Jameson on Benjamin

8/2/2019 Jameson on Benjamin

1/17

Benjamin's ReadingsAuthor(s): Fredric JamesonReviewed work(s):Source: Diacritics, Vol. 22, No. 3/4, Commemorating Walter Benjamin (Autumn - Winter,1992), pp. 19-34Published by: The Johns Hopkins University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/465263 .Accessed: 03/01/2012 09:43

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 Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Diacritics.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/465263?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/465263?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup


2/17

BENJAMIN'SREADINGS

FREDRICJAMESONWe have long been awareof the way in which significantwritersassemble their owncorpusorcanonaround hem, n what it is no longerhelpfulto thinkof as influences. So,aroundFlaubert, constellationofreadings romApuleius' GoldenAss oCandide, romthe Quijoteto Sade, makes one imagine some ideal seminar n which the earliertextswould be transformed y reading hemthroughFlaubert'seyes, andhis own augmentedby this idiosyncraticcanon it containsandpresupposesall at once. The greatmodemtheorists, meanwhile, also projecttheir own privatecanon, for one-time, ad hoc use:witness the multiplereferences of Deleuze and Guattari'sAnti-Oedipus,which mightvery nicely be transformed nto a whole new undergraduatehumanities program.Benjamin,as a criticand theoristnow also consideredto be a writer,compoundstheserelationshipsand seems to dissolve into his multiplereadingsfully as muchas he turnsthem all into a unique"self' thatremains o be defined. It is this syntextual,rather hanintertextual,phenomenon-something on the orderof symbiosis in biology-that wemean to examinehere.But we must first learnto distinguishbetween a tradition-oriented anon(whetherthis traditions in the serviceof a conventionalRight,as is mostfrequent,or of a Left orradicalmovement-building nspiration,as withRaymondWilliams,orLukacs,or eventheleft-modernists uch as KristevaandTelquelorthe surrealists hemselves)and a setof relativistically privileged references in which contingency is inscribed from theoutset-what could be called adisposablecanonandwhat, na moreBenjaminian vatar,it would be appropriateo refashioninto the "constellation"as such. The differencebetween these two conceptionsis not to be grasped n some "belief" n history,as theZeitgeistwould vulgarly give us to understandthereare believers and unbelieversonboth sides of thedivide). Rather, t is in theways in whichinterpretive ommunitiesareformed,and roles that master codes play in thatformation. The second position, forexample, holds generally to a position that might, in distantparallelto now ancientstructuralist olemics andstrategicpositions,be characterized s a commitment o thearbitrarynatureof the code. It might, then, in contrastbe abusive to attribute o thetraditionpeoplesome natural-law rCratylistconceptionof thecode;on the otherhand,it is notreallythem thatwe focus on here,but ratheron Benjaminhimself, and the wayin which he is able(orunable) o coordinate wo framesof referencenormally hought obe incompatible: the ad hoc culturalbaggage of his own idiosyncraticreadingsandenthusiasmsand theseeminglymore absolutecode of Marxism through heverycenterof which, however, this same oppositiontends to run). Meanwhile, inasmuch as theCratylistor tradition-orientednotion of the code has some crucial commitmentstorepresentationtself, it is thatrelativelymodernistproblemordilemmathat will also beat stake(albeitin a new and unfamiliarway) in Benjamin'spractices.Oneway into theproblemof the codes in Benjamin ies through he workshe readandappropriated-andeven thisstrategycomes in two distinct orms. One is tempted oorganize heenormousmassofbookreviews[collected nvol. 3of GesammelteSchriften]according o themes,but thenthose themeswould be characteristic f Benjaminandhissubjectivity,rather hanconstitutive of the authors and volumes thus described. Wewould find ourselvestherebyback in some more traditionalkindof auteur-mappingnrelation oBenjaminhimself. Butif we turn o the workswithwhich he wasmoredurably

