[Alexander Garcia Duttmann] the Gift of Language. (BookFi.org)

7/30/2019 [Alexander Garcia Duttmann] the Gift of Language. (BookFi.org)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/alexander-garcia-duttmann-the-gift-of-language-bookfiorg 1/79

The Gift of Language

Memory and Promise in Adorno J

Benjamin J Heidegger and Rosenzweig

XD AA DOTTMANN

Tslated b ARLN LYON S

A LON RSSONDON



This Engs tranaton Ist pused 0( by

THE AONE PRES

Pak Dve, od N

Te toe ess 0

fst pbsd n Fc as La parole mCTwi f pss Edtos G e 1 H

Aexnd Gaa Dttman as asste s t de te Copy-

gt sg and atts t 1HH t be dentd as t at

ts wo

FR NT puss ws t e e taks o te F'l Msty

ute ()J" : wads te ost o t1at1.

Bts L ataoun n Pucato Data

catal(), Md ';1/ Ihis ook s alal jO t Bits ilna

BN 5 11 5 ( H 126 1 P

A ts d No pat o patn be epdud

stod n tea syste tnsted J' b Y

man to acaL ptoopy tewse tt

po pmss t u t e

Typst by A Br asbuy Wtse

td and ond r ta by a de Unesty ess

F q D



Contents

ot t tro I

rtor o

Conteatin

On th Path twards Saced NamHidggr nd Rnzwei

Th ilniate: fntie, init and dnitin h dube tnity Chitianity an Juail Sience ad tue hat which wathe and cncen u 6

)f th path-ike ntue thught 8h whi W nd

I natin the thin

I I I venalin an nIanhy

I Appitinhe uneadab nam h i anua Th thgicitia 8Yt t cne 8Appaitin at 8

h chain th i 8Catatphic qutatin qut catatph



Vl Contefls

Astz' t nan o God: ogatonsExusonnng aganst tougtAls ob na and Bng

Notes

Bibliography

Index

94

97

1 04

1 08

110

1 12

33

4

Note on the English translation

The G oj Language is y rst book writtn btwn 986 and19R8 Tn yars latr and aer having trid to dvlop soe ofits thms or motfs in Das Gedchtnis des Denkens. Versuh berHeideer und Adorno (The Memor oj Thought: An Essa onHeidegger and Adono, Atlon 2001) , I bliv tat its strngtif it has any, is insparabl from its oftn lliptical charactr.Tis s th rason why I hav mad only a w changs to horginal txt

A.GD

London



Tranlator's Note

Existing English transations av bee ued wherevr possibeand modied wher nssary by th author. Many thanks tothe sta of the British ibrary, Warwick University LibraryUniversity Cog ondon ibrary, Middlesex Universityibray and Senat Hous ibrary.

In the eyes o the cabbalists it is becauseo th nam presnt in it that anguag

can b spoken

(Gershom Som)

Nothing inks man to language bettertan his name

(ater nja min



C onstellations

n Negave Dialet dono says that langag is mo than asstm of signs at th dsposa of cogtiv fnctions h itis ssntall langag bfo o byond th systm and thsign it bcoms psntatio o psntation (Dae) anddos not dn its concpts This dos ot man that th thning which dono calls ngativ dalctics th intnt of whichis pcisly not to b withot langag (Hglian dialctcs wasa dalctc withot langag) noncs dnition qt th

opposit thoght whch in its own nfolding wold not bcapabl of dning its objct a thoght which wold not ltth thing itslf appa ntmttntl by sing th most concslangag wold pobably b as stil as a thoght gogdwith vbal dnitions Dael is langag as constllationo congation t is n no way th psntation of a sbating movmnt which achs a slt angag dsignats hth nonngativ oth of spclaton By dniton a constlation ntails th chanc of an appaition Somthing alows itslfto b thoght thogh a constllation somthing povos

thoght in a constlation Bt what is it that appas in thappaition? ccoding to dono th nam psnts tslf as thlingistic pototyp of thoght wthot bing thoght itsl its th pototyp at t h cost of th cognitiv fnction noth wods th is no mmdiat lation to th nam fonowdg Th nam appas oy in a constlation ofcocpts hs th constllation agag as costllaton isncssa. Thoght s abl to nam xcpt by placing itslf ina constllation by tavllng th path that spaats it om thnam This path is th pah o Dag n The Jargo oAuthenticity, dono dnonc (philosophical langag whchdnis th constllation and tis to nam th nam in annthinabl immdiac (hiosphica) langag bcoms



2

jar }<o wen it cla ims to be abl to denominate witout division A denition taks te names place and marks te distance betwen name and concpt. The costell ation, the necess ity of a Darstelfmg which neither refuses denition nor reduces itself to a denition, is a sign of loss: te unit of te name and knowl-edge, knowedge troug the name, te cognising name tat Benj amin

speaks o ave ben o st Te name ppears, but itsappariton s inseparable om t dispersion tat all constellations presupose And wat if te apparition of te name were noting oter tan te gift of anguage, te memor and promise of tat gift? Wat if te constll tion were in1plicated in te ver structure of the gift, tus transforming itself into a pural constellation, into a mut ipicit of constelations wose number woud not be limitd beforeand b a horizon? Watif te Darstl in te sense of a constellation or a congura-tional languge wr oriiary?

At te end of is essay on th question of tecnolog,Heidegger speaks of costellato of trut' Concealment and

unconceament ake pace or com to pass as a constelation or in a constellation . Te questio is, terefore, te question of te conste llat ion' I t is te sing o art, te saing of te poet/, poisis - wic speaks t trut, te constel a tion itsel Ad tis saing onl seeks to d te ever obscure name, asHeidegger maintins in is i terrttion of Hlderlin 'DasGdc . Tus te nam, in ts vry obscurit, is te constell ation of truth.

Ben amin denes truth s conguration , as a timeless constelation of ideas wich, throug concepts , divides and groups

penomena Ideas are of te order of language e aredispaed, witout intention , i te act of naming, nd te ave to be renewed in piosopica contemplation . In tis renewal te primordia mode of appreending words is restored' ( Th Origin of Gra Tic Drama Te rea tio to trut is also, and primari, witout intention In tis wa pilosopica restitution, t restitution of trut, te Darsel of te idea, manifests itsef in a anamnesis wic gives te ord its proper power of dnomination Later

, in is teses on the pilosop of is tor, Benjamin takes up once again te cocept of a constel a tion in ordr to point to te stopping of thougt Sillst l u 1 ds DC1kns) wic all ows te essianic

Cstlato

tc n tm nd stoy to b gspd tt s to sy t tcof stod lngug of of ns of t nmtslf T mssc wod s t wod wc ngug ssd bsoutl nd tston s copt.

Isnt Rosnzwgs st wc mks ts w o wcmovs n n obt constlton? st t constlton n ts

vy unt n t unty of ts fom gu snc ccss to tstut s doubld sc t s mo tn on upotnmo tn on dsplcmnt mo h o tng w fon1 plc (Etot) In txt on Rosnzw nttd StngRoot Mssmo Ccc cotsts t uttc Etorgwc dns Juds wt th globl Etot wc cctss t css of t 11 t t wy of th dstucton of t 1 omos s t mnn of Euo o of Cstty sn t nm s bsouty gtd sch o bsout tng of spc found s st ctd b ctn xt

ot? Dosnt t stnd n t constton of doubl ccss nt JudoCstn constto?dono Bnjm dg oszwg dspt t

undnbl dncs whc consttut t plosophcl ndstocl sngult of c of ts thks d t clngof t tougt t v tought tougt on thgounds of t nm th ppo of t nm s t xpnc of constllton

cn tn mg th mossbl du btwn toswo d suc vw of tought d nug nd tos w

tnk t ton to t n m compt dntl ttgnstn o pk fo xp ow c w dc tsconstlton? f w kp to t Posoa 1sao t snot too dcult o ntcpt ttgnstn countgunnt thos wo tt t nm s somtn wc dos notsmp lnd tsf to n nlss of th s f ngug o to foml lngstc nlyss woud b ccusd of contbutng to glocton () of lngu nd of ctng ot sovngplosopcl pobls ons tus ccusd would pbp syg vtng tt ou tmt to dmonst t

suc gou s ctnl ptnnt but ou fogtg togn xpnc of lngug ou t t vl of

convnton to of lngug wtout tkng t cod-tons of possblt of t to t ss fo on lv to



T G[ aI ua

nothr h tls bout th ppriton of th nm r prob-bly ctns but tht dosn't mttr ht rlly ntrsts us isth tructurl ncssity of thos tls . nd ho cn you notgofy n pptn vn if it is trrifyng? Y ou d o not xprnc th nm th g of lngug ys singur lys tob rmmbrd You strt out from hypothsis hich issubsqun

ly provn you oppos on hypothsis to nohr

but gv you our ord: tht's not ll thrs somthingcomptly dirnt . .

h four chptrs of this boo prhps form constllton:thy cn b rd sprtly. Hr nd thr thy rfr c toon nothr th motifs on cn distinguish in thm intrscth minng sinlr h mr of crtn discontinuityhch th vry og of th constlltion hs not bn rsdftr th fct.

On the Path towards Sacred Naes

In th dst sns to c mnsto st n moton to gt somthng undry.

(Mrtin Hidggr)5

Hid and oszwi

Wht s th logic of th nsrs tht Rosnzig nd Hidg-

gr giv ch in drnt y nd prhps lso hl foo-ing dirn pths or somthng othr thn pth to thqustion ht is pth?

In pssg from hs txt on Rosnzg nd Hidggrfrom 1423 (Hidggr und Rosnzig Ein Nchtrg zuSin und Zt" rl Lth brody indcts ht t s thtins nd sprts ths to thinrs. It s thir rltion tothoogy Lith rst quots from Rosnzig: hoogicproblms must b trnsltd into humn trms nd humnproblms must b prssd unti thy rch th domn of tho-

ogy. H thn commnts on th quot his chrctristion ofth n thinng" ppls s much to th thining of th rlyHidggr s it dos to Rosnzig vn f Hidggrs rtion to Christinity conssts of turnng y Abkh n dRosnzgs rltion to Judism consists of rturn kkh So Hidggr i R osnzig supposdly distncdhimslf fron Chrstnity But for ht rson? Shoud h hvrturnd to rigion to thology to n thought of thscrd or of th hoy hich might b ssoctd in som yith Judism? Should h hv turnd tords trnity tordssomthing hich is not simply tmpor tords somthinghich for Rosnzig is ssntily Jish? his is not onyht Lth suggsts in th concludng rmrs of his ssy by



rising he ques ion of h which necessri y exceeds he rdic lemora li y of ruh bu a so wha his saen sems o im py in is very srucure desi is r of objciiy des ie he eec roduced by reding i which mkes he senencper o be sime consiv e pro osi ion impy ing neiherevluion nor cri ici sn1 folows quoe which sys h i is no e

nough o rnsle heoogicl rms ino secu r ones Th sk of rnsl ing hem gin mus be comleed he s ofrns ing mn' s problems ino heo logicl ons Rosenwei seks here ony once of rnsl ion s press ing n' s robems o he oin whch hey become hologicl probems h sme s rns ing he gin ? Bu even if his were he cse he quesion riss of wheher wha hoogy' mens wh imens c cording o Rosenzwig nd Lwih is co m ibe wih he Jwish hough o h sc red or o he ho lv To he ex en h Rosnzwig 's s een chrc erises he n�w hin-ing' , nohing cn reven us r

om n ysing he conc sion Lwih drws from i concusion concerning he re l ionshi beween Rosenweig nd eidegger or hir nonrel ion o ech oher in heir re ion o heol og y, s requiremen n ny even Lwih mkes i cer in his uobiogrphy My Lif i German B ore and �er 19 3 h Heidegger ws enough of heoo gin o kn ow wh he ws doing when he refused o spe of he Good Lord nd dened dh s n insurmounbe insnce" of our Being nd our poenili yforBeing ' 7 hus rnsl in wh needed o be rns d However if h ws si ll rns ing h hdn' rel ly rnounced heology n hi suobiogrphy Lwih clls h is heoloy godless heology' , n hei s heolo gy' n impious heol og y' otlose The% i) .The quesion hen is wheher Heidegger whie being enough o heologin no o be one ws s i l enough of heologin o d dress mn's essence which ccording o Roseweig is mo pr oer o mn han he pro riey rvee by rns ion ino seculr erms On he subjec of deh L Swih wries

n oposing h hough o phiosophy which s dhRosnwig chooss fundmn suposiion s his

sing poin h lif is dsind o nd in dh Hidggchooss h sm oin of du ] Th is lso nssnil dinc bwn h wo houghs ind ogh

O te Pat towards Sacred Names

by his mon i On h on hnd Rosnwigdvncs ong ph ding him o nl if' pssinghough Cion s bginning Rvlion s middl ndRdmpion s nd; n nl uh' h s cosondso nal lif' On h oh hand Hidgg dsibsbif in n uh s sidu of Chisin hology

somhing which hs no y bn dicly imind 8

Hidgg ws hps sill oo much of Chisin o gsh impicions of h nl uh' of h s which musshin in h innmos consicion of h Jwish h' 9 fidgg und his bc on Chisiniy bcus h ws hoogin h Rosnwig ws vn mo of hologinsinc h und o Judism

Lwih's commny mks sns ony on h bsis of hisquimn tere must be a retur. n oh wods uning

wy isn' nough h cn b no uning wy wihou un Hnc hs qusions h dos i nn o un wyfom Chisiniy fom igion fom hoogy? h dos imn o un owds Judism? h do his uning wynd his uning insc wih h qusion of h ph? Mosuccincy wh do hy qui wh dos hi inlcingqui h inlcing which is hm ogh nd hsm im is hm o h qusion of h h nd mybso o h of h nm h scd nm?

hn discussing Rosnwig's nd Hidgg's hough w

mus loc h qusion of h ph in wh w my c hsared vn if fuh disincions v hmsvs o b ncs-sy ' This my b dicu o conciv whn w spk ofidgg bu x which ddsss h qusion of hph is culy cd Th n of Scd Nms' De eeger Name'). wi ly ou fiy schmicly hfus ha sm o m o b common o Rosnwig's ndidgg's hough

() Hidgg' s uning wy is i lly uning wy? lso psns isl s un o s s bckwds whichbings us o hiddn o fogon oigin s n nlogousgsu in Rosnwig nd Hidgg fo h l h phWeg) wh mus b hough hough isf is clos o hoigin hn h mhod which pvns us fom noicing h



chrcter of t hought s wy . 10 It s cert nly strnge org n t must be nvented one retu rns to t by nventn g t , gven that t cannot express t s lf - accorng to Hedegger unless texpresses ts elf n Greek th s language where t s nowher to be found . For the for mer Rosenzweg the pth s eternl w y (ewiger v eg) s the wy of Chrst nty where the Chrs tncommunty ttests to tslf (bezee ) by ttest ng to t ; tht sto sy by spekng by bec omng com munty of mss onr es who re gd wth eloquence. hs eterl wy not onlyccompnes the eternl l fe of the Jewsh people (n eternty tht do ubles the other eternty) but so opp oses tht lfe Th wy s I wll ttempt to demonstr te , remns secondry n relton to the m medcy (U nielakei) chrter st c of eternl lfe hs mmedcy dos not need words. It ps se swthout med ton n to the nme nto ts slence he pth th wy one word mre one word too mny

(2) hnkng the pth b co mes unvodbl for Hedegger

when he experences lck the wnt of s cred nmes hs experence s experence tself, the e ldp th ( We ed) . Why does Hed g ger tke up Hlderln s l ne ' he sacred nas ar wanting , one th t refer s to s cred nes nd tht belongs to n elegy whose tt le (Hei! ) nmes return? He quotes t tthe moment when h wnts to pont out th t experencng the experencng of experence cnnot be done except whle on the pth I erweg. The essence of experenc or of the pth s lo stwhen t s dented wth method wth the d lect c l movement of the concpt whch s the truth of method. Ths cuses

the lnton (E rdug) of the mmedte of wht hs not yet been experenced (da U1e ahre1e) . I t s n ths wy th t the med te cn return (zurcgehe ) nd present tself n ts relty n ult mte truth: s the property (Ei enu) ofconsc ousness At the en of the chptr he Rys or theEternl Wy whc n be found n he mddle of he thrd prt of The Sar oRedmpin Rosenzwg wrtes

It s xpnc co hom (emer) [ th vcton of vty Th tuth ls bhnd th wy Th wy nds

wh hom hs bn chd Fo though ts nd ls ntnty nd t s thus tnl t s t th sm tm ntsnc tnty s ts nd h vythng s on th

O te Pat towards Sared Name 9

no mo ys th s only on lght h th thshll b full of th knowldg of th Ld s th wtscov th s In th ocn of lght v wy s submgdlk vnty But thou oh God t tuth L

h tnty of tuth of ths tuth ponouncd h t th ndthough n postoph wthout nm s stll oth thn thdoubl tnty of wy nd lf tnts tht nt but notsymmtcl not symmtcl bcus thy nt; bfo thEtnl bfo tuth ll wys fd wy; Of tuth wthntuth lf too dspps h gol of th thought of thtnl wy nd tnl lf s tnty s th byond of thnm h nd howv s nmlss t s bov ny nmh vy snctcton of th nm occus only so tht thnm mght on dy b mutd Byond th wod nd wht sth nm but th collctv wod byond th wod thshns slnc h would b no tnl lf f th nm

tht wll b mutd th nm bov ny n th nmoutlvng nd mothnlvng th on nn (l)on (deree Nam all-e) ws not wntng

() Expnc undstood s pth to b tvlld s thxpnc of lck of wnt of scd nms of wnt ofth on nm (l)on (but w must not b too hsty nplcng ths xpncs t th lvl of th sn xpnc)xpnc undstood s tun to th Gk o to th tnty of tuth to whch Jwsh popl ccd mo sly sncth ltonshp to tnty s mo mmdt ltonshp

such xpnc s n xpnc of th futu Somthngmgd somthng hppnd (Gk thought vlton)whch hs yt to mg to hppn so tht w cn sy tngd t hppnd ht hs tkn plc thus ppls to nvnt to com Fo Hdgg t s th nvnton of wht hdnot bn sd n G nd wht cnnot b sd xcpt n G c t b sd n Gmn? hy dosnt Hdgg sy t nGmn? Fo Rosnzwg t s dmpton

Ths th th ftus common to Rosnzwg dHdggs thought of th pth In both css dtou

mposs tslf nd pcds th tun on th on hnd to nogn on th oth to n mmdcy Fo both th tuntks th fom of lton of xpnc to th nm In both



0 T G f auae

ass a utu must b awaitd which points to an vnt blongg and not blonging to th past whic xplains th possibility o th dtou

T h immdiat: f rontier) limit and denition

h chapt that Rosnzwig dvots to th tnal way opnswith th ollowing sntnc No man has th ow to gasph thought o th Cato o his ways a not ou ways andhis thoughts a n ot ou thoughts . Rosnzwig thus statsby quoting and commnting on Maimonids, who says thattl a som ways which main obiddn to us, th ways odv thought Mayb w should add i w spak o divin

ways, it is bcaus w a xpincing th way, and bcaus itis this vy xpinc w undgo in th st plac his is tuo us, th Jws, but also, i anoth sns, o us, th Chistians must b xtmly caul, o th tuth o th tnalway as th tuth o th Chistian community mais xtnalto thos who am Ou li is no long mshd withanything outsid ouslvs hav stuck oot in ouslvs Itmains untu with spct to this slootd li, it sms alinto th Jwish popl which, o this ason, is always oundvywh. It is ound anywh, on all paths and ways, but

without bing ound th Bcaus it is h and lswhbcaus it is nowh, this popl is th only on to knodistancs and al ontis, o xampl, whn it is a qustiono wa Rosnzwig givs only this xampl, as i to undstandth maning o a distanc ad o a onti which kps thoth at a distanc, it w ncssay to undstand wa, itsintnal divisions o spli ts

In kping with th spiit o Chistianity, which admits o noboundais, th a o it [th popl o th Chistia a,.G.D o vy distant popls [it is against ths poplsthat th Jws wag wa accoding to t univsal uls omatial law, GD. Holy a and political wa, which inJwish law w constitutionally distnguishd, a h

O th Path towards Sad Names

blndd into on cisly bcaus thy a not ally Godspopl an a till onl i pocss ( d Veg) o sobcoming, thy cannot daw this n distinction; thysimply cannot know t hich xtnt a a is a holy wa,and to which xtnt n1ly a scula wa. b

Lt us not this implicit dnition th tnal way is a wayo bcoming and, i consqunc, th sign o a want, o a lack,o an immdiacy which is lacking. Conpad with th tnityo Jwish l i th tnity o th way i s an tnal bco ming, abcoming tnal within tnity itsl Etnal li itsl mustbcom th tnity o an outliving, o a li mo living thanth li o suvivos h is tnal li only in contast to thli o thos who pav th tnal way [Baer: this wod sno to thos wo a claing, opning o chating a path o away, G.D] So th tnal way is this bcoming that tnal

li has nv known ad will nv know. h a asonso bcoming Chistian, o bcoming somthing whichbcoms, which is not yt ally Gods popl, but th is noason to bcom Jwish, sinc on is ith Jwish o on isnot, in an immdiacy which pcds th im o th wayJwish aon' is to b souht in an attstation (Bezugug)which is poducd though gnation (Zugug) and thus notthough th popagation o th wod o in th gowth o thcommunity unitd by th wod But th popl nins thtnal popl h maning o its li in tim is that th yas

com and go, on at th oth as a sunc o waiting, ophaps wanding, but not o gowth . ! I will not ling onth moti o waiting ( Wart): in hi discusion o lasmnt,Hidgg says that waiting constituts th ssnc o thought,and h maks it cla that it is a qustion o waiting and notxpctation (Erwartug) Fo th Jwish popl and only othm attstation is immdiatly and ssntially gnation, sincgnation is sstially and immdiatly attstation. ttsttionis Jwish, and not only bcaus all attstation, though itslgacylik stuctu, is a gnation, a vival o th nam(th pomis passs though th nam, th pomisd nam is thoigin o attstation th nam o th ancsto is gnatdthough th ngdd gandson) n attstatio quis actain imn1diacy it is a sot o immdiat mn1y I I nd a



12 T G f Lgug

ong speech to attest to my identity, am mmediatly sspect.Jst one ord (one name) is enough for the Jes, and it isperhaps this sefsuciency ith its impied speriority thatmakes them even more suspect, hich attracts sspicion. Theimmediacy of an attstation is absoute, ost, ngraspable, as ifthe attstation anned that to hich it attested the moment it

transformd it into something prely attesting th pre fact ofmy existenc, of my procreation, of being named and namingattests to my being chosn. What is at stake hre is the insanecertainty of an attestation. Isnt extermination, from thisperspect iv, the radical caing into qestion of Jish a ttestation, the only possible qestioning? Can an attempt to uprootthe very pope that has taken root in itslf thanks to the Bezeu-

gung be anything other than an extermination? Isnt antiSemit-ism, the hatred of the Jews , another attestation to the staartand ndeniabe vitaity of th Jewish people? snt the extermi-nated peope n10re ivng than ever?

Had the Jes of the Od Testament disappeared from theearth like Christ, they old [no] denote the ida of thePeope, and Zion the idea of the Centre of the World, jst asChrist denotes th idea of Man. But the staart, ndeniablevitality of the Jeish people, attested in the very hatred ofth Jews, resists sch ideaising. Whether Chist is morethan an idea no Christian can kno it. Bt that Israel ismor than an idea, that he knos, that he can se. For live. We are eterna, not as an idea may be eterna; if ar

eternal, it is in full reaity. 7

Extrmination e could say, alowing ourselves to be gidedby the main thread of this interpretation, operat es an i dalisationof Juda ism hich testies to its opposition to ideaism . henabsolte attestation has ben absoutely cald into question, aremainder not an idea, not evn an existence stil refers tothe attestation: n Jdaism, man is aays someho a remnant.He is aays someho a srvivor, an inner something, hosexterior as seied by the crrent of the ord and carried o

hie he himself, hat is left of him, remains standing on thshore. Somthing ithin him is aiting. 8 Neither simpyimmdiate nor simply nonimmediate, attestation (immediat

On the Path toward Sacrd Na 13

attstatio for th Js, onindiat attstatio for thChristians) i ithot masur; bt nothi is mor dispropotonat than this immdiacy hich assurs ad prcds vrbalattestation.

Silenc is th trth of spch and of t nam nothing ismore ssntially Jish in th dpst ss tha a profoud

distrust of t por of th ord ad a frvnt blif i thpor of silenc. 19 n rmaiig silnt or at as � ary fdiscours, th J kps himslf at th vry hart o lauagof wat othrs hav at t da r t attt t thidntity. All lagags ar at th Js disposal but th Jhpope do ot hav a lauag in th ay that a particarpop has somthig that old disappar th day o trac ofthat popl rnid Th J is lauag, h is th nam forthis raso ach Jwish gratio is as such a atstatio toth name This raon hich not a rason hch i muh

mor and mch ls than a rao do not ld itslf to dialtical or dialcticaspeclativ foraisatio It opposs a philsophical history hich claims to b tru ith rspct to a r

gnral or a ectiv history; it opposs it ithut doig o, txcds it. hr ar to sids to vry bodary oszeig nots

By stting borders for orselvs bordr o somthielse. By bing an individal popl a atio bo apeopl among othrs. o clos oslf o is to con clos toanother. ut thi dos ot hold hn a popl rfuss to bmerly an individal popl and ants to b th opeople'. Undr ths circumstanc it mut ot clos itlf owithin bordrs bt incld ithin itlf such bordrs aould throgh thir doubl fnction tnd to mak it individal popl among othrs2

Rosnzwig dscribs th dialctic of inclion and clsio,the dialectic of th frotir, of th limit; dsribs a il-sion hich xclds inclsion in th dialctic Hl rdrs asfollos Sthing (Etwas) as a imdiat dtrminat

being, is threfor th linit rlativ to anothr somthing(adre Etwas), but the limit is prt i th somthing itslfwhich is a something throgh the mdiatio of th imit,



whch i jut a uh s nnbig iit s h onhrouh hh somhg a somhg ohr S I1dAdees) h s wll s, as s nt.' Th pl hh is logr n iiiual ppl whih i h oly popl' - honl ppl t r hs nm - i th only popl ko' what a wr s, a al h onl o hh knw

nhing it, h ly oe t ta bd h opposonwhih liit nd whih allow th liit to b ross: hJsh popl s ond h onradon h onsus thital rie i h lit o th ati h oron wnol hrrss n wrl hsory I snzwig pprso transla t th Hlian rm Volksxeist a �Vexeis hosof b(elrt a vcs/ihe, A.G.D.I o d Lh arha ha i t kows oh war.

