Einstein on a Beach Metaphor

7/30/2019 Einstein on a Beach Metaphor

1/13

"Einstein on the Beach": The Primacy of MetaphorAuthor(s): Craig OwensSource: October, Vol. 4 (Autumn, 1977), pp. 21-32Published by: The MIT PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/778477 .

Accessed: 06/08/2013 07:39

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to October.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 81.140.8.6 on Tue, 6 Aug 2013 07:39:47 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpresshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/778477?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/778477?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpress


2/13

Einstein on theBeach:The PrimacyofMetaphor

CRAIG OWENS

If, as is frequently nd strikingly ttestedeverywhere oday,boldness n theater roclaims,rightlyrwrongly,tsfidelityoArtaud,thequestion of the theater f cruelty, f itspresentnonexistence ndineluctablenecessity, as theforce f an historical uestion.Historicalnot in itspossible inscriptionwithinwhat we knowas thehistory ftheater,not because it would mark a stage in the developmentoftheatrical orms r because of itsplace in thesuccessionofmodelsoftheatrical epresentation. he question is historical n a sensethat sboth radical and absolute. It declares the imit ofrepresentation.JacquesDerrida,"The Limit ofRepresentation,"fromL'ecritureet la diffkrence.Across those differences hich segregatethe dominant attitudes towardsperformancen our centurynto either xpressionistic r analyticmodes,' thereappearsa singlecommitment hichmaybe associatedwithneither: challengetothestructure frepresentation hich has been identical with thatoftheater versince Aristotle haracterized ramaticpoetry s mimetic.This identificationftragedywith the imitation,ratherthan the immediatepresentation, f actionposits a fundamental ualism at theheart of thetheater. erformance nd text,representernd represented,re (it seems rrevocably)plit.Theatricalrepresenta-tion establishes tself n that riftwhich it alone createsbetweenthe tangiblephysical presenceof theperformernd thatabsence which is necessarily mpli-cated in any concept of imitationor signification. he imitatedaction (thetheatrical ignified) s situatedoutside of the closed circuitestablishedby thecopresenceof performernd spectator.Thus what is representeds always an"elsewhere."As a result,while the performers in fact both a presence nd a

I. "There are, in the contemporary enewal of performancemodes, two basic and divergingimpulseswhich hapeand animate tsmajor nnovations.The first,rounded n the dealist xtensionsof a Christianpast, s mythopoeicn itsaspirations, clectic n itsforms,nd constantlyraversedythe dominant and polymorphicstylewhich constitutes he most tenaciousvestigeof thatpast:expressionism.... The second,consistentlyecular in its commitment o objectification,roceedsfromCubism and Constructivism;tsmodes are analytic ... ." AnnetteMichelson,"Yvonne Rainer,Part One: The Dancerand theDance," Artforum, II (January1974),57.

