofheteronomyand autonomythatdisperseandreconfigureworldyandheavenlypowers,gods,mortal menandprinces,crashingdownfromtheiroldordersasitwereasifmortalsand heavenlypowersarecaughttogetherinatheologicalFallthatistheFalloftheology, ofacertaintheologyorpassingincontrastingrhythmsthroughthepoemsoasto belinkedtooneanotherwithoutdifference,cominghome(derEinkehrzu)as equals,asthecentralthirdstanzaofthepoemseemstosuggestandthough they(gods,menandprinces)mayseemgovernedonlybytheirownwhim,theydo finallyfallbackintothisabysmalboundedness(Gesetztheit)ofthepoemwhichis thelimitoftheirpower,andthusthemarkeroftheirfinitude.Benjaminsreading addsoneoftquotedmetaphortomakeclearwhathemeanshere:Hereatthecenter ofthepoem,theordersofgodandmenarecuriouslyraiseduptowardandagainst eachother,theonebalancedbytheotherliketwoscales:theyareleftintheir opposingpositions,yetliftedoffthescalebeam.Thefailingscalebeamisanother evocationofthegroundlessground,theGesetztheit,ofthepoemandtheopaque centerthatnowbelongsto[orisdueto]anotherorsomethingother(Einem anderengebhrtdieMittedieserWelt).Itresemblestherecedingspaceofthe theologicopoliticalthathasreplacedtheprevalenceofthemythologicalinthefirst version,whichmeans,perhaps,thenarrativerepresentationofpoliticsandreligion, ofaspecificGreekpoliticaltheologythathadtobeovercomesincethespirituallife BenjaminseesarticulatedinHlderlinslateworkcannotbethatofapeoplenor thatofanindividual. Theopenplaceofanother(ortheother)inthecenterofthepoemisalsotheplaceof thepoetsdisappearance,hiscominghome(Einkehr)indeathoratleastinasortof deaththatisnowidentifiedasBldigkeit,timidity,turningtheoriginalnegative connotationsofthetitle(whichthefirsttwostanzasmayhintat)into,well, somethingnotnegative:Timidityhasnowbecometheauthenticstanceofthepoet. Sincehehasbeentransposedintothemiddleoflife,nothingawaitshimbut(nichts bleibtihmals)motionlessexistence,completepassivitywhichistheessenceofthe courageousmannothingexcepttosurrenderhimselfwhollytorelationship.

Relationship(Beziehung)isthenakedabstractexpressionofwhatBenjaminalso callsthespirituallifethatisinitselfsacred,standingbeyondallexaltation (Erhebung)inthesublime.Thispositionifitcanstillbecalledthat,whichitcant couldbethelastoneinthetrajectoryofHlderlinsliteraryspeechact,which startedasafailedattempttobethevoiceofamodernprophet,andturnedintoa dramaticyetcontinuousdeconstructionofitsearlierhymnicaspirations. Benjaminisdefinitelyonthetrackofamodernorevenamodernistconceptof writingandreadinginHlderlinswork,ofaliterarityatthelimitofliteralization Hlderlinsactof(re)writingisinBenjaminsrereadingindeedbecomingsublimely prosaicandsoberasaresultofitsconsistentquestioninganddeconstructionofthe theologicalprincipleof(Fichtean)positingandfiguration.Thedissolutionofthe figuresintoformalisticconnectednessisdescribedbyBenjaminasaprocesof Versachlichung(materialization,becomingconcrete)thathintsatamodernist poeticsofdisfigurationandlinguisticmaterialitybutatthesametimeBenjamins readingisstilltheprogrammaticannouncementofthatconceptaswellasits obfuscationthroughtheuseofanexplicitanalogywithaSchillereanaestheticsof dematerialization.Itseemsthattheactualperformativestructureofthepoemthe factthatitisanaddress,anappeal,anincitementisalltoohastilyreducedtoan affirmationofafullfilleddestiny,asifthereexistedaharmoniousorganictension betweenthepotentialityoftheinnerform(thedictamen)andtheactualconcrete poem.Whichleavesalotofincongruitiesandquestionsunsolved,suchasthe questionaboutthefunctionoftheprincesaretheyworldyorheavenlypowers, and:inwhichscaledotheybelong?or,ingeneral,dieGewaltdieses Zusammenhangs,thepowerofthepurelyfunctionalsouvereignitythatthepoet awaits,whichmeansthatwatstillawaitshimisnothingexcepttosurrendertoit. Yetthepoetspassivityisstillnotfullyrealized,histimidityorBldigkeitisstill holdingitselfbeforethelawofthepoetizedordictamen,andincontrasttowhat Benjaminseemstosuggest,ithesitatestogiveitselfupinthispostsecularEinkehror gatheringofallworldyandheavenlycreaturesinthepureconnectednessofa languagethatwantstocommunicatenothingmorethanitselfandassuchwantsto becomenothingbutanallencompassingprose. Benjamindeclaresthatintheadmirableorganizationofthelastverse(gutauch sindundgeschickteinemzuetwaswirusw.),theimmanentgoalofallstructuration

