❴Epub❵ ❧ Spectres de Marx: l'état de la dette, le travail du deuil et la nouvelle Internationale Author Jacques Derrida – Saudionline.co.uk


10 thoughts on “Spectres de Marx: l'état de la dette, le travail du deuil et la nouvelle Internationale

  1. says:

    Certain Soviet philosophers told me in Moscow a few years ago the best translation of perestroika was still deconstruction Specters of Marx sustains five star prose and luminous ideas Unfortunately i became lost along the way maybe my effort slipped The opening program is truly delightful, Hamlet and The Manifesto amble about, offering a gleaming tribute to Marx always a heady feat, and one Derrida performs with panache.The subsequent sections are a somewhat mixed bag Derrida scoffs at the idea that only after the Soviet collapse is it proper to recognize Marx s greatness Derrida links Marx s use of ghosts and spirits to a reading of Hamlet Instead Derrida places Marx in that metaphysical caravan between presence and Otherness where each theorist struggles to be outside and after, but is bound to such all the same.Francis Fukuyama s The End of History And The Last man is then challenged by Derrida and delightfully ripped to shreds Neo liberal military humanism often is found hollow upon inspection Derrida then broaches the relationship between Marx and fellow New Hegealian Max Stirner What follows was beyond me Derrida is ever playful when discussing the ghostly baggage of Marx, addressing the idea of a hauntology to depict the uncanny alienation present in our being there are also grim and yet hopeful dimensions as well There is a frequent use of Marcellus imploring to Horatio Thou are a Scholar, speak to it, Horatio This strikes me personally as call to the stage of our present vanguard Badiou, i ek and Negri Hardt amongst others.


  2. says:

    The circles of the stormy moonSlide westward toward the River Plate,Death and the Raven drift aboveAnd Sweeney guards the horned gate Sweeney Among the NightingalesThis one was a DNF But NOT a disappointed or angry DNF An appreciative but elegiacally regretful DNF, like Orpheus ultimately, in the labyrinthine entrails of Hades, bidding sad farewell to his ever beloved Eurydice.Yes, I left Orpheus, and Jacques Derrida, struggling with their grief as they commenced to wrestle once with their demons and started the interminable wending of their way back to the glad light of day.And to read Derrida is always so monumentally and fiendishly difficult even MORE difficult, perhaps, than parsing Virgil s dense Latin in my sopho college year, as he sang comparably, maybe, to singing the horrendously difficult Pierrot Lunaire of Eurydice s troubled and helpless paramour, lost in love I rarely make the effort any You can t teach an old dog to relearn even his OLD tricks.But for all my gripes about Derrida s sententious and prolix density, when he waxes lyrical he is wonderful affectively non pareil At the opening of this hugely contentious work, to give an example, he salutes an aged and balefully obsolete Paul Valery s sunset words on the climacteric collapse of all real value in the West, after WWI and the effect is simply marvellous.I have to agree with Jonfaith the opening is remarkably convicting, but after that c mon You ve got to come up for air and at least grapple with mainstream journalistic opinion, some of the time Having said that, though, Jacques, I must here offer my fond farewells to you and to any hope of progressing significantly through this remarkable book of yours, though its purple passages may and do, thankfully, abound.Because when you write with a melancholy and lyrical passion, you are without peerBut when you invent new forms of metaphorical logic WITHOUT revealing of your inner leanings, you could mean just about anything.More CLARITY, please, Maestro You always hid yourself in purposeful obscurity because you always despaired of accomplishing any than writing on the wind, but let me tell you something It IS possible to take a subjectively stated, strongly ethical POV we are, after all, trying to COMMUNICATE with each other without conceding defeat to Nothingness right from the outset.Sure, our opinions may mean nothing to many of our friends, in some minor aspect or another, and that s unavoidable But the only way you could have made a clear point in this book is by putting your heart into it And do you know, Jacques, reading this book today in this fear crazed, heavily metalled political climate of ours the weary dawn of the second millenium s second decade I can only turn to wave goodbye as T.S Eliot languorously did in The Boston Evening Transcript, to his ethical doppelg nger, la Rochefoucauld, and say in my own words God s in His Heaven, and all s Wrong with the World And the courage of our convictions will clarify our point.