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/13

22 OCTOBER

signifierfor n absence),we alwaysregardhim as the atter,s a representativeorsomething lse-the actor as perpetualstand-in.The major innovations in performance f the last fifty earshave beenaddressed o thisrift, ither o exaggerate t (Brecht) r to annihilate t Artaud).Bothstrategieshift rom epresentationopresentation. ince thepresence ftheperformers anterior o,and a necessary onditionfor, nytheatrical epresenta-tion,the mpulsewhich animatesthat hiftmightbecharacterizeds modernist,reductionto that which is unique and absolutelyfundamental o thetheatricalsituation. Modernist performanceabandons representationby establishingidentity etweenrepresenternd represented.he performero longerstandsforanything ther han himself.The resurgencef nterestndanceat thebeginningof this centurywas a manifestation f the same impulse. Accordingto Yeats'formula, ance has alwayseluded any such dualism.)Since the structureof representation s identical with that of verballanguage-a systemof signs which always substitutefor nonpresence-theambition to overturn n entrenchedheatrical epresentationalismas frequentlymanifestedtself nprogramswhichwouldradically lter, fnoteliminate, heuseof speechon stage.The nonverbal pectacle s itsoffspring. et theoverthrow frepresentationannot be restrictedononverbalmodes, incean identical mpulsehas also animated thepoetic theater f our century. hus, modes traditionallyconceived as antithetical ecomecomplementary.n Artaud'spolemical writingson theater,t is theconjunctionofthenonverbal nd thepoetic thatconstitutesthevery ossibility ortherevivificationf theater.While Artaud's modernism s apparent in his move to disestablishtheauthor-"the theater, n independentand autonomous art,must, in ordertorevive or simply to live, realize what differentiatest fromtext,pure speech,literature,nd all otherfixed nd writtenmeans"2--it does not followthathemeant to eliminate speech from the stage altogether. f the theaterwas to bereconstitutedutside ofverbal anguage,theauthortobe replacedbythedirectorand thestagetobecome the ocus ofresearchntoalternativeanguagesofgestureand scenographywhichwould "always express thought]moreadequatelythantheprecise ocalizedmeaningsofwords," twas simplythattheauthorityfthespoken word was to be undermined.Artaud advocated the overthrow f allhierarchicalrankingsof theatrical anguages, which had assigned speech apositionofpreeminence,nd reducedthemise enscenetoa subsidiary ole.Thetheater f crueltywas to be characterized y a pluralityof equipollent voices:spoken,musical,gestural, cenographic. f in thespectacleshe envisioned"thespokenand written ortionswill bespokenandwrittenna newsense,"4 till, hesensuous, physical side of language-everythingwhich characterizests poeticuse-was to be retained:2. AntoninArtaud,"Letterson Language," The Theater and Its Double, trans.M.C. Richards,New York, Grove,1958,p. 106.3. Ibid., p. 109,4. Ibid., p. 111,



4/13

Einstein on theBeach: The PrimacyofMetaphor 23

But letthere e the east return o the ctive, lastic,respiratoryourcesof anguage, et wordsbe oined again to thephysicalmotions hatgavethembirth, nd let thediscursive, ogical aspectof speechdisappearbeneath its affective,hysical side, i.e., let words be heard in theirsonority ather han beexclusively akenforwhattheymeangrammati-cally, let thembe perceivedas movements, nd let thesemovementsthemselvesurn nto other imple,directmovements s occurs nall thecircumstances f lifebut not sufficientlyithactorson thestage,andbehold! the language of literature s reconstituted, evivified,ndfurthermore-asn the anvassesof certain ainters fthepast-objectsthemselves egin to speak.5Artaud's ambition was thus more than therevivificationf theater; t wasnothingless than thecompletereanimationofpoetic language. Or rather, nenecessarilymplicatedthe other.'This poeticaspectofhis enterprisextended ohis instructions orthemanipulationof scenicelements:The language of thetheater ims then at encompassing nd utilizingextension,that s to sayspace, and byutilizing t,tomake it speak: Ideal with objects-the data of extension-like images, like words,bringing them together nd making them respond to each otheraccordingto laws of symbolism nd living analogies: external aws,thoseofall poetry nd all viable anguage,and,amongother hings, fChinese ideograms nd ancientEgyptianhieroglyphs.7

That Artaud'sprescriptions or hestageshouldconstitute n arspoeticasuggestsa historicalfiliationwitha numberofmodernpoetswho also identifiedhestageas an appropriate ocus forresearch nto intensifyinghepurelyphysical, i.e.sonorous,movementsof language. Mallarm6 wroteIgitur for the stage. Eliotidentifiedhepoeticmomentsof tragedy s those at which the anguage reflectsback into itself,becomes aware of itself s a theatricalpresence.Further,n apassage reminiscent f Artaud'sproposal thatwords be perceived s movements,he suggestedthat if verse drama were to be given new life, t might ook tononverbalmodes ofperformanceuchas theMass and theballetforparadigms.Both poet and metteuren scene would transformanguage into an entirelymaterial vent.AndValery, escribinghis own workfor hestageas a concatena-tionofmusic and architecture,alled theresultant enre"melodrama": "I foundno other term o describethiswork,which is certainlyneither n opera, nor aballet,noran oratorio." Like Eliot,he drew parallelwithreligious iturgy: Tomymind,it must and does bear some resemblance o a ceremony fa religious5. Ibid., p. 119.6. Susan Sontaghas stressedhe mportance f this trategyorArtaud: The function hatArtaudgives thetheater s to heal thesplitbetween anguage and flesh.... Artaud'swritings n thetheatermaybe read as a psychologicalmanual on thereunificationf mindand body."AntoninArtaud:SelectedWritings, ew York, Farrar, trauss and Giroux, 1976,pp. xxxv-vi.7. Artaud,pp. 110-1.