diacritics 22.3-4: 19-34 19iacritics / fall-winter 1992


3/17

engaged,and to whichhe consecrated ong program-essays,'we face a moreinterestingproblem nmodeling appropriationtself and nproposingsubstitutesandmorecomplextransactions or what used to be called influence. Indeed,the engagementwith theseworks reminds us of the specificallymodernistdynamicsof reading,which have beencompared o a seriesof secularconversions:thegreatmodernistauteur s not a furnisherof individual works in a genre, and one did not simply read a new Faulkner,a newLawrence,a newStevensorPound.Rather,hese wereallfragments f a monadic otality,whichin theperiodof the consolidationof aproperlymodernistdeology(inthe US afterWorldWarII, andin theaestheticizingsituationof Cold War ntellectuals) t graduallybecame conventional o describe n phenomenological ermsas a specific "world,"withits original temporalandsensorystructures. It would seem moreappropriateoday,inhindsight, o characterize ach of these "works"n termsof a distinctivecode, which islearned like a foreign languageand thenprovisionallyused by the reader o articulatepersonalexperienceafterthe fashionof Lacanian ackingnails. Levi-Strauss'saccountof thesurplusof signifier[see "TheSorcererandHis Magic"and "TheEffectiveness ofSymbols"],the way in which shamansor psychoanalysts each the sufferingsubjecttorearrangets disorganized ignifiedsundernew signifiers, s also a useful referencepoint(in analternate"code") ortheprocessof conversionto those modernistworksof art(ofwhich it can thencorrectlybe said,butonly in theseverynarrowanalogical imits andtothe degreeto whichreligionitself functions this way, thattheyfunctionsomething ikespiltreligion,orareligionof art). I do not know thata modernist"code"-that is, afullyachieved secularaestheticsystem-has in this sense ever been adequatelydescribed,althoughwhat used to be called"style study"was a beginningapproximationwhich,asits slogansuggests, imitedeverything olanguage tself). Such a modelwould, however,go a long way towardreconciling the incommensurabilityhat has always been feltbetween an objective,or structural, nalysisof a work anda receptionistone, since the"code" n this sense is very precisely the mediationbetween these two dimensions. Itwouldnecessarilybe a comparatistmodel, since it premisesa similarreceptionat somelevel forall the "modernist lassics"(orrather,tis by wayof suchareception hatvariouscontemporarywritersbecomepromotednto modernist lassicsofjustthistype). Finally,andby the sametoken,the model would hold only for themoder period.Benjaminoffers an interestingoccasion for raising such issues, since in him theconversionprocess s most oftensynchronic ather handiachronic.Intellectual ife in themodemperiodseemed to demandalienationof thisreligious type,in thatno onecan livein culturaland intellectual solationfrom suchcodes, while on the other handno singlecode can be dominantanylonger. It is possible to convertreligiouslyin some absoluteway to an individualcode or stylistic "world" it being understood hatmodem philo-sophical systemsseem tobeof the sametypeas aestheticworks nthisrespect),andthenwe have the phenomenonof disciples or else of scholarsdevoted lifelong to a singlecorpus (spectacleseither nspirational r dispiritingdependingon one's pointof view).Butmost people in themoder period spenttheirtimepassingin and out of the varioussecularreligionsand theirenthusiasms,offeringtheimageof atrajectory cross a rangeof codes that wouldhave to be examinedon the basis of rhythmsexternal o them(thatof the riseand fall of politicalorideological temperatures,orexample),and n anycasecomparable o the greatcycles of fashion.

1. Theseessayswere,until thepublicationofArcades, he mostwidelyknownandinfluentialofhis works. Mostof themweretranslatedbyHarryZohn n theEnglish-languagevolumeentitledIlluminations,withthesignal exceptionsof theessayon KarlKraus, ranslated nReflections,andthe "Commentariesn PoemsbyBrecht." Unless otherwise ndicated,references n the text willidentifyquotationsin the Germancompleteworks,after reference to the appropriateEnglish-language edition.

20


4/17

Inthecase of Benjamin,however,all these enthusiasmsand aestheticcommitmentsaregiven to us simultaneously.Not the leastinterestingproblemraisedby thiswriter show he canhold so many seemingly contradictory ffiliations at one time (andhow wecan thenourselvesgo about heanalysisof suchcontradictoryines of flightinhiswork).He himself was occasionallyaware of this untheorizedmultiplicity,and raised it in theformof a problemthat was also a whole program:"ToencompassbothBretonandLeCorbusier-that would mean drawingthe spiritof present-dayFrance like a bow andshootingknowledgeto the heartof themovement" "N"1a.5;Philosophy,Aesthetics46].2But,aswe shallsee, this involves alittlemorethanmeresynthesis,orlearning rommanymasters,orabsorbing hepositive points. LeCorbusieralso meansforhim thebeginningwork on modemarchitecture f SiegriedGiedeon(whose Space,TimeandArchitecturelaterbecamea kind of manifesto of ideological modernism or US architecture), longwith Mayer'sbook on ironconstruction:a Utopianvision of glass and steel is presenthere, along with a great many athletic and therapeuticovertones of the puritanicalCorbusian vision (so central an exhibit of loathing in the current turn away frommodernism n architecture).To juxtaposethis clean consciousness,as brightly it as ahospital,with theverydifferent herapyof Breton,as that eads down ntotheunconsciousvia thoseprotocolsof dreamsanddrugsBenjaminhimselfpracticedas anexperimentatone point, is to lay out an equationwith variables whose solution is not at all evident,unless it be simply Benjaminhimself.Inother nstances,Benjaminexplicitlyworriedawayattheproblem. Itwas cleartohimthattheArcadesProjecthadits linkswiththe olderBaroqueone in atleastone way,namelyvia Baudelaireandthelatter'sspleen,so oftencompared o themelancholyof theProtestantReformationdramatists.Whatfollows3 s avery interesting etof deductionsas to the role played by commodities and commodification in both periods, as thefoundationon whichthisaffectis based. But at this level, we still have to dealherewithajuxtapositionof themes whose possible connectionwithBenjamin'sown psychologycanbe amplyspeculatedon, while he himselfjust asenergetically riedto depersonalizethemby magnifying hem intoa theoryof history. It is however notyet paradoxical hatBenjamin,specialistin seventeenth-centurymelancholy,shouldhavebeen interested nits nineteenth-centuryarieties.What finally succeeds in arousingour methodologicalcuriosity is, however, thesimultaneous nthusiasm or two writerswhoseem somehowabsolutely o exclude eachother,and in far more fundamentally deological ways thanAdoro's gravitationallyrepellentmonads.Such s forexampletheantagonismbetweenBrechtandKafka,vividlyexpressed n person by theformeras he demurs romBenjamin'sKafkaessay ("Jewishfascism") [see the August 31 entry in Benjamin's "Conversationswith Brecht" inUnderstandingBrecht 110ff.]. Theantagonism,ndeed,seemsto dramatize omedeeperfundamentalantinomy n modem cultural hought, f not its reality,namelythatwhichassigns antitheticalpositions to the political and the subjective or existential, to thedidacticand theexpressive,to consciousnessoragencyandto theunconscious. Indeed,while itmightbe abusiveto thinkof Brechtoverhastilyas arealist, t is certain hatKafkaquintessentially ccupiesthestereotypicalpositionof themodernist,awakeningall of itsshadowoppositenumbers. To all the mythicandformalist mpulsesthatcluster aboutBrechtin theWest, seekingto reappropriate im as an "existentialist" fter the fashionof Esslin's book (or as a greatpoet, insteadof a dramatist),may be opposed Brecht'sartisanaldemandfor usefulness:

