Sie sind auf Seite 1von 15
MICHEL FOUCAULT x LANGUAGE, COUNTER-MEMORY, PRACTICE Selected Essays and Interviews ted with an Introduction by DONALD F. BOUCHARD Translated from the French by DONALD F. BOUCHARD and SHERRY SIMON Comell University Press x What Is an Author? in proposing this slightly odd question, I am conscious of the eed for an explanation, To this day, the “author” remains an {ex question both with respect tots general faction within dyovure and ia my own writings tat i this question permits fe fortum to certain aspects of my own work which now appear [Badvised and misleading. In this regard, I wish to propose a ecomary eis and revaluation For nstanco, my objective in The Onder of Things baa been to tusie verbal elusters as scusive layers which fall outside the faniiar categories of a book, a work, or an ethor. Bt while 1 tonideed “nutral story” the “analysis of wealth and “polt- fel economy’ in general terms, I neglected similar analysis of the eutbor and his works; fis pechaps du to this omison that Tenployed the names of authors throughout thie book in a talv and often erde fashion, I spoke of Bln, Cuvier, Ricard, ‘his sey orginally appeared nthe Bulletin de la, Soc ott de Phish, 3, No.9 (1963), 72104. 1 was dled {ot incre beloe the Secty atthe Collage do rane on Febresry 30" es Wak ping Were cited Prt z r “ind ls Powis aod he didnt tit flowed hr esta: Fooeels ial salenet,boweve, Ins been fterpaated the fist paragagh of the tulaton Tae ‘test of the dicussion that flowed Fousrlts paper layin Its een tel vey Lacn Colina eth Fre Sas sopomsed suc enterprise. Be athe Statin The Archacology of Knowladar (esp Pp. 200-001), Frost focfally denier ts connection This stay eprodoced See by pein of th Sot (A foot spd by Be 114 comermnsensone and others as wall, bot fed to realize that Ls allowed th fnues to funtion ambiguously. This has proved an embarassment to me in that my oversight has served to aise two Pettinet objections. Te was angued that I had not propsly decribed Buffon or hig work and that my handling of Marx wns pitifully inadequate term of the totality of his thought Although these objection were obviously justified, ehey ignored the tack I had st msc Thad no intention of dserbing Bulfon oF Mars oF of repoding their statements or Implicit meanings, but, simply sated, 1 wanted to locate the rales that formed a ert number of con cepts and theoretical relationship in their works” In ation, it was argued that [had ereated monstrous files by ringing together names as disparate as Buon and Linnaeus on placing (Cuvier nest to Darwin in defence ofthe most readily observable family resemblances and natural tex* This objection also seems Inappropriate since Thad never tried to establish « genelogel table of exceptional individuals, nor was Teoncemed in fortng tan intellectual daguezeotype of the scholar or naturalist of the seventeenth and eighteenth century, Tn fact, I had intention of forming any family, whether holy or perverse. On the com ‘rary, T wanted to determine—a mul more modest task—the functional conditions of specie discursive practes ‘Then why did T use the names of authors in The Order of 1 Pte ra en ee ER ener e ne Stat Gate tr a ee fier nol, as ooo cee ‘Form spprecition of owes tciigus, sce Jonathan (ile, “tie igure Hate of Sruseram’ Sustouing at Intrdacion, ok David Rabny” (Ox Clateodon Pees, 1073), mies 7 ours acmmon? 115 Ce ee eS eer Descent nme etie Sela epee epoeinrl Saar eee eee eee ee See pee ee ie noes ud eters nt tof oy Sees se oe rh te eof scene ai eee eee eras ee rg me as ae eee een ee ee FS Se eect pee coe eee SE rama pending a abel peler cmt ply ee et eee ee a Bh wre tor ans 4. The of, Krouledge, tam. A.M. Shecdan Seth (London: “Tavistock, 1912) was pated In Fence i 1980, for SEcuton of tho ator, so esp. pp. 92-6 122. 1, Surtacl Bechaty ‘Tents for Nothing tenn. Becket (London: ‘alie& Boyr, 1074, p18. z 118 couwrsnsimdony ‘ch as this we most recogalze one ofthe fundamental ei, Principles of contemporary waiting, tis not simply “ethic cause it characerlees our way of speaking and writing, bar Deas it stands es an immanent mule, endlesly adopted and yet nover fully applied. As principle, i dominates watng fn ongoing practice and sights our customary attention to the ‘niched product* For the sake of Iastration, we need only ‘consider two of is major themes. Fit, the waiting of our dy ay freed itself from the necesty of “expression; It only refers to ts, yeti snot restsotd tothe cones of intesecity. On he