5/13

24 OCTOBER

nature."Yet he reiteratedtspoeticnature: The action, imited nd slight s it s,mustbe further ubordinated o themeaningand poeticsubstanceofeach ofitsmoments."8Like Valkry's melodrama" (which it resembled n severalrespects), obertWilson's recent pectacleEinstein on the Beach (in collaborationwithcomposerPhilip Glass) resists ssimilation to any of the conventionalgenresof perfor-mance.AlthoughEinsteinwas identifieds an "opera", and while its scoremightbe anatomized accordingly nto arias, duets, choral passages, and ballets, theproduction ackedthecorrelation etweenmusic and dramatic ction thatdefinesthatgenre.Glass occasionally ncorporated oncrete ural referenceso the visualsubject of a scene into his score,but his insistenceon structure nd logicalprogressiononly emphasized the independenceofmusic from ction. One wasremindedof thatdisjunctiveness etween ound and image whichCunninghambrought o thedance. Actionexhibited similar utonomy:Einsteinprogressedsa sequenceofhighlyallusive visual imagesthat ppearedto succeedone anotheraccording to an internal ogic of association. They centeredon the figure fEinstein.Habits ofhis dressand personality;mathematical nd scientific odelsand instruments;he productsof technological progress, uch as trains, pace-ships,and atomicexplosions,coalesced toform complex portrait yassociation.From scene to scene,thespectator's enseof both scale and durationwas altered,perhaps in demonstration f thecentralhypothesis f Einstein'sthinking thatdimension and velocity reinterdependent).ecause of thefrequentrbitrarinessof the selectionof theimages,no detail being too insignificantor nclusion,aswell as thefreedomwithwhichassociationsweremade-organizationwas neitherchronologicalnor thematic-Wilson's work has been comparedwithdreams. fthe space evokedin Einstein was dream-like, ne importantdifference ust benoted.Wilson's images,unlike thoseofdreams,are not open to interpretation.Dream-images re themediatedrepresentationsfdream-thoughts; ence,theirinterpretability. ilson's imagesare,on thecontrary,mmediate, resentational,resistant o analysis. This is supported by the subsidiaryfunction ssigned tospeechand spokentextsn all ofhisworks.For anguageis,aboveall, themediumof interpretation.With Einstein, Wilson carries ambivalence towards language one stepfurther.ven thepublished"text"for heproduction s nonverbal, seriesof113charcoal sketches made by Wilson himself and reproduced n a book whichassemblesmusical scores, pokentexts, nd choreographic iagrams.Arranged sa sequence of cinematic stills, these atmosphericdrawings chart Einstein'sdivision into fouracts,nine scenes and five ntermezzihingesor "knee-plays")and describe hreebasic scenicmotifs: train, courtroom,nd a field fdancersoverwhich a spaceship passes.This pictographic extproceedsfrom nd extends8. Paul Valbry,"History of Amphion," trans.Haskell Block, Collected Works,New York,Pantheon,1960,vol. 3, p. 220.