  3. says:

    A spectre is haunting Europe, the spectre of Communism so begins the Communist Manifesto, and Derrida takes that line as the basis of his deconstruction of Marxism One of the spectres used here to help make sense of Marx is Hamlet s ghost And a lot of time is spent discussing Hamlet, much than I would have expected Now, I ve been hearing a lot about this book lately, and so decided it was important to read Earlier in the year I read Haunting the Knowledge Economy a terribly interesting book, but not one I found time to review at the time and now it seems too late Still, it made me curious about this book Like this book, it is framed around a series of ghosts from Dickens this time and his Christmas Carol The idea of certain ideas haunting us, coming back in various guises and always returning that they can t really be ghosts, in a sense, without a kind of repetition, is an interesting and structuring idea here But I think Derrida really did not mean for hauntology to become a standard means of criticism, but rather one that was particularly apt for Marx I could be wrong, of course, as it does seem to be used much widely in post modernist circles, but I m not convinced it out to be.What is also interesting is how Derrida uses the idea of ghosts to explain Marx s notion of commodities not commodities as use values, but rather commodities as exchange values, where exchange can only make sense on the basis of a ghostly third that stands in place of this value what we call money, that most ghostly and insubstantial of things.No matter how often Marx has been killed, cast into the dustbin of history, proven wrong by his own predictions, his ghost seems to return yet again to haunt us As does our debt to him This book is not about praising Marx, or even of burying him This is really about exploring the debt we owe and how best to live with the various ghosts of Marx that continue to haunt us.


  4. says:

    OK, I accept that having Derrida on a list is close to showing off only because he has a reputation as such a difficult writer, and here Derrida, the BIG name of deconstructionism turns his eye on Marx, the BIG name of 20th century politics to argue that we can t understand the current world without Marx, and we can t fix it without Marx I m not sure what happened in the 1990s but a whole bunch of philosophers came out of the woodwork to proclaim a form of Marxism Derrida s is among the most exciting, the most challenging, and in the long run I suspect among the most important It s an extremely demanding book, read it slowly and soak it up If you don t understand his references, put the book down and find out what he s on about It took two times through before I felt like I was getting it It was worth it.


  5. says:

    we see here, after tearing into fukuyama, by way of kojeve, by way of Shakespeare, that there is a sense of justice that is indeconstructible that s damned interesting.


  6. says:

    Yeah this needs several rereads.


  7. says:

    I mostly concur with this review If, as one of the reviewers below notes, Specters of Marx concerns methodology or deconstruction as a whole rather than Marx per se or, less importantly, Fukuyama as easy a target here as he was for Zizek , then we have to wonder what it does at all While Derrida explains, several times, that he wants to hold out the Messianic hope of what he might have called a Marxism worthy of the name or indeed a Marxism beyond the name of Marx , and that he does not mean to dismiss the importance of political action, I can t help but feel that he s talking about Marx not because of his political content but simply because Marx is there for the taking, like anyone else Why even talk about Marx etc if Derrida speaks repeatedly of a certain Marx Derrida takes Marx to task for wanting to get at the ghostless real, but Marx s hope for a pure presence is the hope of just about any thinker If Marx falls down, then so does name your thinker one text is as good another, because all of them speak the same truth of deconstruction We get, via Marx, via Hamlet, via Blanchot, via Stirner, via, at times, the gormless Fukuyama, much of the same, if we ve been reading much Derrida he explains, again and again, the gift and the host and responsible decision and justice and the to come and a nonteleological eschatology what I ve elsewhere called an Apocalypse without an Eschaton , all of which allow something new to perhaps enter the world.It thus might as well have been called Specters of Your Name Here It s not useless of course The line bewteen disembodied spirit think spirit of the age and specter which has a spectral body, a bodiless body should be remembered and worked over, not least of all because it conjures the best bit, hauntology pronounced in French like ontologie The review above rightly notes the superiority of this concept to trace or difference because it gives a clear kind of presence to what is only purportedly absent from the supposedly present at hand signifier The trace also has a spectral body For my purposes, I m interested in the links between Derrida on the Gift and the Christian notion of grace, opposed to the Law, which is necessarily, I believe, predicated on an anti Jewish logic of supersession It would be especially productive to think this with Derrida s justifiable sneering at Fukuyama for bringing the neoliberal good news.