inthispoemissummedup.Heisreferringtothedoublemeaningofgeschicktas beingsent(asbydestiny,heteronomy)andskillfull,adroit,appropriateas characteristicoftheartistsautonomybutonemustalsoadmitthatthesameclosing versesarebothsemanticallyandsyntacticallyobscureorasRainerNgelewrote5 inappropriate(ungeschickt)andawkward,gauche(linkisch).Linkischisan expressionthatwealsofindinHlderlinsNotestoAntigone6,whereitisthe oppositeofmchanos,whichreferspreciselytothecoincidenceofanautonomous andaheteronomousactthat,accordingtoBenjamin,Hlderlinspoemis articulating.Yet,intheNotestoAntigonewhicharealsonotesonacomplex processoftranslationthatoperatesondifferentlevels,includingthelevelof secularizationonecanreadthatweasmoderns,whoareschicksallos(without destiny),aredependentonformsthat,besidesbeingrepresentationsinminiature (inverringertemMastab),havetoadoptanawkward,agaucheperspective (linkischerGesichtspunkt),ifwewanttograspsomethingoftheinfinite.Thismight verywellbetheonly(in)appropriateformtograspthearrivalorEinkehrinthe profanehomelandoffinitudetowhichstillaccordingtoHlderlinsNotesto Antigonetheheavenlyisturninginourmoderntimes.DespiteBenjaminsreading, Bldigkeitthepoemaswellastheattitudethatisrepresentedandadvocatedinit designatesfirstandforemostthislinkisch,thatis,textualresistancetothe proclaimedEinkehrintheprofane.Ithesitates,initsanomicorlinkisch resistance/insistence,beforethesovereigntyofanallencompassingformal gathering. Anditisexactlythisconjunctionoftechnicalmechanicalskillfulnessoreven propriety(Schicklichkeit)andanobliqueperspectivelinkischerGesichtspunkt, amchanosthatbecomesthecentraltechniqueofHlderlinslastpoems,atleastof thoselessknownbutextremelyinterestingpoemswritteninthefirstyearsofhisso calledmadnesssuchasThehappyLife,TheGraveyardorThePromenade,but alsoofsomeoftheverylastones.Theydeterminestheperformativeinsistence resistancetowardsthearrivalorthedwellingintheirown,inourmodernproper (dasEigene),whichHlderlinlinkedtotheconceptofsobriety,andofwhichhe
5

Rainer Ngele: Hlderlins Kritik der poetischen Vernunft . Basel/Weil am Rhein/Wien: Urs Engeler 2005, p. 138. 6 Friedrich Hlderlin: Essays and Letters on Theory, translated and ed. By Thomas Pfau. NY: State University of NY Press 1988