2. Thefile of methodologicalandepistemologicalnotes in theArcadesdossier is designated"N." I have sometimesmodifiedtheEnglish translationwithout ndication.3. IntheNfile, but also in theveryinterestingprovisionalset of aphorismshe extractedfromthe Baudelairefile underthe title "CentralPark" [see 1: 657-90]. For an English-languagetranslationby LloydSpenser,see New GermanCritique34 (1985): 32-58.

diacritics / fall-winter 1992 21


5/17

"Idon't accept Kafka, you know," says Brecht. And he goes on to speak abouta Chinese philosopher's parable of "the tribulations of usefulness." In a woodthere are many different kinds of tree-trunk. From the thickest they make ship'stimbers; from those which are less thick but still quite sturdy, they make boxesand coffin-lids; the thinnest of all are made into whipping-rods; but of thestunted ones they make nothing at all: these escape the tribulations ofusefulness. "You ve got to look around in Kafka's writings as you might in sucha wood. Thenyou 'llfind a whole lot of very useful things. The images are good,of course. But the rest is pure mystification. It's nonsense. You have to ignoreit. Depth doesn't get you anywhere at all. Depth is a separate dimension, it'sjust depth-and there's nothing whatsoever to be seen in it. " [UnderstandingBrecht 109-10]

Inthisworkingprocedure,whichchops uptheaspectsand isolates theusablethemesorlevels, thequotablechaptersorverses,in interrogativeashion,we slowly comeuponthebasic clue of formal autonomization-the objective propertyandcapacityof modemworks to be brokenup andused injust this way.Brecht was himself the idiosyncratictheorist of this deeper formal tendency, aconceptunderscoredby Benjamin n his luminouspresentation ssays (still amongthebest introductionso Brecht' idea of anepictheater,romwhich thepoeticcommentariesmust be sharplydistinguishedas having a ratherdifferent innerrhythmand genericdynamic). It is theconceptof thegestus, translated s the"quotablegesture":An actor must be able to space his gestures the way a typesetterproduces spacedtype. This effect may be achieved, for instance, by an actor's quoting his owngesture on the stage.... Epic theater is by definition a gestic theater. For themore frequently we interrupt someone in the act of acting, the more gesturesresult. [Illuminations 151; 2: 536]

How does one reconcile this voluntaristaccountwith the notionthat modem life tendsobjectively, under its own momentum, owardsthe fragmented, owards that which is"always-already"nterruptedwhetherby Taylorization, eification, hecity, the forciblepenetration f capital ntothevillage, orwhatever)?Itis thegreathomeopathic trategythatcanbedetected nverydifferent orms at distantplacesin themodernistandscape-namely,the decision andthewill to choose theinevitable, oaffirmwhat s anirreversibletendency,and,by making necessity into a virtue,to open up a rangeof possibilitiesforits possible appropriation.The transformation f the fragmentas a resultof a socio-historicalprocessinto the gestureas anobjectof didactic nquiryand scientific investi-gationoutflanks heZeitgeist. It short-circuits hetemptation o reinvent hepathosof acall for the "reunification" f life (as in Lukacs),andit underscores he way in whichnaturalization as tended to accompanysocial fragmentation.As a result,not only theintelligible pieces but thisvery processcomes beforeus as somethingaltogethernaturaland commonsensical,as what goes withoutsaying and, utterlyself-evident,needs nofurther omment. TheBrechtian strangementffectwill now take tsdeparture reciselyfrom this unnaturality f thegestus, as thatstarklyreappearswhenthefragment s heldup dripping and streamingin the cold light of day. But the very process which"interrupts"-whethert be the logic of capital tself ortheenlightenedwill of theactor-pedagogue-is also gristfor the mill of modernism'shostilityto narrative s such(andBenjamin'sown, as we will begin to see).Itis thereforeperhapsnot so unexpected hatsomethingsimilarshouldnowtranspirein Kafka'sown form-production, s thatis uniquelyanatomized or us in Benjamin's