contrary, we recognize It in ts exterior deployment.” This 2e- versal transforms writing into an interplay of signs, regulated less by the content it sigies than by the very nature ofthe sigue. Moreover, t implies an action tht is aways teatng the limits ofits regularity, transgresing and reversing an order that i acepts end manipulates. Wang unfolds like a game that Inevitably moves beyond ss own rules and finally eaves them Dbehind, Thus the essential bass of this writing isnot the exalted ‘emotions related tothe act of compostion or the insertion of « subject into language, Rather, tis pemsily concerned with creating an opening where’ the ‘writing subject endlesly iappeare’ ‘The second theme is even more familar: it is the kinship ‘etoen writing and death. This relationship inverts the age-old ft Of tard Sl, “Th his f Langage” Dirt, 4 (197), 7. On eer” ad wig sess Je co ‘Benoist, “The End of Structuralism,” Twentieth “Conta Stas 3 {GB}, 3 and and Hanes, Cigna ar, Cac eel 180). Ae the flowing tne ipl ter ‘rloment” a ring ete Farina Be Saar cones ye gy ie eno rm epee onal ea a sonar aur? LIT conception of Creck naveative or epe, which was desigied to taantee the immortality of a ez. The hero accepted an early ach because his fe, consecrated and magnifed by. death, (posed Into immortality; and the nareative redeemed his ac France of death In a diferent sense, Arabic stores, and The ‘aban Nights in particu, had as thee motivation, their heme fad pretest, this strategy for defeating death Storytlers con- five their narratives late into th night to forestall death and te delay the incvtable moment when everyone must fall lent Suheheraade’s story isa desperate inversion of murder; it isthe fort, throughout all those nights to exclude death frm the ‘ule of existence? This conception ofa spoken or writen nar tive as a protection aghast death has en tansfomied by out falter. Welding ls now linked to sucrifce and tothe sacri of He elie w vohintary obliteration ofthe sf that does not egtie tepresentation in books because it takes place jn the heyday existence ofthe writer, Where a work had the day of treating immortality, i now atsins the right to Kil, to Become the murderer of its euthor. Flaubert, Prous, and Kaha are ob- vious examples of this rovers In ation, we find the Tink tween writing and death manifested inthe total ellacament of the individual charactorstice of the writer, the quibbling and ‘enfrontations that a weiter generates between himself and his text cancal out the signs of his particular individuality. If we wih to know the writer in one day, 4 will be though the Sogulaity of his absence and in his link to death, which as teansformed him into a viet of his own waiting, While all of ths is Familiar in philosophy, as in Iterry erticsm, Yam not ‘eran thatthe consequences derived from the disappearance or teath of the author have been fully explored or that the in portance of this event has been apprcelated. To be speci, it 1, Se above, "Language to Init" p 58 10, Tho racent toa af Jal Berth, elected in Lost tn the Funhouse ond ‘Chinera, supply Tntrsting examples of Pouca ‘hes "The Iter wor Salads, in fat & novels reworking of Arabion Nights, - us. seems to me thatthe themes destined to replace the privileged ‘postion accorded the author have merely served to Artest he Possibility of genuine change. Of these, I wil exumine two tha Seem particalilyinportant. "To begin with the thesis concerning «work. Tas been under stood thatthe task of etic is nt to restablish the ts be fwwoon aa author and his work or to reconstitute am she’s fought and experience ehrough hie works and, further, thie criticism should concer itself with the stractares of work, it aehitetonle forms, which ae studied for tel ntsc and i termal relationships" Yet, what ofa context that questions the cconoept of a work? What, i short, ithe strange wat designated by the term, work? What is nocosary to its composition, if « work is not something written by @ person called an “anthor?