claimedthatitcouldonly,andofnecessitymustbehintedatthroughthenever endingdtouroftheforeign,thefreeuseoftheproperbeingthemostdifficulttask, evenanimpossibleonethatneverthelessmustbelearned. Everyonewhoispreparedtoreadthesetextswilldiscoverthathere,notwithstanding theirirritatinglycorrectorschicklichyetnaveformalstructureespeciallytheir versification,theprosaictendencythatissituatedattheheartofHlderlinslater workismorethanBenjaminimaginedinhisessayturningitselfinsideout.The prosaicbecomesinacertainsensesomethingverytangible,evenmaterial.Itisin manycasesanexplicitlyawkardtextuality,makingthevoiceofthesetextsintoa timid(blde)yetattentivereaderofpraetextsthatinthefirstplacebelongto HlderlinsownformerworkaswellastootherformerpraetextssuchasKant, SchillerandRousseau.Theirthinkingandwritingreturnasmortifiedquotations, oftenreducedtowordplays,secularizedtranslationsactually,whichmakesthemas BenjamintriedtoexplaininThetaskoftheTranslatorgenuinelyuntranslatable. Butthesetranslationsare,inamuchmoreconcreteandmaterialsensethan Bldigkeit,advancedmomentsinaprocessofpostsecularizingtranslationtowards Benjaminsideaofprose.ApoemsuchasTheHappyLife(whichIcantreadhere seecopy)appearsasasortofendgameoftheessentialtheologicopoliticalintertexts ofHlderlinshymnicworkaswellasofhisgenerationingeneral.Theyseemtohave workedthesepraetextsthroughinordertobecomerealgesturesinthesensethat AgambendefinedtheideaofgestureinhisbrilliantshortessayontheGerman critiqueKommerellandsituateditspoliticalstancepreciselyinthisideaofawholly profanemysteryinwhichhumanbeings,liberatingthemselvesfromallsacredness, communicatetoeachothertheirlackofsecretsastheirmostpropergesture.7 Butthepoemisnotforallthatanopenwindoworadoortotheexperienceofthe profane,common,worldlyspacethatispromised,butonlyananomicgesture towardsitperformedbyahardlylyricalvoiceinasemipriestlyrobe(Gewand)that intensivelyrefusestointerpretandconsumetheworldthatisreflectedinitsgaze. TheBldigkeitthatseemstoinsistonitsownrefusalorincapacity?notonly(as Hlderlinoncehoped)tobethepropethicvoicethatreadsthetimeasapointof intersectionbetweenhistoricalandsacredevents,buttoparticipate(even hermeneutically)intheworld,becomestheincarnationofananomicstancethatis
7

G. Agamben: Kommerell, or On Gesture, in G. A: Potentialities. Collected essays in Philosophy. Stanford: Stanford UP 1999, 77-85, p. 85.

neverthelesslookingforaconnectiontotheworldbeyondorbeforethemomentof sacrificeortotalization.Itturnsfromtimiditytoadeliberateweakness,theweakness thatinitsinoperativenonparticipation,itshermeneuticalreservation,mayaswell becomethelocusofaprosaicsayingthetrue,atleastthepromiseofthat,sinceit cannotbedosoinasayingthatinitsobliquenessrunstorisktofailaswellasto succeed. WhattosayfinallyaboutHlderlinslastpoems?Oneneedsaverylinkisch,an obliqueeyetoreadinsomeofthemwhathasneverbeenwritten:disseminationsof letters,initialsandperhapsothersymptomsofamourningthatrefusestodelude itself.IamreferingtoafamousdiscoverybyRomanJakobson,whosesevere grammaticalanalysisdetectedtracesofwhathebelievedtobenames,thenamesof thefictionalandrealbelovedDiotima,Susette.Onemustresistthemelancholyofthe readerwhocravesforholynamesthatareneverthelesslackinghereinsteadone mustbeattentive,inthewaytheGermanJewishpoetPaulCelantaughtus,tothe prosaicdatesandscarsthatareperhapsinscribedandencryptedinthesebare linguisticWintergardens(IfyouallowmethishommagetoRolandBarthesCamera Lucida)andthatdoinsist,asalmostnothing,astracesofasacred,perhapsnolonger sacredlife,standingbeyondallfalseexaltation,thatis:beyondalleschatological hopeandtransfigurationalpathos,inthesublime.Readingtheirunreadabilityis respondingtoananomicgesturemoreliteralthanliterary,agesturetowardsthe recedingspaceoftheutterlyprofaneandproperthatstillawaitsgathering. Paper read at the international conference on The Insistence of the Theologico-Political , H elsinki, 11-13 June 2009.

Anda mungkin juga menyukai