22


6/17

greatprogram-essay n thePrague abulist. Itcan be detected,notunsurprisingly, t thepointat whichgenericallythe two oeuvresof Kafkaand Brecht ntersect,namelyin thetheatricaltself. InKafka hissignificantlysurfacesatthe momentof theparadisiacal,nthe NatureTheaterof Oklahoma inAmerika):One of the most significantfunctions of this theater is to dissolve happenings intotheir gestic components. One can go even further and say that a good numberof Kafka 's shorter studies and stories are seen in theirfull light only when theyare, so to speak, put on as acts in the "Nature Theater of Oklahoma." Only thenwill one recognize with certainty that Kafka's entire work constitutes a codex ofgestures which surely had no definite symbolic meaning for the authorfrom theoutset; rather, the author tried to derive such a meaning from them in ever-changing contexts and experimental groupings. [Illuminations 120; 2:418/111]

Thatthisobjective gesturality n Kafkaseems topresupposeapeculiarly mpersonalanddecentered consciousness (derived, via Rosenzweig, from China and its theaterandpsyche)is of great, f secondary, nterest o us in this context. Toputthe centerof gravityof this crucialBenjamin/Kafka ssayin thegestusratherhan ntherelationship f Kafkato a popularJewish storytellingtradition-this last leading back further n the twindirectionsof theprecapitalistmode of productionand of cosmology proper-is at leastto estrangethis familiarwork,which is more often used in evidence for the Zionist ormysticalBenjaminthanin coordinationwithhis other texts.YetBenjamin's undamental oint ies here,andtheconceptof thegestuswill bethecrucialmechanismwherebyhenegotiates he most difficultanddelicatetransactionntheMarxianapproach o a literary ext, namely the acknowledgmentand ad hoc workingcoordination f its simultaneous laimstovalue and oideological mystification.Thetwofaces of thegestus-its visual form and the undersideof an interminablyglossed set ofpossible meanings-offer a means of coordinationherethat is ratherdifferent rom theequallyad hoc solutions to be found ntheessays on KarlKrausandEduardFuchs("TheCollector").Notonlydoevents sort hemselvesout into a seriesof gestures "eachgestureis anevent-one mighteven sayadrama-in itself' [121;2:419/1 11])in suchawaythatthe Kafkanarrative inds itself imperceptibly ransformed nto a kind of Eisensteinian"montageof attractions,"tself not unrelated o the peculiarlydiscontinuousmontageformof the Benjaminessay (even beforethe absenceof the scaffoldingin the ArcadesProjectallows thebuildingblocks of such anessaytobeinspected ntheiroriginal orm).Thisform also opens upa distancefrommeaningthatcanonly be filled by interminablecommentary,which is itself not inconsistent with absoluteincomprehension:"Kafkacould understandhings only in the formof a gestus, and this gestus which he did notunderstand onstitutes hecloudy partsof theparables"129;2: 427/111]. This is finallythe social meaningof Kafka'sform-production: is possibilityof perceptionand of themicronarrative f thegesture s at one with theomnipresent xperienceof outsiderealitypressing n as what cannotbe graspedorunderstood.But whenBenjamingets this far-ityields apictureof Kafkaasakind of privilegedrecordingapparatuswhomustmultiplyhis vivid notes and sketches in exact proportionto the incomprehensibilityof thephenomena heydesignate-he suddenlyrefersto analienationby way of the machine:

The invention of the film and the phonograph came in an age of maximumalienation of men from one another, of immeasurably mediated relationshipswhich have become their only ones. Experiments have proved that a man doesnot recognize his own gait on the screen or his own voice on the phonograph.The situation of the subject in such experiments is Kafka's situation. This is whatdirects him to learning [Studium], where he may encounterfragments ofhis own