I will igrss f mOet nd a another quote. In 1<Jt-40, Max orkhr wrot a ry shor txt

ntitl 'f Il

/!Ish Charae.:3 I ths c Horkh th xl stt�s thtthe Jes deny their 'lack o eerience'. And reaer skshmsl s thr a lk tn ths ack th nial the lck wht ws hppn t that t to ws C;y t ra Jws? Th sso (Sfdt,�) of th Jwsh opl sat to rst 0 L1 lck of xrnc' y dng thr lckof experiee', the Jes de y their missio Accordig to Horkhr, an ont-typ lical contraicti m dsrn hr a cotrao tht dds th stap' (Pig): th "hstorcal stap' (th xprc rsltng fro a nal o n ssntal lack) ust b separtd fr th nd-dual stap' (th stm o th .v who holds hmslf od ort th lmt of hstor th stp of th msso hch delmts hstory) hs cotradcto gs rs to dnl, t s th locs of enial; bt t te sae tie it preserves the Jeish eolefrom solt trachry' At th d th tt thr is nhorst l h s st b witnsss th ipossible , hthr th t t or ot' Dic JUdCN SS'lI r d as U lm-g che .C ,rfl o sc 'oll ode lIiht). One isL�td , trctd its dtrinig contt, ths sntn can b ra i w

i rnt ways , spcia lly when oe is a wre certain uns fonzw's1 Th Jws must attst t (2eu ) the ipossibl thy ar

On the Path towards Sared Names 5

witee of th ipible iepdetl f their will2 The ew ut egdr zg) w, the u

ad i the ae of the impibl, e if the o ot watto A w who becoe a father aready teti awithout beig able to op poe it to the ipoible Jewihprocreatio ad geeratio i h ipoible

t u retur to the path log ic deterie Rozweig tatet about the Jewih

people, it ee ad it xitec, it eec uch a it aifet itelf i it xitc, without eiatio a thak t thae which i il I i a loi of th iiat whocertitude rit or appar t rit the ialectic Aittedlther i a proie, a traditio a law hwer, it i a if himediac of Bzel h nm) d th ew tgive up dicoure a Koszw hen i a dirt di-

_

ton of th wa whe it i a usti n f dlt th wa hritiait, of ai it a liit a tati it itue ThJew liit, deliit, but he er ilue hielf i the ialetic of excluio ad icluio O the otrar he ilud itwithi hielf, ad if h d hilf actd b th iio war it i rather b irtu of a ort of autoliitatio te the beod the Jw do ot dped o a liit e rprtthe truth of the liit o the liit whih till parat hi frtruth, from the uttrig of the ared ae i ilece or asilece thi liit i other tha a othr liit t ak hJewih people the ol people ad i thereore ot the liit thatdee a igularit ol war belog to the thic pat' ofthi pople, Roezwei tat Th Jw rprt a rh hbming f whih do ot bear th ark of it of dialetical eet itio i a ut be b itioa attetatio BeuU) Th ew participat i that frowhich the are a pror xcluded Thir participtio xludthe participatio o ther ic the raw th liit with thriour of truth Thi i wh w rer both to Jw ad toChritia b aociatig a eparatig the ertail, thJew wh tur hi back to the exterior ad tur iwar to th

iterir' a bece hard proud or riid', ee thuh hcat deced ito hi ow iterior without at the a tiacedi to th ighet' Ad it i a lo ru that the Jew who





we n me ad compreend me? Wen we ble oreiy·2 win ie y ubmiig i e masure eeel wy? W we d c e nerred veeaneo e wll wi nn bide e i of 'urly ralviliy (ein zii Ledki) beaue i esa i. In we i dil o verk e aiy beween risaiy

d udim eween eel wy nd li e eur f riaiy a reurn o udaim? oezweg es a i eeniy bu w i el mke dr imeemes e wy, e e wy a way e beinig a end f wic e eesarly beynd me; oerwe ime culd ee nwy. Te way i eal I dras lf frme eml wy wi led e ie n emol way 'nly x eme a eve be surveyedJ3 e eeal wy oweve e disane wic earae epont fro e beinnig ad ed i lway e ame. en

ne o e emoal way e doe ee e w e sesly pr o e way: e wy beoe ie O te eernalwy one 'es in bu e wy one 'ee ning no ele e 'see ly e ening ad e ed: eey'Tu e ee peiod f me ve ered n ernaleii ee�l midle nd eel end f e erl aou i empliy. J Te one w wlk ernlwy kow 'beinn n e e o eqlly n o a ever 01e o r i e eerl a s olyey a e ow mel a do a every e.

e eel wy mke e even epeuaL i e eewee e eve ae l oniuoul Te eve i eeel wy a erpeuy o e ere Ec gul eve('is) s deende e even iel Gi: 'vryeve (Eiis) and mdwa e\e benn an ed f e eernl d y vue of cenl s i emoral mddle of eei evy even i iel eel. ui e mn wo 'es e beginig and e end w 'se eway nd e enr a e ene of a 'zn 37 a is gake i? s e aable f eing mre an saw befr? O

e emral wy e w oly f rzn Hwvr on e eernl way i ' midon sr nssingeniely f dn i ll middle ll bewe, all aW e erly o e eel way? If all s way if

/ th Pl Sacred Nams

i oi o ;1 a u ewee i a et oron s nv ;l to 11l to onsttut iel u. Iotr wod e man o \l e el wy is o aje. Te eer1 a lS 10 uje nly e subje uee deiy rrsntation y epeein o mel oad t orzon of rprsntlton vey ime

eideer dee u jeiviy e nly e ruureof w e ll ujev e ue e enmenolialoep of e oon spa n e Kaf/c ad i eof e leure ue on Nieze u we mu o ( e oe lo e wen eee es ou eemporl uure of Dasi nd i oe o e reewors of Bi1g 0£ T1C. In s diuson releemetee wie 'eleae1en ;oss1i) indeed erls� :)f onsf ho transnnta r-prsntatn d o arnqusn t n of oion. d 'W i

nt of t orizon e i but t e in us o opene wi surrouns u (is ugd Q) opnnss s d t viC (:4ussh) oe erne(Auss) o w to our eee arc obecs I nolimin tlt onwei n ann e oep of oron vi e dos not well on n Th Sa . nnd e Sl tng tat eidee unstans b e ighi h 7" ;/ ontss, t rfusa of e em l Yndle e ssty of stn nesf o e uje of oso rprsnL1ton tod. To sa tat t a

no uje s to p tt t i no lleo ee eont \ot tol!' ere me do not mlyrfr to w ei dene loely S 'e p upo I w1 we ursu (a IgC mr " u \ C KSor prs an rfrn to e pely mder ee of e wo e surn onqun oceedin aainen n orr to aptur te1 oje " e bje (dsd, d -ghC g{si C

e tnt of e w e eeniy of l o bloo e

no ienil euely i s e pi e oy we o bats wi me e wy enl do ts siiualae of e y led us o tnk? ye i p lwyss a ratons w e and e me d



2

nln unin aw ay n tunn, h mSSn an te w I caus pks a lanuaes, bc ause i as a husd anuags ( ZU Ig) i its ouh t wa s vrythno bo poty Bu by yn, it can esurct:

any s n wy, has o spra evr rher. M o pv s status wou an fo i renouncingis niy a hwith at. Chtianiy must osely- . T ju nal o it psrvon hrouutn pu pr ng b oo o fom foren amixtur o tal p n posysn s verabfom o fpvon fo Ch ant y . . 1 In thna pp pocaion (ErzC,lg) bar s witnes (Zcugnis ) to tnit; o etrna way his wness musta y wnss (Zgis) I . he th pyi onw ow of h on boo (1ischlchs Fort-strm de ci C 1 BlfS) \s (h'C t,t) o h ancestor

n gnd (?cn' It,�) anson H t oupourin h p (A IiSl 1 des Ges fes) us sablish he coun o ny ({ iS/ ?t des Zliss) in un nu a o ba wa oursn on from nh

p anas; anu h v onion of h spri-u: I o p nl o ec a bigb\ n an an, b wn onu and onu [ . . ]An p n py n , h one who hears

an a now hf qu o On who rs spokan cvd wor Sp u s . . . I is mn 'sown ply a h p of ns son an ans-in . ' n va t f o b eialy a situal tn sn. Man huny, wha ssnal o m,nounc s f on ba i o ha wch announs, on a o h nnun cn tl Th p of ansmsson nnunc n n cons ach hanks to h LO S} 'of, h yng cry: th wachwor, ·1 th sswo w h un h, w ow th ey blon o te

cO uny of h w y. rt nua he spritul unty of LOl} 'o whos funcon h t of a nam llows tebiv a n o omhn' n the wo Wh a h b ves

th Path towards Sacrd Nams 2

n is nt wve th bc f thut n th sm wy thspt he es n pint t subjctive uny f thuh ts iny he the is Losugswort, we ls n wyh e Loswort tcs th pth f cnitin If h Cisncnuny becms une huh its test fith n if thcnent f t it s the wy ten th uniy f th ne wys th situl uniy f Losgswor mus be cnis s t

funtin f Chistinity n s its vey spiituity Chsn knws h he bivs tht h wits he tun fCh st n tht s life s n t enl wy is is fith cnn f tesimny n ts sliu n th sltu fth snul sul he tsties t is ft which is ft in smn By esifyin by ttestin hs fi by ttesin t snhn he nens rzugn) th eenl wy n spiitulnnen he he extme Jewish fith s th pucf n enenen rzugns nr Zu�ug) which is nt ntsimply spiiul It s nt fm f knwle n t s n

cntnt the Jew nene Jw d as ud Gzugt),sts zugt) his blief by cntnuin t pcee rtzugC)h Jewsh peple His belif s nt in smin: h is himsfthe bie H is beevin wth n immicy tht n Cistinmts cn ve civ f hmsl his beif cs littlef ts mtic xtin it s existnc n t mens mtn ws -- n ttstin tht ttss t u xistnc ncn whu lnu xistnce tht ttsts t iself wthutws in the ct ttests t ntin it is n siitul nuFm the mmnt tt Jwish ttesttin ssts tnsmissin

n mtc tnsln i s n ne ttsttin t lstfm Cstn pnt f viw f tnslt mns t est tstify stfyn Rsnzwei tells us is lwys n inviul mtt Sach ds Enzlnn) mtt f n iniviuityth mins ncncivbl f the Jws ws tminincnsists n nenin futh ntins f ti pple bybl s s wht ivs th s h Chistns m hismnss f t siit s phps n ct f th untnsltbl fw simultnusy cmmns n fbs tnslin

n witl th Jw s t [h ccuss fth wichusus ts victus wy thuut th wl f binfunly myhic G t w ws f w



The CUt (�r Languag

would word il vi l i thi el f viio ! u wih iitc hi it ic. hi itc of h Jw cottly ubjc hitiiy to h id ht it i ot tiih ol th ruh ht it vr i the \y hi ih ofoud reo for the hrii hrd of th Jwwhich i hei to th g htrd of th Jw. h l yi it i oy ht diectd o the objectiobl

dmoiher fr tht he ut doihe by hi eitcit i hrd of o' ow irfecio o ow oty . . he Jew cied hi h d bld dr th yoof the lw d thrby liv cottly i the liy of thhvly kigdo the hriti cottly r hd boo d t ielf i o oitio t rdmtio d hler tht h hilf i ittd to tici rdio emoioly. y ticii redeio h Jw urch th oio of tuh wih th of hurdemd wrd h iv h i o th hriti who o

hi mrch f c io h urdd wrd h ourch hi vry forwrd t with illuio wth d( Wa) .45

f h Jew i i oi i to reouc dico r bcu h i thword ielf d he e (thi reucitio d he ticitioof rdemptio p th meig of ctictio) th thhriti who dwell outid of the m d who therforemut wlk o th etr wy beco d by ttchi toouch imorc o h word by ircoii it vl h

mde of th irit rmid u of he ivi bdy of ietitece if the irit were wiig fr hi bdy wihouitti it d tud it i bcu i eld hi ithe wt which i ierrud which it wd to irrup lo g hee i hriti hted towrd Judi hritiitywil ot hve itrutd Jwih witig d will ri eligio. I g rliio till or redy religiodo't it belog o wht owi cl myth? ut hmyth' itelf i double i h doubl uity uity d duble. i the uiy of th yth which crrie th Jwih

eole beyod ll cordictio out of h world d hiory.he myhic t of the Jew i ierbl from thi ow ofth myh from thi uity which u h future withi h

0 ath towards Sar Nams

eole gr

he Jew lo ur o coic betwee the urem e viiowhich i plced before hi ou d the peole og whomhi life h plced him H oe oee the uiy of tmyh which the tio lot hrough the iux of hritiity which they were boud o loe for their ow myth w

g yth which by ledig hem ito itel led themwy from od d their ighbour. he Jew' mythedig him ito hi eole big him fce to fce withod who i lo the od of ll tio he Jewih peolefeel o coict bewee wh i it very ow d wht iurem the love it h for itelf ievibly become love for

hb t eg our

we hve ee htred oly reiforce he will o witrovided we c ek i thi cotext of will u if it i

tue tht htrd reifoc the will o wi etece of hetyp the Jew give the lie o h hriti' ugget to u it ibecue it ru u git will; git will to exit lzm olk will to be peopl

) + All hriti re miio

rie Ech ime hriti miiory ucceed he Jwiheole tke root eve more deely i itel Exiece ecpethe pirit iofr the piit rm it power through itdicoue. very miio i trmiio; every miio is thuimpoibe ice i i ected by the ftl logic of he urlble

Sl d gstur

h i mdic of Jih exeice i the immedi y ilece (Swig) of ilet exitece which through it veryiece come cloe o he me ilece Wh doe i eto exeriece ilece the eece of lguge d thecomletely codeed word (das gaz gsammlt ort)? heilece experieced i ulike the muee (Stumht) of theproocomo (orwlt) which hd o wod yet'. It i ilece

which o loger h y eed of the word. ,< eig ilet io the e bei g mue d if we were fored to deci dewe would hve to ckowedge ht it i cully hritiity



4 The GUt 4 La1/glag

which is still ut t i ut bau t lu hexperiece of sil i laguag lagua th dvrty laguages' mars th path whih lads r rtoi orprewrldly uti t traswrldly ilc hi privlgrated to slece, this digity ilc which l r haay eed of th word, which is mor stal tha th worwhch is th word as suh (is t possibl to spea of a ystial

thought here? may al be foud i B a/1d T whHedegger writ that the call \hch call as to apearbefore ts ow ptetiality for big itsl do t put itlfito words at all yt it reas othig ls tha bscure adideite s he ilec which oszweg peas f is thslece of completd udrstadig Lt e poit ut passg that this setece could be compared ot ly withcertai paragraphs of B ad but also with a tet ofejamis ettled he etaphysics of uth

Where

slece lets itelf be uderstod as th ilce of complted

uderstadg, oe glace say everythig' his passag rlaguage to the glace i a tru paage ot a miserable surrogat for commuicato h glac whih says vrythg says ore tha ca be said ll at o ce r i the bli of aeye, he glace exceeds lauae

Nothig shows so clearly that the world i urdeemed asthe dversty of laguags etwee e who spea acommo laguage, a glace would suc for reachig auderstadg; just because the spa a o laguag

they are elevated above spech [hu we ever spea acommo laguage the L1HYt i beyod laguag it isthe opeig f laguage, D twe dieret laguages, however, oly the tammerg word medats, adthe gesture ceases to be immedately itelligble as t hadbee i the mute glace of the eye stu B dsAues. It s reduced to a haltig sig laguage, that miserable surrogate for commuicatio [he Lossort s ievitable for hrstaity because it rpreset the experece ofthe derece betwee laguages udasm does ot eed such

a word, at least to the extet that it is already, ad this byvirtue of its very existece the silece of completed uderstadg, AD As a result the suprme compoet

0 t Path toards Sared Naes 2

lturgy s ot the commo word but the commo gestureLiturgy frees gesture from th fetters of helpless servtude tospeech, ad maes of t Smethig mor tha speech

hs log quote comes frm th troductio that precedes thethree boos that form the third part of Te Star t s mportt to ote that gesture dos t mitate laguage it s ot a

rudimetary or primitve form of laguage, or aotherlaguage esture is the other whch costitutes laguagebecause compreheso depeds o the sharg of laguage the secod boo, i the chapter o the eteral way, Rosezweig ists o the relevace of the gesture but it must ot beforgotte that eelg plays a decisve part i ewish relgo,give that udaism ca oly aticipate the redempto hemplet gesture s the glace

he power to dssolve all that is rigid already iheres i the

glace t is a power which remaied uattaiable to thedeed at a power for whose ae the word sacrced tselfif oly to master it at this cot for the bref pause before theaswer word forgets itself ad is to be forgotte it watsto perh the aswer he po wer of the glace, however,does ot persh wth the momet Oce a eye has glacedat us, it wll glace at us as log as we lve

he gesture is ot a deed ts potecy, the stregth with whch sss Jsa aan an un umes frm the

direce which separates t from both laguage ad the deedd yet, a ll laguage co prses a gesture or a sig he sg,excessve ad sigular, always remas uaswered, ad we doothg other tha rspod to t, we do othg but attempt torespod to laguage, to the gesture or the sig whch it ecessarly cmprises ad which s ot reducble to it We do otrespod to some lguistic prposito or other, we see thegesture respose, a word ecouterg aother word, s alsoa word , somethg other tha a wor d, search of the word ofth e other the other of the word osequetly, what caot be

erased i a respose, the glace, wa tches us, eeps us our wholelfe, eve f we have forgotte t t s the glace of the otherwhch does ot forget ut the gesture or sig remas usee



26 Th G �f o mJ

s log s we do ot pproh the me d its silee hus itis ot we who keep d hold mes but mes tht keep dwth us We keep mes beuse they lredy keep us dthey keep us beuse somethig i them somethig relted tothe gesture or sig drws us towrds s ilee A t the edge of thepth of the wy of lguge we experiee somethig very

simp le s omethig mybe me mybe the other of theme the me s other wthes us i the silee

Tht hich tchs d cocs us

Wht wthes us? Wht keeps us by wthig us? drw oosezweig to suggest ths hypothesis othig ould wth usif we were oly witig for deth Fo r deth keeps othig itis the bsolute evet it doest eve wth us he lterity ofthe me the gesture or the sig is ot the lterity o f deth tis the lterity of the future Of ourse deth isribes itself ith utue, u the fuue would ot be futue i f it let itself bedeteried by the ertity of the idetermible of dethDeth wthes us so muh tht the gze beomes blid wereogise deth by seeig other who is ded or dyig butthis reogitio does ot imply y kowledge it blids ushe gze of the me wthes us d ke eps us beuse it is theoditio of possibility of the reltio to the other of this reltioship whih is iterrupted by deth d mrked bforehdby this very iterruptio he mes sy At lest help me sotht deth oes to us oly from us Do ot give i to geerlity Like the reogitio of deth the reogitio of thegesture or the sig does ot presuppose y previous kowledge ut if it blids us it is beuse it puts us i reltio with future of whih we kow othig Deth hs o future whihis ot to sy tht the future is deth Ad yet t the dedretur t they keep surprise i store for ? Ad wht ifthe lterity of deth d the lterity of the future were ot bsolutely iomptible? Ad wht if this were lterity deth otherth the future the future other th deth the deth d thefuture of the other? ht whih hs me of its ow

osezweig writes o loger be thig o loger everyms ir t is ipble of utter bsorptio ito the tegoryfor there be o tegory for it to belog to; it is its ow

teory

th th towd cd Ns 2

he gift of the me is the other o f the de th whih theme rries withi itsel However osezweig does otspk of thi s rhi beyod whih situtes the me bey odthe li fe of the o who s med

For oly Others die; M dies oly s Other s Hehe ot oive of itself s ded ts fer of deth is thehorror of beomi the oly thig tht its eyes see i thedeesed Others deesed He deesed t [ ] As oftes he sees ded m breth o f fer blows over the livigd this breth omes over the livig m wheever he oeives of himself s ded m for stritly s pekig oe ever oeive of oesel s ded m but oly ofAother Oeself thus outlives the other every otherregrdless For the other every other is ded siply bybeig other from eterity o He ws reted s otherd s reted beig he beomes opleted reture ide:th; S created ein g he is ot etied i the l lsisto outlive "bb) y other For life is ot the pex ofretio ts destiy is to outdie itself (sich zu bstb)Not life but deth perfets the reted thig ito idividul solitry thig Deth edows it with the supreme solitude of whih s thig mog thigs it is pble

Oly others die die s the other m other whe diethe other dies; but oly the other other i reltio to the thigkeeps the future by sigllig to us hus we re wthed fromth ed of the pth tt i to sy from th e limits of lgugwhere the detour d the retur o loger be told prtwhere the detour beome retur

A ope questio is the gle mostly hristi mostlypg? Or is it lo Jewish? Must we reh somethig tht thegle ot? s this thig mostly Jewish? Or is it lso hristi? t is hristi beuse it ws previously Jewish? heouth is osutor d fulller of ll expressio of whihthe outee is pble both i speeh s t lst i the

silee behid whih speeh retrets i the kiss t is i the eyestht the eterl outee shies for m; it is the mouth bywhose words lives ut for our teher Moses who i his



28 Th G o g

etme as prveged y t see the ad hs desre (Seh-suht) t t eter t t Gd seaed ths cmpeted e th ass hs mth hs des Gd sea ad s t des a

hs passage mst be read cjct th ather passage:

Wherever t [that hch has a ae ts ] s ther s amdpt ad herever t pes ts th there s a beg-

g [ ] here mst be a here the rd a stvsbe spt hece reveat radates ad a he a yetechg mmet here reveat rst peed ts mthBth mst have bee e ad the same at e tme thgh ger tday smethg as ted tse as y exper-ece s tday r t s sppsed t pt my experece (Eebnis) a rm dat [ ] he grd thereveat s mdpt ad begg e; t s the reveat the dve ame ] r ame s trth rdad re ad t sd ad ry (Sha und Rauh) as be

e d have t aga ad aga bstate vacty It scmbet t ae the ae ad t acedge: I beeve 6t

r Rseeg the qest the prper ame s reated tthe qest the stde the Se h has mth here e mst reread the Metaethis3 he ma th a prperae s the y e h ca pe hs th ad repy t thedve ca See the secd part the secd b The Sta ) the etera ay the dtae eee eye a I Gds sea at the same tme the rg ad the ed eterae? What s t t sea? Is t t revea the ame at the methe agage passes t sece?

I I

Of the pathike natue of thought

Oe mght be tempted t say that edegger ever thght thepath as a tempra r a etera path as a methd r as a meta

physca r a tthegca ccept Is t the thght thepath as t becmes decsve r Hedegger hat eads s t the

On the Path towads Saed Names 2

brders sbjectvty ar aay rm t? I e as the qestverhasty these terms e rs t tag a certa ay thg hch des t seem t ead ths drect tacct r exampe here s a qte r hs RectraAddress: Oy a sprta rd gves the pepe the assrace greatess r t ecesstates that the cstat decsbetee the t greatess ad a ettg thgs happe that

meas dece be the a presdg ver the march thatr pepe has beg t ts tre hstry 6 I ths passagethere s a reatshp betee the qest thght t sthe sprta rd hch gves a pepe ts greatess JacqesDerrda has stressed ths aspect sprt6 ad the qest the path the Germa pepe ths pepe hch egeders ts sprta rd s the march: t advaces ag the path sprt accrdg t the a a S!ittgesetz step by step hereat betee the t qests s very bvs: the qest the path the path a Mash s ed t a (Wie

zu Ge) hch d be dct t dstgsh rm sbectvty. ever I th that t d versmpy thgs tcam that edegger ce a certa epch strayed rm therght path the prper path Why? Perhaps becase by sayg se d be rced t spea the ae a thght thepath the etre pt hch cssts precsey shgthe esseta character strayg: there s rght path Weca as rseves crse osteun represetat sreay a rm esteun t bcs the path hch eads tthe essece the path ad e mst sppse a certa c-tamated rg a certa prty a certa rghtess thepath Jacqes Derrda rased ths qest a text theisouse on Method66 Des edegger a strayg rm thepath t be thght derety as smethg ther tha straygbetee path ad methd betee t paths hch d tder rm themseves?