6/13

Einsteinon the Beach: The PrimacyofMetaphor 25

Wilson's ambitionto mount a spectaclewhich cannotbe containedwithinverballanguage:Wilson shunsrecipes nd this swhytowrite bouthim,who is alwaysso loath toexpressudgement sic]oropinions, storisk ncapsulatinghim in one of those airtightwrappersof culturetowardswhich thewhole of his work is directed, f not as an accusation at least as analternative. o translatentowords tsexpressive omplexitymeans, na way, to prevaricate n both the author's and thepublic's emotiveparticipation.To singleout a particular ineardevelopment r a newdefinition f theatre n his work is to misrepresentts underlyingpremise, heattempt o reconstruct n thestageeverything hich lifesystematicallyhatters.italicsadded]9Wilson's theater oes not intend to provokearticulateresponse;rather,targues the poverty f those systems hroughwhich such a responsemightbeformed-primarily anguage, butalso all processes f logical thought ccordingtowhich weparse,analyze, iterally ome to termswithexperience. he ambitionto stagea semblance of theunanalyzed, morphouscontinuum of sensorydatawhich is subsequently egmentedby the formativection of language ("every-thingwhich lifesystematicallyhatters") nvolves an implicitargument hatthe

activity f anguage upon thatcontinuum sa violationof ts ntegrity.anguageinevitably produces an endless stringof synecdocheswhich, in spite of theirintention o signify,will neverreproduce heoriginalunitywhich s priorto allanalysis, ll logical thought.This argument bout thesynecdochic haracter f language is hardlynew,yet tseemstohave exhausted ittle f tsauthority.While ithasbothpsychologi-cal and philosophical ramifications-Merleau-Ponty,orexample, has writtenthat speech "tears out or tearsapart meanings in the undividedwhole of thenameable"-it also underpinnedtherevolution n linguisticswhichdates fromthebeginningof this century. aussure's now-famousdiscussion in his Coursof the arbitrariness f the sign was rooted in thedistinctionbetween"form"and "substance"; the latterwas considereda nebulous continuumanterior olanguage:Without anguage,thought s a vague,unchartednebula.There arenopre-existingdeas, and nothing is distinctbeforethe appearance oflanguage.... Phonic substance is neithermorefixednormorerigidthanthought; t is nota mold intowhichthoughtmustofnecessity itbuta plasticsubstancedivided n turn ntodistinct arts o furnish heoignifiers eeded by thought.The linguistic fact can therefore e9. VickyAlliata, Einstein on theBeach, New York,E.O.S. Enterprises, 976. This attitude, oclearlyhostile totheenterprisefcriticism, as infectedhosewhohavewrittenbout theproduction:nearly ll of thepublishedaccountsofEinstein todatehavebeencontentwith impledescription. orsuch description,which is not attemptedhere,see in particular,BarbaraBaracks n Artforunm,V(March 1977),30-6; and Susan Flakes in The Drama Review,20 (December1976),69-82.