7/17


8/17

existencethatare still withinthe contextof the role. He mightcatchholdof thelost gestus the way Peter Schlemiehlcaughthold of the shadow he had sold.[137-38; 2: 436/111]This anticipationof theclassic existentialfigures(Malraux'sanecdoteof your inabilityto recognizeyourrecordedvoice, Camus'simageof the man in the phoneboothwhosevoice you cannothear)serves less to document Kafka'srelationship o the thing theyexplained and domesticated(by calling it "theabsurd") han to underscorehis verydistance from them. Meanwhile, the reference to Schlemiehl reminds us of one ofBenjamin'smost dramatic nterpretiveacts andreversals,in which, in a discussionofmirror-imagesndreflections,hesuddenlygrasps hemirror stheanticipatoryore-formof the modemmedia[see"TheWorkof Art ntheAgeof ItsMechanicalReproduceability,"Illuminations 230]. This then unexpectedly binds the Kafka essay into the laterproblematic f technologyandreproducibility,while asentence hat mmediately ollowsthis extract("itis a storm thatblows towardsus out of forgetfulness"),anticipating hewell-known cadences of the Angelus Novus thesis, now seems to juxtapose Kafka'sstubborn ndartfulnotationswith the wholequestionof the culturalhistoryof the humanpastandits relationship o progress(whichthe "Theseson History" akeupdirectly).I want to suggestthatthesearenotto be graspedas thematicconnections,althoughwe seem to be unableatfirstto enumerate hem otherthan n theform of themes. I willtry to show elsewhere how simultaneous cross-references of this kind in Benjaminfunction ess to linkvarioustopics thanto differentiate hem. What s underscoredhereby the incomprehensible ppearance f the sametopic in two distinctplacesat the sametime is rather hemultiplicityof distinctmeaningsoraspectsthatcan be made toprojectoff distinct faces of the same "seme"or namedconcept. This alreadybeginsto show ina moreconcreteform,butin the realmof themes andideas, whatBenjaminmust havemeantby a constellation.In therelationshipof Brechtto Kafka,however,we find a moreexternal,canonicalmanifestationof this way of constructing he objectof studyandof linkingprivilegedtexts,which are so many objectifiedcodes in theirown right. GestusconstellatesKafkawith Brecht: it makeseach one usablein terms of rewriting he other. The Brechtiananalyticconcept,forexample,allows us toreread he modernistKafka,whileat thesametimedemonstratinghe activerelevanceof Brecht' own didacticandpedagogical ormsfor the wider ntelligenceanden-act-mentof anonpedagogicalandexpressivemodernistliterature.It does yet not seem clearto me that we can definitivelymapthe constellationsofBenjamin'sreadings something nanycase implausible nview of thethesis aboutcodesthatwe aredefending nBenjamin'spractice).Indeed, hattheyare argelysubstitutableconstitutes a first answer to the objection(implicitin Scholem, for instance)thatsincemany of these essays were occasional and even commissioned-Benjamin had noparticularnterest n Leskov, buthad to make thejob of writinga review of a Germancollectedworks nteresting orhimself,etc.-the presenceof this or thatparticularwriterorcultural ext would notbe primaryevidencefor anything. Still, it seems to me thatacertainformaldescriptionof the constellationas such is possible.Indeed,we havealready solatedtwofeaturesof its structure:adifference nidentity(Le Corbusierand Bretonas two antitheticalncarnations f themoder) and anidentityindifference(Brechtand Kafkaas antitheseswho share he form of thegestus). Now weneed to examine whatI will call a verticalpatternn thiscorpusof essays, whichhas todo withthegroundingof an otherwise ree-floatingconstellation,withthe naturalizationof the contentof a set of relationshipsotherwise withoutcontent.The shadowpresencewithin theessays of akindof linkedtrilogyortripartiteerieshasoften beenacknowledged:this is themovement rom"TheStoryteller" cross"Some



9/17

Motifs in Baudelaire,"o "TheReproducibleWorkof Art."Readas a sequence,this setof threesteps or stagesoffers a relativelycoherentmessage thatcanbe articulatedn aseriesof propositionsabout herelationshipbetweenexperienceandcommunication, sthese are impacted by technology (or modernization)and find their ratios varieddialectically along with it. A thesis mightbe constructed rom these stagesthatwouldhave some formal analogies with Lukacs's Theoryof the Novel (to which a lengthyreference s madein "TheStoryteller"),bringing helatterupto date as it werewiththeinclusion, f not of massculture, hen at least of technologicalrealities. Butsuch athesis,it should be clear, is not "in Benjamin,"who does not argue for propositions orinterpretationsn this way: it is the effect of a montage,somethingderived andfully asarbitrarysanyconceptualreconstruction f this or thatallegedintentionattributedotheArcades fragments,which does not mean that it is wrong or uninteresting. In fact,Benjaminsolicits this kind of attribution, f conceptualreconstruction nd nterpretationafter the fact, on the partof his reader;he cannotbe read without such a retrospectiveoperation,no matterhow questionable he results.It would now seem possible to affirm the existence within the corpusof the greatprogram-essays of the "middleperiod")of yet anothershadowtrilogy,a much faintertripartitemovement that intersects the one in "The Storyteller"but that deals withideologyrather hanmodernization, ndwith belief rather hanwiththe determination fperceptionbythetechnologicalbase. This"trilogy" anbe calledthecosmologicalseries,and tmoves fromthefundamental ssay onKarlKraus,againthrough"TheStoryteller,"andontothe"Commentaryn Brecht' Poems,"notnormallyconsidered o beoneof theprogram-essaysas such(owing to its discontinuous orm)andneglectedin both BrechtandBenjamin riticism.Ineachof theseessays,aswe shallsee,Benjamin indshistextualinvestigationmoving, as it were, againsthis own conscious will andintent,towardtheidentification,asof awatermark, f something ike a"great hainof being" n connectionwith the threevery dissimilartexts in question-the pamphletsof Kraus,the tales ofLeskov, and the lyricsof Brecht. This ladderof forms,or chain of being, seems to leaddown intoontologicalregions,sedimented ayersof a natureunder he socialphenomenaof what,at least in the Viennaof Krausandthe Berlinof Brecht,areurbanandtherebyhistoricalrealitiessubjectto humanpraxisand accessible to changeand modification.What can now be the status of such a ladderof forms andof theNature,or at least thenaturalization,hey propose?