I act the p ath bears hs a e: MartHedeggerW eg rtes Phppe LaceLabarthe at the begg a t extrememberg a date ad cded hs b La posie ommeexpiene 67 He rst descrbes a vst t dtaberg the heames a text edeggers hch he trasated th Rger

Mer: he Wat Sacred aes e the emphasses theact that a pem ad ectre by Cea t st petry every



0

poem) but the ver thought of poetr tsef appears as path 'He adds that ea ould ot have ot bee thkg ofHedegger w oud ke to ask m self tur followg thstrae what beoes of the path Hedegger the path of thepoem ad the path amed b a poem he text he Wat ofSared Names whh deas wth the pathke harater ofthought gathers together all the relevat tfs; t deals wth

Deken (thought) Dichten (poetr bt ot ust the sese ofr poes) Seinsveressenheit (the forgettg of eg) Not(per eed dstress eesst) Geschick (dest sedg) Lichtun (the learg of eg as aleteia Gestellnis (ot Gestell theframework of teholog) a the ne Geend (ope rego)What ma be surprsg s the fat that al these motfs a theseLosunsworte of Hedegger's thought terset the questo ofthe wat of sared or hol ames Wh s t that Hedeggeraes the ame the sared ae amed b Hlderl at theomet whe he seems to be gatherg everthg together

almost everthg that he has thought thrt ears wllow uote the ed of hs text wo words must be oted;edegger spe aks o a bldg ad o a gae

et as log as the gae of the path Web lick remas deedto us ad as og as we dot see that eve the wthdrawa ad selfreserve of preseg preseg rules tsow wa Anwes so log we shall rea bd towardad uved b the oppressve omgtopresee whhbeogs to the wat of sared or ho ames a wat whh

shelters the ame of the hol ad the ho tself ad oetheess oeals erbirt t O a soour the ope Regoout of whh the wat of ho ames presees hols birtthe possblt of a sght Einblick to that whh toda isasmuh as t s watg

The whirl Wege and Wke

' Wee9 s the ttle of a poem Hedegger wrote 90 - four

ears before he wrote he at of Sared Names - adwhh s part of the oeto alled Gedachtes t s hardsurprsg that Hedegger hose the ame Gedachtes ad otGedichtetes: the more a poet s what he s the more he s a

On the Path towards Sacred Names

thker the more he s other tha what he s the more heexposes hmself to what he s ot Hedegger sas as muh aetter to ml Stager 950 ein Dichter ist freilich um so dichtender e denkender er ist . 7 t s thus a ase of poetr Dichtunbeg exposed to thought Denke - am usg here the termsfoud aother of Hedeggers etters ths te set to Maxomerell 927 Poetr s ts ow exposure to thought

hought s proper to poetr Here s a thker who aotexpose hmself to thought exept b beomg that whh he sot a poet t wll have bee eessar for hm to exposehmself to poetr order to expose hmself to thought tothk exposed thought thought tse he thought exposestself somethg arrves perhaps poetr wll mt msef toquotg ad dsussg the rst le of 'Wee Wee Wee desDenke ehende seber entrnende (Paths paths of thoughtgog b themseves vashg') Paths paths of thought go bthemselves the follow a path s ths path a sort of metapath

hs s uke as suh a dbup would be meaglss fthere s a path that guaratees the path to take wh the speakof a path whh foows aother path whh ds tsef o thewa whh tsef waks whlst vashg We must go furthers ths other path whh s ot a metapath stll a path Doestvashg entrinnen mark the wthdrawal of the path to thepath he path doubes up but there s o other path to followthere s o path of the path there s o represetato of thepath The path s ot the path of a stor or a teleoog or asubet f we kow advae through takg the path

wth a gae that t has a ut ad that t leads us to a exatplae the path s o oger a path t s ol a path f t strasfrom tse t s ts ow strag a strag that aot beomea propert of the path he path stras Aoe who tres top t dow s aught a vertgous whr a whr wherepaths do ot terset but where the path opes oto theopeg oto the vo of ts org t s perhaps ths rredubestrag whh alows method to srbe tsef aog the pathat the same tme however strag rus al ethod he pathever stops strag ad vashg Oe does ot foow a path

oe ds oesef o t wthout kowg where oe s gog the path s gog t has aread left ut the path s ether amovg w akwa or a path whh tself kows where t s



32 The G (r angag

goig or which i leavig appropriates to itself all the stages ofits turs ad detours. Also dig oeself o a path withoutkowig where oe is goig does ot i the least mea that oeis goig owhere i particular ad doig othig i particularIt meas that there is ot path that there are oly stretchsof pth ad that aother bit of path ca cross the oe o whichoe ds oeslf he poem that Heidegger gives us to read

after Wg is Wik , which we traslate poorly as Sigs' orHits but how else ca we traslate the word Wik Oth Way to Laua<{, Heidegger distiguishes betwee Wikad Gbrd , hits ad gestures ad Zich ad hr, sigsad ciphers. he sig Zi is supposed to belog to themetaphysics that the hit Wik eceeds. a we otice hitsother tha i passig? Hits eed the widest sphere i which toswig Heidegger otes A certai idetermiacy is essetialto the Wik. s the gestur to which our attetio is draw adwhich distracts us really a JVik? he Wik has o presece it

is always part of past or of a future which caot be (re)preseted A Wik seems to be iteded for us. Our destiy addetermiatio are tied to th Wik because it remids us thatwe share the place we ihabit that is we share laguage. ootice a Wik is to eperiece alterity Heidegger would say toeperiece the divie. For to be divie meas to sigal iGttr wik I id i id (he gods sigal by virtue of theirxitc

, 7 The JVik is the origi of laguage of he word it

is accordig to the epressio used i 01 th Wa to La{ua,its essetial or dameta trait dzug d Wort. s't

eperiecig the alterity of laguage amig? st amig oticig a Wik which is lost to ideticatio ad kowledgead without which there would be o laguage?

o ame is to uveil to ucoceal. It is a showig whichallows somethig to be eperieced. However if such ashowi g mus t distace i tself from the p roimity of what is tobe said the the sayig of the distat beig a sayigfromafar becoes a callig. o the etet that that which is to becalled is too close it must be kept at a distace it must be kept

as somethig distat it ust remai obscure uder its veryame. The ame ust veil it . Namig is a whichucoceals but as such it is also a call which

01 h Ph ou'ds Sd Nam 33

h ame sigals it calls ad shows somethig somthigwhat must be amed called what the am calls by disclosig ad cocealig it what i the ame as ame is disclosedad cocealed what sigals calls the am as if the amewere callig itself but without closig i o itsel I amigthe am keeps the W, it watches itslf it is coceredwith itself this elatio to itslf this relatio of laguage to

laguage is a relatio of distacig of disclosure whichcoceals ad of cocelmet which discloses The ¥ik, thefudametal characteistic of laguage of the word isothig certaily ot a attribute or a fuctio of laguageof the ame. t is eually ot a Lwort. Perhaps the Wikis just a o peig which does ot allow itslf to b graspd assuch perhaps it is othig but the alterity of laguage. tsrelatio to itself which we eperiece whe we ae is avertiious whirl. It is thus i periecig the ame theame yet to come the shard ad divided ame that we d

ourselves o a path which is goi by itsel Wg ghdr. Ad what if the poem the Gdicht were othig othertha a vertigious whirl a Wir? ould Heideggr ot havewritte a poem this pom? (We do ot kw that the poemis a whirl we must peric the pom eter ito its movemet we must begi to walk; the rst thig will be to startgoig .

The poem is no long er a smooth text, possessing a straight' maning , quite the contrary this linguis tic congurat ion is

in itse lf a whirl which carries us along so mewhere And no tprog ressivly for it tear s us awa y with hard brusquenesso m the very beinning r . . . 1 Bt whre does th is whirlcarry us? o th word of which the pom consti tutes the lin-g uistic cong uration (Sprah,{�e) . What is this word? Whospeaks to whom with whom, and about what? We arecarried into a dialogue (Geprch which brings word toword, language to languag e not as something arbitrary andanecdotal bu t as the miss ion entrusted to the young girl, to Germania: '0 , thou , dauhter of the sacred land! Name . . . "

more precisely , it is a qustion of nam ing and saying.70

s the Wik erma does it poit towards ermay towards



h G[ 4 aa

Germae he ik the ddess which gives us lngugewhch kes us spek nd ne s (t) the ve ogn ofhsto o f ll hstoicl issos he dlogue (which s lsoslence Sch] does not be whee hstoicl pogess sled udew the dvet of the dlogue is the begnning of histo. ut fo Hedegge it s the en people whost ssue Sdug Bt rag histo b ssung

its lnguge.O the pth towds sed es th expeence of the

ne s the expeience of o Gbrde is lws theexpei ence of deto u nd etun of the pst nd the futueof eo nd pois hee s no etun without detou nd it is question of etun when Wnk o Gbrd hint o gestue ke teselves notced; fo howcould we notce the if we do ot ecogse the (we ecogse the wthout ecognising the)? Hedegge keeps onesentence to s the end fo the onent of wkening Wht

we sid bout the sleeping of eing ens to s tht being asuch hs not et wkened so tht t looks upon us fo out ofits wkened essence. 7

Translating the thing

n his ess he Rtrat of Mtho Jcqus Deid spks of pefonce o pfotiv of witng b whi ch Hedegge nes clls ufr (incso) wht he decdes o decs tocll r wht he llows to co to be clled ur3 o wht ccodng to h s clled d clls itself u r ' eidsketches the tnslto of this wod followng t

h tcto of

ull pefong gestue b . At stke is Heidgges tenchnt decisio to cll wht ws in cetin

w still uned o unkow ud its e hs decsoDeid cls s led in tself icisi on it cn ol bned e tsel nd be icised i its ow witng H ddshee is gestu hee o the estue is he whichcnnot be descibed s the gestue of poducg ologs o etwtng Wht bout the decsion eid clls technt in ths dicult pssge deln with denointion ndtnsltion? Wht bout the pefotve of wting if wht isstill unned s not ell uned but ol unknownunde its ne tht s to s if the pefonc ol sttes

this is the nane of the thing? Wht bout dnontionf it s tnsltion in loose sense of the te f t onl kscle wht is ld bvous in ct if ththing cnnot et ppe? Wht bout tnslton if it is kindof denointon whe thee is ot t l nguge wod o e to tnslte?

t s pecsel when developng hs thoughts bout ng thtenjin gves soe hints bout the elevnce of tnslting.Fo hi it s necess to oot the concept of tnslton i th

deepest le o f lngug e. heefoe thinking tnsltonsges thnkng the n snce denontion is the soce oflnguge it is lnguge s the oigin of hunn lnguge. Fo



36 T G 4 aage

the ery begg there trlto Oe ot thk trlto fter the ft oe ot dd the oept of trltoto lgut theory f t were merely eodry oeptIt eery to foud the oept of trlto t the deepetleel of lgu t theory for t muh to o frrehg dpowerful to be treted y wy fterthought hhppeed oolly

here would be o lguge d thu

o org wthout trlto To thk trlto we mutthk trlto deomto d deoto trlto I ej m tex t queto of tk Aujgae)whh od g to m m mut me thg He beomewht he he tt h humty d ommute h prtul eee through mg the thg reted by od utdeomto deped o how thg mute themeleto m rther the me whh m ge to the thg Sae)deped o how t ommute telf to hm

he gft ofgg e h bee ge to howeer m ot

ge e he h o gft f othg ommute f he doeot reee the g of udertdg the lguge of thghe gft of lgu ge Ga der Sprae) the gft of udertdg th other lg uge Se the gft of lguge thegft of deomto e the gft tk e wht geto m ot ge d e the tk of gg me eprble fro thg lettgthemelebeudertood orggtheeletobeudertood the m who me lwy m who repod A uh he repoble mM ume the repoblty of the tk whh od h gehm whe he repod to wht he her d whe he reeewht he udertd gft he repoble m ume hfreedo oe oe of tk wthout oeg offreedom? o ge m mut he lredy reeed gftwhh doe ot me to y tht he otet hmelf wthgg bk th gft for wht meg be ge to thehum tk f deomto othg more th the gg bk or the repproprto of the gft? Mybe t etbletht od repproprte the gft to hmelf eh tm e tht mge me to thg Mybe t epble tht pproprte h eee through returg the gft but for the gft tobe gft thoe who ge mut ot kow wht they re gg or dog hey mut expoe themele gg h expo

Traig e i 7

ure ot oppoed to m tk o the otrry f the gft ddot ole expoure m would he o tk he would olyhe tehl kowledge

Reeg the gft oeg the mele empjangen, otwe), mg the thg oepto Emni) d potety te themele together hum lguge ejlm tht there word to degte th double truture of

deomto the orgry d orgl truture of lgugeFor oepto Empjgn) d potety together whhre foud th uque uo oly the lgut relmlguge h t ow word

h word the word trlto ot oly the rght word the word tht ut the thg d the oe tht we hooe from mogt ll other wordbeue t trlte wht the thg ommute better ththe other rlto the me tht lguge h lwyhd to ll tel he gft of lguge the gft of trltoof the word trlto he tk of the tk of the

trltor ejm ue the expreo Empjngni de Namenloen im Namen (the oepto of the mele the me)t the momet whe he derbe the gulr lo betweeEmgni d Soaei h expreo be udertood two wy he mele (ej doe ot y daNamenloe bu t da Ubeae the umed the thg hbee med by od) ome wy teror to the eHoweer t doe ot preede t It pe through the me tobe wht t he me welome egeder llow thtwhh h o me to pper The me the etrywy forthe thg d t te M mut me wht mele 2Se t llow the mele to pper the me ot be e wthout beg wht t ot wht doe ot pperwthout t he me mut ere tel Tht why deomto lwy oermg Wht oermg f t ot theerg of the me? o me to experee wht meled th experee ordg to ejm lled trlto

Thg he o me they re mele namenlo, but there lguge of thg A thg tht mute thg theypek to m Hum lguge the trlto of thelguge of thg d to trlte th lguge m mutme Deomto mple relto of ty betwee the



38 Th G! gag

thng nd the nme n nity between two lnguges. tbeomes possble n even neessry beuse lnguge is not theother of the thing If the mutsm of the thing were bsolute, fit were o t the sign or the m nifsttion of nothe r nguge ngl lnguge, the queston of trnslto would never rseAs soon s we re delng wth nother lnguge, we redelng wth demnd for trnslton. hs demnd s ll th

more urgent sne the lngug o f thngs nnot b omprdwith just ny lngug mong st th humn lnguge s Withregrd to the lnguge of nmes, humn lnguges re m edervtions, devitons or degrdtions Th nme reeives ththng We re remided of the pssge n The Metphyss ofYouth where enjm ompres the nme wth jug broughttowrds me nng to reeve t. The ln guge of nmes s s uperior to the lnguge it trsltes Howver, the nne tht trnsltes the thng n never trnslte nothe nm. snt the fttht t is mposs be to trnslt nme , me in the snse of

proper, sngulr, uque nme the sgn of the rst trnsltotht seems to ommnd ll trnsltions? Doesnt t show thederene between the nme nd wht s nmeless nd demnds trnslton? In he sk of the rnsltor, enjmin limstht trnslton whh bsorbs the otent of the orginl ndbers virtully no tre of its menin g thus e stblshng perfet hrmony between lguges, remins untrnsltbleWe understnd now why he is so insstent on the ft tht wennot think trnsltion wthout thinking lnguge tself, itsbeng, its essene rnsltion must be trnslton of the other

of lngug e whh is other, beuse there is mo r thn onlnguge to dentfy nmng lnuge wth lnguge s suh isto rob lnguisti theory of ts deepest insghts 8 3

he lnguge of thngs nd the lnguge of nmes refer todivine lnguge, the lngust beng of od For od retedthngs; the retive word n them s the germ of the ognisng nme od ssures the objetivty of the originl trnston.Wht does ths objetivity onsst o The nme does notontent tsel f wth reeivng the thng nd givn g t voe tonme is to dd knowledge (Erktnis to wht is wthout

knowledge, does not know tself, does not know the otherThrough the nme the thng beomes somethng reognsednd known; trnslton nnot do other thn mke the

Translatn th thng 39

unknown knowble One mght thnk tht trnsltion dds foregn element to lnguge; in relty, t does nothng of thesort trnslton loses the rle tht the gift of lnguge opensby dissoiting nme nd thing. It s knowledge tht reognses the thing, llows the thng to refer to tself through thenme. The nme s the selfreferene of the thing n the sphereof knowledge. The thing trnsltes itself nto nme n order to

pper s wht t s If the pssge from the lnguge of thingsinto the lnguge of nmes were brred, if no knowledge werepossible, the trnsltor would hve no tsk He would beonfronted with problem (Aufgab whih hs no solution.We ouldnt even sy tht his Aufgab is n Aufgbn n thesense of neessry bndonng - Pul de Mn drws our ttention to ths mbiguity n hs pper on Th Task f th Translatr8 he lng uge of things nd the lnguge of nmes bel ong to divine lngug e, to the lngug e of dentty n od n mend word knowledge nd reton re dentl. The lnguge

of thngs s the lnguge of the word wthout nme; inversely,the lnguge of nmes s the lnguge of the nme wthoutword

Wht s thng? enjmin speks of mgil ommunityof things whh revels tself to ntuito (Anshauung nd sreognised by the nme. ould we sy, modfyng nts lne,tht ntuiton wthout denomntion would be blind? he ideof mgl ommunty seems very lose to tht of ntureor osmos determned by set of orrespondenes; we ndthis ide in enjmn, notbly n the texts on the mmt faulty

nd n the nlyses tht del wth udelre f the thing islredy ught up n network of orrespondenes we neverexperene thing without experienng nother thng, someh d d t g e se 0 orrespon enes ntur orrespon enes -

rete ommunty ommunity wthout nme, wthoutknowledge, wthout voe It n be nmed beuse ertnlnguge is proper to t, beuse it s essentl for the thng toommunte its sprtul ontent to mn here is no eventor thing n either nmte or nnmte nture tht does not nsome wy prtke of lnguge, for t s n the nture of ll to

ommunte their spirtul ontent6 Thinkng the thng

whih is supposed to hve spiritual ntnt on the bss oflnguge nd thus on the bss of trnslton mens thinkng





42 The G it of Lmguage

languages are those of media that ar e distinguished as it we re bytheir density, that is, gradually; and this with regard to thedensity both of the communicating and of the communicable

f . ,9 3 haspects 0 commUnatOn. angua ges ave dierentcharacteristc densities. This density depends on the one hand onwhat communicates or gives something to understand to

someone, and on the other on what has been communicatedThe thing communicates without knowing what it communicates; hearing the thing is to hear a language without name andwithout voice Conversely, hearing the man who names is tohear the language of names and know the thing The name isthe essence of language there is no language more dense,intense and extensive than the language of names The languageof nanes is the trans lation of al l other languages. Each time it isnamed, the name calls It invokes and evokes language becauseit is its name To name the name is to call upon man to achieve

translation and allow the name to appear as das nnerste Wesender Sprache selbst. The proclamation and exclamation of thename indicate translation is nearing its end:

The name, however, is not only the last utterance (Ausruj oflanguage but also the true call (Anr of it Thus in thename ap pears the essential law of language, according towhich to express (aussprechen) oneself and to address (anspre-chen) everything else amounts to the same L anguage andin it a spiritual essence - only expresses (aussprechen) itself

purely where it speaks in [the] name, that is, in its universalnaming. So in the name culminate both the intensive totalityof language, a s the absolutely communicable spiritual essence,and the extensive totality of language, as the universalycommunicating (naming) essence By virtue of its communicating nature, its universality, language is incomplete wherethe spiritual essence that speaks from it (a us hr sprcht) is notin its whole structure linguistic, that is, communicable Man

�loe �as alangua3f that s complete both n ts unversalty and

Its tensveness

Is the dierence between languages the same as the dierencebetween language and spirit? Benjanin does not seem veryclear on this point he claims that only man's spiritual essence

Translating the thng 43

can give itself to be understood without remainder, absolutely;he then says that the spiritual essence and the linguistic essenceof things are in harmony. Saying that the linguistic essence of athing is spiritual only in so far as its spirit gives itself to beunderstood would be to advance a tautological argument. Thepiritual essenc is nothing other than the linguistic essencehowever, there is a dierence between the spiritual essence andthe langu age of the thing a dierence or a distinc tion which isthe most originary' of all dierences and distinctions, at onceimperceptible and decisive. If the spiritual essence is communicability itself, it may designate nothing, nothing we can identify;it designates what makes communicability what it is an d makesit communicate its elf as comunicability; it designates theincommunicable and untranslatable at the heart of communicability, of language, of the name. The incommunicable is notthe negation of communicability, it does not oppose itself tolanguage, it is not in conict with communication and conmunicability ( the conict between the expressed and expressible onone hand and the inexpressible and unexpressed on the other'),it is nt th npt Benjai jts Th inconmunicabledoes not hide any content, it has no meaning it s communicability.

But can we conceive of a language without content, alanguage that has only its own essence as content, communicability' How can we experience a language which gives itselfto itself Must we not, to start with, think the dierencebetween languages as a dierence inscribed in content In hiswritings on reseblance and the mimetic faculty', Benjaminspeaks of the semiotic' The seiotic' designates the meaning'of the thing, what it means t o say to refer to the se miotic' is torefer to language as an intermediate term in communication.But if we stick to the logic of the text on language in general,we must dene the semiotic' as the expression of a densitywhich can never correspond to the density of the language ofnames Meaning' in the sense of the semiotic' is the dierencewhich inscribes itself in meaning' in the sense of the selfsuciency of language. For the language of names, the semiotic'

becomes pure communicability. Inversely, in the postAdamic'languages, that is to say, those which came about after the Fall,in the languages which carry the scar of the injury to the name



44 G o gg

nd o h on h y l dny h mo unmn y om o mmunb ly om h n o nu om n h mnn o mn o ommunon A h ndndn mnn o ommunon hmo nb om h mn h mm nonn on o lnu o noh nu Ion of oondn bn n hh mb

h oh nd h o ommun mi ndmimi onu h onomy o on lnu oondn ommunon o o non hh h m ommuny o hn dnomnon h non hh nom h onmuny o nbl oondn no ommuny o h o nonnboondn n oh od h nlon hh ool n dnomnon mm nomonho o h onon o h ommunby - o h h mm no n n h mo

h h h m hh bun h moh h mm uly n nu n k mmn only houh knd o b h b hmo mn 9 h momn h od o nubom o nm od h nu nd hounon od h do nohn bu nd nukn dd o n od h o nm h mn o mhn mmoy odn oH) h momn non o h nm o hohouh nu bom nmd llumn

k h on ho k onn h bndn I bomonb nu mbn nohn bu h odn o njmn n m hh nu hoybu ho h h om o om h odmon h m h bo ou y nd unb o hod nu n h m y hm uddnly nd undby odd h mm h n o omunby h do h on hoyb h hoy nohn mo hn by nobldny o nu houh h dny by mon

houh hoy h xn nu nd h nmh do hnkn o h nm h on o nu l

u bou non I u h o non h o

Tranlaing h in

b nld h wod o nm o noh lnu bomonhn h do no y h nm hh unknonund nm A nlon n onn f h nn h h ldy bn nmd o nld nlnn nd n nnn mk l mk ommunbySo n h oAdn lnu h of nn wy hh mk of nhn don; njmn would o n

onn If h n w n bo nn dnomnon ould b nohn mo hn ommd oon oud n xn h nm On h oh hndnmn nno b n o bou nd unlmd onny;dnomnon n b no mo hn omnobd o lnlfdd fo f h nm n w ony nm nohn mo hn n by n ho ould xn h nm Bnjmn db h ondoyuu of dnomnon hh lo h o nlon ofh archranlain hh nold n l nlon - hn

h mk h dn dnonnon only n onof h dny o h od nd h onn nm nGod no h o oluon o h k h God xlyn o nn hml h of nn hn 6 n ofh y on lnu Bnjmn quo om whh k o dn n God n o h nl o h h loh mn o h nm h f h n(Bild d Zichn) njmn y nl n n lmoublm w h lnu omun of mu on hd ' di n nu h nul of h

hn o h u bu h xn of ommunbly y nu on Bu o h n only nmn o mn h xn of h nm nlonHd mnd h udn o h lu n Wa h3Dkn? h n od o nl w u y non o hyn o od Suh n lai (br) ralon( Un). h ra on ( U) bl onl wno ou no h k om h od And hnoon ud only by l (prun) h l of l nl on hh h h wod . o l

u n h d H Hd n Wn odd h od mo hn ju h wodn(Wrlau) odd h n o hn ju h n





4H Th CUt 4 Lanappaitio ad deiatio. t i the dieio of th call ofthe ae Fo calli alwa aout to howi ad howialwa aout to callig to igalli. ai talati ithu th chace of a gtue of a i of th Wik of aact of a deciio of th pg

Ovr-naing and lanhol

ogettig alwa ivlv th t it ivolve th poiilit of dtio

(W B ) a t a

Schllig O um Fdom a elacholic voice evoethe elacholic codtio which i at the oigi of lif

od too th would b a eth o a if h di tae th coditio hi ow ad uit it to hi a o ada ablute peoalit. Ma ve gai otol ove thcoditi ev though i evil h tive to do o it i olload to hi i ddt of hi h h adelood ca ve b aied to coplt actualit Thi ith ade whih adh to all it li ad iauch athe i ve i od hilf a coditio at lat elativlid pdt the i i hi too a ou f ad whichhowv ve attai actualit but athe ev fo thtal jo of ovcoig 1 the veil f ade which ipead ov all atu th dep uappeaale elachol fall lif.

lac of eecti th peice of vil ad the uealiableatue of pue actualit a the caue of th melacholic chaact of a atu ad vthig livig bolute eectioectio a appopiatio o the coditio (Bg) doe otow elachol o veil paate goud fo itece Thegoud doe ot ect itlf a a veil We ca alo talate thii te of a dialctic btwe atue ad piit MelacholSwrmu) itelf howv i the hitoical piit i it atualdepth Adoo wit of iegaad. he ciio o



round d exstene as o the eapopato of the cod-ton the separato whh ets the sprt sink dey to t ownnatre demnds the accompshment o tua hstoy. o theobem o reation how doe oe aopat oe owncondton � wod not ase meanchoy \ee not whatHedegg cals a toe o a undameta toe (Cr1dstim-J , the ouce o the amt of the gf of th ca.

Hedger quotes chg sentnce about the manchoy of ceatue and adds: 'Ths s why a creators ceate ope thpoets thnkes ad nds of the tat a anchoy

" d ' A I , 1 ( )7 A . ] . t accor g to stot e. s 1 IS ctures on t

udamental concepts f metaphyic, Heideger draws o Aris-tot e at the moment when he ame thoe who ar acted bymelancholy ut there is nthng urrii in the f act hat forHeidegger th poet the thinker and the founder of th tat arthe u1 ti mate melancholi. By opposn cratures' meanchoyto a ades which ever become actual, by oppoing mean-

choly to the crator pure act, Sching eem to r ivilge mancholic man a if man wre more macholic than atur:conf rontd with the problm of cration, with his condi tionman as through evil It is uciet to accept this intrprta-tio meancholy rvea itsf in creation, in th act of a nitecreator to attribut mlacholy to Dasrin : for Daen is th ocus of cratio. idggr xais his views of cration inthe lI troduio1 o Meaphy ics :

Th e lis is the htoca p ae , the there i whch t �whch whch htoy happens o ths pac andn o hstoy bong th god the tmps th pst thesta th game the ot the thnk the u th counc o edes the asmby o pop th ay and theet ths dos not t bong to th poli, dos otecom potca by tng nto a aton wth a statsmanand a gna and the bunes of th tat o t s potcai.e. at th ste of hstoy odd th b fo apoet alo but the ay poet st a/oe but thnay pts u a/one but thn ay us. Be thsmans a oent en to u powe to bco pmnent

n hstoca bng as cato a mn of acton Pnntn the hstoca pace thy become at th sa t apo

thot city and bc on, str len and canny J hcilih) \vitht iss amd th ns as a whlewthout statt and mt witht structre ad odecse they v a cao must t crte aths

X

hus meanchoy s et he smply potc nor purey apotcal It lred marks a gap in relation to what ha bee reatedr1 ;ns attached to wht it dtaches s r01 As sch onsttutes the i1Iug whch accopanies d ddeact on prayses and reares raton Bt wht s the tak othe fonders o hstoy? I oudato taom the eatoh et\ee the eop e and ng and f the te of angagdepends n this rtionshp, stnt we nd the name of thaac whch des a htoy S1t the otca act teondn act a act denomnaton It a meachoy dete-mnd on the grounds o reation o ceaton as selara-

ton necessar y raction whh presupposes the ak o lossof a nme, a eacto shaed by the mobty of nami adthe dee to ame Doet th exeee of mea nhoyeman taed the hbs that Bamn denes as theattemt to e oeef fom i el Geal . and

h I ] I ] ! W c g S e �s Gogo Agamben show ong th n o Feuds aay

meanchoy can aso be the phantamatc capacty to mae I F In 0 ect w St apopatn appa a ost . at -

fulness to the obect hee b tef a w to eaopato whch coespond to the hub of ceaton By maknga dstne ro what meanchoy mt the w to eapprori e whie cea a path fo t It bd man to thecotempato o h powens but by muatg os taccomhes what ceaton coud ot At th same tmehowe we mut be awae o anothe meachoy the apoae te exoed to the w to eappoatobecos meachoc What about th meachoy Maybe t sa meanchoc uppemet whch aect the ogc of caton oeappopa ton

Readng the pasage on meachoy n enamns esay on

anguag a the anuage o na w e that he stuatsmeachoy n atue the wod of thn. It not man wo



Th CUt 4 aa

i ahic which a h that a i ahoi yto th tt that thi of achoi atur of thih whih is ot a rut f th icult of crati ispart f his w y tht jai i at withprfri a ip ivrio hat wou b tru if hca r ap that aturs lacho i du to thircti f a wrk or to ars iabiity to ae itsuti S1!). At rst jai to b advacig th i f art ut it i y a proviioa arguetFr h taphical truth that ip itf ha a ouba

It i a taphica truth that a tur woud bei toa t i it wr dwd with a uag (Thuh todow wih aua i r th t ak abe to pak)This propitio has a doube eai It eas rst hwud at aua itf Speeches this is the great

srrw f atur (a fr th ak of hr redeptio the ifa aua f ma t o a is upposed of the pot -

1 1ar ature

v il rh t hyl trth How caar th thi b dwd wth aguag How houd theratiship btw achoy ague be coceived t rt ak a itctio btw eachoic utish " ' h " h b l d : t

- 1 t ut \V w a y t p a s 0 ature ad thi othr uti which i th sig of a crtai beatitude

Slkt) a jyus if For auag itsf does ot reiwhat it i hi ditictio which divid uti i ecessarybecau th aua f a which tra ate the laguage ofthi oe the biity to e t trate by ig itbcoes th agug of arbitrary i Ma ow betitudewher his if is i accordce with th pure iguistic spirit( Spracgst) is eparatd by a dirce of dgre froth beatitud of ute ad ot eachoic ature ut oegree of dirc c b foud i ut i t is divied by aruptur o etabish a degree of irec w ust presuppoe

th iac cotitutd by a t of reatios but the pssgfro o aguag to other th fa destroys a ieceMuti i ot idetica with achoy It y ot be

Or-amg ad meaoy 5

echoic he oss of the guage of thig the ipossibiity o f tratig the thig i pies oss o f its eeti adorigiry utis Mutis is t oc the deciive trit of thegug of thig of th thig which receive the ae correspodig to it ad the ct of choy ecause he isute ature ours et the ivrio of thi propositio edve further ito the essece of ature the sdess of tureake her ute 1 3 e hear th et of ture but thia t is ot the resut of trsforatio of its ut isMuti doest ed to trsfor itef ito aguge for us tohar it ih of a t N othi precedes achoy Meachoic uti i a et ad the aet is the wordes wordof utis Mutis itsef speaks of the des of the thig byaetig h thig becoes cofused with achoicutis which speaks before speakig eve whe there is oa rustig of pt i it thr i away a ae t 4 heuti p eak ad touche upo the ii t of aguag e whe it

couicate itsef but it is othig ore th thi breoticeabe cotact the soud produced by the vibrtio of stig - it is a eect of he ade of the thig which ha ostits origiry utis which i o oger ute or is ore thute As et utis revea a aectivity he et isthe ot udieretiated ipotet xprio of guge itcotai carcy ore tha its euous breth t the iit ofuge we caot decide whether we edowed the thig with guge or whether the thig itsef touched upo it

oudt this ogic of eachoy be the oe which deter

is the uti of sacred joy of betitue eji giveso cue which wou aow this hypothesi to be coredut othig prevts us fro thikig that oeachoicuti i eect of cre oy d hppiess ppies otrikes us dub Adoro h show that the rexivity ihrti aguage abado happies to it ow pst

o happiss the ae appi to truth: oe does ot hveit but i i it Ideed hppiess is othig other th beig co paed a fteriage of the origi hter wi thi

the other ut for this reo ooe who i happ cakw that h is so o ee hppies he woud hve to pout of it to be s if aready b or H e who ys he is hppy



4 h Gi o agag

, nd n nkn hn, n nt t. H n kth h y hy h ny ltn nun t hn ttud n hh l t nmbd · ty.