  8. says:

    I don t know if I would call this a profound book about Marx, but that s not to say that there is no profundity to be found here Ultimately, this work may be revealing about its own author, but Derrida is himself a worthy subject Based on a plenary address Derrida gave at a UC Riverside conference entitled Whither Marxism in 1993, Derrida performs close readings of passages from three of Marx s texts The German Ideology, Capital, Volume 1, and the Manifesto He relates Marx s writings to those of Shakespeare, particularly in their shared enthusiasm for super natural imagery Both writers pages are filled with mentions of ghosts and specters One can quickly imagine why ghosts would intrigue Derrida neither fully alive nor dead, they problematize our bifurcation of life and death This work, like almost all of Derrida s oeuvre, is ultimately most concerned with how to acknowledge the Other in its full otherness, the ultimate other being the ghost, being the dead that haunt us In his preface, Derrida asks what it is to learn to live One cannot, surely, learn it simply on one s own, but to learn to live from the dictations of an absolutely present other sounds like slavery To learn, then, is to interpret, to take from the other s example and make such practice one s own The other, then, can only be freeing and free if it remains not entirely present And one can only learn to live as a semi presence because learning to live is learning to die To learn to live die we must learn to live with ghosts, with the past that we will become in the future To be free, to be just to ourselves in the future , we must be just to those who have died, arrived at our future, in the past Derrida says that in discussing Marx, Marxism, and the Communist movement, we must think of ourselves as sifting through an inheritance We are discovering what Marx has left for us An inheritance becomes one only by acknowledging itself as a collection of disparate elements Derrida celebrates Marx for his understanding of his future, his acknowledgment that his thought would not survive time without transformation Almost a kind of historical perspectivalist, Marx knew his thought would have to transform and disperse with different economic historical changes He knew, as Derrida puts it, that his death would disperse his identity, making him both less and than one, a swirl of ghosts, haunting different historical and social situations The task of discovering our inheritance from Marx then, is to transform Marx s legacy through interpretation Jumping into his lecture, Derrida notes the specters that inaugurate both the Manifesto and Hamlet The specter is, of course, neither fully present nor absent It is a presence of absence Yet, it is an absent one It is not simply death, but the Dead One a King, or Communism This is an identity we must take entirely on the word of the ghost We cannot identity the specter It proclaims its identity to us I am your father s spirit Through its self identification, the specter makes the work of morning impossible Morning both presents the memory of the fallen for reverence, but it is also the act of putting the dead in their place Here, the fallen lie buried Here they are Morning both recalls and dismisses the dead and death The specter, through its self identification, de territorializes death and life The dead no longer lie buried The specter s very self presentation makes it impossible to locate it in death or life, here or there The specter thus throws time out of joint, as Shakespeare says And if the ghost beckons us towards a mission, either avenging a fallen father or mobilizing towards a revolution, can it not be said that we are spurred forward towards the future by the dead, by the past The mirror image of mourning, perhaps a sub genre of it, is conjuration The living summons the spirit so as to make it absolutely present so that it can be expelled This expulsion, however, only results in the ghost s dissipation into a multitude of spirits S He who performs the conjuration, then, becomes all the haunted Derrida goes back to the question of addressing the ghost in its otherness Here, Derrida s indebtedness to Walter Benjamin is most apparent To create any kind of justice, Derrida posits, is to attempt to set right, a concept which is reliant on nostalgia for the past