The question has two implications: the one for what it may be abusive to callBenjamin'smethodhasto do withtherelationshipof theconstellationsof his objectsofstudy osomeultimategroundingn humannaturetself, some ultimate onstraintn needand initude whichwould alsoimplyanultimateconstraint nthemutability f thecodesthemselves,some ultimate ruthof naturalaw). The otherconsequence s perhapsbuttheinversionof thisoneandconcerns deologicalanalysisassuch,somethingwhoserelativeabsenceseemedto mark heoriginalityof Benjamin'sMarxismandhis modeof culturalcommentary.Itwould,however,be a mistake o think t absent: the Second International(as, for example, in the essay on EduardFuchs) is not the only object of an explicitideological critique in termsof the thematicsof progress). Ideological demystificationis present,tactfully, n the Surrealism ssay, where the well-known distinctionbetweenrevolt and revolution is firmly objected, in passing. And it is present openly butrespectfully n thegreatKrausessay, in which thepassionatenegativityof the satirist itseems clear thatthe little fragmentcalled "The DestructiveCharacter" as to do withKraus,rather hanwith Brechthimself, as has been claimed)and the laterconversiontoCatholicismare bothobjectedto be necessaryflaws, unacceptabledeologicaldeforma-tions withoutwhich, however,Kraus' historicandprogressivemission wouldhave beeninconceivable.

26


10/17

It is a familiar dialectical trope, whereby the flaw is retrospectivelygraspedasnecessary for the strength,and the ideologically doubtfulreread as the ally, of thepoliticallycorrectandprogressive. Yet it would notbe genuinelydialectical f one wenton to claim that this reinforcementof opposites was always and at every historicalconjuncturerueandoperative. WhateverBrecht' ideological flaws, forexample, theydo not have to include these Krausianones of akindof baroquecum VienneseCatholicnature:Brechtfaced a verydifferentpoliticaland historicalsituation rom that n whichKrauswas formed as a young man.Leskov's situationwas very different rom either of these, and it may thereforebeuseful to startwith him. The traditionalview of Leskov as a "profoundlyRussian"storyteller omehoworganicallyrooted n thepeasantryand its superstitionsand talesisat leastpartiallyestrangedand chilledby his commercialandfamilylinksto England initsdryempiricalbusinessspirit hevery antipodeof Slavicpeasantmysticism)andbyhissympathieswith the heretics of Russianorthodoxy(who may in this respectalso offersome verydistantandheavily Slavic versionof what Protestantismmeant n theWest).Thesegapsin the"organic" ive a Leskov who at thevery east constructshis "russianity"(to use a Barthesian xpression),who works itupas anartobjectout of systematiccodesrather hanexpressingit unconsciously ike some kind of earthoracle. Meanwhile,thisdistance-which might well be compatiblewith the aesthetics of "estrangement"-ismoredifficulttoreconcilewith thattheoryof the conditionsof possibilityof storytellingand the tale itself which Benjaminhas famouslyoffered us in an earliermomentof theessay: namely, ts constitutiverelationshipo the threekindsof social situations nwhichit variouslytendsto flourish. These areall somehow situationsof handicraftso thatthepracticeof handworkclings to the oral narrative"like the potter's fingermarkson theclay"),but thekinds of storieswill varyaccording o theirorigins: in apeasantorvillagemilieu, among sailors,or in the mouthsof merchantsand commercial travelers. Thisenumerations surelymeantto draw a fundamentaline between this kindof narrativeproductionand what is consistent with the psychologies, sensoria, and lifeworlds ofpeople who handle modem machinery-namely, factory workers. Their needs areexamined in "The ReproducibleWork";meanwhile, "The Storyteller"gives us theobverse face of Brecht's reflections on his theaterpublic, since this handicraftpublic,closer to the earthitself, is not likely to presentitself in his urbantheater. Are we toimagine that Leskov's travels form him into some distant modem analogue of themedievalstoryteller utlined nthe firstpartof theessay? Perhaps,f we take nto accountthe mediationof the earth tself (as content)and above all the formal mediation of therequisite rrevocable enses in the storytellingnarrative:"Aman who dies at thirty-fiveprovesateverymomentof his life to be a manwho will dieattheageof thirty-five."Thissentenceof MoritzHeimann' is aprivilegedobjectof Benjaminianmeditation; edeniedandaffirmed tat the sametime. Untrueexistentially atthispointalong implicitdialogueopens upbetweenBenjaminand the rathermoreKierkegaardian artre,who wishes toinsist on the irreducibilityof the lived moment,in which the future s nevervisible), itbecomes true in commemorationand in the tale. The issue is not only aestheticorphilosophical but also historiographicand political (as in Sartre)and will later, inBenjamin,be staged in competing conceptionsof the past. For as passionatelyas herepudiatesbourgeois/socialdemocratic SecondInternational)onceptionsof progress,hejust as stubbornly eeks to refutethe historicistconceptionof the isolated momentofthepast("wiees eigentlich gewesen")andto refusethe historicist mperative orecapturethesensethepastmomenthadof itself withoutanyknowledgeof itsfutureand tsdestiny.Forus, rather, hefate of thepastmustbe included n ourpictureof it, as a sadnessor adefeat,a massacre,or,on the otherhand,a barely perceptiblesensingof dawn air. Butthisis hard osquarewith the tabooonmarginalizing onceptionsof thepastas decadence