Hn , by dntn tht hh h yt t b bn bthnd nu tth H n bndn t t nubu t ntly n bndnmnt t bndn t ttht hh bndn t t bm mmy y n tn nu, hn mn tthd t th t. RdnAdn lm, ud y tht lnu th n hn, t bndnmnt nd t mmy Ony nu ndn th thn t hn th d nt mn,h, tht th ttmnt hy mut b tdn nd n n nu t tt t n ttmnt.Lnu th ntn hn n tm b thut hn nt t dny th mk t n, thtm l , nu Suh thun mnt t nntn Lnu th n t hndd t t th th thuh th th ntnh th nt mu Rn h tht ntn nd th th nnt b mud nt h thntn h n bjt, th th d nt bm ty(genum) th n h n. ut ntnbd ntn th th, h n h b ddd hmmy ntn dmnd tht nttn bndnd Oth t n dn bmn ntn nd

thby kn hn. n hn nd tuthn h undn th nut n ht nmm nd unttb ht mmml but unttb nd unttb bu t mmm h mm nd th unttb nnun tm nth d n th m thy und nu,th n thy mn ht thuh th t. Adn tAdn, ntn tht hh mk u t t nu, th n th dnty (rde) hn. Adn yl t Hd h n h k n Gelaen Hd

ut tht ntn th ntn thu ht - ht nb n nn n (da dle en e) ut th nntn btn ntn nd hn, th

Oer-amn and melanholy

nntn dtmn th dnty hn nt bt ud t tht njmn, hn h k thbttud ntu, qut n hh nm tn dnty,th nbty n Fdh h Adn y butth nm tht h t h h nmd thm, And by th nbty (del) th hh thy ld y m m h d h " ] 8 h b t t mn n t a na n t t n ty n

qutn h th dnty hh ntn bt un thn h kn h knn hn nd jy Ctnyntu hh h bn nmd mn mut but t nnmt bu th ntn hh t bt th tt t nbty un t mk n n t th t hnu m nl ntu, t t hn nd tuth,nt th tm tht hn nd tuth.

Ntu nmd d by t n nm, jyu. ut thjy nt tht ntmntn by t jyu ntutht mn, nt ntu btyd by n th ntu tht mnn by nn th n nm yu ntu lnh ntu. h lm nmtb th njs aumnt H d n mmnt tht utnt n ntdtn th t A httn bm ntab n th tt, njmn mld t l tdnt d, d hh n t dtn utmnt t ntu munn n nunn adn (Trauer)th th dt nlntn t hn (praclogke).ut ndn mthn th lnu nuh m thnnbln mthn t k, n h, n ln kn,

nnty thn nbty dnntn t munat ny tht hh h t h n b ndd thnu th lnnt d nt t n nbty t dnntn hh ld t th blty mmuntn.It t dnmntn h t hh m un l tl thuhy knn by th unknb b nm d n hnth n h nm dlk nd bul - h yn n ntmtn munu dn (Trauer) ut hh m hn th nm d d nt tm thbd, d lnu nm, but m th hundd

nu mn n hh th nn h ldy thd, ythh, dn t Gd nunmnt, h knd thn h - hh l ut tht th tn

h G� O i d l h l



h G� { aa,

bn nm nd knod is symmi bu hih knold - hs h hisi o l ss ss om onl o noh ihou noiin Bnjin bgins by sying h h mlnholy o nu - o h nmd hin - is usdby h o n o h unknob - God gnissh h s omlly: hins h no o nx in God. h nm isl in is ds ssn in is

diin ssn ldy onins mnhly I is s i nhoy oiiny. Bnjmin sms o subsib o uivs oosiion: h hih is n hih is ld byis o nm is mnholi sin h nm is lys ndihou xion kind idniion. u by ddin bkd omn o his oosiion hih limis is hh simultaously sius i hih mus b disiuishd om oh vs. Sying h suh oosiion isvlid o ll nus n h nu o ns is o iiiy dny is vidiy o diin nu n s susiin

iniby bins o dis his nion h snn hinsh no o nm x in o ks on omydin mnin. W us so k hid ision inoun In h lnug o biy sigs h nu i h nm oms o n nd h n is dy ihd i hsbom xn o is his iil nu ns oommuni somhin hih is sh In sinousid h u lngug o nms n ks lnu mns h is knold inoi o him) nd h

( ) o lso on ny cr n

bo l ni lnug hih is suosd o us mnhoy I is h oiin o h muliiiy nd onusion onus h is in h ion o hun ngus o ho hins somhin h n b dsibd s ninonmin s h ds inuisi son o ll lnhoynd (o h oin o i o hins) o l nunss.

And s o Bnj in os om on x o h oh. O n hon hnd nu is nhoi o h d h i is onmd nd so no on hs o n on h oh hndhis onmin is dy dmind by h o nm bydnominion. Fo his si nin is ovning.A din hih is no din o d insibs is inh unisliy o h u nd nbs us o in h ms I

O-namin} and mlanholy 7

ll nnin is onmin ll onmin is nmin. Onmin mus k h o nm hih is no dyindbd o hih hs sd is oun ohis h ouldb no nmin. h hi ns onmin i lmns hnm ihou lnin. A n n b im li o ion i dos no h Bu i ovnmin is n nonn is in h nm is nih no im

nih in n indqu . h nu o nms nsls nd ds no nsl h nu o hins Bnjminuss h nin o h ul o sy. h u sys hissyin n k h om o hsiion: n us Bnjmi no bin ioous nouh. Bu h sm syin myso sho us h h o oo o hink noh iou hisi ou dos no su is ins xd nliy isns is s h iou o ul hih n only onsiuis s ul i i nnds is on din dinhih ss uion. Wh his u dsins is h ossibi

iy nd h nssiy o doubl inion o mnhoy oh ss om on mnhoy o noh. I onminis nohin mo hn ib idn i i dos no unnin in n nu n b mlnhoi only bus o ilu. n hs ild nu. En i minin h houdn h don his nd h h nu o nmsdy ils divin nu Bnjmin dos no xud hisid - oninu o hink o mlnhoy s ion o mn'sondiion . N u is nnholi bus mn is unb o oi his on ondiion. dos nohin mo hn mns

mlnhoy i sks i nns und h nhoi on ho is unb o iv i is o nn. 2 On h ohhnd i onnin is univsl i i uls nmin hmnhoy o nu is no lon subj o h ondiion on I sus o h vy suu o h nm nd is nodivd on lk n i ion o ilu - s i dn k on h bsis o n ssn ihou lk Nminmo hn i nms h nm no only n ois hi nms i is nv bl o ssu is on idniy. I is xssio ssnil sons i mus b xssi so h i n nm h

hin. I is hus mninss o sy h his xss is quin o k o h k o niud.h inoib is in his s h ssn o oiion.

58 Th Gf f Over aig ad elaoly 59



58 Th Gf f agg

It not in th t ht ditnuih nit fo n nntoton ut ht ino ht nily dy foottn nd in tht y unfottl hn nu itlf o th it ng n th hih d oon it h nnhoy of th thnk u thnk out th ft of nu nug i

undtnd no th cxty f th h to ndow

th nu ht lnu n i th thn f itnt th onin nhnt to nn njin tht ndon othn th nu i uh o thnkn t of h it kn t of tnttin t tul n nu tl unitnjn l th tnion tnltion So i ndoinith nu tnltn No. h jut n tht ndown th nu i not n th t onnd th tnltinth tu n ttiutd to th thn ith nn t If tntion ndo th oth th lnu ndoin ith

nu do not nily qu tnltn th nu ofth oth y uin lnu to lnt y onn lnttf th thin ti lnu y until only t ot udnty fo nn h thn n oth hil nfo lnu it ltty not th oth of lnu Ho n tnt nt h thin ho ht do not oitlf to n th noil Ho ut notfot tht th thn h t on nu nd tht it ituln nift tf in t ounity It nu d th lnu of n It t nd fu tnltionuti th uti tht i th ud ound of th lntthu th thn t th y ht of lnu of nth thn i th onin hh t lnt It tf to th no o th inounlht ho itlf ithout hoin tf n nhly ut thnoil not t ll t k th od thtontitut th nu of ntu Fo thi on t htt thunity of th nuti o nt ho on t

h lnu of n ntty th du n hih t tul n ountd h unntutd o of th

ounton un thouh th ho o f ntu fo thot fo of xtn to n nd fo n to God

Over-aig ad elaoly 59

n ount hf to God thouh t n hihh to ntu nd (n o n) to h on kind tontu h n odn to th ounton thth fo h fo th ho of ntu too i udth n unokn nu th du of th t od of God hh d in n th oning n nd n th judnnt undd o

hin h nu of ntu o l to t od eee Losug) tht h nty to th nxt nh on lnu ut th nnn of th od thnty nu t A hh lnu tntonof tho o unt n ultt lty th od of Godunfod hh th unty of th liguisti ont

h thn hi nt do not tun nto n oy ftunn into n oy n n ntd ith nntht i to y n xod to ht o fo outid ndin und th lnhoi of th oth nn

hih n xto nd n ht ho in dnoy in tudy of th on of Gnn ti d

If th ot o o und th of nhoy f nhoy u f to o out of it nd tn dd ut tny u thn t xod to thot t unondtony n h o ht to y t no qut n of ntn ny nn o nn of t on uh nin t h t qu fonth oit H t thin t nd tnd nd t not

n yhool ut n n ontoloi n In hi hndth ojt o othn dnt thouh t h kof othn di nt nd fo h it o ky to th of hddn knold nd h it th nof th h ht dtin th ht of oy fon of tn It nd t i not of knod ut t not uy od unt to xd h t on nd th tin xd

d 3 n xt n

h o tnfotion t th tnfoton of th

nu of n nto fnt lnu h n th ntldn tn th nholy of ntu nd of n o

0 Or-naming and mlanholy 61



0

l th dn o ntur mnhol pruppo dnition omnhol whih nphi th ritn thi dn or tollgori intntion Th thing whih lmnt do not bomn llgor bu th lmnt do not llow itl to brdud to it rprnttion or hnti pproprition. Amnt th thing do not tnd in th tulit of th li omning but qull it do not lnd it to xtion btr

tion or rition. h lmnt i nithr mboi nor lgoril it prrv th thing both ron th idlition oprtd bth mbo nd from th mortition whih it mut ur tobo m n obt o knowldg nd ritiin Cr itiim mnth mortition of th work.' In hi nli o gorPu d Mn tr th ruptur tht oppo llgor to mtphor. Thi ruptur dtrmin th mning of lgor mtphor i th rult o nthi o th litr nd gurtivmning rrid out b th powr o rmbln whil nllgor uggt gurtiv mning whih mrk n boutditn rom n litr mning. Allgoril ubtitutiondtro ll rmbn l orrpondn Bnminddu th ripturl hrtr propr to llgor fron thidtrution vn i in tr txt h oniv o writing whih onntrt nd mb th powr o rmblnwithin itlf th mimti pow o lngug hr h do nothitt to ign writing to dth Writing dpri mini ol it powr. o rom th mont tht ll nning i ovrnming th writing tht fr th thing nd ru up gintth lmnt inrib itl in th thing. Th lmnt prribovrnming nming i lw mor thn nming bu th

lmnt lw dd itl to th nm. But th prx o oindit lgoril inription it i th indioibl ign ofllgor nd wht xd it writing. n othr word thuppmnt o dnomintion, th nm uppmnt do nothv ing indiviib mning Ovrning i both th lgor o ngug nd th indiion whih upnd lgormbo nd mtphor. Thu it i not urpriing tht Bnminrturn to th id o mnho linkd to ornming inth ontxt o hi thor o f llgor. H rpt th p oth utim o ntur from hi work on lngug word or

word nd mphi th llgoril vlu of ornming Tob nnd - vn i th on who nm i godlik nd biful -

Or naming and mlanholy 61

prhp lw rmin n intimtion o mournul d. Buthow muh mor o not to b nmd onl to b rd to brd nrtin b th lgorit nd to hv bom highignint thnk onl to hi 2 Algor ubtitut mning or nming rding i th xhution o nming bout ovrnming. n onidr lgoril mlnho to b rtivmlnho it tul im or th rpproprition o th

ondition through llgor. But tht would b to top itmovmnt For i it i impoibl to x th mning o thuppmnt it i qul inpoibl to blok th pgbtwn on mning nd nothr.

Th nournful dn nd mnhol o th thing mrk imit or lgor. o tht nn tht thr i ink btwnthi mnhol nd trgd Bnmin nvr to pointout th fundmntl dirn tht orbid idntifing thxprin o trgd wi th tht of mnhol. Mb w hvto trt b xluding mlnholi mutin from th trgimutim dt with in th book on th Traurpil n ordr topproh th n of trgi mutin Bnmin rt quot pg from Th ar o Rdmpio whr Ronwig howtht iln (hwign) i th vr n of trgd ForRonwig thr woud b no trgd i th hro did not ilnt Hi mutim hi iln i hi lngug. In rrring toRonwig Bnmin hoo trting point or rtionon th lngug of trgd whih lo ppl to othrwitn Luk nd ith. Thi rtion i ummd upin th following ntn

Th grtr th dirpn btwn th trgi word nd thitution - whih n no longr b ld trgi whn thri no dirpn th nor url h th hro pd thnint ttut Th intnt th nl ovrtk him hthrow on th dumb hd ow of hi bing th f ri whl hi ou nd rug in th word o ditntommunit . . ] Trgi iln fr mor thn trgiptho bm th torhou o n xprin o th ublimit o linguiti xprion.

n trgd ph i lw lt whn omprd with th itution t i thi dl it i dth th mot xtrm xprin



4 Th G� n g O i l h l 5



4 Th G� nag

no less magica than the language of names: but exterioritybelongs to its agic By going outside of itsef languagecontinues to name; it names something which no onger standsin its imnnence in that contempation (Ahaue) of thingsin which their languag passes into man 3 Language drawsattention to itse� it becoms expressly agical We woud betemped to say that black magic enchants anguage: it triumphs

ovr hite nagic in a inevitable confronation Judgement(Gericht) is the purication and eevation of the anguagewhose ngic founds itself upon an immediacy aected by anonlinguistic outsid To name something outside languagesignies knowedge of good and evil: the judging word hasdirect knowedge of good and evil Its maic is dierent fromthat of the name but equay magica 3 The loss of theanguage of names is not at al the loss of language itse it issimultaneously a destruction and restitution of the magicalimediacy which characterises language Judgement comes

from the wound inicted on the name: its magic (Magie eUrtei) no onger rests blissfuy in itsel 34 Benjamin seems tospeak of magic because of this immediacy which always beongsto language which prevents an from mastering it competeywhen he turns it into a means Language judges It judges theother its reference and it is itself the judge who judges thespeaker For this reason it is decisive it entais a decision it hasaready decided mans fate Language is the judgement (Geriht)which has condemned man to judge the oher ( Urteil richteeWrt) But it cannot refer to an object which conceals itself

from intuition without presupposing something which hasaways xisted outside of it and as the origin of abstracion isaso the origin of a aegory:

For good and vil bing unnameable nameess stand outsidethe language of names which man leaves behind precisely inthe abyss opened by this question With regard to existinganguage the name oers ony the ground in which its con-crete elements are rooted But the abstract eements of anguage we may perhaps surmise are rooted in the wordof judgement The immediacy ( which however is the in-guistic root) of the conmunicabiity of abstraction resides injudgement This imnediacy the communication of

Overamig a melahol 5

abstraction came into being as judgement when in the fallnn abandoned immediacy in the comunicatn f theconcrete name and fel into the abyss of the mdatnss ofall communication of th word as means as the emptyword into the abyss of prattl For t must be said again the qustion as to good and vil in the world aer creationwas empty pratte The tree of knowledge did not stand in

the garden of God in order to dispense information on goodand evil but as an embem of judgement over the questioner This imense irony marks the mythica origin oflaw 35

Overnaming thus refers to the mthica vioence that Bnja-min analyses in anothe eay entited For a Critique ofViolence 920- which eas with th mythical origins ofaw: If mythica violnce is awmaking ivin violene is awdestroying; if the former sets boundare the latter boundlessy

destroys them; if mythica violnce brigs at once guilt andretribution divine power only exiats f th former threatensthe latter strikes; if the former is boody the attr is ethawithout spiling bood To introduc aws is to limitHeidegger reminds us that cisions are aways taken at or on alimit by denition they involve limits and th absence of limits(Nur e Grz alle i Ethee ie immer lh ber Grz Grzlki) The imitless rl) destruction Benjain speaks of in relation to divineviolence woud consequntly b a dstruction of th anguage

of decision which decides upon the imit and its absence (Grzligkit) Mythical vioence and judgement ar the answersto the questions hat is good and hat is evil? In otherwords knowledge of good and vil is euivaent to the tragicexperince of anguage Overnaming refers to the riginarypresence of judgemnt which performs th abstraction andaows us to judge instead of name Its eect is not simply oneof contamination: its purity is that of judgent Ther iscontamination here but it is the contamination of one purityby another The reationship between huan anguages is tragic

and mthical becaus each language judges the other Whenwe hear the ament of nature we move from judgement to hegift of the name beyond good and evil: this gift aready inpies



Th G g

overnang, udgemnt, but its trac equaly resists beingerased.

Doesn t the pur ity of udgi g lang uage manifest itself insignicatio ustnt we adit that pure signication is neces-sarly decisive Where anguag ony signies, each word issubect to and subits t ecessity he signication of tragiclanguage consists of the sigication of anuae Whenlanguage has an impact by virtue of its meaning, that impact istragic he word as the pu re bearer of its neaning is the pure

d , 39 b wor May e we have to thk of the anguage of naes as oe which dos ot opps interior to extrior, abstract toconcrete : that is why its sigication is a signication without signicat ion . It is neithr dcis ive no r neces sary but equay itis not arb itrary or uncrtain Fro this perspectve , signicationturns naing into vrnaing Trag ic signication is paced under the aw of ju dgeent: its purity corresponds to the purity of a ful ed idividual ti m' whi ch is to be dis tin-guished from nessianic ti' In the essay on Trauerspie l antragedy, Benjanin opposs m hanial to historical tie andthe empi rical to the idea . The po ssibiity of the tragic dependson a tme which is neither echanica nor historica nor messia-c

Historical tie, however dirs from this echanical tieIt determines much more than the possibility of spatiachanges of a specic agnitude an d reguarity think of thehands of a clock and aso more than the possibiity of

spatia changes of a more co pex nature An d without specifi wt s bd tis what ls dternins historical time in short without deing how it diers fromechanica time we ma y assert that the determining forceof historica tie cannot be fuy grasped by, or whoy cocentrated in, any epirical prcess Rather a process that isperfect in historica terms is quit indeterinate enpiricayit is in fact a idea he ida of fuled time is the domianthistorica idea o f the Bib it is the idea of messianic tie Moreover, the idea of a fued historica tine is never iden-

tica with the idea of a individual time his feature naturally changes the meaning of fment competey, and it isthis that distinguishes tragic time from essianic time ragic

Ovrnm Id mnho 7

time is related to the atter in the sae way that an individually fulled time reates to a divinely fued one

Dening individual time as fuled is paradoxica the tragichero becomes the victim of this paradox His inmortality eashim to eath Benamin cas this death an ironic immortaity.It is the origin o f tragic irony If every event s nothing morethan a function of fued tie, of mortal immortality, ifsignication commands every event, tragic irony comes to itsmost singuar expression at the ment when destiny strikesthe hero in his passivity, in his inactivity ragic time burstsopen, so to speak, like a ower whose cayx emits the astringentperfume of irony. he heros fault consists in individuation.Indiviation institutes the predoninance of signication sothat the existence of the individua is arke beforehad by thepossibiity and the necessity o f a faut But Benamin warns uswe must not dene individuation on the basis of its reationwith man he essence of the individual does not partake of theindividua, as Heidegger woud say. What if we had to thinkindividuation in its essentia relationship with anguage What ifit weren t indiviuation which instituted s ignication but signification which carried, as its maor eect, individuation Andwhat if the reation between human languages, whose mutipli-city seems to be in accordance with the principle of individua-tion, were tragic tragically overdeterined because of theoverdetermination caused by the signcation of eachanguage he tepora character of the tragic lets itself be

shaped because everything that comes to pass in individual timeis destined to sigication, which is to say overdeterination(brgr Dtrm rht urt Dtrmnrth t rtmmtht) ragedy is the representation of individual time itoperates the passage between this time and dramatic time, it isthe form which the mythica universality of the historical timeof the individua takes his form cannot be open. Trurspon the other hand, is based on repetition Its form is that of thehyperbole, of a presence which is forever deferred and as aresult ghosty

he mourning pay ( Trursp) is mathematicay comparabe to one branch of a hyperboa whose other branch ies in



8 h G g

innity T law goerning a iger lif prevails in terestricted space of an eartly eistence and al play untildeat puts an end to t game so as to repeat te samegame abit on a grader scale in anoter world t is tisrepetition on wich te law of te mourning play isfounded ts eents are allegorica scemata symbol ic mirror-

images of a dierent game We ar transported into tatgame by death T tie of the mourning pay is not fu-led but neverteles it s nite t s nonindiidua butwitout istorical ursality Te mourning pay is inevery respect a ybrid form Te nirsaity of its time is

· spetra not myt

Tis yperbolic struture wic fers presence and gesTrurpil its gameike caracter may also control te polymorpis of meancoly wat Arstote describes as te uctu-

ating power of black bie Tragedy tus distinguises itselftroug a time wic is sum up in a totaity te totality

of a unied form' hl rm) and by a language petried by signication wil Trurpil is caracterised by a timewic is repetition and by a language wic is essentialy transforntion Te wor in the pocess of cange is te linguisticprinciple of te mourning play \ 3 n the angag isonly a form o f the anguage of te word (Wrt) Te word doesand does not belong to anguage

Words ae a pure motional life cyce in wic tey purifythemselves by deloping fro te natural sound to te puresound of feeling For suc words anguage is merely a transitional pase witin te entire cycle of its transformation andin tem te mourning play nds its oice t describes tepat from natura sound via amnt to music n the mourning play sounds are laid out symponicaly and tis constittes the musical princip of its language and te dramaticprincipe of its breaking up and splitting into caracters Temourning play is nature tat nters te purgatory of laguage ony for te sake of te purity of its feelings it wasalready dened in te ancint wise saying that te woe ofnature would begin to lament if it wre but granted te giftof language For te mourning play does not describe te

Ovrmig mlhly 9

motion troug te speres tat carries feeling from the pureworld of speec out to music and then back to te iberatedsorrow of blissful feeling nstead midway trough itsjourney nature nds itself betrayed by language and tatpowerful bocking (ughur Hmmug) of feeling turns tosorrow

n this passage once again we d te idea of a melancolicnature of a nature wic laments if it is endowed wit speecFeeing must pass troug language to be pure the puricationof natural sound wic transforms it into pure feeing is depen-dent on anguage But the circe oesn t close: the natural sounneer returns to itself because language interrupts its movementoting can go troug anguage witout being led astrayLanguage seems to be diided tere is an emotional life' apassion of language of te word and a signication wic

preents tis passion from reacing its essence For feeling is teessence of natural sound Te natura sound is an impurefeeling Te unity tat anguage achieves throug feelingunfoding in words trough te concentration of te inniteresonance of its sound stands in opposition to te unityestablised by te eternal ineibility of the spoken wordSignication brings ambiguity into language And it is manwo betrays nature his usurpation of power is wat createsimpassie istorical time Benjamin writes: us with theambiguity of te word its sigyig character nature falters

and wereas te created world wished on to pour forth in allpurity it was man wo bore its crown Meancholy fromtis perspectie at eas t comes from a straying of feeling noter words te inibition wic prevents te transformationof te passionate word and turns feeing into melancholy eancoly is neiter pure nor impure it is neiter a naturalsound nor te ure sound of feeling refers to an internal division of language wic as it folds back onto itself opens upanoter world te tragic world Feeling is always meancholicbecause language always signies Tus elancoly appears asa kind of originary symptom n is book on the Trurspil

Benjamin describes meaning as an inescapabe disease (utribr Krkhit) But feeling eventually identies itsef wit itselagainst te background of te aective unity of language