™ Dificutes aise onal sides if we aise the question in thls way. Tf an individual isnot an author, what are we to make of hose things he has valtten oF said left among his papers orca ‘municsted to others? Is this not propery & work? What, for instance, wero Sade’ papers before he was conocrated as an author? Little more, perhaps, than roles of paper on which be ‘endleslyunravelld his fantasies while in prison. “Assuming that we are dealing with an autor, i everything he ‘wrote and sald, everything ho let behind, to be inched ln is ‘work? This problem is both theoretical and practical. If we wish ‘to publish the complete works of Nietzache, for example, where ‘do we draw the line? Certainly, everything must be published, Dut can we agree on what “everything” means? We veil of course, Inchde everything thet Nctsche hinvelf published, slong with the drfts of his works, is plans for aphorisms, his ‘marginal notations and corzections. But what if, in a notebook filled with aphorisms, we Oud a reference, a reminder of an apy pointment, an address, or «laundry bil, should this be nehded 11, Piya prescription fr crc at diverse a8 C. Won Knights The Whoa of Bee (Landon, 1930) and Roland Bathe? (On Racing, ats. Richard Howard (New Yorks Hil & Wang. 1863) uo ur 8 sermon his works? Why not? These praca! conideratons are end once we consider how a work ean be extracted fram the "tions of traces left by an indvidal after his death, Pin, ‘tack a theory to encompass the questions generated by & Weak and the empirical activity of those who naively unde Te the publiction of the complete works ofan author often ‘ters frm the absence of this framework. Yet more questions Gise. Can we say that The Arabian Nights, and Stromates of Clement of Alexandria, or the Lives of Diogenes Laces coo: State works? Such questions only begin to suggest the rang® ‘Four diiclties, and f some have found it convenient to y= jos the lndividoality ofthe vitro his status as an autor to ‘Ercentate on a work they have failed to appreciate the equally problematic nature ofthe word “wo and the unity it designates. “hnother thesis has detained us fom taking ull measure of the thors dispearance. I avoids confronting the sper event that makes i possible and, tn subte ways, continues to preserve the existence ofthe author, hiss the notion of éerture.» Stcly speaking. it should allow us not only to circumvent sferences {Dan author, but to situate his recent absence The conception of Grr, a curently employed, is concerned with neither the fet of writing nor the indications, as symptoms oF sigas within 2 text, ofan authors meuniog: rather, it stands for a remazkably profound attempt to clborste the conditions of any tet, both tho conditions of its spatial dsperion and ts temporal deployment. "Te appears, however, that this conoept, a8 currently employed, 12. We have lop the French, dvr, wih ty dole teerence tothe at of writing and othe prenorda (and metaphyseal) nate wing ex an ent i enc es theta tat bat Sent the progisn of forquer Der be the thane of nllerntal tri too buds on a themy of he inane dents wing {Be inipiy of proven and absence fa that “sgn represent the [eset in ts buance™ ("Diferanc,” In Spech and Phonomene, Toe David Br Alm [Ener fs Northwestern Uni, Pras, 18ta),p, 198), Soe. Deda, De Ta granmatloge (Pass Eins (Misi, 1907), 129 oooerenseencony ‘nas merely transposed th emplieal characterises of an autor to ‘transcendental anonymity, The extremely vsble sins ofthe futhors empirical activity are effaced to allow the play, iy panllel or opposition, of religious and cite modes of char fcterzation, In granting » primordial status to writing, do we ‘ot, in eect, simply reineibe in transcendental tems the theological allimation ofits stred origin or a cetcl bell in | ates anceps vase cto ogy Sai ended gat ow lise cen ce Rip panier nh se Sisnlestac omen ae olson ty Sata ca eas eatin Serta kien Ceatee acer see ceca amiga ede ed Ss ao en ee pce Sha oti of i Seistenats nile aa ptt ete a ora og rs Nebel cn Scorn ep ch wa EE Soe take aoe ate Sni'h Pa wy tw ere fue Soca oan sa bt tw on Faerie pa i (ESS RS plehtmeres rt {Ss Maret Ladpno) on ell od ety on Se oer Risto aerenac ee ae sities mene tied Sete muraisgeeAenhceoaae cea ee murs avr? 121 x ‘Its obviously insufliciont to repeat empty slogans: the author as dimpposred; God and man ded a common death Rather, we should reexamine the empty space It by the authors ds Dopearence; we should attentively observe, long is gaps and fal lines now demarcations andthe rexpportionment of tis told we should wat dhe sd functions released by this diay earece. In this contet we ean briefly consider the problems finale ln the so ofan authors name. What ithe ame of an tuthor? How doer it function? Far frm oferng «sation, T tl attempt to indleate some of the eifcutes related to these ston he name of an euthor ‘poses all the problems related to the category ofthe proper name, (Her, Lam refering to the work ff John Sears" among others) Obviously not a pure and tnple