7/13

26 OCTOBER

pictured n its totality-i.e. language-as a series fcontiguoussubdi-visionsmarked ff n both the ndefinitelane of umbledideas .. andtheequally vague plane of sounds.... Language worksout itsunitywhile taking hape betweentwoshapelessmasses. .. Theircombina-tionproducesa formnot a substance.1'While Saussure's intentionwas simply to restrictinguisticsto theanalysisofform, nd despite his recognitionof the fundamentalunintelligibility f theprelinguistic, heeffect f his formulations nonetheless ouphold a traditionaldistinction etweenwhat is thought nd what is expressed n language.Saussure's notion of substanceas a shapelessmass was interpretedy theDanish linguistLouis Hjelmslev as purport: n unformedmass of physicalorpsychicaldatawhich,while commonto all languages, sneverthelesschematizeddifferentlyyeach.It is like one and the same handful of sand that is formedn quitedifferentatterns,r like the loud in theheavensthat hanges hape inHamlet's view fromminute tominute.Just s the ame sandcan beputinto different olds,and the same cloud takeon evernew shapes,soalso the same purport s formed r structuredifferentlyn differentlanguages."Hjelmslevcites as an exampleofpurport hecolorspectrum, mass ofobjective,physicallymeasurabledatawhich is segmented ifferentlyydifferentanguages:Behind theparadigmsthatare furnished n thevariouslanguages bythe designations of color, we can, by subtractingthe differences,disclosesuchan amorphouscontinuum, hecolorspectrum,n whicheach language arbitrarilyets tsboundaries.Whileformationsn thiszone of purport re forthemostpartapproximately hesame in themost widespread European languages, we need not go far to findformations hatare incongruentwiththem.'2Ifthought s conceived s a shapelessmass, ustas on the pre-)phonological levelsounds forman indistinctcontinuum, then both the plane of content(thesignified) nd thatofexpression thesignifier) ill require, ccordingto Hjelm-slev,descriptionn terms f bothform nd substance.While theanalysisofformbelongsin bothinstances o linguistics, hatofsubstance iesoutside tsdomain:"The description fpurport .. mayin all essentialsbe thought f as belongingpartlyto the sphereof physicsand partlyto that of (social) anthropology...Consequently,forbothplanes both a physicaland a phenomenologicaldescrip-10. Ferdinandde Saussure,Course nGeneralLinguistics, rans.WadeBaskin,NewYork,McGrawHill, 1966,pp. 112-3.11. Louis Hjelmslev, Prolegomena to a Theory of Language, trans.F.J. Whitfield,Madison,rUniversityfWisconsin, 1963,p. 52.12. Ibid., p. 52.



8/13

Einsteinon the Beach: The PrimacyofMetaphor 27

tion of thepurport hould be required." 3Wilson undertakes uch a description n Einsteinon theBeach. A phenom-enological descriptionof purportwould presumably im to recover hatunitywhich underlies the constantly changing appearances of things (includinglinguisticobjects)as they urface n experience. n Husserl,thatunity s under-stood to be a function f (synthetic) onsciousness, f a transcendentalubject.Einstein implies both that aim and that understanding. ach of threemotifs(train, rial, nd field) s brokenup intoa setof mageswhich, incehomologous,maybe reintegrated.he locusof thisprocess freintegrations the onsciousnessof the individual spectator. tructures thusinborn,that s, emergeswhile thework is performed s the spectator spontaneouslyapprehends the relationsobtainingamong images.Thus, coherence s not a result fanylogical sequenceof images (the series train-trial-fieldepeatedthreetimes) as programnotessuggest, ut resides n intuitively raspedsimilaritiesmong imagesderived roma common motif.This is clearlydemonstratedn Wilson's text.The train, s itappears in Act II, its observationdeck receding nto the night,reappearsas abuilding in Act IV. This relationship,ratherthan the individual images inisolation, s thesubjectof these woscenes nd makes them unit.Similarly, hesharplydelineated riangle f ightprojectedbythe ocomotive'sheadlight n theopening scene s congruentwiththatwhichstreams rom n elevator haft n thefinal cene-a visual linkingofend withbeginning.Andthefluorescented n thecenter fthecourtroom uringthetrial cenes nActs and III becomes, nAct V,a column of lightwhich slowly ascends into the flies nd which, in turn, sreminiscentfthestrip f ightwhichpainted tself own thebackdrop n thefirstscene.These imagesdo not function s isolatedsigns;instead their onjunctionrevealspatterns f interrelationship hich make Einstein a complex,resonantexperientialunit,or gestalt.To theextent hatWilsongenerates unified ield hrough isualmeans,histheaters nonverbal.Nevertheless,hetechniques ccordingtowhich his imageryis manipulated can only be described as poetic. Here poetic does not meanevocativeor allusive,but indicatesa particularprocessof establishing elation-shipsbetween mages.Wilson's manipulationofimages is primarilynalogical,that s,metaphoric.Metaphor,based exclusively n purelymaterialor sensuousfeatures, as been isolatedby thelinguistRoman Jakobson s thefundamentalstructure f all poetic texts. If the two poles of language are selection andcombination,the first ased on equivalence (metaphor), hesecondupon conti-guity metonomy),14akobson haracterizes oetry s thetransferencefequiva-lence fromthepole of selectionto thatof combination.'5 n poetic language,13. Ibid., pp. 77-8.14. On this twofold haracter f language, see Roman Jakobson, Two AspectsofLanguage andTwo Types of Aphasic Disturbances,"Fundamentals of Language, The Hague, Mouton, 1971,pp. 90-6.15. Roman Jakobson, Linguisticsand Poetics,"Style nLanguage, ed. T.A. Sebeok,Cambridge,M.I.T., 1960,pp. 358ff.



9/13

28 OCTOBER



10/13

RobertWilson. Einstein on theBeach, 1976. Act ,scene ;Act , scene ;Act V,scene . Photos: abetteMangolte.)words are combined ntorhythmic,lliterative, r rhymic equencesbecauseoftheirequivalence as pure sound. In thisway, new semanticrelationships reestablished-or lostones restored-on thebasis ofpurelyphysical parallelisms.It follows fromJakobson'scharacterizationf metaphorthat the poeticimage mustofnecessity ranscend heconstraints f thesignifyinghain (whatone might all themetonymicorce)n itsmovementowardmeaning.Metaphorsarenever ontext-sensitive.heydo notreachout toother, ontiguous lements fthe chain that mightdeterminetheirmeanings. Two images standing in ametaphoricrelationship re unaffectedy thosepressuresfromwithoutwhichwould have us perceivethem as somehowabsolutelydifferentecause of theirdifferent ositions in a linear, i.e. horizontal,sequence. Rather, the properdirection fthemetaphor s vertical, achmetaphor ppropriatelyocated na setofequivalent mages.The principleofequivalenceorcongruence hat haracter-izes that set and confers ignificancen each of its members ecomesa kindoftranscendententer owardwhich each metaphorgravitates.IfEinstein on theBeachdescribes lineartime pan (roughly he ifetime fAlbertEinstein), t nevertheless emainsa resolutely onlinear work. Eventsdonotpreceed r followone another ccording oany temporal) ogic.As a result ftheirmetaphoricalaspect,Wilson's images resistfallinginto any meaningfullinear sequence.The impositionof a logical scheme train-trial-field-train-trial-field, tc.)only emphasizesthearbitrarinessf Einstein'stemporal tructure. hecircularityctivated ythatformula ffectivelyhecks ny ineardevelopment.nan analogous way,a recursive reatment f spokentextsworkstoneutralize he



11/13

30 OCTOBER

ordinarydirectionalityf spoken language. A single text s repeated gain andagain, its finalwordbeing nothingmore thana cue to thespeaker obegin again,until that inear time n which all narrative nd all spokendiscourseoperate seffectivelyuspended.Since metaphorworkstosuspendthetemporalizingffectsf thesignifyingchain (its syntactic r syntagmatic imension), t has frequentlyeen associatedwitha correspondingmotive.Metaphorreveals n atemporalprincipleofsimilar-ity be it a resultofdivergence r convergence, hat s, ofhomologyor isomor-phism) that onstitutes hepossibility fanyrelationof mageswhatsoever. hatprinciplehas, in varying ontexts nd todifferentnds,beenidentifieds a law, aform, n essence;yetwhetherone grants t regulatory r ontological status, tremains that with which poetryhas been principallyconcerned.The poet hasbeencontinually hargedwiththeresponsibilityfuncovering hatwhichrendersall relationship possible. It is thus, through ts metaphoricbase and not itsthematic ontent, hatpoetry articipates n the nvestigations fmetaphysics.Yet this motive is operative only within a particularattitudetowardslanguage, theprimary haracteristicsfwhich have been identifiednd analyzedby JacquesDerrida:To concern oneself with metaphor-a particularfigure-is ... topresupposea symbolist osition. t is above all toconcern neselfwiththenonsyntactic,onsystematicole,withsemantic depth,"withthemagnetizing ffect f similarity ather hanwithpositional combina-tion, call it "metonymous," n the sense defined y Jakobson,whorightlyunderlines the affinityetween symbolism not only as alinguistic notion, but also, we should claim, as a literary chool),Romanticism witha morehistorical-that s,historicist-orientation,and more directedtowards interpretation),nd the prevalenceofmetaphor. italicsadded]16