70 T G o ngg

sorrow eners no he anguage of pure feeing in oherwors, musi 46

How an we express he inerna dision of language in rea-on o he proem of denominaon? Wha aou he inkeween anguage and musi? Aorno speaks of a iae ofmusi an anguage

he anguage of mus s quie ieren from all signifynganguage. onains a heooga imension Wha i saysremains oneale in is ery uerane, whe a he sameime eng preise and eerminae he message is oh earand eie. he ea of his uerane s represene y hegure of he iine Name. Suh anguage s a prayer, rans-formed y he proess of demyhologisaion, i.e. a prayer riof any magi seeking o exer an inuene. is he humanaemp, oome perhaps, o nae he Name self, no oonfer meanng upon Musi aspires o e a anguage

wihou nenon. Bu he emaraion line eween hs lan-guage and he anguage of neons is no asoue; we areno onfroned y wo whoy separae reams. here s aiaei a work. Mus s permeae hrough and hroughwh inenionaiy Musi eref of al inenionalyMenen, he merey phenomena linkng of souns, woude an aousi parael o he kaleosope As asoue nen-ionaliy, howeer, i wou ease o e nusi and woudee a fase ransformaion ino languae. nenions areenra o musi, u ony inermeny. 4

Benamn asries o mus he power o gaher a pure an no-signifyng language, a language whih isn', aer a, heanguage of names sine i is rough ino eng y a disionwhih aso engeners sgnifying anguage he anguage ofnames s suppose o preee al diison. Mus wou hen eoh he anipaon of a resore language of names and herae or memory of meanhoy. Adorno reognises in musi amoemen whih seeks o name he dne name and musremain aahe iae an inermiene, ae as ner-

mene o sgniaion, o nenon, o anguage, o houghwhih draws near o musi in so far as i reies on ha whihesapes he ogniie funon': o hnk phiosophay

Overnam an meachy 71

means as muh as o hnk inermenes o e inerruped yha whih s no he hough iself 4 Eah me we assuneha he essenia he language of names, he diine name haseen os Bu if oernaming s uniersal, allowing signaionand wha remains heerogeneous wih regar o he name oinsrie sef no anguage, hen musi or, o e een morepreise, wha in musi parakes of meanhoy, shows he essenal and rreue sraying whih separaes he gif from hename. Man's meanhoy iness hings wih meaning manerays he word u he aso erays hings. Howeer, hismelanhoy, a s exreme, ouhes he hing isel I saesmoried hings, i hears heir amen, her reah maye i shs hearing whih ransforms he lanen ino nus nusiwhh from hen on les he mmemora and unforgeae gfof anguage e hear. Melanhoi man reahes he im of hishumany, if his humaa onsiss n he ask of denomnaon hus, he analyss of he hngs sadness aows his imi upon

whh nomiaion aways suspends isef o appear Meanhoy erays he word for he sake of knowedge Bu in senaous sefasorpion i emraes dead oes in s onem

. d h 49 an, or er o re eem em.Grutmmung er Trauer As Grusmmug meanhoy oes

no oppose self o wha we woul hink of as is oppose. orf i makes one hik of he immemora gf or, eer ye hererea of he gif ino he name, is aso he Grummugwhh orrespons o a generosiy Maye hs is wha Heeg-ger waned o show when he spoke of a reaie ra whn

melanhoy, insie Trauer

or a aulang undersandng, renounemen a ggaway and a loss rea renounemen, in oher words onewhih arries and produes a fundamena one and epoysisef auhenially is a power of reaion and engenering By leng go of s od possessions i reeies a gif, u noafer he fa, as a reward for whin i he mournful endurane of neessary renounemen and gng away s a ree. , 5g

The reaie ra (schrcherzeuge is expressd here y hefa of reeing a gif whh also remins us of he sruure of

72 T G



72 T G o n

concpion and sponani ha namin analss whn sd-ing dnominaion. h craiv rai is wha in and hroghh Grunstimmung incins rnoncmn o rciv h gi h nrcivabl can w hn spara i rom a dnoninaionwhich rcogniss h hing or maks i appar h craivrai divids isl and i is his division which marks hpassag rom naming o ovrnaming rom ovrnaming o

naming rom on mlanchol o anohrh las par o namins collcion Brlinr Kinhit ( Arlin Chidhood is nid h Li Hnchback. hauhor wris:

Whr h appard cold onl look a h dbris A ardconmpaion which hings scapd in on ar m gardnhad rnd ino a small gardn m room ino a sn roomand n bnch ino a lil bnch. h shrunk and i was asi h wr growing a hmp which now mad hm par o

h Li Hnchbacks world and or a long im. his liman awas arrivd bor m. And in doing so h blockdm pah. ohr han ha h didn do nhing hisprovos drssd in gr h us ook orgings hal ovrhing go I I wan o go ino m sma room oa m small dinnr hr is a Lil Hunchback Who hasalrad an ha! So h Lil Hunchback was on hr.On nvr saw him. I was alwas him who wachd mAnd h mor pircing his gaz was h ss I saw msl 5

h lil hnchback kps h unorgab and or ha vrrason orcs s o org h hing o org ha w havorgon. sn h h mblmaic imag o wha maks originar mancho com orh Evr im w nam h hing hi hunchback wachs s: h hmp is h mark o ovrnaming. w nvr s h on who wachs and abandonss Un luschst u noch trurJol l Zichn

V

Apparitions

Th unrbl m

Mmor and promis can w hink hm wiho xprin-cing h nam Wha dos his xprinc consis o happaranc o a nam is nvr wihou a crain promis vni w ar haring h nam or h rs im. Evr im anam appars or h rs in h na is a bginning and assch i is inimidaing a h sam im is bingabgin-ning or is bingbginning draws s o i. Wha can wxpc i w har h nam o h ohr or h rs im i whav no mmor o ha nam ohing. u w wod bnabl o har ha nam or an ohr i h nan did nohav a srang powr o vocaion. n a x on loch rom965 Adorno dscribs his nan as dark as a gawa 52

(unkl i in Tor) mab bcaus o h vowl which aksh shap o an opn mouh or ho (Loch) and h consonanswhich srround i ik wo colmns. hrogh his ranscripiono a onal gur (Klngur) Adorno ris o vrbais hisadiovisua imprssion. h nam o h phiosophr isphonographic gr imprsss isl pon him bfor h has

rad h book which has his nam on is covr. is a ohlor rs xprinc h xprinc o h nam as h origin oxprinc. And i is no insignican ha h moo Adornochooss or his x xprsss asonishmn. dos so in on oAdornos langags h on h aribs lswhr 53 o hisnaiv own h Dilkt minr Vtrstt Vtrstt his ahrsown no Himtstt his passag wrin in 95 das wihlangag and wha can happn o i in h misr o xil as ih ahr avngd hims b imposing a diac on h onwho ris o kp h mmor o his languag whol a orign

languag in a orign conr rapd in is naiv land Isnwaning o kp ons langag waning o kp h nam o

74 h G L Appritions 75



74 h G o Lg

that anguage the name which is the prototype of thought inlanguages and which kes German untranslatable? German ismore philosophica than other languages as Adorno claims inhis answer to the question Ws ist eutsh) consequenty itstays nearest to the name. Here is the epigraph the sentencewritten in the rankfurt tongue a variation o Hesses dialect:Ui hww ih gesht Wow . . . said . The irony of thisepigraph names the name. An epigraph aways operates in thesame way as a name.

ames carry memory even if we have never heard thembefore. Because of this names promise and can be taken aspromises: aer the name appears we are waiting for soething.The name dark as a gateway invites us to cross a limit byappearing. t appears when we arent expecting it. n his essayon language Benamin audes to the intuition of mytholo gi-ca wisdom according to which ma ns name is his fate . 54 s itconceivable that the name could be the archive of al memory?The name pronises the hearer the other a knowedge that thebearer of the name has already forgotten: he must have forgot-ten it to become what he is but aso to respond and to beresponsibe. The man with a proper name is the only one whocan open his mouth and reply to the divine cal says Rosenz-weig. We are judged by the name we are prejudged and thisudgenent is a sort of death warrant because it says the inevitabe. As soon as we start to be to be named as soon as we arecaled to appear we hide we try to escape fron the reveatoryforce the memory the truth of the name. The possibility of

survival of another memory and an oter promise thus dependson a certain unreadabiity but an essentia and not accidentaunreadability. The name must be essentially unreadabe. We cansave ourseves or be saved ony if something in the nameremains unreadabe. The name remains unreadabe in so far as itis a promise but for the name to be a proise and to carrymeory it has to be given it has to appear as a gift. This giftas we wi see is the event of language.

The gt o l«ugeApparition the inverted comas indicate that the concept isoaded with meanings. t can refer to the apparition of a

Appritions 75

presence to the apparition that makes presence manifest to teappearance of that which is presented etc. But the invertedcommas aso refer to Ado rno. What he cals apparition has thesame structure as the name the proper name the name itseWhat can we propery say about the name? What can we sayabout it that woud be iproper? s the name propery thename? To answer these questions wi draw on Benaminagain on his theoogicopoitica thought and his digressionson language in genera and the language of man They areindeed digressions: they do not seem to ead in the same direc-tion as the onvention theory of anguage of wich Benaminsays that it is in accordance with a borgeois idea or concept.A surprising armation since he does not dea wit the socio-political impications of language in his eary essay. Maybe weshoud read the text in question as a prehistory [Urgeshihte]of these impications. Which obviousy does not explain thespecicity of the era encompassed by a bourgeois concept of

language. n the course of his digressions Benamin identiesthree anguages or rather three dierent states of angageGods anguage paradisiaca human language and language as aparody of Gods anguage. Gods anguage is the one whichgives names to what has ust been created by the word by thecreating word s shene Wort) this word which aowsitsef to be neither spoken nor written neither classied nortransated neither chosen nor refused neither oved nor atedsince it absoutey precedes a other tongues and anguages.There is no gap between te word and the name which God

gives to created things er erkennene Nme: it recognises thecreated thing as such the two move in the same circle in thecircle of divine sameness they intertwine intersect and interchange: n God the name is creative because it is word andGods word is cognisant Goes Wort ist erkenne) because it is aname. 55 n the name God recognises himself as creator asword. He recognises throug the name the creation whichwoud be unknowabe without name: God made things know-abe in their names. Man however names them according toknowedge. 56 Knowedge is inked to the name and to its

forgetting. God recognises creation through the name and inthat way recognises himsef in his inguistic essence. But divineknowedge is not a mere exterior knowledge distanced from



7 Th G o gg

tslf subt to tm to th fat that tm somthngavs a datum o a ss of ata. On th ontay t sknowldg that podus what t knows. By all aounts thssamnss th ndn of th wod and th nam ould bguaantd n no oth way than by th slfgvn and foundngnam of Go nam of all nams. Howv a dstnton a

dsmnaton a dsunton whh dstans th nam must bat wok at the vey heart of th ndn of th wo and thnam othws man woul b wthout languag wthouttuly human languag h would not b man fo h would nothav th ablty to dnomnat whh haatss hm as alngust bng.

Othws thn God would b unabl to omplt hs a-ton and would not b God. Caton s ompltd by a gftGabe n ompltng hs aton God ats th humanbng n hs own mag whh mans aong to Bnamn that h dos not at hm wth th wod o on th bass ofth wod. God onvs man as dnt fom natu byonvng of hs own bng. Man has no given nam. Of all thatus only man gives nams and gives himse a nam Thaton of man s a gft a gft o f th nam of languag f theg Th gft of th nam oms btwn two tmlssnsss(btwn dvn tmlssnss and th tmlssnss of paads tostablsh th paadsaal languag n ths sond stoy of thCaton th makng of man dd not tak pla though thwod: God spok and th was but ths man who s notatd fom th wod s now nvstd wth th g (Gabe of

languag and s lvatd abov natu. 57 Man an athly atu bought foth fom th ath fom what s most natuals nonthlss th oth of natu and s so psly baus ofhs aton h was not atd by th wod. What onlusonan b dawn fom ths ntptaton of mans aton? Maybwhat nsus s that th wod m ovs outsd of tslf th at t dosso at th vy momnt whn th l of dvn samnss losstslf by allowng th nam to b substtutd fo th wod Thgft o f th nam (of th nam whh has not bn gvn of thnam whh an stll b gvn and gvn agan ths unqu gft

whh s onsquntly th only gft fom God mpls thfogttng of th nam. Th nam is th gft t s always gvnth by God o by man vn f only man an give thngs

Appaii 77

nams sn th thng namd by ts ato by th ato s notwatng fo th nam t is th nam; but as a g th nam irgtt To gv to say ye to th oth s to fogt and to sayye to th g v s to fogt aan oul sumaswhat s sad h by sayng that fogttng s pat of th appaton of th nam fo th appaton dos nt lt tslf b

thought spaatly fom a thought of th g a thought whhts to tak th gft a ts statn pont t s i man languag that Go gvs langua unto languag shmslf by fogttng hl ma s f baus th ablty tdnomnat whh ns hm languag oth wos nolong stands n vn atualty an annot atuas t xptby tng t Mans paadsaal languag must alay b alanguag of pu and absolut ton

God dd not at nan fo th wd and h d notnam hm. H dd not wsh to subt hm to languag butn man God st languag whh ha sv im as mdumof aton f God st whn h ha l hs atvpow to tslf n man Ths atvty lv of ts vnatualty bam knowldg keti. an s th knn th sam langua n whh od s ato. Thfo thpoposton that th sptual ssn o man s languagnds xplanaton s sptual ssn s th languag nwhh aton took pla n th wod aton took plaan Gods lngust ssn s th wo All of human languag s only ton of th wo n th nam Th nam

s no los to th wo than knowldg to aton. H

Th human at of nomnaton pats an os not patth dvn at th nam s psvd and spaat by a nopttv ptton by a ptton that annot b pttv Fo dnomnaton s th task assgnd to man hs fom snothng than assung sponsblty fo ths task Man sth nam as task

Fo God at thngs; th atv wod n th s th

gm of th ognsng nam ust as Go too nally nadah thng aft t was atd. ut obously ths namng sonly an xpsson of th dntty of th atv wod an



78

the onising nae in d, not the prior solution of the taskthat od exprssy assigns to man himse that of naing

. I S'yths

ith th pasg frm ds anguage to ans paradisiacalnu th nua f anguage the nae proper is sepa-

ratd th rd fr the rst tine Now the n can nolner b subtitutd for the word without a distance separatingit the na1e becoes the nae of paradise the rst nnnaes wonn and things and nally, after th 'Fa , itboes the 'name in general a rhaupt, always substituted, but for another na he nae appears. hic namhappens to be c osest t th nam as the o incidence of nameand word? h propr nae, bviously For the na1es giento things by ortas (coud they give then proper names?)rquire a datum, th rril of oethin whih ies itsef tob understood, thrugh its incoprehensible anguage, as thething that arre h proper nam stands at the ery frontierwhich diids the name, runs through anguage and rks thewithdrawa and forgetting of the nae.

By giing naes, parents dediate their children to God; thenaes thy ie do not correspond in a metaphysica, notetymologica sense to any knowedge, for they namenewborn children. In a strict sense, no name ouht (in its

etyoogica eaning) to correspond to any person, for theproper naHe is the word of God in huan sounds. By iteach man is guaranteed his reation by od, and in this sensehe is hisef reatie, as is expressed by ythoogicalwisdo in the idea (whih doubtess not infrequenty oestrue) that a nans name is his fate The proper name is thecomnunion of man with the creativ word of od. 60

Through the gift of the nae, there is (are) generation(s) Phioof Alexandria writes ' Fr this, h say s, is y nae across the

ages", inasuh as it beongs to our time period, not to theprecos1ic, and my enoria", not a name set beyondneory and thought, and again for generations" (Exod. 3 : 15 ,

b d, 1 h

hnot egs ungenerate ut ea generaton eac new

counity, does nothing nore than repeat the originary inter

Aaitios 79

ruption or intrmittene For ans 'te is his nae, and it isthe naHes t to nake an t th ae as h ies it(again) The word for th bing (Ws) of th wrd is notrantd, ay idegger in his tet n orges poe DasWot \ (,: The ift inriaby incude tting, th VHentut which dnt wait fr th Fa and threaten todstabiis th intrnal ny of the Slf an pak of arlatin to onlf her? In th bginnin as the rd: so th'Fall i originary Th na11 is forottn his an be undr-stood in t ays (1 ) the name is forotten becau th bearerof a nae ho can i propr nam and at th sam timengender the body of th naKd ner as the power to ivehisef th abiity t enoinate (2) t na is forgottenbeaus it i gin thank t od forgetting ('od rested whenhe had e his reatie por to itself in an) Th nam isorotte becaus it is a U he forttin of th nae is forgotten in th conventiona theory of anguage Isnt this theoryconentional inasuch as it denes the na as the mark of aconvention? For xample, i the denitin of the proper naegiven by Beneniste convention or not? 'hat we normalyunderstand by the proper nae is a conventiona 11ark of sociaidentication such that it an onstantly and uniquey designatea unique individua. ! With the nae, eerything begins bynot beinning, by beginning again without ever being abe tobegin Thr is no am without a aparition but as soon as it

appars th nam is no Longr. Is the vnt here, as Benjaminarms and ust ar, the 'Fal , the wounding of the name,the birth of abstract and juridica anguage whih ony parodiesGods anguage? Must we not aso say: the event is the gift ofthe nae? Because of th forgetting of this eent, because ofthe forgetting of the gift, whih is not a ere acident, a historyand politics becone possibe For example but it is the onyexampe that an be iven in this context a 'politics whoseain is its own negation, the negation of its nam, a 'nihilisticpoitis, a politis which chaenes a those who persistenty

attenpt to estabish uniersa laws. Benain, in the fraentcaed 'Theologicpoitica we do nt know if he agreed tothis title, since it is not on the anuscript, een though it is onthe tyewritten oy suggests that a 'word oitis shoudpratise nihiism

, � But it should not do so i the Ha of a

A i i l



HO

ngativ tlology or a ssanc tndncy History taks th1 f , 6 5 G A b ' kp ac nas rg ga n s rnr capturs

Bnjans thought Whil agrin wth it, w could add thatthrouh th , th an hav takn th plac of th naeFo what do Bnjan allow us to thnk? Mayb this that allnams kep a crtan mory of the nae of th g, bcaus

thy ar sngular oly in so far as thy kep uch a ory anmoy which kep nthig, thg t th gv amwhich ds ot lt itlf b kpt whch withdraws and isforgottn th oent t s gve hat else would w kp buta na you nam , n' s nae h l oic o f th ift is aipossibl loc a g whch d not nclud fogttnwould not b a gft Th givr mut ntrrupt th rlaton toth othr th very instant h stablsh t by givng th giFo th ry rao, othing pvnts th gi fro inscribitslf in an conomy which transfors t And it is surly on th

onditon that it bcoes othr that a i can b rcivd auch But if forgettin wr absolut nothing would happn: acrtain oy ut bnd th gi to th iv This noymans that th gft s always a promis, sothing yt t

( A d h f h 0 ° h h hco n t spac 0 t IS prom t spac w ICparats us fro th ftur the g agan bcom othe Theivr gvs th gft, but h dos n t v th i of gvngoneslf th gift; othrwis w would not exprence th g, thft would b absolut an d woul erase tlf idiatly hft of th na is Uwordeklih, it urs us to thik th

mo rial, it g vs u th thought of th ioralJ ()7

The theo logio-politial

h na s givn n its apparton hre s no na wthoutapparitn' and no apparition' without a na. Th appari-tion has th sa structur as th na h na appars tpomiss and causes a nory to ge It s thr, innry and proi, that we ust stuat th thologcopol-tical' I undrtand ths tr acoding to th eanin thatBnjain av t t dscribs th ntrdictory rlation o twoforc which attract ach othr O aks th oth strongrby oving away fm it, th th daws th rst towards tby withdrawin and lttng it sparat aai Pore s th wrd

Appaiti01S l

Bnja i uss. copar s th profae pursut o f happinessad the nssianic tendecy to two foc

I n aow pts t o t goa towad wich th profanyamic act a aotr maks t tn f Msaictty, th ctay the qst of aity o happs un cout to the Msanc dctio [th f anwho aums the tak of dmat w a s stay ady stayi appach t ame AC D . l ; bt just a a rca, tgh act, ca ath tat i at thposit to, so t f t a ast tugh ofae t con f t iac Kdo 1 (

My ad two wo t to a twcs ad hap a two laas t aguae f ta the ta th polita ad th aga t thocal t ad of ma tity Calya c t at tw t tw ) o auae cpx w at my t att by atttoy t th t a ad to th toca moy aady sc ts t m whch becausof t ot wtot thr t s ot othrw Usst thws ri tf moy a omis It tat t pt t t ty twn ti tructu f antt wthout tt a th tuctur that )ri ttts th at f thought t Dcht1Pa w t b t a t the unableic w aat te thut o om a tolo-gicopotcal tout W cd ak what s te k whicht y tyg DC7k t t tygmmoy a to DCl ad (t? h qst ipobay t a wv t a vy pcisaw I w tt ys t qt a paa o L'Imtiol des 1od. t avg d dg nwhich stat tat w of sty at t ri UV/ r -,\eshf) s a ' 1 ytoy, ii Lacouabath wit:

T projct o a w ythoy as o t cad to hautGra thought What s at stak he ctaily th posi

2 The GU; (�r Lan,lag Appris R3



ility o ntonl rt th possiity or th Grnso idntiyng tslvs nd xisting s suh nd so ntrng into history itsl Th nw ythogy is th prmis ohistory ginnng gin)

Is th prois nvolvd in th rltion twn th pronust or hppinss th ssi tdny du t w

ythoogy whi would try to rt n orginl ory?No Th thologiopotil opt put orwrd y Bnn is not th s s ytlogy' nd i w wtd todoun ssiis s myth in th ss o th ritiu orligious idologs it would myth withot logos tion whih rks l lgd itoril idnttios nddos not llw hstry to idntiy tsl with its with nssn ing propr to its osnt rtin rtiu osuh idologis sprig ro s idtiti? htrgs ro t pssg td ov is th dity rhing t rigin history or ost i h ists tiwih thking o tis rigin s s s rois whihis rt o histry r wih strys r istry t t iigthus xposng itsl to orgttng h i o w ythology' s prisy th rtur lost riin sti t o itsr)propriton os th oril rii pst d turrk th p wh ry nd prois intrst to indtslvs togthr

T thoogiopolitil pris dos nt siply grudhstoril uity: it dstiiss it s it rounds t sin hssin tdn rins srt o th historil n

ory: lwys promis o sothing to om rois:lwys ory o sothing tht hs hppd hs o topss nd twn t two twn ory nd proisn who ns In txt y hol on th dirnt trds inwish ssnis w nd n phoristi lin whih surisn iportnt id ginning t th ont o dpst t-stroph thr xsts th hn or rdption 7 This lin

ss to sy tht thr is only th ory o th ost trriltstroph to kp th prois o rdpton ts strng nd

disonrtng logi w n tll wht kind o politil intrprttions nd ustitions t old usd or is hyproloi to us nologs ro ourth n th rsthptr o hs Trs Thgiis pinoz nots tht thing is rrrd to God' s n xprsso o th suprltidgr s n th ountns o God" tht is vry hgh ountins th slp o God" tht is vry dp slp t is in this

sns pinoz dds tht w should xplin mos h v whr God himsl sys : hv ovrthrown you s th ovrthrow o th ord m upon odo d Goorr" vinovrthrow is thus "mmr ovrthrow" 7 hyprologlsuprltiv: th mory is unl to onprhnd thvnt n othr words th or it is lkng it only osnssry t tht ont t th ont o th dpst tstroph) th mr t is drwn towrds its own oundtiontowrds oplty othr vnt proisd to th hosnpopl nd to th whl o nkind his vt stds nd ry s its onditon o possiiity Th hn ththoln spks is wht rss whn ll is lost nd nnot rgind: it is t th ont th ost trri distrss whnw hv to nd ory nd rnou it tht th psstyo oplt rvrs pprs notr id whi dos tsn lin to tought o Bing whih voks ldrnspon dling with dngr (hr) nd rsu Relmg. Thpromis s insrid n ory vrsl h prois ordmption) s only pros insuh s it inluds nry o th tstroph) Ths is wht Bnin suggsts inon o his ss t ot isry: T ssi osnot only s th rdr h os s th sudur o th ntihrst Only tht historin wll v th gi o nning t sprko hop n th pst who s rmly onvind tht h wll not s ro th i h wins nd this y hs

d not s to trU w gv up mmory worgt th prois nd sr th dd T sri o thdd s th tstroph whih xds tstroph tstrophyond tstroph with no possil turning k it rnsunthnkl or ll thought t is th unthnkl itsl llthought thrtns to sr th dd to th xtnt tht w

ontinu to thnk tr th dth o th othr: whih is lwysth s whn w thnk prois dnds ro thought th

84 h gg Appri Oi 85



84 g g

ossib ithss o its oy h hstoian Bnjainasss os t sak n th a o th da h is oyty to a th as n th a th nthinkab th s l ota bn a v sak tha ht hh ds hs oton a stops h oostitti s as a sbjt hh oiss ts i tso ath a a o saii th dad Mayb th

a tahs s ts th possibity o saki th nam th t ly v s o sak /m � aat ath bt aso sak / hat stv sotabl sassabl dath ai i aott t by oss thoht sa that thi th a i th oth o a dath hat h a aisth its h s s sb oy an moys isb th s oy ad ois v thsvs t b a a bl spt hv this spt s t yt aabl ly th Mssah hisats al hsty th sa ss that h aos olts ats ts lat to t ssai Fo thisaso nthi hstoial a lat tsl o ts o aot toanyth Mss

7 ssai histoy s tt at that as sh hstoy is ot ssa v hstoy assas a ot latd ot thot a hyphn hishyhn aks bt a a a h thooiooital s th o th to o th ssah ththoooltia sts oy bas th ssiah has ot yto absolt t th absot to o hn sak o th t th thooooltal a alays b

volv v o t to it s o ts tsl th ithotnt bas aot to th oth oom at astas a t ssbl hstoal bi ja is tly a ths att othi hsta a lat tsl o its oat t ayth ssa h s ththolootia h t s t to o th othth oth os aast al ptatos t (to o)hh v ts its