referees, che proper name (and the authors name a wr) has other thin indicative functions. Tis more than a Beto, ger pointed at someone its, to a certain extent, he quant of description. When wo sy “Arist” we ae tng a word tht means one oF series of deinit desrptions tf tho type: “the author of tho Analyin,” or “he fonder of tetology” and a0 forth” Furthemore, «proper name has ther fontins than that of signieation: when we dlicover tha baud has not writen La Chase spiel, we cant mala- tun thatthe meaning of the proper name or ths sath name as been altered, Tho proper namo and the name of en ator cals between the poles of description and designton, and, ‘ing that they ae inked to what they name they ae not tially determined either by their doseiptive or desgntive fanctlns* Yer ts here hat the spc dificateatend- 1B Net a ete 8 Seu Speech Ate At Eaay te the Poophy of Lente (Goi Coat Baten Pr 108), 1 r,t,» 100 18 Tap 7 ng an authors name appoar—the link between a proper nme snd the individual being named and tho link between an authors ‘namo and that which t names are not isomorphons and do not fanetion in the same way; and these diferences require larifcation, ‘To lear, for example, that Pere Dupont does not have bbe eyes, dacs not live in Pais, and i nota doctor doesnot validate ‘the fact thatthe name, Pierre Dupont, continues to zler to the same person; there has been no modification ofthe designstin that links the name tothe person. With the name of an autho, however, the problems are far more comples, The disclosure that Shakespeare was not bom in the house tht tourists now vist | ‘would not modify the functioning of the author's name, bt, ft were proved that be had not welten the sonnets that we a tribute to him, thie would constitute a siguiaat change and ‘fect the manner in which the author's mime fonctions. Mote ‘over, if we establish that Shakespeare wrote Bacon's Organon and that the same author was responsible for both the work of Shakespeare and those of Bacon, we would have invodaced a ‘hid pe of alteration which completly modifi the function ing ofthe author's name. Consequently, the name of an author ‘snot precisely a proper name among others. Many other factors sustaln this paredosial singularity ofthe name of an author. Ie altogether diferent to malatain tht Pierro Dupoat does not exist and that Homer or Hemet ‘Trisegstes have never existed. While the Bist negstion merely Amplles that thre Is no one by the name of Pierre Dupont, the second indiates that several indvidaals have been refered f by one name or thatthe veal author passessed none of the tats traditionally asoiated with Homer or Hermes. Neither is the same thing to say that Jaoques Durand, not Pecte Dupont, 1s the veal name of X and that Stndhals natne was Hensi Boyle ‘We could also examine the Function and meaning of such stat: ‘ments as "Bourbali i this or tht person” and “Vitor remit, CClimacus, Anticlinacus, Frater Tacitarms, Constantin Con. stunts, al ofthese are Kierkegnara” 122 coeerenaemons mice sauna? 188 ‘These diferences indicate that aa author's name isnot simply am element of speech (as @ subject, a complement, or an ele- feat that could be replaced by a pronoun or other parts of Ipecth). Its pretence is Functional in that i serves a8 a means tf easilcation, A name can group together @ number of texts tao thus diferente thon frm others. A name alo establishes {igerent forms of relationships among texts. Neither Hermes tot Hippocrates existed la the sense that we can say Balzac ex bed, but the fact that a mimber of texts were atached to 4 single same implies that relationships of homogeaelty, lation, tecjproel explanation, authentication, or of common utilization tree established among them, Finally, the author's name char tries a particular manner of existence of discourse, Discourse that possesses an authors name isnot to be immediately eon sumed and forgotten; neither sit accorded the momentary atten tion given to ordinary, Heeting words. Rather, it tae and it manner of reception are regulated by the elture in which s ict. ‘We can couche that, unlike « proper name, which moves from the interior of a decourse tothe real person outside who produced it the mame of the author semains at the contours of terts—separating one from the othe, defining thelr form, and Characterizing thee mode of existence, It points tothe existence of certain groups of discourse and vefrs to the stats of this di sours within a socity and culture. The autho’s name is not a fmetion