Certainlythe argumentsthateverydayanguage is essentially ynecdochic ndthereforenneedofrehabilitation,nd that t s thefunction fpoeticmetaphor orestoreanguage toitssupposedlyprimary ature,maybe traced o a specific odyof theory rticulated t the end of the 19thCentury: he poetic of the FrenchSymbolists, articularly s enunciated n thecritical nd theoreticalwritings fStephane Mallarm&.Accordingto Mallarme,therevolution n poetry,whichhedated to Verlaine,was involved in a return o "certainprimitiveresources nlanguage."'7 Fascinated with speculationsconcerning heprimalsymbolizationprocessesofmankind,he sketched theory f thesuggestivenessfworasrootedin "a beliefthat a primitive anguage, half-forgotten,alf-living,xists n eachman. It is a language possessing extraordinary ffinitieswith music and16. JacquesDerrida, WhiteMythology," rans.F.C.T. Moore,New LiteraryHistory,VI (Autumn1974),13.17. StephaneMallarm&, electedProse, trans.BradfordCook, Baltimore,JohnsHopkins, 1956,p. 35.



12/13

Einsteinon theBeach: The PrimacyofMetaphor 31

dreams."'18 his primitive anguage was conceivedas a pictographic diom ofhieroglyphswhich was the predecessorof the more abstractmedium, verballanguage, with whichphilosophic and scientificystems ave been erected ndwhich correspondedto a particular state of the world which preceded thedeployment f time.19For Mallarme,thepoet's taskwas torecover hatdata ofpre-history.oetrysprangfrom n impulse to restore oobjectstheir riginalresonance rcomplica-tionwhich logic and language had strippedfrom hem.Andmetaphorrhythm,rhyme, tc.)made thatrestoration ossible:The poetic act consists of our sudden realization that an idea isnaturally ractionizedntoseveralmotifs fequal valuewhichmustbeassembled.Theyrhyme;nd their utward tampofauthenticitys thatcommon meterwhich thefinal tress stablishes.20This conception of language remains tacitlyoperative in the texts ofphenomenologyand gestaltpsychology in which the task of reassembly ndreintegrationemainsprimary).t also persistsn at least one other ontemporarydiscipline-the structural nthropologyof Claude Levi-Strauss. Whereasphe-nomenologywould dispensewith the dentificationf thatdata withprehistory(each of us has access to it in the raw material of perception),Levi-Strauss

emphasizes ts ink with theprimitive.His descriptionsf a pensbe auvagecenterupon metaphor,which is isolatedas theprimary ehicle ofmyth:The effectivenessf symbolswould consistpreciselyn this"inductiveproperty,"by which formallyhomologous structures, uilt out ofdifferent aterials t differentevelsof ife-organic processes, ncon-scious mind, rational thought-are related to one another. Poeticmetaphorprovides familiar xample of this nductive rocess.21Thanks to the myths,we discoverthatmetaphorsare based on anintuitive ense of the logical relationsbetweenone realm and otherrealms;metaphorreintegrateshefirst ealmwith the totality f theothers, n spiteof the factthatreflectivehought truggles o separate18. Wallace Fowlie,Mallarmb', hicago, Phoenix, 1962,p. 264.19. The neo-Platonicbase of this theory f language has beendiscussedbyGilles Deleuze in hiswriting n Proust,whichembeds the novelistwithina decidedly ymbolist radition: Certain neo-Platonistsused a profoundword todesignatetheoriginalstatewhichprecedes nydevelopment, nydeployment, ny 'explication': complication,which envelopsthemanyin theOne and affirmsheunity fthemultiple.Eternity id notseemto them he absence ofchange,noreven the xtension f alimitless xistence, ut thecomplicatedstate of time tselfuno ictumutationes uascomplectitur).The Word,omnia complicans, nd containing ll essences,was defined s thesupreme omplication,the complication of contraries, he unstableopposition. From this theyderived the notion of anessentiallyexpressiveuniverse,organized according to degreesof immanentcomplicationsandfollowingan orderof descending explications." Gilles Deleuze, Proust and Signs, trans.RichardHoward, New York,Braziller, 972,pp. 44-5.20. Mallarme,p. 39.21. Claude Levi-Strauss,StructuralAnthropology, rans.Jacobson Schoepf, New York, BasicBooks, 1963,pp. 201-2.



13/13

32 OCTOBER

them.Metaphor,farfrom einga decoration hat s added to anguage,purifiest and restores t to its originalnature,throughmomentarilyobliterating one of the innumerable synecdochesthat make upspeech.22If, as LUvi-Strauss laims, the poetic and themythic re essentially nalogousfunctions,then theythemselves tand in a metaphoricrelation and must beconceived as a single function. If the techniques according to which mythreproduces n original,pre-discursive nityor totality re primarily oetic--i.e.intuitive ather han ogical and rooted n metaphor-thenitfollows eciprocallythatthe"purpose" ofpoetrywill be to createmyths.Here,Levi-Strauss earticu-latestheoperationprescribedn all of thegreat exts fliterary ymbolism: hoseofMallarme,Valkry,nd Eliot,andcertainlyfArtaud.23 ndthewordwhichbestdescribes hatoperation,mythopoesis, ecomesprofoundly autological.Einstein on the Beach, an essentially metaphoric structure, annot beisolatedfrom hispoeticmotive.Because Wilsonparticipatesn thismythopoeicimpulse,his attitude owards anguage maybe ascribedto a particular inguisticand poetic positionand his formal trategiesssimilatedtoa specific erformancetradition,tself dentifiedy tsargument bout language. Elsewhere,he has beenquoted to the effect hatEinsteinwas chosen as central igureecauseheexhibitedcharacteristicsf both thinker physicist,mathemetician, epresentativef theanalytic) and dreamer musician, visionary,representativef the idealistic).24Accordingly,Wilson's desirewas to synthesize hosedivergentmodes ofperfor-mance (analytic, xpressionistic) otedat thebeginningof thisessay.Hence,hiscollaborationwith composer Philip Glass and choreographer ucinda Childs,bothofwhom have previouslyworked n an analyticmode. Still, thissyntheticambition is profoundlymythopoeic, n inductivereintegration f previouslydistinctorders;and Wilson's desire to transcend he polarityof contemporaryperformancemodes remainedwholly contained within one of its terms.As aresult, heprofoundlyntuitive haracter f the frameprovidedforthe work ofGlass and Childs qualifiedand at timessubverted heobjectivenatureof theirstyles. At the same time,thestrengthfWilson's imagesseemeddilutedbythepresence fantitheticalmaterial.)Had Einsteinachievedencyclopaedic tatustheclaims thathave beenmadefor t wouldbe ustified. s it s,Wilson'swork,whichhas so frequentlyeen hailedas totallynnovative ndwithoutprecedent,emainsenmeshed n a particulartradition, hecoordinatesofwhich have alreadybeenmapped.22. Claude Lkvi-Strauss, he Raw and theCooked,trans.J. nd D. Weightman,NewYork,Harper& Row, 1969,p. 339.23. "The truepurposeofthetheater s to createmyths."Artaud,p. 116.24. "Accordingto Wilson ... what triggeredhefusion was thesubject tself,AlbertEinstein,mathematician, ut at the same time a dreamer.... It is the contradiction,he interplay,nd theharmony fdreams nd mathematics hat form hecentral ensionof thiswork."Flakes,p. 70.

Documents

Einstein on a Beach Metaphor