_ b atipat by a

s o any ki,

bt has aay lt a t th ast s ta as

apiab at di ho th histoia ad tssiani th tholoa ad th olital at to ah

oth Ho an thn attibt a bin, an ssn, to ththooiopoita h hyphn tavss th thooialad th poitia and tis thm to ah oth bre beig hthooopoita in th sns that Bnjamin sms to ivo od iv th tm is not a ho Mmoy and pomisa opposd to totaisaton Whih an aso b statd bt this no atnativ h n th ana o a thoht o th

nam h moy o th na that is to say, its oiinayottn, is inspaab om th pon1is om hat thivn nam pomiss to knod th it its A nan1aays pomiss anoth am bas it s ivn to b ivnivn aain and aso sd snt th Fa th sa o thna Mmoy and pomis oiinat om th appaition oth nam So th appaition o th nam hih n1st thinko as both an intption and an opnin has th srucre of ephe and, onsqty, baks don th totaity hihappopiats th nams hih a srfosd to istat thstas o th ont in its movn1nt

pp r

Appation, th od apation, appas qnty in Adonos h Thr It appas in h Adono dosntaays tansat it Appaitio is aady an appaiton: apaition as appaition, th mmoy and pomi o a oinana It od hav to b shon I mst oo a dtaidanaysis h that th stions on appaition psppos aadn o njain, o hat h its abot mmoy in th

th o th hss on th Phiosohy o Hstoy h isnothin mo itiv than th appaition, Adono stats: its and taks hat it ol hav aod to b mpsd ithit O i it aos somthin to b impsd bt it is not athn it is bas it boms an ima Obviosy thsmnts o th onomy o th appaiton a ond in Bnjamin o him, th pat is an appaition hih has an iminatint th momnt it appas and tansoms its nto an imah histoioaph mst tain this ima that h annottan th past ony oms to him thoh th ima o tsappaition, th appaition o th past is th ond o mmoyBt ho an dsib th onomy o th appaition inas

8 Th G o gg Appaits 87



8 G g g

muh as i is he appariion o ar? Works o ar aording odorno, are iphered onsellaions o he oher: wha appears isa nonbeing i is he oher he appariion as oher Weanno ormulae an eonomy o he appariion Is onomyis caasophc When he speaks o he appariion dorno ishinking o he power o a aasrophe He is hinking o hepower o an originary a o iolene whih is repeaed

endlessly

rworks beome appearanes in he pregnan sense o heerm ha is as e appearane o an oher when heaen alls on he unrealiy o heir own realiy rworkshae he imanen haraer o being an a een i heyare ared in sone and his endows hem wih he qualiyo being somehing momenary and sudden his is regisered by he eeling o being oerwhelmed when ae wihan imporan work [ o his exen hey are ruly aer-

images (Nachble o he primordial (vowellch shuder 77

he appariion orms and exeeds a wor We anno hinkhe appariion exep on he grounds o exess and aasropheWhy? Beause we will hae already orgoen he oher and wewill neer hae suienly orgoen s soon as he aasropheours a he beginning an as a beginning an apoalypione les isel be heard: he aasrophe is boh desruie andreelaory I ould jus as well be announing he arrial o heoher as preening him rom arriing s a sudden and unore-

seen irrupion a aasrophi irrupion he appariion surprisesand immobilises me I eel as i I an being oerwhelmed sinesomehing appears and surprises me o say ha he apparionis an aerimage o he primordial shudder is o say ha hereaion i eokes inoles a mehanism o ideniaion orassimilaion In The alectc of Enlghtenment Horkheimer anddorno all his mehanism a mimesis reex I is a sor oappariion o he oher) i is he appariion isel whih pushe mehanism o ideniaion or assimilaion in plae heword used by Horheimer and dorno is Anglechng Wha is

he moemen o his mmess Frozen by he irrupion o heoher whih anno be assimilaed, exposed o a world wihouworld befoe he world (voweltlch man likens himsel o he

pp

imobile naure whih surrounds him Here naure is in ahe oher he oer ha man experienes in he appariionhe m imesi reex i s a ype o selonseraio n selonsiuion and slarmaion bu i is aso he sign o an openinghere woud be no reaion o he oher i we were no oerwheed i we were no surprised by he appariion heeonomy o he aparion is aneonomi i anno be oalised

he appaiion doesn happen i happens wihou happeningo appear means o be ransormed ino an image o imagineonesel In oher words here are no pure appariions onlyimages Bile and Nachile bu no Abbile imiaions orreproduions rwork are images as apations as appearane(Escheigen an no as opy d r is his imaginaion hisimagiay essene o he apariion he appariion imaginesisel I is a aasrophi imaginaion heir appaton whihmakes arworks ino images always a he same ime desroyhem as image (Blwsn 79 Consequenly a wor o ar is

wha remains o a work o ar o an image o he naure o awork o ar as image o he imagining and imagined appariion

We an see ha dorno ries o hink at on he grounds ohe appariion he appearane (Aang o he nonexisanas i i exised moiaes he quesion as o he ruh o ar

his senene seems enigmai bu i beomes a lile moreinelligible a leas he rs par i we read he nexeene By i orm alone ar promises wha is no i reis-ers objeiely howeer reraedly he laim ha beause he

nonexisan appears i mus indeed be possible

Wha exalydo hese wo senenes mean? Doubless one will be wary ohe philosophial language used or he binary oposiionbeing/nonbeing seems o dominae he logi o he rssenene In he seond senene whih is also dominae byhis opposiion dorno ranslaes he appearing o he appari-ion by esceinen and no as we migh hae expeed byaehen he erb whih orresponds o he subsanieAfga o dene eschenen he uses wo pairs o onepswhih like being/nonbeing hae dominaed philosophial

hough in he Wes and deermined is hisory hey are hewo pairs possibiliy/realiy and subjeiiy/obeiiyHoweer I will no ones he use o his language raher I

8 The Git of Larglae Apparitions 9



woud like to draw attention to on particular point. It semsto me that the apparition actuay implie a strange obigatioand that Adorno thinks of art wht I would ca the oblatio1of the theologico-political' But why art? Maybe bcause it hodsthe memory of the language of divine creation

, {� whichBenjamin cas th anguage of things, or the language ofnames'. In any case, art is not an abstract laguage: it resists the

abstraction of concretism as wel as the abstraction of thconcept: What appears is not interchangeable because it doesnot renin a dull particuar for which othr particulars couldbe substituted nor is it an empty universa that equates every-thing specic that it comprehends by abstracting th commonh

. , 1 H3 S h d tc aractes tCS omet g appea rs, acor g to orno ar .It must be understood that every apparition is an apparition'of art, in othr words it is not an apparition' in a eld whchwe assume is already formed and dened. Art is the trace ofthe apparition', the apparition' as trace artworks from which

te apparition has been driven out without a trace are nothingmore than husks . 4 How can w erase the trace of th apparition' and in that way ease the apparition itself How can weerase the trace of the name? Adorno eaves thes uestionsunanswered. But we have noted that the apparition has a rlationship with the name the gift of the name the other. Itssingularity is in its structure the singuarity of the name Teother this nonbeing comes to cipher itself (1 am borrowing Adorno's term) into art, into the consteation of artCipher: an interruption which allows (nothing) to appear. The

apparition' of art as the ciphr of the other is the gift of alanguage which remains indecipherabe even as it deandsdeciphering Isn't this demand markd by the as i (als ob) ?Art appears t as the form of a promise and calls for what itpromises. he obigation to ful a promise is part of the act ofproising itse t may be impossibe to keep a pron1ise; but apromise without obligation woud not be a promise. Whatdoes art promise? According to Adorno it promises happinessWe are reminded of the im portance Benamin attaches to thepursuit of happiness' he order of the profane shoud be

erected on the idea of happiness t H 5

A promise is essentialy apromise of happiness' happiness is part of the promise Abso-lute despar would actualy be the ack of promises. Which is

the same a saying that the ogic of the expression promise ofhappiness that we nd in Adorno's work is seinclusive: to saythat the promise is a promise of happiness' is to say that thepromise promises happiness but also that it promises yetanothr promise. The apparition' of art obigs us to rememberanother promise and the other as promise

Te chain of the will

This memory and proise are not rooted in wi. As a will toreLate - to the past or the future wil aims for its own reappropriation. By denition, it wants itsel According to Nietzschewi is formed as a will to memory and is reveaed in thepromise, since the promise is the future of wi, the future aswi. Wi without memory would be unable to promise and sowoud inevitably fai:

And precisely this necessariy forgetfu anima, in whom for-getting is a strength, representing a form of robust heath, hasbred for himsef a counterdevice, memory, with the hep ofwhich forgetfuness can be suspended in certain cases naney in those cases where a promise is to be made consequenty it is by no means merey a passive inabiity to be ridof an impression once it has nde its impact nor is it justiditi aud b ii ur word n sm casiand nding you cannot cope, instead it is an active desire notto et go a desire to keep on desiring what has been on

sone occasion desird, realy it is the will's memory: so that aword of strang new things circumstances and even acts ofwill may be paced quite safey in between the original Iwill' shal do' and the actua discharge of the wi its atwithout breaking this ong chain of the wi. But what a otof preconditions there are for this n order to have thatdegree of control over the future man must rst haveearned to distinguish between what happens by accident andwhat by design to think causay to view the future as thepresent and anticipate it to grasp with certainty what is end

and what is means in a, to be able to cacuate compute and before he can do this, man himself wi really have tobecome reliable regular automatic notwendig] , even in his own



92 T G of aua Apparitios 93



f

tion: this according to Bnamin is th ony chanc ofmmory.

Can a nam b qotd? Th in qotd abo is a nam.Not bcas of any caractristic tat w cold say is rprsn-tati o Adornos thogt and so wod rfr to his namn if th lin inod may contain a qstion that w codcal Aoros qstion. This in is part of a mod which bars

th nam o Aschwitz. anFranois Lyotard foowingAdorno and sing his concpt o a mod (which is not aconcpt) has anaysd th possibiity o linking phrass orsntncs to th nam of Aschwitz of otiuig to uselaguage atr Asch witz:

As a mod Aschwitz dos not illstrat diactics b itngati Ngati dialctics brs th grs of th concptwhich procd rom th rl o f t esultat and ibrats thnams that spposdy istrat th stags of th concpt in

its momnt. Th ida of th mod corsponds to thisrrsa in t dstiny o diactics: th mod is th nam fora kind o paraxprinc whr dialctics wold ncontra nonngatab ngati [u gat o iable] and wodabid in th impossibiity of rdobling that ngati into arst

W know how many dicltis riiin ust oe amentais. On nam n this nam is nr th ony on tonam il. At t sam tim th nam this nam wi notallow any othr nam to b nar it: any othr nam wod

ioat t mmory o th nam of this nam hich sms toconstitt th ry aw o th nam Th law o th namapplis to this nam mch mor than it appis to any othr. tis th a w o absot singarity o incomnsrability o thatwic is nparalld. No nam aows anotr nam to b narit al nams ar aos and gard tir priilg. For thisraso w cannot compar on am wit anotr: as absotsingarity ach nam forbids rprsntation. To imagin thform o th nam as Adorno dos is prhaps initab bt itis arady a transgrssion against th aw. t is a ncssary sacri

lg or othrwis thr wod b no nam and no apparition.T ban on rprsnting or imagining th prohibition o

pp

imags (Bilerverbot this thologicopoitical moti which isomniprsnt in Adoros thoght rrs to th inportancattacd to th am. Aschwitz is th nam o that whichbars no rlation to othr nams of what rmains nnamaband concas itslf from imagination. Aschwitz is namss.Bt what wish thoght rals abot th nam is that tnam hids itsf and that its law is th law o withdrawal rsr-

ation of th crypt. Th nam ncrypts (itsl Absot sing-arity scaps (its n his work Th Nam of God Accordingto a Fw Talmdic Txts Linas writs: Bt t proprnam clos to what is namd is not connctd logicaly withit consqnty dspit this proximity it is an mpty shll ika prmannt rocation of what it oks a dismbodimnt owhat is mbodid throgh it Throgh bing orbiddn to bttrd it is hd btwn th two: a Ttragrammaton that isnr prononcd in th way it is writtn. Th passag romTho (dnonination maks it possib to addrss somon in

this way) to (a form o addrss that ighights th gap andth sparation) is ssntia to th nam: Tho bcoms H int nam as if th nam bongd sinltanosy to thpright straightforwardnss o bing addrssd as Tho and toth absot of holinss. 2 Th nam blocks th path which itcars: this is its law t aw itslf as w wi s.

Bnamin stats that th law is stabisd tat it stabishsits at th momnt of th Fa: w all ndr th innc oth aw in postAdamit angag Bt th aw draws man toit it sdcs him it says to him: com. This dging wordxpls t rst hman bings rom paradis thy thmssha arosd it in accordanc with th immutabe law by wichthis dging word pnishs a expects its own awakning asth only th dpst git. n th a sinc th trnal prity ofnams was iolatd th strnr prity of t dging wordaros T prity of dgmt dob s t prity o tnam: rom tis momnt th nam maks t law and dgs.W can fa dr t innc o t aw bcas w orgtw orgt orss: orgtting is th laws condition o possibi-ity. As soo as langag is gin as soon as t nam is orgot-tn that is to say before th Fa th oic o th law starts to

sdc man wo was cratd by forgtting by God s orgt-ting. t is as i th aw rqirs orgtting and orgtting was t

94 G i of u Apprton 95



w progrmmd b w odr hn h w n rn' wh w of h wknng of h w or h w s h w ofh wknng of h w Th nm h whdrw of whchmks h w ss: con snd bfor m kp m And h sm m s whdrws ss: go w forg mbr m Whch rnss no: com kp m s do noforg m c

Ashwtz' the ne of od obgtons

f h sngur of h nm of God consss n h bsourvokng of wh voks f voks on b rvokng ndrvoks on b vokng hpohss cn b rskd srskd' bcus sms o n h hs hpohss coud brjcd on vr srous grounds: dmnds crn mpru-dnc nd vonc vn rrsponsb Dsp h musb sd bou h nm s such nd s w nd no b smpnog on h nm of Auschwz' s b o mk h w

md b h nm of God Bu w mus spk h nm ofAuschwz' mus no b rpcd Th whch s bondcomprson whch voks bsou mus b nmd Ths sh mprv of h nm: A nw cgorc mprv hsbn mposd b Hr upon unfr mnknd: o hnk nd cn such w h Auschwz w no rp sf nd hnohng smr w hppn Whn w wn o nd rsons for hs mprv s s rfrcor s h gvn on of Kn wsonc upon m Dng dscursv wh woud b nourg' Hr mposd nw cgorc mprv on

mn n mprv of h nm: c nd hnk n such wh Auschwz s nvr rpd nd nohng smr hppnswhch s o s: c n hn s f Auschwz coud hppngn s f hd ed hppnd svr ms f Auschwzhppns on onc s cus hs nm pons o n vnwhch w nvr sop hppnng) W cnno dduc Adornosmprv w cnno hn mns of dscursv houghw cnno hn wh h hough of h rnscndn forh confuson of rnscndn nd hsorc or mprc vss no n rror of hough Ths s prcs wh Ausch-

wz' hs nm whch from now prcds hough msus hnk n w spk of nw cgorc mprv n

w spk of srege f w mp o dduc ? n wmpos cgorc mprv on h cgorc mprv?n nm do so? Ths qusons nrsc n hs quson:wh connu o sp k of cgorc mprv' fr Ausch-wz?

I sms h hr s ron wn h obgonmposd b h nm nd h of h mor w Th nmwhch mus no urd forbds rprsnon

Prhps hr s no mor subm pssg n h Jwsh whn h commndmn: hou sh no mk uno h ngrvn mg (Bdns or n knss (ehns of nhng h s n hvn or on rh or undr h rh cThs commndmn cn on pn h nhussm whchh Jwsh pop n hr mor prod esttete Epohe ffor hr rgon whn comprng hmsvs wh ohrs orh prd nsprd b Mohdns Th vr sm hodsgood of our rprsnon of h mor w nd of our

nv cpc for mor Th fr h f w dvs hsrprsnon of vrhng h cn commnd o hsnss w hrupon b ndd on wh cod ndfss pprobon nd no wh n movng forc ormoon s who unwrrnd h vr rvrs s hruh or whn nohng n ongr ms h of snsnd h unmskb nd ncb d of nr s fn posssson of h d (nverkebre nd nshheIdee hr woud b nd rhr of mprng h rdour ofn unboundd mgnon o prvn rsng o nhussm

hn of sng o nd hs ds h d of mgs ndchdsh dvcs for fr of hr b ng wnng n ponc 6

W snd bfor h nm s w snd for h w Thnm concs sf nd gvs sf o rd So h nm'sdound s h w's dound mus xpos oursvso h snc of h nm nd ndur bngposd Wndur somhng whn w cnno s uprgh bcus whv no suppor nd cus w mus s n h doubndSuch n ud' s no ncssr s w mgh hnk h sgn

of c of fh Bu s ws dngrous poc -ud' Kn connus or hs rson govrnmns hv gd





00 e G it o ne Appaon 0



s latd to th unanmous pvg whch w occdntaluopans accod to Auschwtz n th ght o th qustonwhch w oppos to spculatv dactcs to a ctan typof occdntal ason Th dang s that ths w would takfom mmoy o sdn pop nams oth than Auschwtz ons whch a just a abomnab nams whch havnams and nams whch hav no nam 04

Th nam poducs th volnc t poducs whn namngA nam aways wants to b th ony on to nam what tnams that s ts nacsssm nacsssm tsl snt nacsssmncssay td to th nan W must lnk on to th nam wmust spak of Auschwtz aft Aushwtz fo nstanc bykpng to th us of hstoca knowldge W must tak thpow of xcluson the ex!J, fom th nam Thvonc of th nam whch sdns oth nams dmands thatw a volnt towads t and dstanc ousvs fom t n thnam nsd th nan w bcom blnd w s only thnan w s nothng We nd ouslvs n absout xtoty Adono wts ow on should thnk nstad has tsdstant and vagu pototyp n th vaous languages n thnams whch do not catgocay cov th thng albt at thcost of th cogntv functon of anguag n undmnshdcognton w want what w hav bn dd to nouncwhat th nns that co too cos wll bnd us to sgna-ton and dluson a dologca compmnts 0 So th nams at onc pototyp and smuacum th pototyp of thsmuacum and th smuacum of th pototyp t s th

nxtcabl ntacng of th pototyp and th smulacum of thought ts pow of xcuson s du to th blndng poxmty that ks th ltt saf fom man by makng t unad-abl But th smulacum tsf s ony a sot of pototyp thpototy of a fdom ncssay fo thought n 930 Adononots

Th lns of ou dstny coss ach oth and fom an nxtcabl ntlacng ams a th sals whch tm andagan put th mak on th dawng of th lns By

showng us ntals that w do not undstand but whch wfollow thy potct th lns n such a way that w cannot

tak hod of thm but as thy hod us thy stop us fom · 1 k b h ·

.

1 ·206n tang g ous vs ta n y t csscossg s

ams f us fom dstny vn as thy dv us unto thatwhch s byond ou calcuatons

Whn quotd th sntnc fom Adono askd what kndof sntnc a w dang wth? And td to ply phaps

too ptcally k th nam that t nams ths sntnc s anan an appaton th mdabl xploson of th appaton t s a n th nam of a mod bcaus t s absoutlysngua bcaus ts sngulaty s th sngulaty of th namThought cannot do othws than to thnk on th gounds ofths sntnc ths nan t s npossbl to tun to a ast o to to a futu whch has not alady bn dtmnd byAdonos sntnc o n t cannot b lftd o mtd vn ft s ncssay to ask qustons about t t dos not lustatthought W know that Adono onc quotd t to say thoppost of what t says0 Pnna sung has as muchght to xpsson as a totud man has to scam hnc tmay hav bn wong to say that aft Auschwtz on coud nolong wt poms But w cannot us ths oth sntnc tojustfy poty o lgtms thought Th two sntncs acontadctoy statmnts and e he do no onad eah oheTh scond sntnc fom th txt Aft Auschwtz th ttof a mdtaton on mtaphyscs s not just a vocaton tdos not smply mt th ow of th st sntnc vn f thfom somhow calld fo th att The eaonhp beweenhe edb ae Thy a two sntncs two nans

byond xcluson A adng must tak nto account thncommnsuab atonshp btwn ths two sntncsBut t s not wong to as th ss cutua quston whthaft Auschwtz you can go on lvng scay whth onwho scapd by accdnt on who by ghts shoud hav bnklld may go on vng s m suvva cas fo th cold-nss th basc pncp of bougos subjctvty wthoutwhch th coud hav bn no Auschwtz ths s th dastc

· f h h d 0g t 0 m w 0 was spa n an ssay on poty and socty Adono spaks of a ycal

anguag (he Wo: Ony by vtu of a dntatontakn so fa that t can no ong ba ts own dnc only

02 h G o u ppartos 03



by virtue of a dierentiation that cannot tolerate anything butthe niversal in the particular the universal freed from thehumiliation of an isolation or a mere specication ( Vereizeg does lyrical langage represent languages intrinsic beingas opposed to its service in the realm of ends

20 Lyricallanguage is then a dierence a singlar langage or speech it isthe dierence or the singularity of speech in language. Nothing

forces us to think that this singularity is always that of a poe.Bt maybe all (lyrical?) poems are traversed by it. The singularity we are dealing with here is not the reslt of a dierentiationor individualisation of the niversal. The relation between thesingular and the niversal mst be thoght dierently Isn'twhat Adorno calls the niversal (as geeie above alllangage language as sch or langage in general? Speech issingular - and lyrical where the niversal becomes singularand singlarity becomes universal. But this becoming does notin any way have the meaning of what we currently call speci

cation All specication already assmes that the universal isdominant The singularity of lyrical language or speech bycontrast never prespposes anything. It is a singularity withoutsingularity it is a dierence because it is not a dierencebecase it is not opposed to the niversal Language is lyricalinasch as its essence draws on a singlarity without singularity a singularity without opposition For as a singularitywithout singlarity speech stands in for langage for sonething which is essential to it and cannot be reduced to its pragmatic se The singlar imediately exposes itself to theniversal beyond positivity and negativity this imediacy isno longer opposed to mediation. The singular and the universalspeec and language come to pass in their exposition or as anexposition which does not turn into a position The exposure ofspeec to language constitutes its singularity. This of coursedoes not ean that it is something determined since the possibility of deterination already implies the predominance of theuniversal. What if lyrical langage were free speech? DoesntAdorno point to this freedom when he writes that as it stands infor language lyrical language also stands in for a free humanity? Is the impossibility of writing a poe after Aschwitz -

stateet a iteritio} both at oe the impossibility ofachieving free speech of experiencing such speech? Bt there

would be neither a statement nor an interdiction if thoughtwhich is directly concerned with the ipossibility of writing apoem could not gesture towards freedon. Ist Aschwitzprecisely what constrains s to think another freedo? Fromthe start the sentence We can no longer write poetry afterschwitz is strictly nthinkable withot relation to thoghtif it remains isolated. Adorno could not write this sentence

withot writing the one he wote fteen years later (e havethe right to write poetry after Auschwitz'). However he couldnot establish a simple symmetry between the two either. In196 Adorno rturns - for the rst time?2 0 - to hi s rstsentence He as not yet written the second sentence In tisthird passage the second according to a chronological orderdorno states the following

I do not want to soften ny statement that it is barbaric tocontine to write poetry after Aschwitz it expresses nega

tively the impulse that animates committed literature . ]Bt Hans Magnus Enzensberger's reoinder also remains truenamely that literature mst resist precisely this verdict thatis be such that it does not srrender to cynicism merely byexisting after Aschwitz It is the sitation of literatre itselfand not simply one's relation to it that is paradoxical.2

So by holding to the chronological order (1951196-166)we could clai that Adorno has passed from an aration to arevocation and that the passage cited above is that very passage:

the construction of a paradox armation and revocation - inthe iterva between an aration and a (quasi)revocation Wewould then be relying on a continuity of reection Even if it isnot wrong to do so we wold not be grasping the essentialwhat makes Adornos thought singular The rst sentence(1951) is unthinkable withot the second (1966) bt the latterremains nthinkable without the former the second sentencenever stops clashing with the rst. The gravit of these two linesis that of the name of Aschwitz divided even as it remainsindivisible. It stems from this dissymnetry this contradictionwithot contradiction And it is this gravity which aects thevery idea of a continuity of reection. To propose such a continuity means reducing Aschwitz' and - at the extreme -

04 T G of aua Appaitions 05

bl ? h i f hi h A k b h



making i a stage of he ialectic, a negaive that can limatelbe negae

We rea he senence which sates the impossibili ofwriing a poem after Aschwitz - what is a poem? wha is it owrite a poem - as we wol rea a qoe: I have alrea laigrea sress pon his Bt I wol like o poin o again whaseems most ecisive: as a qoe oes not jst mean that it is a

hacknee' phrase, ha i is too hacknee', ha we qote iwithot reall hinking abot what it means an someimes jsto proce a specic eect Isn' his eec alrea programeb he sentence, b is banalit, b he immense an nbearablebanalit of he afterAschwiz', b the necessit which hisname imposes, or beter, b the necessi ha he senenceimposes b imposing his name?2 2 If we rea his senence aswe rea a qote, it is becase we almos never rea he wholesentence, in is enire. We onl rea he rs par: we forgethalf the senence in the same wa tha we forget what is not

qoe in he qote, the context or the omitte wors owrite poer after Aschwiz is barbaric. And his corroes eventhe knowlege Eknntnis) of wh it has becoe inpossible towrite poer toa he senence which states the impossibilitof writing a poem after Aschwiz sates h impossibili ofthinking afer Aschwitz

Thinking against thoght

Afer Aschwitz, he meiaions on metaphsics (he meita

tions ha bear this ile an hose we n in all of Aorno'sworks poin o he confrontaion o f thog ht an eath . e ferring o he analses of the philosopher Alfre Schmit,2 wecol sa that the concept of atiais which Aorno sesfreqentl, is a limiconcept of thogh, a concep whichstans at he ege of meaning an, for his reason, is no longersbjec o the law of the concep If he absence of images'Bidosigkit) in Aornos materialism2 an the Bidvbotconverge, it is also an most of all becase of nie Materialism, Aorno states, is the philosoph ha wol brin eathinto consciosness wihot recing or sblimating it

,2 Whatoes it mean to bring eath ino consciosness' withot sblimating i, witho iealising i, wiho imagining i? Is i p ossi

ble? he consciosness of which Aorno speaks canno be hea wareness of oneself conceive o f b m eaphsica l ho ght: thisconsciosness ms be ene in another wa How? Not onhe basis of sbjective selfrepresentaion, of he experience ancerite of he sbjec, b mabe on the basis of the vigilantmemor of a thogh which wol think against thoght,agains a thoght which wol want to rn in pon itself,

against he hoght of hogh as the hogh of ienit hefact of hinking aer he eah of the oher which cannot behogh: nohing else, Aorno seems to sgges, shol behogh Thinking abot hinking is hinking against hinking,since hogh never sops mastering eath b sblating i, bhinking a ialectical eah of eath. Agains this eah ofeath, against he iealisaion of eath, Aorno sets anohereath of eah, a eah of eath more errible han eath Iesabilises the esablishe opposiion beween life an eathSince Aschwiz, fearing eath means fearing worse han

eath

,2

he srvivor of Aschwitz can neiher live nor ie,he srvives eath as a passage from natral life to the ieal lifeof consciosness :

he gilt of a life which prel as a fac will srangle otherlife, accoring to saisics tha eke o an overwhelmingnmber of kille wih a minimal nmber of resce, as ifthis were provie in the theor of probabiliies his gilis irreconcilable wih living. An he gil oes no cease toreproce iself, becase not for an instant can it be maefll, presentl conscios. his, nohing else, is wha compels

h · l h ? s to p osop se .