of a mas eivlsate, nor eit Scion iis wtnated Inthe breach, among the discontinuities, which gives ise to new ups of discourse and their singular mode of exstince Con 10, This a patclely smportent point and brings togetber a many of Fawcitt tg cooing the easy. a Shs" Gdbee) to lvoe sess he detuning ote Uediinal end ben rend trier of dintouse wows ata ‘docontinties are sesved in eer of two waye by seeence toa becgating subject oto Innguage,concelved ws plelade, which Soporte tistics of comocsary ar intettion Bee ce Fouci rcts the bei in te presumed falls of ngage that tndedies ico, tho euthor is sbjetod to the sane gent zy sequently, we can say that in our culture, the name of en auth ‘sa variable that accompanies only certain texts tothe exclusion of others: a private letter may have a signatory, but i doot not ‘have an author; a contract ean have an underwiter, But not aq author; and, simialy, an anonymous poster attached to a wall may havea vate, but he cannot be an author In thi ens, the fonction of an author i to characterize the existence, culation, and operation of certain discourses within a society. x In dealing with the “author” as « function of discoures, we rust consider the characteristics of lscourse that support this tse and determine ity diference from other discoarss. If we Timit our remarks to only those books or txts with authors, we can toate for diferent features, Fin, they aze objects of sppropsation; the fm of propery ‘hey have become is of «particular type whose leg eodiestion ‘was accomplished some years ago. Te is portant to noice, a well that is status as propery is historically secondary tothe penal code controlling is appropsiation. Speeches and books ‘were assigned real authors, other than mythical or important zaligiousSgure,enly when the author became subject to panih- ‘ment and to the extent that his dicoarse was considered trans- sresive. Tn ou eultare—undoubtedly in others ax well—disouee ‘was not orginally a thing, a product, or a possession, but an sotion stated in bipolar Sed of sacred and profane, lawful ‘and unlawful, religious and blasphemous. Tt was a gesture ‘charged with risks Tong before it became a posession extght 4 clrait of property values But it was atthe moment when & ‘im which carcises dacoune and bo i Gdieated as « di onmoes srr for xanpl, seo LOnde de dicous pp. B35 fd tes 30. In seminar ealied “L'pruve at Fengudte” which Foucault conducted at the Uaivety af Mansel fn he sping of 1974, be entered th debut tround the fellowing quent. geal mviction tt uth rvs fom and sustained by Tooele mae a avn? — 185 system of ownership and sit copyright rules were established (toward the end ofthe eightenth and begining of tho nine- {oeath century) that the transgressive properties always ital tho act of writing bectne the forceful nperative of itertare* Ie J ifthe author, at dhe moment he was sceepted ito the social twder of property which gover our calture, was compensating for his new status by reviving the older bipolar eld of dsourse in a systematic practice of transgression and by restoring the danger of walling which, on another side, had been conferred the benfts of property. ‘Secondly, the "authorfunction"™ is not universal or constant in all dlsoouse, Even within oor civilization, the same types of teste have not alas required authors; there was atime when those texts which wo now call “teray” (stories, folktales, epics, tnd tragedies) were aceapted, creulated, and valorized without tiny question sbout the identity oftheir anther. Theis anonyasty ‘nat lanored boctise thee real er supposed age was a suficient uaratee of tele authenticity. Texts, however, that we now call elentifc” (dealing with cosmology and the heavens, medicine or ‘ness, the natural slences or goography) were only considered nt simply, «reset phenomenon, lnited ase ofthe anceat and ‘dcsend ‘lef tat tu aft of evets In an older me and in other cultures, the Search for uth was hazaroa a the fuee and truth resided inp danger ze, but i this as 80 end {Fert cold oly be approached ater «Tong propaton or the detais o's hitalze! procodte -war bose represented pst, Discus, for these salen, was um acuve porapration of Fant and the ett that as saccenl conte the power ‘Perth tal, charged wil al hs vis sd bone. 31 GL The Order of Things, p. 300, and above, “A Prtac to Teagan, pp. 90-93 a Pouca paring ofthe “suthocfaeton” has Been rained ‘This eonept shel nt bo emma (ae wat by Collin ithe

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen