Disaggregating Territories: Literature, Emancipation, and Resistance

This article focuses on the implementation of literature for the democratic opening of the human being-in-common in the philosophy of Gilles Deleuze and Jacques Rancière. Deleuze and Guattari advocate a quasi-traumatized, “animally” disfigured discourse that testifies to the impossibility of bearing witness to the unpredictable whirl of becoming, not only in philosophical but also in literary writing. Kafka exemplarily blurred the boundaries between his representing and represented subjects, drawing them into an unrestrained field of immanence. It is through such persistent revivifying of polyphony that his minor literature unleashed the suppressed creativity of major literature and language. It subverted literary language from within its identity, deterritorializing its monolingual molecules and pushing its subjects beyond the politically acknowledged threshold of representation. By invading the subject’s speech, action, and behavior, minor literature revolutionizes its agency. In Rancière’s work, political regulation of the subject from above is the main target of oppositional literary deregulation from below. For both Deleuze and Rancière, literary politics consists of the disarticulation of the politically authorized selection of sensations by an unpredictable revolutionary assemblage that escapes it. Now oriented inwards, toward the subject’s perception apparatus, instead of outwards toward other political subjects as before, revolutionary politics in Deleuze’s and Rancière’s rendering deactivates the agency, and departs from an inarticulate molecular area excluded from the scope of its activity. Despite undeniable divergences between their thoughts, this paradoxical “action through non-action” connects their conceptualizations of literature. However, as the genealogy of the messianic tradition has shown, the deactivation of majoritarian agencies does not merely achieve emancipating effects; it simultaneously empowers the minoritarian assemblage introduced in the place of agencies. As a result, the initially democratic assemblage suddenly resurfaces as the major agency of revolutionary terror. I argue that placing literature at the service of the allegedly egalitarian force of negation entertains this risk in both philosophies

Centre and Periphery. Failed Intertranslation in Franz Kafka’s At the Construction of the Great Wall of China

173

Pripoved kot argumentacija

Unter diesem Titel werden autorisierte Beiträge des vom Philosophischem Institut im Juni 1989 veranstalteten gleichnamigen Workshops veröffentlicht. Die Beiträge von Vladimir Biti ("Narration als Argumentation"), Mirna Velčič ("Argumentation als Diskurs"), Olga Kunst-Gnamuä ("Die Argumentation zwischen dem Subjekt des Begehrens und dem logischen Subjekt"), Jelica Šumič-Riha ("Teror des Wortes"), Rado Riha, ("Die argumentative Natur der demokratischen Invention") und Andrej Škerlep ("Die Argumentation im Verstandigungsprozes") analysieren vom philosophischen, soziologischen, politologischen und sprachlichen Aspekt aus die Argumentation als Basisform der sprachlichen Interaktion. Die Mehrzahl der Beiträge geht dabei von Habermas Auffassung der Argumentation als Mittel für Erlangung eines rationell motivierten Konsensuses aus und versucht Probleme und Grenzen dieser Auffassung vermittels ihrer Konfrontation mit anderen modernen Argumentationstheorien (Lyotard, Ducrot) aufzuzeigen. Einige Beiträge beschreiben materielle Wirkungen der Argumentation auf der Ebene des politischen bzw. wissenschaftlichen Diskurses.Objavljeni prispevki Vladimirja Bitija "Pripoved kot argumentacija", Mirne Velčič "Argumentacija kot diskurz", Olge Kunst-Gnamuš "Argumentacija med subjektom želje in logičnim subjektom", Jelice Šumič-Riha "Teror besede", Rada Rihe "Argumentacijska narava demokratske invencije" in Andreja Škerlepa "Argumentacija v sporazumevanju", poskuskušajo s filozofskega, sociološkega, politološkega in lingvističnega vidika osvetliti argumentacijo kot bazično obliko jezikovne interakcije. Večina prispevkov jemlje za izhodišče svoje analize Habermasovo pojmovanje argumentacije kot orodja za dosego racionalnega konsenza in pokaže problematičnost tega pojmovanja in njegove meje v soočenju z drugimi sodobnimi teorijami argumentacije (Lyotardovo, Ducrotovo). Nekaj prispevkov pa obravnava materialne učinke argumentacije na ravni političnega oziroma znanstvenega diskurza

Master and Slave : hermeneutics and poststructuralism

U članku se nastanak hermeneutike izvodi iz romantičarskog relativiranja oštre prosvjetiteljske razlike između sadašnjosti i prošlosti. Na isti način, stoljeće i pol kasnije, poststrukturalisti relativiraju strukturalističku binarnu opoziciju što pokazuje da, unatoč oštroj polemici među njima, između hermeneutike i poststrukturalizma ipak postoji važna dodirna točka. No preko sličnosti, među njima se kroz distribuciju moći unutar opozicije obnavlja i razlika. Dok hermeneutika uporno nastoji zauzeti položaj moći prema svom oponentu, poststrukturalizam se te moći isto tako uporno nastoji odreći u oponentovu korist. U mjeri u kojoj tako dosljedno utjelovljuju hegelovske uloge Gospodara i Roba umjesto da ih problematiziraju, oba se nastojanja ispostavljaju jednako reduktivnima.In the paper the origin of hermeneutics is derived from a romanticist relativization of a sharp distinction between the present and the past during the Enlightenment. A century and a half later poststructuralists are in the same way relativizing a structuralist binary opposition, which shows that, despite of violent polemics between them, there still exists an important point of contact between hermeneutics and poststructuralism. By way of similarity, through the distribution of power within the opposition, the diversity between them is also being renewed. While hermeneutics is persistently trying to take the position of power in relation to its opponent, poststructuralism is equally persistently trying to get rid of the same power to the opponent’s advantage. To the extent in which they so consistently embody the Hegelian roles of a Master and a Slave, instead of problematizing them, both aspirations turn out to be equally reductive

Miroslav Krleža i povijest hrvatskoga razvlaštenja

Rad se usredotočuje na Krležinu dugotrajnu opsjednutost hrvatskim nacionalnim pitanjem koja je bila podjednako prešućivana i u jugoslavenskoj i u hrvatskoj recepciji njegova djela. U prvom slučaju Krleži kao priznatome jugoslavenskom autoru jednostavno nije pristajala nacionalna strast; u drugome Krleža kao autor “proleterski” obilježenoga nacionalnog osjećaja nikako nije odgovarao (malo)građanskome hrvatstvu novouspostavljenoga hrvatskoga književnog kanona. Rad pokušava ispraviti tu nepravdu smještajući Krležinu opsesiju u tipično postimperijalni srednjoistočnoeuropski politički, intelektualni i kulturni prostor

Die historiographische Fiktion als Herausforderung der Identitäts bzw. Differenztheorie

.