In an essa calle After the Fact' an a having nameAorno, Blancho wries

he nee to bear winess is he obligation of a estimon hatcan onl be given an given onl in he singlarit of eachperson b the impossible witnesses the witnesses of theimpossible one is remine here of Horkheimer's phrasingin he passage cie above, A.D some have srvive, bttheir srvival is no longer life i is the break from livingarmaion, the atesaion ha the goo that is life (not nar

06 Git of u

it ife but ife for others) has undergone the decisive

pparons 07

return There is ndnk because thought imlies forgetting



it ife but ife for others) has undergone the decisiveblow that leaves nothing intact.

A few lines on we nd a sentence which reminds us strangely of osenzweigs thought as if this sentence was reroducing the constraints of the riviege accorded to eterna life atthe very moment where this riviege is no longer a riviegeand the sentence itsef comes into conict with it. I rans

ony prvg, this time the riviege of drawing all rivilegesinto irreversible oss. Surviving - survival which survives thesurviva of the name but aso the surviva of the only namewhich describes the after - henceforth means dy ing more thanonce. We can no longer die and we can do nothing other thandie umanity as a whole had to die through the tria of someof its members those who incarnate life itsef amost an entireeole a eoe that has been romised an eternal resence).This death still endures. And from this comes the obligationnever again to die only once without however alowing reeti

tion to inure us to the aways essentia ending 2 8It is as if something had been left intact a certain rivilege which transatesinto a certain surviva which survives survival

How do we name a thought that thinks against thought?Adorno seaks of hilosohical thought maybe because heattaches a truthfuness to it that we need not ress ourseves todenounce f negative dialectics calls for the selfreection ofthinking the tangible imication is that if thinking is to betrue - if it is to be true today in any case it must also be athinking against itse2 he word we could use to name this

thought belongs to eideggers lexicon it lays a very imortant art in the essays he wrote as he read and reread Hlderin It is therefore a erman word the word ndnknndnkn is memory the fact that we remember somethingsoething which will return and belongs to the futureHeideg£er insists on this in the lectures on Hlderlinsoetry 2 But the word also indicates that we aroac something which does not let itsef be aroached which oers acertain resistance to thought Andnkn Adnkn tries toaroach everything that resists it or more exactly it tries to

let itself be aroached by the other who is to come so that itcan kee him by forgetting him and make sure that he wil

return There is ndnk because thought imlies forgettingthe other a reduction of its alterity an identication of thenonidentical a reication or mortication If each of thedead resembles one who was murdered by the living thaterson is also like one they ought to have rescued22 We seemto be abe to nd in this line of Adornos the terrifying idea ofa sacrice of the dead o kee and guard the dead in order torevent them from being sacriced and in this way rescuethem rescue them without akng da work that is whatthe work of the thought of ndnkn would consist o Buthow can we kee the dead the other who is mortied bythought Thought abandons the other it deivers him untoforgetting it leaves that which it tried to think or to rescue todie that which suddenly returns returns as soething elseothing can be rescued unchanged nothing that has notassed through the orta or the gateway Tor of its death.223

It would be easy to class this hrase among the utterances ofseculative diaectics or if we follow the use of the verb to

rescue to show that it designates the idea of the resurrectionof the dead on the nal day of judgement. We cannot arguewith such interretations But what we must also do is attemtto deciher the consteations of Adornos thought startingfrom the na I would say decihering the aarition of thename even further that the gateway of death Tor ds Todss the name the nae that is as dark as a gateway If thename is too close to the named as Adorno suggests it isbecause it freezes or arayses it and thus takes it towards nothingness towards the limit of language If we come too close to

the nae we are in danger of being aralysed We mustalways mourn what is named For the name arady identiesthe thing as acues Derrida stresses

he thing agnicent and classed at once raised above alltaxonoy all noenclature and already identiable in anorder o give a nae is always like any birt certicateto subliate a singlarity and to infor against it to and itover to the oice All te olice forces in the world can berouted by a surnae but even before they know it a secret

couter at the moment of batis wil have ket thed 22u to ate

08 h Gt of u Aarons 9



How somthing luds this comput th idnticationo th thing by th nam ncssaily ogts that it was a gitDnomination is an onaming' and is so bcaus o thstaying o th na bcaus o its spaation bcaus o thoiginay intuption h a n nough and always toomany nams. A nam nams mo than it nams n othwods what is namd can haunt th nam mak it tun and

tun o xampl und anoth nam his is th whil oth nam h is no idntity o th nam o o th namd oo th nam and th namd

As ob

Bcaus it nams mo than it nams th nam is a pomisBut as soon as dnomination is onaming th nam whatappas always at its singulaity bcoms inspaabl omth constllation By thi ngatiity n as total ngation

atwoks mak a pomis ust as th gstu (sts) withwhich naatis onc bgan o th initial sound stuck on asita pomisd what had n bn had bfor n bnsn n i it was th most asom ,22 h wok o at thconstllation as appaition' is a pomis t is a nam And thpom in its y singulaity its gin singulaity is th nama x s witing a pom at Auschwitz babaicbcaus all poms a pomiss bcaus a pom still pomissn i it pomiss what is most asom? No pom atAuschwitz mans at Auschwitz th can b no mo

pomiss o nams Auschwitz conmd th philosophm o d h 226pu ntty as at Nonthl ss w ha to tstiy and th can b no tsti-

mony without nams s tstimony alady a sign o hop?How can w think hop? Dos it consist in th unctainty ot call i t otkowing that all pomiss ntail in thxpo to th cal o a pomis? Hop is past o to com itscap th on who tis to kp it until dath

o th gaz wich las it bhind th ath isoundd to a sph that can b oiwd it appas as int pictus which in th mantim ha bn takn ompac ot th cnt o atio but somthing minut and

phmal. o such xpinc is allid th mlancholy hopo oth stas inhabitd by happi bings than humansBut th ath that has gown mot to itsl is without thhop th stas onc pomisd t is shinking into nptygalaxis. On it lis bauty a th ction o past hopwhich lls th ding y until it is ozn blow th aks ounbound spac 7

hought as Adn is inspaabl om th nan and thpomis om th nam a pomis h nam is a pomisbcaus it kps man at a distanc bcaus it is th uniqu

h d ? nomnon a stanc

What is a mtaphysical xpinc? w disdain poctingit upon allgdly pimal ligious xpincs w a mostlikly to isualis it as Poust did in th happinss oinstanc that is ponisd by illag nams lik Ottbach

Wattbach Runthal Monbunn On thinks that goingth would man nting th ullld as i it xistdBing ally th maks th pomis cd lik a ainboAnd yt on is not disappointd; th ling now is on obing too clos ath and not sing it o that ason

Whn h dns th nam and stablishs a lationshibtwn th nam and t pi een inng prxi-nity and an illuinating distanc Adono uss th oulawhich dns th appaition o at as i it xistd (a ob s

wr) w wantd to show that a thought is potic asHannah Andt ishs to say o Bnanin3 w shouldncssaily to th nam and th omula o th appaitionWhat dos Adono say about th pomis? says this aponis cannot b kpt but this impossibility dos not inplyany disappointmnt A pomis is not a m anticipation cannot mak a pomis unlss it is impossibl o m to anticipat th cts o that pomis know in adanc what igoing to happn wll thn in this cas th pomis is not apomis A pomis is xcssi th always has to b anothpomis to th pomis anoth na o th nam whichpomiss pomiss itsl in pomsg a ctain happinss hd . 2 b h � f . sappotmnt may t symptom o a con un w

0 of

onfuse the promise and what is promised. We an't endre the

Aartns

Being is not a nane bt it is not the other of the name either it



p pfat that the nane withdraws. This does not mean that we anpromise absolutely anything: a pronise must be kept. Thename as promise fores us to pronise to remember it to keep itin our memory Bt remembering demands the possibility offorgetting. What does the name promise? As the prototype ofthought in language it promises a ertain experiene ofanguage an experiene of langage as gift: it promises a name

and another name a promise and another promise anotherapparition of the name as promise. As soon as there is apromise there are others there is never only one promise thatis what makes the happiness of all pronises what makes everypromise a promise of happiness. Andenken the memory of theoming of the ane a memory whih does not hod meaningbut an insription that al names arry tere are naes and thereare as inadnissible names absoltey singuar names whihdestroy singlarity for exanpe what we al the singuarityof the poem nanes whih obige even more beyond obliga

tion.

Te nae and Beng

Heideer speaks of the promise of Bein in his letures onNiilism as dtermined by the history of Being'

Addressing in this way whie withholding itself in defaultBeng s te rse f tse To think in order to enounterBeing itsef in its default means to beome aware of the

promise as whih pronise Being itself is'. t is however instaying away that is to say insofar as there is nothing toit .23

Being is noting it oneals itself it is a promise inasmuh asit oneas itself and it is noting But we annot keep Beingand renain attentive to its pronis xept by giving names andkeeping the givn nane Was e Dnke? is ear on thispoint Being or that whih gives ein obliges (et us toname so that something an appear. Every time a name is

given there is a promise and a promise of te promise(ereng an announement wih promises). ertainly

gis th name the name of the nae. Bing is before the name itis erier Ther is nothing befor the name only Being tatwhih gives both Bein and the name the originary al theall whih is a gi the gift of denonination As Heidegger saysin his ssay on George the word of the word the name of thename is laking beause this word this name is nothing it isnot a word it is not a na it gives the word it gives the

nane it is not simpy the other of the word the oter of thename it is the word it is the name othr The name is (not)nothing. Nothing is more diult than giving a name nothingis more diut than naming things by their names. Heideggerexperiened this by naming and refusing to name. But we oneaross names - by aident by obigation

N



Notes

C ain

Maimo Caa, I da p 54.2 Thi ialog ha n inia y KalOo Apl

n in nin an i a qoning of hol of hogh whih a omna logi oflangag in Aiol Aong o hi mol, wo nlanag a "manng a hy igna omhngGoing ak o h oign of hi hma of pnaionw ol ay ha wo a ppo o nam fo"ing hing o "o KalOo Apl, ginin n gg p 376.

3 Th an la hap of h ook w pn oJaq Dia mina Th on i a onion oa olloqm on anlaion whih ook pla n Spm9R7 C gan y e eCollg Innional Philooph Th h ,nally, wa win pially fo hi ook

I wol lik o hank Giogio Agamn, Ginva

Bopiani, Silva Bovnhn, Philpp LaoLaah,JanL Nany an go Saniago

I On h Pah wad Sacd Nam

4 Tana' n: h oiginal il D chin nac chin an al mn I qi a long way (og o h a nam)!

5 Main igg, ha I ad Thinki p 1 1 7 .6 Kal Lw, igg an onzwig En Nahag

z Sn n Zi, in id nk in Di Zip 75

7 al wh L i maY £< and f 93 p 2 .

wh in ahag, p 9 az Ronzw, T Sa dm p 4

Mn g Th an of Sa na p 2 d p 24. 2 Rozwig, Th Sa p 379

3 d p 3R3.14 Id p 336 5 Ibd p 3051 Ibd p 3 3 .7 Ibid p 328 Sqa ak fom h anlao of T

Sa8 Ibid p . 45 9 Ibid 4520 Ibid p 302.2 Gog Fh ilhlm gl T Snc �f Lgc p

27.22 Ronzwg T Sa p. 32.23 Ma okhi, amm Sch vol. , pp 23-424 Ronzwg, T Sa pp 47 4.25 bid p 408.26 In a omplly n on, Gnva Bopian

wi : i i v g jny fo hpla of on ih, oi of onlf, kng ha whihh pl alay onan, whh wll pmi a n[ Th mo pop all man o of himlf, o of hpla of h ih. Ginva Bpani, L aa pp 21-2

27 Ronzwg, Th Sa p 33628 id p. 33729 bd p. 33830 Ibd31 Ibid p 33932 Th poh i lk a hng3 3 Ronzwig, Th Sa p 339.34 Ibd35 Ibid p 34036 Ibd p 339.3 Ibid38 Main gg, Dic n Thikig p 80

4 The G ala

3 Marin Hidggr The rc so p 3

os 5

(Bebe i h am a "rurning (ckker Th rurn



3 Marin Hidggr The rc so p 3 arin Hidgr sc, o V p u ry o

rconru h argumn or nonrprnaionanc o houh In h diaogu on esseh, i in adicuion who aim i ramn proor ay hain ordr o dicovr nc o an w mu urnaway rom nn and avoid xing our gaz on hi n hinc an i a ing a hin u w mu no payoo much anion o houg o i horizon i w wano hin h nia characr o hi nc W mur ourv rom h horizon o hough rom hhorizon ha rom a anian prpciv i away cradby h ynhiing aciviy o h rancndna imaginaion W can up h argumn chnaicay w uoo or h nc o omhing in a pac' in a i'wic i no h i o a which i nia o wha haan nc wihou or a ha ing a compy dirni' Thi dirnc i incrid in idniy o

egke i w hod o h dniion gin in Ide dDrece (p edes ws ser s h ses ckgegeb J jdes sebr s dssee ch r es sebs h sebs[Each hing i i rurnd o i ach i i amor i wih i '] Th nc o hough - o hougha ramn i wha Hidggr na wih an archaicrman word ee. I movmn h movmn oh eg, i a movmn o w mk hing - no h ojc or egesd - urg orh andunod (ehe by giving i duraion ( Wee, verwee

and r (Berhe, rhe, by ringing i o r in i ando dw in i r - which i no poiing To gi ri oi away o a urg or ma a r; urgingorh aing ring ar modaii' ha poin o hvn ha giv ri o h givingri a vn Bu hege (hawhichrgion and i nc canno ray wo dirn hing i w may pa hr o hing aa ' py: Th (s o h ege i prumay inc ( Wese and he sess of s se - of se (ds ebehrer ebs

, (Dscorse Thkg, p 86) To hin -

omhing nia - i o approach wha on hin and inuch a way dw apar er rom hi hing' dwing''

(Bebe i h am a rurning (ckker Th rurn(zck, rck i nia o nc a idniy onquny h nia characr o nc i i approachingaiy i dirnc i i no impy nc i i nonc in n o Ere, o ha wich ing ipyh a ma no dirnc; nia i mmn which a a pacing ha gahr a nc o oug h hing i and hough - dw in i proprpac by maing i com ac o hi pac o hi pacwhich i pac h gahring o a ebge ard bya pacing W can rad h esrch a a rancripion oh aying o Parnid I i a i ege, h nc ohough o ramn h nia o h nc o nwr arady i own nc nc i a i i ovmn wr nc drmind on h bai o idniy onh ai o ebgke I w hin w away hin nia; a i o ay w ourv carrid by hnia movmn o h ee, by nc To in i

away - and no ony whn w hin h ac o hiningh nc o man o do onhing ohr han hinomhing or which i no omhing ; i i odirac ourv wihou or ha rnouncing ough; ohin i o ra hough - horizona and rancndna wihou raing ramn in ohr word noprmiing wha i rad o rcuprad y a rcion which wud aa upp ini iica rpiion o an hin' and ao no priinghough o com pur indirnc Thi doub prcau

ion i dou anion o diracion ow a man who hin xpo im o h rappropriaion ando o h dirnc which coniu idniy Drivn byhi wih o ound hough on princip an rurn o anaura dipoiion' (rge o man Hidggrwho concrn i o droy or dconruc h axiom oh roe whi coninuing o hin on baio h idnicaion o uman nc wih hough undrin h imp oranc o h anian concpion o rprnaion Thi conain a i har h idniy o houghand wi Thining undrood in h radiiona way arprning i a ind o wiing [ ] Thining i

T G a.wc N



n nd n s tnkn D dW D D Th 58-) Itnkn s not sst to t ssn o n ( WJm D) tn t nssty o tnkn tout tnkn o tnkn t tnkn tout tnkn ns otnkn t do ttnton tt ts dstrtonrss trnsts ts nto t nssty o tnkn l o non nd tt s y n nr to your quston s to t I rly ntd ro our mdtton on tntur o tnkn I rld I nt nonn Eh wd Nh (Id. 5) In d A d PTh F h P Lourtnvoks n s turn o nonl ln nd notn nonrtnson to ln nd ntn ttn dos ts odsty n ts not to b oso-sn? s rs no onr ntn osoy ndntn notn otr I t s rsly t vountrstbtus tt must rnoun ( 45). (yotrd Tn o tnkn snt syt omn ro outsd tonsr ts on t nd std o n ts tru t stout tsl sovn to rsolut ddn to tnt ntn not to nt ntn rsly not tont to rodu nn n l o t ust bsnd" Th I T ) Tsrtrton o t rqurnt xrsss t ssnto un ssn brns our ttnton k to t r dox- rn o rooston o t o w or w n w. It vlts t ds us to undrstnd tt tr s n ssntl nrttud or ndsonWn w: n rn o t nd t t st or t t t ts to rtun to t ssntl dsst-n ro t Wn w sns not ntnto nd ntn notn s not o t ordr ot l notn ould n obt outsd o tsordr Wln lln osoy or tout n ysb or o nonln; on t otr nd nonnn b orm o ln T solr nssts on t quvo- rtr o t orulton onlln or ontn nns lln n su y s to nvov nton b t vn n t sns o nton s drtd

t ln nd rnouns t Nonn ns trorlnly to rnoun ln And t trm nonllnnns rt t rmns bsoutly outsd ny ndo ll D Thn 59) To tnk nd tnkn to ross t trrtoy o t l to tnk nd tostrt out ro t xtnuton o t ll or ts or orlss ntv nton to tnk nd to dvst tout o tsvoluntst ; to tnk tt dos not otsl to lotd n ts h nd s tus ssntlto tout tt s t onrn o t E

4 Rosn Th 344 d. 36643 Id. 343.44 Id 3445 Id. 43446 Id 347 Id. 3-48 Crstns sys Horkmr ttstd to tr rlon by

don t o ost o t ty sould v don rsuton nd urdr r t rons to t rosson oJs t to t ttstton to God nd s oCould t s do otn otr tn ttst to tr rlon Couldnt ty do t t rstns dd osCrstn trd o k to t dstnton tndsours nd nrton ts dstnton tt Rosns to b t orn o rstnty Horkr rts

To sv tslvs t s d to tr dny tr Godor or tsvs nto Stt Ts to otons nt oss o Juds on ls tt t Js dsrn no lonr rsnt t ord t otr tt tyl nto t nvtb ntons o t otrs Isrl"m h{ vo 4 345) To sv tmsvs t Js ust dssot t ndssol ttstton

4 Rosn Th 955 Mrtn Hdr n Tm 38 (§ 56) .5 1 Walter Benj amin , The Metaphys ics of Youth ' , TValter

m d W vo 5 Rosn Th 956.53 Id 3754 T \d t ord usd n t orn s



ot 1 2 1



e The Pri(i]>!£ { Raso, p . 5

Tas!tiX th ThiX

7 Jcus e trit o tph Eciti p 9 Wlt Bejm L u l th

u o / ) Strt d Ot H/rfi\.

p 1 1 8 IH b p 922 bi p 8 i p 0 4 Pul M oclusos Wlt Bjs "sk

the slto T ita t Thy p 85 lte Bej octe o th Sml ' G

Citq p 5 H Bj O Lu p .

Ib p H H dW) I90 Ii p 1 2 .9 Iid. p 8 92 I bi p 1 1 7 93 i pp 1 2 9 p 2 .95 Wlte ejm O the mtc Fcult n- V)

Stet and th ltigs p 12

9 Bj O Lu p 9 bi9 eg lzat Cad Thi? p 99 Iid. p

eLuc c O Dv Plc 1ptCmmuiy p 1 5 .

1 Hegg V! Ca Tikig? p 2 2 Heee, 0 te Way t Thii p 2 .

II I -ai a a(Jy

lte Bejm K O th th veso Hs Dth ui ati p

F ch Wlhlm Joseph Schellg O u edo p 9

5 heoo oo Kiekeaad Cottio o thetht p 2 th pss o the Phlosoph o Rlgo hch h vts to the elo o the sublmeegel clms tht th elchol o tue - o ll tht stul - s th sult o lue to uest eth Fo

t m whch hs psse though th thee s o -tul mchol

Hlls me "Geme "DeRhe p

Mt Heeg Shelling Teatie o the Ee ouan edo p

1 t Hege, todtio to etaphyi pp 52- 9 lt Bjm , wo Poms b ech Hlel

Selted iti p 2 Doubtless oous lss o thestuctu o Das - e t Jeuc cs wok

o em - oul sh tht the questo o melchol o omto - s splc b ths ve stuctueThs splcemet m come close to wht Bejm sthk wh h spe s o the ojects sess, wchoul ogte uvesl ovemg the subject oths txt But thee s th equvocl t s becusvoluts the wll to ppe to oese whch e s lk t the them o the Volk so to thethms outo eomto mkes etphscl tptt o melcho possble we ust

stush volutsm om to ll llg' the seseo eectv exposto to exst etvt hch soth else th expos ectvt)

, (Se Luc

c, h xpien f Liby p 28 bout the poblmo cto s pp 8-)

oo Agbe Stana p 2 ejm Lgue' , p 12 1 1 2 Iid1 id 4 d

1 5 heoo W Aoo iima oalia §2 p 1 2 1 Rosewe The Sta p 2441 7 eegge Dioue o Thiki p 82

2 2 ots 2



Bjm O guge p 2 9 bd. pp 22 2 Id. p . 2 2 Ibd. p . 22 2 Ibd p 23 23 W te Bj Th Orn o Gr an Trc Daa, pp

83- Ibd p. 2 25 Pul e M A gors �f Rad g, p 6 Bej Th Or, pp 225 Ibd p 9 8 bd. pp. 39 29 Bej O Lguge p 223 These two texts wee tslte to ech b JLuc

c Phle LcoueLbthe.3 Wlte ejm Th Role o Lguge Trarsp/

Tge Sctd Wrs, p. 59

32 Bej O Lguge p 33 Ibd. p 9 3 Ibd. p . 2 35 Ibd. 36 Wlte Bejm o tque o Mthcl olece

On Wa Strt d Otr Wrtngs, pp 5- 3 I t s o o the mt o t ote tht th tme coms

o ecsos to be tke ecsos ctul lws ecebout mts o otes the bsece o lts o otes eegge les me "Geme u

"De Rh p 38 D oes ejms ess O Lguge Geel the

Lguge o M escpe bstcto jugemet sgcto It s pehps ot sgct to ote tht Schloemwte to tslte ths ess to the lguge whchseems pop to t - Hebw the og lguge(Ursprach Appet Bej ot use ths expesso whout o t est ths cotext s O Lgug text este ot to be he Gm Csomeoe who speks ol Gem he uest t

D Bejm who v lee ebew tslte ebew text wthout tsltg t W e eme heeo eegge hs veto of Geek phse . I so

s the ttmpt to ppoch th Urspra wht s rspra-chh Hw c b cos s ttempt toppoch p osweg ss tht the Jew speks thesc u ol whe h esses Go - the meso o th txt s o log tht o bstcto. Bejmsess s cessl ptcpt both: bscto p t cot b othwse o txt whose sttg

pot s ot hpothess but ptcul expeece keto tuth whch scps bg peste s hpothessTht s th xpltio o th ctos Bejm cpovok t s s tht hs thought s hevl ogmtc uveble tht hs ste s poctc oscusvv uthot Wht ths ects we evtblewhe o tes t thk the evet o the gt

39 ejm h ole Wl BCljaill, T3[ Tg Std

Vrs pp. 556

Ibd p. 5 2 stotle Th Ma �f G and Mancho Probs

ook XXX) obems octe wth ctclWsom tlgc Wsom p.

3 ejm The ole p . 6 Ibd p . 6 5 bd p. 6 6 d p . 6 Theoo W. Aoo Musc Lgue A gmet

Qas na Fatasa, pp 2-3

Thoo W. oo ots o Phlosophcl Thkg Crtca ods Itros ad Ca chwords, pp . 3 2

9 Bejm Th Orn, p. 3 5 Heegg ls e "Geme u "De

he p 9 5 Wlte Bejm ele ht Gsmt Shr

t, pp 33- Th pece o he ttle uchbck swth em pe I mge tht ths etele whch people s shes beo th ees o the g s me up o pctus k thos the Lttle uchbck hs

o ll o us The sh b t get spe lke the ttebooks wth tght bgs tht wee oc the pecusos omovg pctues. The thb pessg get woul



26 Th I

64 W l B j i Th l i li i F ' i 0 Ibid 82

"os 27



64 Walte Bejami Theologicopolitica Fagmet' i 0eWay Stt ad Othe itin<s p. 156

165 Giogio Agambe gue et histoie' i alt B;ami p .

6 t is tue that a ois e ivtabl educes the supise ofth gift (this is wh ua David Gaca Bacca claims thatou caot omise a gift; c Tes eiios loso-l ita

ios e eoma p 3 Howeve we caot compltelsepaate the pomise fom a supise. A pomise is alwassupisig ad impobabe It is ot ased whe it has beekept: what happs is ve what had bee pomised ad isot without pomis. Supise is the memo of a pomise

6 The logic' of th gi also uis a seculatio whichseeks to beet fom fogettig Fo fogettig that thishappes absolutel fogettig the gift which is thus thbsolut i e by sig h gi al poiilitof ceivig a bet that is to sa of makig the gift

etu absolutel.6 ejami Theologicopolitical Fagmet' p 1546 Philippe LacoueLabathe Potique t poitique i imi

tatio es Modees p M itaics AGD.1 Tanslatos Note i the title ad thoughout this sectio

the is a pa o the similait of ave i (futu ad veni ( et to coe'

1 Geshm Scholem Towad a destadig of thMssiaic dea i Judaism' i Te essiai Iea i Judaismp . 1

1 2 Bauch de Spioza Tatatus ThologioPolitius pp 66-. 3 ate Bej mi hss o th Philosoph of Histo ' iIlninatios, p 25

4 Bejami Theologicopoitica fagmet' p. 55.1 5 f th futue is th comig o f th the the othe et to

come ad if this futue does ot let itsef be aticipated ifthe pomise a d the memo of the ote ae abso luteloigial th the othe is alwas th oe who ca comead who coes at a omt who is alead the

6 JeaFaois Lotad The D end p. 88. Theodo W. Adoo Aestti Tho, .

8 Ibi p . 3 Ibid p 85

Ibid p . 82 .1 8 Ibi. 2 Ibid. p. 8 3 Ibid. p 83 .1 4 Ibid p 8 185 Bejai Theoogicopolitical Fagmet p. 155.186 Fiedich Nitzsche T Gen alog oa[i t, p . 3

ee aache eads this passage dieetl Heshows that te elatioship the wil maitais with itselfad establishs though memo ad pomise cosists ofa alteatio because it cosists of a iteetatio ofwil as will il is a give wod. ( ee amache The omise of ttatio Remaks o theHeeutic mpeative i Kat ad ietzsche' iPmiss: Esas on ilosophy a d itatue om Kant toCelan, pp 1 12-4

8 acques Deida Mnois: o Pal a p . 50

18 Adoo Aesthti Theo p 4 18 heodo W Adoo Pisms 34.10 hiipe LacoueLabathe Th Respose of Ulsses'

Who Coes e the Suet11 otad The Ded, 88.2 Emmaual Levias he ae of God Accodig to a

Few Talmudic Texts i Beod the Vese p. 122.3 Bejami O Laguage' pp. -2 M italics AG .D.14 oest Soloviel th cabbaist sa that these two voices

that of God which we must ot ame ad that of uame

able evi ae so absolut alik that the dieece betweehe is like the soud of a aidop i the ocea (GeogeSteie Commen taie p . 14 .