To make right is to make as once was, as the fallen ideal Yet, the making right is an event planned for to take place in the future the messianic The positing of a future is grounded in nostalgia Derrida claims, dramatically and persuasively, that the primary purpose of deconstruction is to break down philosophical totalities that block certain types of questioning with answers that thus make it impossible for thought to truly, openly question, and truly wait for the messiah without naming it To try to recall the past without demanding the future in the present Derrida s Marx becomes a pun intended haunting character He is a man terrified of ghosts He tries to conjure them so as to do away with these specters and is thus constantly haunted by them, completely possessed by his private battle with these wraiths Marx is controlled by the dead as all men are, but he is aware of his war against death In the first sentence of the Manifesto he summons the specter of communism which is the spirit of both the past primitive communism and, for Marx, the future so he can locate it in the present in Europe Marx s writings are, for Derrida, the greatest articulation of spectral anxiety of what will come in the future from the past Marx s work is itself one of gathering an inheritance, an inheritance of history, of the march towards the future, towards death, the ghost world In this sense, Derrida will claim Marx as his mirror reflection Both men are obsessed with ghosts and the messianic which will tear down the veil between life and death Marx, for Derrida, made the mistake of naming the messianic, as Communism, instead of awaiting the word of the ghost that haunted him For the messianic promise must remain, for Derrida, promissory, abstract The promise is always, at most, half present It remains spectral and haunting Even if never fully fulfilled the promise transforms the procedure of thought and life with the possibility of coming into being The promise, like all specters, puts time out of joint, and we should celebrate it for this The communism formulated by Marx, and the Soviet experience it inspired, was motivated by messianic energy, but it tried to deliver the messiah into the realm of being, rather than promise From there, all of the points made in the book are fairly trite Derrida, of course, makes the obvious point that the neo conservative proclamation of the death of Marxism, he uses Fukuyama as his example, is an attempt to conjure Marx so as to abolish him, and that this is futile The dispersal of Marx s spirit s only creates Marxism s We are as haunted by Marx after the death of the Soviet Union as we ever were The book s weakest point is when Derrida tries to offer his own variation on Marxism, the New International, a transformation of international law not tied to the notion of the nation state Derrida claims it to be inspired by a spirit of Marxism that of self critique and re invention Unfortunately, what Derrida calls for is basically for rich western people to be, you know, nice and generous to those poor people in the third world It s all very Bono esque Perhaps Marx was afraid of ghosts, of the indeterminate Certainly, he was a man who attempted to force certainty onto history But I think that Derrida was frightened of presence, the very concept he, at times persuasively, argued was an artificial construction Derrida attempted to conjure away presence We should remember that he lived and thought in a terrifying age that of the Cold War, in which there was a palpable sense that the present was the moment of annihilation Humanity lived a presence of ideological bifurcation that threatened to destroy it, to make the present intolerable, and to destroy the past and the future Derrida feared his present, and he tried to dissipate it into the past and the future In this sense, I think he was the premier philosopher of Cold War consciousness In the last interview he gave in his life, in 2004, Derrida returned to the concept of learning to live Near death from cancer, he said he was learning to live finally He saw that the generation to come would have to struggle against not a bifurcated power structure, but the single leviathan of berserk western imperialism In the era of the ongoing War on Terror, Arab Spring, and Occupy, I think Derrida would have been on our side.


  9. says:

    Someone, I don t know who, said I should read Derrida s Specters of Marx, finally Why finally What does the finality of this reading of Specters of Marx entail That I should at last read Specters of Marx having attempted and deferred reading it two perhaps three, perhaps times before That perhaps, this time the reading would differ and I would not defer reading yet again in the endless repetition of picking up reading and deferring That I should read it once, consume it, and extract from it some value, leaving only the useless behind Or perhaps, to read Derrida on Marx finally, is to read Derrida on Marx at a certain fin de siecle, at an end of a time of Marxism when the fall of the Soviet bloc gave rise to academic discussions of where, whence and how would Marx and Marxism remain relevant as a philosophical and as a political program Or is reading Derrida reading Marx at last, finally, to relegate Marx and Marxism to a historical canon, the revolutionary call to justice tamed, dismissed and enshrined in a bygone era, the specters finally exorcised once Marx has been canonized Derrida s Specters of Marx attempts to discern the continued timeliness of Marx s untimely texts In doing so, he interprets the timing of revolution and revolutionary ideology as the timing of justice, as justice as timing, as justice not as a quietism, but as an action that requires good timing, bringing the times to justice Touching on Blanchot and Heidegger its touching, his touching on Heidegger , he then proceeds to discuss the specter of Justice within the timing of western triumphalism articulated by Francis Fukuyama that dismisses the timing of justice in Marx and Marxism and instead declares an end to history and with it and end to both time and justice Derrida then attempts to conjure the ghosts of this triumph, those currently haunting the triumph and the ghosts of the injustices past and future that make this triumphalism disjointed, unjust, a triumph of injustice that attempts to at last finally erase justice, the work of mourning, and the memory, the specter of justice For Derrida justice is one of the specters of Marx, the call to see the injustice of the times not as some Hegalian spectator quietly dismissing the spectacle of suffering historical and present as only a spectacle on the way to the denouement of justice, but as one called to act to the work of mourning by the specter of justice in order that the times might be set right.So what do I think of this book Of what use is this book, and is it sufficiently useful that one can draw value from it A value that can then be exchanged in the marketplace of ideas And, perhaps, finally a book whose value is not derived from its use but from the exchange value of its specters For me, anyway, the value of Derrida s text involve a greater investment than return The value derived from the Specters of Marx lies in the specter of justice underlying time, as the basis of time However, the extended meditation on Fukuyama and the attempted critique of western capitalist triumphalism short changes the reader, especially in light of valuable critiques of the culture industry coming out of critical theory Moreover, Derrida fails to address the other specters of Marx of the proletariat in particular but not just the proletariat, of the party and parties and of the history and histories of Marxist thought and practice since Marx And to this failure to provide for a reckoning of this history, those participants and the concepts that animate Marxism, Derrida s usage of Marx fails to reckon with the specters of Marx In the end, I felt toward this text as I feel toward other works of Derrida the philosophical insights are themselves spectral disembodied bodies that dissipate as light and a new day approaches, incapable of having much impact on a text or a philosopher beyond rattling some chains and moving some tables.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Spectres de Marx: l'état de la dette, le travail du deuil et la nouvelle Internationale summary pdf Spectres de Marx: l'état de la dette, le travail du deuil et la nouvelle Internationale, summary chapter 2 Spectres de Marx: l'état de la dette, le travail du deuil et la nouvelle Internationale, sparknotes Spectres de Marx: l'état de la dette, le travail du deuil et la nouvelle Internationale, Spectres de Marx: l'état de la dette, le travail du deuil et la nouvelle Internationale 9d36e6d Prodigiously Influential, Jacques Derrida Gave Rise To A Comprehensive Rethinking Of The Basic Concepts And Categories Of Western Philosophy In The Latter Part Of The Twentieth Century, With Writings Central To Our Understanding Of Language, Meaning, Identity, Ethics And ValuesIn , A Conference Was Organized Around The Question, Whither Marxism , And Derrida Was Invited To Open The Proceedings His Plenary Address, Specters Of Marx , Delivered In Two Parts, Forms The Basis Of This Book Hotly Debated When It Was First Published, A Rapidly Changing World And World Politics Have Scarcely Dented The Relevance Of This Book

  • Paperback
  • 258 pages
  • Spectres de Marx: l'état de la dette, le travail du deuil et la nouvelle Internationale
  • Jacques Derrida
  • English
  • 26 February 2017
  • 9780415389570

About the Author: Jacques Derrida

Jacques Derrida was the founder of deconstruction, a way of criticizing not only both literary and philosophical texts but also political institutions Although Derrida at times expressed regret concerning the fate of the word deconstruction, its popularity indicates the wide ranging influence of his thought, in philosophy, in literary criticism and theory, in art and, in particular, architect