15 Theodo Adoo Ngative Dialetis, p . 365 16 mmaue Kat Citiq u Jugemen t Pat Book pp.

12-8 Ibid p. 12.18 acques Deida Befoe the lw i Kaa an d th e Cont1

oay Citial Peo1a : Centeay R eadis . 14 1 1 Pete Szodi Duch die Ege geht' i CelanStudi,

p. 102-3.

2 Max Hokheime ad Theodo W Adoo The Dialetioflightnmn, 23

8 The GUt 4 Laguage

2 H C h Di R li i d V d Q

27 A ti 3 2

9



2 Hemann Cohen Di Rligi dr V au d Qd Judntum , p 43

22 Sgnd Fud ad thim pp 179-8, 8523 otad T Drd pp 57- 24 Phlppe LaoueLaathe and eanLu Nan (ds L

n d h . artir d trav ail d acqu Drrida p 3 1 1 25 Adono Nati Dialctic, p 5 2

206 Theodor W Adorno Notiz ber amen in GesammelteSchrifte , vol 20 .2 . Like Adorno Heidegger links names

with destiny In his analysis of the poe Das Wort' he says

that the poet needs ames because names are the words

which show the thing and make representation possible :

they are die darstellede Wote and they present what is

alr eady to representational thinking: "The poet hiself

composes in virtue of the claim to the names In order to

reach them he must rst in his journeys attain to that place

where his ca i nds th required fullment This happens

at his country s strand. Th strand bounds, it arrests, limitsand circuscribes the poets secur sojourn he bourn the

well from which the twilit norn the ancient goddess of

at draws up t names is at th ge f th pots land

or is the edge itself the well? ith these names she gives the

poet those words which h condenty and sure of himsef

awaits as the portraya of what he believes to be that which

is . The poet's caim to the rule of his Sa ying is conrnedThe ourishing and shining of his poetry become presence.

The poet is sure of hi word and just as fuly in comnand

of it (O n te Vay to Lauage pp 44-5) But there is one

word that the Norn withholds this withdrawal of thename, this lack (Asbleib des ae) puts an end to the

pots journey to the Norn's wel For by this new experi

ence the poet has caug ht sight of a dierent rule of the

word, although in a veied manner' (Ib id. p. 1 46) The

word the missing word is the word of the word So the

poet who experiences the withdrawal of the name abandons

rpresentation and abandons himsef to the words hidden

essence which invisibly in it s Saying and even already in

what is unsa id extends to us the thing as thing (Ibid. p

1 54 The withdrawa o f the name its essentia l illegibilityleads us away from destiny - as representation

27 A ati 322 8 Iid. pp 32-29 Theodo Adono n oet d Soet n

t Litratur vol 1 p 53 2 A dosse ontanng all th texts whee Adono has asd

and ased aga n the questo of oet a Aus hwtz haseen ollated Peta Kedas ad was pulshd n

1995 see Lrk ac Achwtz? Ad d di Dict.2 Theodo Adono Comtmt n \t t Litatu,

vol 2 pp 7-822 Laoueaathe a i Cle ic p 1 hat

does analt ean at Aushwt The ae sevalanswes 1 ) vtg has eome uneaal analopaed wth the past of that whh ae efoe Aushwtz (2 veth as ome uaal analopaed wth th omsual ealt of Aushwtz3 Nothng s mo aa than th neesst and ts a

maton e ae o ow on ondemned to epeatvethng has eo anal ad ths eptton tselfs not exempt fom analt The lak of posslt eansthat evthng has oe the a neesst o a analtfo us wtes Kkegaad T amaton of analt neesst s alead a evoato othwse Adoo ouldnot have wtten a text enttld Afte Aushwt A s soonas we am the eesst of analt - ths expesso s aplonasm - we do ot smpl negat posslt we alsoden that we have alead aknowedged t e seem toe ute ale to stand th analt \e all uneaalPhaps ths analt mad of ts ow peated aatonshould have a dent nae t s ath a fault gve thatdog wong to the onl thought of whh we thnk thatwe an am the mpossle posslt' - thought atAushwtz means makng osef gult ve f suhwongdong s nevtale 4 The tme desed theexpesson ae Aushwt ou tme - s haatesd the analt of evl annah Aendt speaks of whenwtng aout hmann: e was not stupd It was sheethoughtessness - soethng no eans ental wth

stupdt - that pedsposed hm to eome one of thegeatest mnals of hs peod And f ths s anal and

Th GU f ,QIac

ee fu f wt te bst w te wod oe aot

Ns

oud osu s t oud st b o despa Th



ee fu f wt te bst w te wod oe aotxtat a daboa o deo pofudt fo Ea tat s st fa fo a t oopae r 1Tat su eotss fo at ad su toutesssa wea o ao ta a te stts taetoete w as et a - tat was fat, t esso oe oud ea Jeusae But t was a

esso ete a expaato of te eoo o ateo about t aa Aedt Eihma i jesale: ARepot the Banality f E'il pp 27

2 Afed Sdt e ds Matas us be Adoo[T Coept of Matas Adoo] AdooKenz 9 p 2

2 Adoo NeLaie Dialtis p 225 Todo Adoo Philosopise einoloie o p

8 2 Adoo eai Dialeis p 272 7 Iid Jeau Na tats uswtz sd t

deat of bt ad dat te oeso to a tabstato te ato o exste Th Expeiee oFeedom p 22 Te te abstato of deat ustot be ofusd wt ts ote abstato w s teoot of a - etapsa - fos of dspa w oao wt Keeaads aass t ossts of t soatoof a eeet et to te osttuto of te . wtout d d deat ts s te foua tatsuases te essee of dsa fo Keeaad: "t s ts ast sese tat despa s te sess uto deat ts

aos otadto ts sss te sf eeast o de to de ad et ot to de to de t deat Fod eas tat t s a oe but d te deat asto e to expeee dat ad f fo a se stat tsexpeee s possbe t s tataout to expee tfoe ] Te d of dspa tasfos tsef otua to a Ts despa a aot de ooe ta te dae a sa touts a despaosu te tea t, te sef w s te oud ofdespa wos wo det ot ad wose e s ot

queed Fute o Keeaad wtes f tee weeot etea a e oud ot despa but f despa

oud osu s t oud st b o despa ThSikess 1 Deat pp 2 0 uswtz asdstod dspa ad ts dat Fo despa awaspsupposes te suppot of a dstutb oest teo dess Adoo sas of w st e ae uswtz- sow ts possbt of da

28 Maue aot A t Fat iios iles T'o

Fiios, pp 8929 Adoo eai'e Dialeis 5 220 edee Hds de Gesamtaus-

abe p 2822 Teodo W Adoo, 2ae p 2 .222 JeaLu N a Te opate Cout The

Inopeaive o it) p 2 22 Adoo Neative Dia eis p 222 Jaques eda Gas p 7 doo awae of ts fu

to of te ae: I a eta ses, out to ae beeab to dedu Fass fo te oes of dood As a oquo dspat os to t eotestpoes Fass ad st ts adae uad tee obefo t aed sfows If te boueosas as fo te eoa utud te dea of abuta atoa out, of oppsso of a b a tede aead equpped t aes e ost adJe ad suaes Beeot Boua ad Eateated te dea bfoe te aduts we stoa pefo ts easato Mi1ia oali p 92

225 Adoo, Aestei Theo p 5

22 Adoo Negaie Dialetis p 222 Adoo Mae, p .228 Wate Ba T o of At t A of

Meaa poduto Ilumiatios p 22229 Adoo, Naie Dialis 20 aa Aedt Wate Bea 8929 Me i

Da Ties pp 22 We ae awas dsappoted b a eeato f te ea

to - o te apoaps - dsappots t s eaps otbeause of a ast w a st as a essa

uded s boo Fiedship Baot sas A powetat s ot ou powe tat o pots to a possbt

32 G Lalga

wtht mat a pbablt whch , let a, pb



ablepbable tha wld be pwe, a pwe ad a pwe ve , l f we dmated t wthceta The Apcalpe Dapptg , p 10 . f aevelat a apcalpe dappt, t athebecae f the pe: wthdaw whe t fllled kept, whe that whch pmed cme t pa Whatcme t pa t eeal ethg lackg e

thg t mthg whch the The wthdawal fthe pme gve e t the the whle al keepg thepblt pe f athe cg f the the thak tathe pme

232 edegge, is, vl , p 22

Bblography

AOO, Thed WAsi To taated b Rbet lltKet,

Ld The Athle Pe 17Cmmtmet, : Nos o Liau vlme 2 pp 7-4The adle, the Pt, ad Eal Expeece, : os o

Liau vlme 2, pp 2111T Jaon o Au n ii , talated b Kt Tawk ad

Fedec Wll Ld: tedge ad Kega Pal 1 73

Kikaad: onsuio n of As i talated b betlltKet, Meapl: Uvet f Meta Pe1

Ma, talated b Edmd ephctt, Chcag Uvetf Chcag Pe 12

Minia Moaia, talated b Edmd Jephctt, Ld:NLB ad Ve 178

Mc ad Lagage: A Fagmet, : Quasi una Fanasa,talated b de Lvgte, Ld e 1 2

Nai iais talated b E B Aht, Ld:tledge ad Kega Pal 1 0

Nte Phlphcal Thkg : iia ods Invnions and ahwods talated b e W Pckfd, NewYk Clad vet Pe 17, pp 127-34

Nos o Liau vlme 1 talated b She WebeNchle, ew Yk: Clba Uvet Pe 11

Nots o Liau, vle 2 talated b She WebeNchl, New Yk: Clmba Uvet Pe 1 2

O Lc Pet ad Scet, : Nos o Liatu, vlme1 , pp 37-4

Nt be Nae, Gsamm , vlme 20.2

Fakft am Ma Shkamp 1 8

34kf M i

Bloh 3

l B l l



Philosophise Trm i1 o logi , vou 2, Frankfurt am Main:

Suhrkamp 1 974 Prisms, translated by Samu and Shirry Webr Cambdg e

MA MIT Prs 98

AGABEN org io

ang ue et hs to ir n : Valtr Bnjami edted by ans

Wsma Pais Edtos d Ce 8Stzas, trans lated by Ronald Martnez nneapoli s:

esit o Mesota Pess 93

APEL KarOtt

W ttg enste in und Hedeg gr' : Hcidc�r. Prpk ti C zur

D 1g sei's "Veres, edte d by Otto Pg g elr Kng st ein

Athe� 8 p 376

AREDT Hannah

Ei/man i Jrsal : A Repor 01 th Banali y of Evi l, New York: Peng u Books 979

W atr Bnjamn : 892 94 , n : Me 1 i Dark Tims ,

Harm ondsworth Mx: Peng un Books 973 , pp 5 -203

ARSTOTLETh Uan o Gniu s a d clan o ly (Prol ms, Bo ok XXX) n :

Th Complt; Works of Aris to l , vo lume 2, Prnceton NJ : Prn-

ceto n Unvers ty Press 984 pp 1 498 506

BAMI Waltr B' iner Kidh i [ A Berln Chldhood ] n : Gsam m le S/zr i

n , volume I . , Frankfurt a Mai : Suhrkamp 972

Doctrne of th S imla r ' trans latd by Knut Tarkowski n

NcU' Germ an Crii que, issue 7, 979 pp. 65-9

For a Crit qu of Mythical Voenc' in: Oc- Way Strc d

Othr Wriin�s, pp 321 54

Franz Kaa: On th Tenth Anniversary of s Dea th ' n

Ilum i atio ns, pp -40

Ilu in atio s , translatd by Harry Zohn London Jonathan

Cap e 1 970. .

The Metaphyscs of Youth ' transated by Rodney Lg

sto : lt Bj le ole pp - 7

O agage i Geeal ad th agage o Ma i O e Ot pp 7-23

O th Meti Falt i 0 t O pp 03

0- tt O g taslated b Edmd

Jphott ad Kgsl Shote Lodo NB ad Veso 7Te Og of G Tg D taslated b Joh

Osbo Lodo NL B ad so 77Th ole o Lagage i Tul ad Tagd'

l g olme , pp 5-elet ol edited b Mas Bllok ad

egs Cambidge MA Haad est Pess

The Stotl lto pp 83 Tel ad Tagd i el g ole pp

55-8hess o th hlosoph o Histo i llu o pp 255-6

Thologopolital Fagt' i O tet Otht pp 556

Two oems b Fdih ldel' taslatd b StalCogold elt g olme pp 836

Th Wok o At i th Age o Mhaised Repodtio llto pp 2 -5

BEVESTE Eil

Po e lgqu g Pas allmad 97

BLACHOT MeAt the Fat i V Cle To Fo e h

F taslated b al Ast w Yok Stato Hill Pss85 pp 5-6

The Apoalps s Dsappotig Fh taslatedb Ezabth Rottbeg Staod Staod iest Pss7 pp 0-8

BOPA ia

' t Mila Feltlli 88

16 The GUt of Lagle

CACCAR Massimo

Bibliograph 137

The Word olke" - f t s One in : Bejamin's Ground:



cone della lee, ilan: Adlphi 1985

COHEN HrmannDie Re (?io de' Ve1�f a s de Que le des j de ws , Wis -

baden: Fourir 988

DERRDA Jacqus

Befor th Law translatd by Avital Ronll in Kqa andhe Contemporay Ciical Pera/ce Cenary Readings, ditedby Alan Udo Bloomington: ndiana nivrsity Press 1987pp 128-49

Glas, translatd by John P Leav y and �ichard RandLincoln: nivrsity of Nbraska Prss 1986

a langue t l discours d la thod in: Recherhes sr laphilosophi t e lagage, volum 3 Grnob 983 pp 35-51

oires fc)/' Pa! de a/, translatd by Ccil LindsayJonathan Cullr and Eduardo Cadava New York: Columbia

nivrsity Prss 1 986O Spii Heid and he Question translatd by GoryBnningtn and Rachl Bowlby Chicago University oChicago Prss 1989

The Pstad, translatd by Alan ass Chicago: nivrsity ofhicago Prss 1987

Th Reit of taphor in: E1cliti volum 2 no 2 1978

pp 5-33

FRED Sigmund0se. and Aooism, translatd by Kathrine Jons

London: Hogarth Prss 1 939

GARCA BACCA Juan DavidTres jercicios _los(co-lierarios de ecoma, Barclona:

Anthropos 1983

HAACHER Wrnr'T h Prom is of Int erprtation: Rm arks on the Herm ene utic

Impra tive in Kant and Nitzsch' tra nslatd by Pter Fenves

in : Prem ises: Essays 0 Phi osoph and Literatu r rom K to

Cela1 Cambridg MA: Harvard Univer sity Prss 1 996 , pp .

81-142

ew Readi ngs � W alter Beai n, dited by Rainer NgelDetroit I W ayne State nivrsity Prss 1988 pp. 1 47-76

HEGEL Gorg Friedrich WilhlmThe Science o Logic, translated by A iller Atlantic

Highlands NJ Huanitis Prss ntrnational 1995

HEDEGGER artinBeing and Time, translated by John Macquarrie and Edward

Robinson Oxford: Blackwell 1967Discse Oi l Thikin [Gelasseheit], translatd by John M

Anderson and E Hans Freud New York: arpr Torchbooks1966

Das Gedicht ' in : Erluteru«en u H6ldrlis Dichg (Fifthrvisd dition) Frankfurt am ain itorio Klosternn 1981

Gedachts translated by ith Hollr in: Philosophy Today,volum 20, 1976 pp 286-9

Hlderlins Hymn Andenken in: Gesataabe, volum 52Frankfurt am ain: Vitorio Klostrann 192

Hlderlins Hynn Grmanin und "Dr Rhin in:Gesamtaabe volum 39 Frankfurt am ain: itorio Klostermann 1980

Identity and DUrece, translated by Joan Stambaugh NwYork: Harper orchbooks 1974

Introducion o taphysics, translatd by alph ManhimNew Havn C: Yal niversity Prss 1956

Nietzsche volum IV translated by Frank A Capuzzi dited

by David Farrll Krell New York: Harper and Rw 1 982On the Wa to Language, Nw York: Harper and Row1971

The Principle Reaso translated by Reginald Lilly Bloomington: ndiana niversity Prss 199

Rpons a Max Komerell (letter written on 4 August1942) in: Philosophi volume 6 Paris 1983

Schel lin's Treatise 0 the ssence o Human Freed0, translatedby Joan Stambough Athens Ohio U niversity Press 1 989

The Selfassrtion of the German Univrsity translatd byKarsten Harries in: Review of Metaphsics, volume 38 pp 470-

80

38 (�f LcThe Want of Sace Nams tanslate Bnha

Bblaph } 39

EVNAS Emmanuel



The Want of Sace Nams tanslate BnhaRado in: a a Wol oume 8 no 3 8 pp 6-6

What Is Cale Thkg? tanslate Fe Wieck an Glen a Ne Yok: Hape a Ro 2

Wos tanslate oan Stamaugh in: 0 the ay toLaae, pp 3-6

HOHEMER MaxGesaelte Ste, olune 2 eite Alfe Schmitan unzelin SchitNoe Fankut am Main: Fische 8

Gesaelte Se, olume Fankfut �n Main: ische88

HOHEME, Max an ADORO Theoo The Dalet of Elhteet tanslate ohn Cumming

Lonon: Veso

AN Immanuel

Ctqe of Jugee/t , tanslated ames Ce MeeithOxfo: Claenon ess 2

ED ASCH taLyk h Ashw? Aoo e Dhte, Stuttgat:

Reclan 5

IEREGAARD S nThe Ske to Death, tansated Walte Lauies,

Lonon: Oxfo Uniesit Pss

ACOELABARTHE hilippeHeegge At a Polts The Fto � the Poltal tans

late Chis Tue Oxfo B lackell La pose oe epee, Pais: Chistian Bougois 86Potique et politque in: Ltato es oees ais :

Galile 86The espons of Ulsses tanslate A ital Ronll, in:

Who Coes e the Set? eite Euado Caaa PeteConno an eanuc Nanc onon: Routlege an Kganaul ACOUELABARTHE Philippe an ACY eanuc

Les 5 e lo e. A pat ta al e Jaqes Dea, ais:alie 8

EVNAS EmmanuelThe Name of o Accoing to a Fe Talmuic Texts', in:

BeY the Vese tanslate Ga D Mole, onon: TheAthlon ss pp 6-28

LOWTH alHeiegge un Rosenzig Ein Nachtag zu Sein un

Zeit in: Hee Dek e e Zet, Stuttgat Metzle85

My Le Ge a y Boe a e 933 A Repot, tanslate Eizaeth ing, onon : The Athlone ess

YOTAR D eanFan<oisThe De, tanslate Geoges Van Den Aeele,

Manchste: Mancheste nisit ess 88he ha Reetos e tanslate eoe

Bennington an ach Bol Camige: olit ess

MAN au eAl loes of Reag, Ne Han, CT: Yale Uniesit ess

7Conclusions: ate Benjamins Task of the Tansato ,

i n he Resstae to Theoy, Minneapois: Minnesota Uniesitess 86

NANC Y eanLucThe xpeee of Feeo, tanslate Bidget McDonalStanfo CA: Stanfo nisit ess 3

The peate Coty tansate ete ConnoMinneapois: Uniesit of Minnesota ess

The nopeatie Comnunit in The opeate Co tOf Diine aces tanslate Michae Hollan in: The

Iopeate CotyETZSCHE Fieich

0 the G eea logy � Moal ty, tanslate Cao Diethe,Camige: Camige niesit ess

1 40 The Gi of Language

PHLO OF ALEXADRIA



PHLO OF ALEXADRIA'De mutatione nominum in Philo of Alexandria: The

Con tmplativ e Le in The Giants and Selections translated byDavid Winston London SPCK 98

ROSENZWEG FranzThe Star of Redemtion translated by Willian W. Hallo

London: Routledge and Kegan Paul 9

SCHELLNG , Friedrich Wilhem JosephOf Human Freedom tra nslated by James Guttman Chicago

Open Court 936

SCHMIDT, AlfredBegri des Materialsmus bei Adorno m: AdoK�erenz

1983, Frankfurt am Main: uhrkamp 1983

SCHOLE GershomToward an Understanding of the essianic dea in Judaismin : The essian ic Idea in judais, transated by ichael A.Meyer New York Schocken Books 971 pp. -36

SPNOZA Baruch deTractatus Theolico-Politicus translated by Samuel Shirey

Leiden E. . Brill 989

STEINER, GeorgeComment taire?, Geneva: Editions Cavaliers Seuls 987

SZOND PeterDurch die Enge gefhrt in Celan-Studien Frankfurt am

ain Suhrkamp 1972, pp. 4-

ZAMBRANO , MaraClaros del bosque Barcelona: Seix Barral 986

Index

Adoo 1 53 70. 73, 75-�5 <)alegory, 6a s ta t on 3 1 4 1 5 2 0

Bjami 358 5 55 59

Chrisat 3 7-8 113 7267

dah 67 26- O 67- 3-

U Man 3< 60 denominatn �c [Iig)Drda 35 dou, 1 27 3

t r a l l f 7 , 1 7 a l w a 1 1 1 5 2 6

orgtg 5 768 <3-Fud 8-<

su 6

gi 7 367 5, 6- 7 7

H idc gg , 5- 0 1 , 7 2 3 35 5 5 6 5 7 7

Hdn 3 6 3 S

Jua 7 1, 1 7-6, 27

Kat, 3 56

LaouLaarth 2

5 56 636 70 730;xp o 3 ya 2( as //nle\ rasarl

Maond 0 1 s s a 6 1 7 6 6 , 8 0 -

5

a 268, 32, 73-�5 2 1 1 2 ;pi o( 73- ad, 7

27 2 3 pop 70a 5-� 5 760, va 37 5 .

N z h , 17 6 1

i, 7 o lagua 3 36uontaatd 29

path 5 6 7 1 6-3 57poty 3, ,

quotan 2

tu 7, 8 6-7, 7, 3R os z i g, 3, 5 3 4 1 5

7

il, - 3 5 227 3, 6

tady 6 -3aslaton 3 6 3 35, 5

utaatab 2 3uth 2 5

l a ng u ag - , 2 6 27 3 -3 \ay I1 6 5

ATLONE CONTEMPOARY



ATLONE CONTEMPOARYEUROPEAN TNKRS

Athetc TheoryAdorno

485 369 9 HB 485 39 7 B

Compoig for the FilmAdorno & Eisero 485 1 1454 HB 4 8 5 1 1 7 7 B

Freud and Nechesson 485 1 483 6 HB

Cticim ad TruthBrthes 4 8 5 1 1 4 4 B

Soller WrterBrthes 485 1 1 337 6 B

O NecheBtile 485 368 HB

Neche: he Body adCulreBod 4 85 1 1 3 9 1 H B

D: A ay o FnitudeDtr 485 1 1487 9 HB

Teling Time kech f aPenmenlgica Chngy

Dstr 485 1 1 5 4 HB

Prout ad SigDeleze 4 8 5 1 1 4 1 7 B

Kant' Critcal PhloophyDeeze 85 1 1 8 B

Derence and Repetito

Deleze 485 1 36 HB 4 8 5 1 1 6 B

The Fold: biz ad theBaroqueDeleze 4 85 1 1 4 1 6 H B 485 187 9 B

Ati-Oedpu Captalim and

SchzophrenaDeeze & Gttrirefe by Mihe Fot 485 38 4 B

A Thouad PateaDeleze & Gttri 4 8 5 1 1 335 X HB 485 158 4 B

Cnema : The Movement The G of nguage: Phenomenoo o Intuton Exoon I



Cnema : The Movement The G of nguage: e ome o o o tut o Ige Memo and Prome n and ron KofDeee Aorno, Benjamn Hedeer Heideer o 485 1 1458 5 HB 4 8 5 1 2 0 8 1 P B and Roenzweg o 4 85 1 1 4 1 5 8 B

D Eoon IICnema The TmeImage o 485 1 488 7 B Seech Neer Neuter KofDeeze rigr o 485 1 1 459 3 HB 485 1359 7 HB Netce' Plooy o 485 1 1452 9 HB

485 27 4 B Fik o 485 1289 5 B Camera Obcura: of Ideoloo 485 1484 4 HB Kof

Dlogue Democra Beeen Two o 485 1 1 49 9 HBDeee amet Death the byrnth: he rigro 485 1 1333 3 HB World of ymond Rouel o 485 1 1 53 4 HB Socrat: Fcton of a

Fo 4 85 12 123 9 B PhloherFoucault o 485 1 1336 8 HB KofDelee o 485 259 3 B To Be Two o 485 146 7 Bo 485 1 2 54 9 B rigr

Three colog o 485 1 1492 5 HB Netche and MetahorLogc of Sene Guattari o 485 1212 4 B Kof

Deee o 4 8 5 555 7 HB o 485 1 1 422 4 HB 485 363 X HB The Forgettn o A o 485 1298 4 Bleroma Readg Hegel Irgaray

Nece and Ploohy Hher 8 5 1 7 The Phoohca ImagnaDeeze o 485 457 7 HB 485 1 2 1 B e oe 485 253 4 B o 4 8 5 1 13 52 X HB

Toward the Dento of Elemental PaonDemnaton Phloohy rgaray Aterty & TrancendenceDerrid Heidegger o 485 1 49 7 HB evis 485 293 3 B 4 8 5 1 15 8 5 HB o 485 129 8 B o 4 85 1 1 5 1 9 HB

4 85 1 2 1 5 2 2 BPoto The Nature of ruth thc of Sexual Derence

Derid Heidegger rgaray ntre Nou: sa on 485 3 1 o 485 1 1 59 3 HB o 485 367 2 HB ThnknotheOther 485 255 B o 485 3 2 B evis

On te sence of Hum o 485 1 1 465 8 HBe Memo of hought: O n Freedom Neche and the VcouHedeer ad Adorno Heidegger Crcle Proer NamDttm o 4 85 1 1 5 1 6 6 H B Kossowski evs 485 489 5 B o 485 1 144 2 HB 485 1 466 6 HB

n the Tme of the NatonLevns

Lbd conomyyotd



485 44 B

eyon the eeLevnso 485 43 5 HB

Oute the Subjct

evnso 4 8 5 4 2 7 H Bo 485 297 6 B

Dcult Feedom ay onJudamenso 485 379 HB

Rdempton an Utopa

o 485 4 2 HB

S d xtence Smone deauvo Sd Sndgen-Gothlnece by o Moo 485 469 Bo 4 8 5 2 2 4 7 B

yo 485 283 6 B

he Conct ofnterpretaton: ay nHermeneut Rcoero 485 36 3 HB

From Tt to Acton a nHermeneutc Rcoeo 485 364 8 B

Hegel Contra SocoloRoseo 485 236 4 B

Clav U nvera

Rosso 485 468 2 HB

Fredrch Neche: ntoductonVttoo 485 485 2 HB 4 85 2 8 2 B

Documents

[Alexander Garcia Duttmann] the Gift of Language. (BookFi.org)