11/17

orregress4andflips thepolemic into another,upward piral. Deathis themarkhere fornarrativerrevocability. The ambivalenceof this conceptualtwo-way street-Is it anexistentialquestionof mortalityandfinitude,of Being itself? ora narrativequestionofpraxis, choice, and construction?-will be the most interestingnegotiationwe watchBenjaminmakein this series.At any rate,Nature-in the formof organicdeath-enters the narrativepictureatpreciselythispoint,where tbecomes clear thatstorytellingas such,in its classicalform,demandsnaturalization.Unless the events of the tale areirrevocable, ts shape sags; itdissolves into theformlessandthenon-,anti-,or a-narrative. Indeed,onewayof talkingabout he modem and what t does tothenovel is offeredpreciselybytheexaminationofwhatmodemfreedomsdotothe"destiny" f itscharacters.)Butthis naturalizationmeansapowerfuldisplacementandshift infocus whereby he socialandthe historicalare onceagain-as in precapitalist ocieties-grasped as formsof naturalhistory: theemergentsecularpoliticalityof modem times must hereagainbe petrifiedand struckby the well-nighapocalyptic ightof a ladderof speciesand forms. Shadesof thetragedybook,withits gloomy revival of thecyclical view of humanevents and humanstrivingsas a danceof death,a funerealpageant!Leskov's cosmology thus proves to be (using the Russian Formalist term) a"motivationof the device," a conditionof possibility of his storytelling tself, whichdemandsa chain of beingthatreachesdown into the mineralworld andthe inanimate-one can now tell stories aboutmagical stones!-and up towardthe apokatastasis(thereleaseof souls intoredemption), nterpreted y Benjaminas a kind of disenchantmentinwhichsuddenlyall theearthlybeingsunder hespellof the fallen worldsuddenly indtheirvoice andbeginto "telltheirstory."At theheightof thissummitof formsis foundthe righteous man himself (the storyteller,who affords counsel) in the form of thehermaphrodite,who reunitesthis variety by way of the symbiosis of the sexes and thegenders. It is an oddly postcontemporaryUtopiannote to find at theheartof a peasantworldview.But we mustbe carefulhowwe evaluate his naivecosmology,asdazzlingas anarbolde la vida, or rather,how we evaluate Benjamin'sevaluation. He was theoreticallysuspiciousof narrative s such(thehistoricalcontinuumor"progress") ndpassionatelycommitted to the Enlightenmentprogramof the dissolution of myth. Myth wouldpresumablynvolve what we have calledgrounding, he attribution f natural ontent,ornaturalization:hebelief intheontologicalprimacyof a specificcode,theladdering hatshadesdown fromhistoryandthepoliticalinto natural aw andtheformsof being. Whatdistinguishes Benjamin's Enlightenmentstance from the more familiar iconoclasticformsof ideology-critiqueanddemystification,however,is his ideathatone mustgo allthe way throughmythin orderto free oneself from it. (This has been interpreted s aspecificandoriginal ormof collectivetherapy r cultural evolution.)Wemust hereforeexpect his views of cosmology to be both ambivalentandcomplicated.Still, the greatKrausessay betraysthe more classic lineamentsof the operationofideologicaldemystification, erhaps ecause hisparticularase srelativelyunencumberedby narrative nd finds its centerof gravity n therelationship f thewriter o languageassuch,rather hanto storytelling.Yet Krausalso needs a formof mythicnaturalizationnorder ofulfill hisvocation.Thisfunction s providedbyanAustrianbaroqueCatholicism(to which the Jewish Krauswill laterformallyconvert),which authorizesa paradisiacal

4. Benjamin'sconceptionof therelationshipofpresenttopast is governed npart byRiegl sLate Roman Art Industry-by a principled repudiationof the notion of historical decadence:"There re noperiods ofdecline"["N" 1.6;5: 571/44]. Thesatirical stanceofa Kraus,however,is precisely grounded in the belief in contemporarydecadence; whence complex tensions inBenjamin's thoughtI will examineelsewhere.

28


12/17

conceptionof a full language, n thelightof whichits deformationsby the modempresscanbe denounced:His conceptofcreationcontainsthetheologicalinheritanceofspeculations hatlastpossessed contemporary alidityforthe wholeof Europe n the seventeenthcentury.Atthetheologicalcore of thisconcept,however,a transformation astakenplace that allows it effortlessly to fit into the cosmopolitancredo ofAustrianworldliness, which made creation into a church in which nothingremainedto recall the rite exceptan occasional whiffof incense in the mists.[Reflections263; 2: 339-40]

WhatdistinguishesBenjamin'sideological analysis of Krausfrom those in which thewheat s separated arefully rom thechaff,andthesuperstitious ndregressivefrom thepoliticallycorrectanduseful, is that n order o generatea rich,"historicallyoperative"critique,this ideological vision of linguistic plenitudemustpass through he mediationof a whole new personalityorpsychic structure.It is this mediation hatthe titles of thethreesectionsof the Kraus ssay-namely, "CosmicMan,""Daimon," nd"Monster"inthe Germanmorepointedlyrenderedas "Allmensch,""Daimon,"and"Unmensch")-begin to project. Here theobligationof the ideological underpinningo producea newagent is clear: the creationalvision must now generatethat "destructivecharacter"required or the tireless labor of the linguistic diagnosticianandprophetof doom thatKraus ncarnated or over thirtyyears. It must now be called uponto explain

the necessity that compelled this great bourgeois character to become acomedian,thisguardianof Goethean inguisticvaluesapolemicist,or whythisirreproachablyhonorable man went berserk. This, however, was bound tohappen,since he thoughtfitto beginchangingthe worldwith his ownclass, inhis own home,in Vienna. Andwhen,recognizingthefutilityof his enterprise,he abruptlybroke it off,heplaced the matterback in thehandsof nature-thistimedestructive,not creative,nature. [Reflections288; 2: 365]To grasp what Benjaminmeans here, we need to consider the sketch entitled "TheDestructiveCharacter" ndin a moregeneralway to sense thequotientand reservoirofsheer antisocialpower,rage,and internalizedviolence thatanysolitary ndividualneedstosummon n order o withstandandassault he massivebeingof the social orderoutside.Krausneeded to become a monsterin orderfor his art-for-art's-sake rogramto beconverted nto the virtualcritiqueof themedia thatbecame thepolitics of theantifascistera(andbeyond). Andhe could do thatbyconvertinghis ideologyof nature ntoa daimonwhose guidancetransformed is own personality nto a "forceof nature."Thenew mission of thisnaturalized orcethen becomes the invention of a firstandfundamental ritiqueof the media. Its originality s the result of a matchbetween thetemperament f the writerand thechangingdemandsof the historicalsituation tself, amatch thatcan only be appreciatedas a dialectical irony. For Kraus sets forth as anaesthete,and it is within the well-nigh planetaryandgravitational hift from the belleepoquetothefascist and antifascist1930sthathis passionsand obsessionstakeon averydifferentmeaningfrom the one theystartedout with: "You would have hadto grasptheFackel literally,word for word, from the very first issue, in order to foresee that thisaestheticallydeterminedournalismwas destined,without osing anyof its basicmotifs,but rathergainingone, to become thepolitical proseof 1930"[Reflections261; 2: 335].Yet at thisultimatepointof the satiricand theprophetic,at whichall thecorruptions ftheage aredenounced,we must notneglect reading hem in theirfinal form in the musicof Offenbach,in whose ultimate artificial and social frivolity nature returns ike the



13/17

repressed,andin which the delirious vision of social nullity and vacuousness wins anaestheticappearance nd turns ntotheeuphoriaof playandstyle (musicappearinghereatthe otherboundary f satiric anguage).Thisnow allows us to superimposeOffenbachon Kraus himself and to insert music into the Benjaminianconstellation(just as thecaricatures f DaumierandGuysconjugate he historicalmaterialist ollectorFuchswiththe modernistpoet Baudelaireand allow the openingonto visual art).Yet in bothLeskov andKraus, he ideological appealto nature,howevernecessaryfor their form construction-in Leskov fornarrative,n Kraus or thedenunciationandregenerationof a damagedandcorruptpublic language-demands the supplementofideological critique o become visible as such. Nothing n the work tself,excepta certainslightinternaldistance, dentifiestheideological precondition s sheer deology, therebyallowing the reader o take the properprecautionsandto open a furtherdistancein itsreception. The thirdexhibit orpanel,the Brechtianone, which consists in a seeminglyrandomset of briefcommentarieson thirteen yricsor songs, does preciselythis,by theway it includesthenaturalwithin itself.Theuntranslatableitle and heorganization fBrecht' earlycollection,Hauspostille,suggests a reworkingof a hymn andprayerbook for moder urbancircumstances. It"objectsto much of ourmorality; t has reservationsregardinga numberof traditionalcommandments.It has not the remotestintention,however,of explicitly statingthesereservations. It bringsthemout in the form of variants,precisely,of the moral attitudeandgestureswhosecustomary orm itconsiders obe no longerquitefitting" Brecht58;2: 562]. This is not to be confusedwithirony,but it does suggestanoperationwherebythe traditionals incorporated nd ndeed s requiredbythe formas the ladder tmustbothclimb and kick away. In these lyrics and songs, "tradition," ariously indicatingsin,puritanism,piety, properbehavior,hospitality,patriotism, leanliness,andpedagogy,iswhatremainsof whatI have called theontological adderof natural orms.Indeed, n boththe preceding exhibits-Kraus as much as Leskov-the acquiredconviction of agrounding n naturenecessarilybecamewhatwe would call a religiousworldview. Butin Brecht'spoems, God himself appears n person,only to be hooted andbooed by the"menof Mahagonny."Here herequirementf treatinghumanhistory ike naturalhistoryis notonly fulfilledbutalso examinedfrom all sides andtransformedntoa new kindofpoetic object in its own right. Such is Brecht'sway with the seemingnaturalness-or"naturality"-of emotions andhis unique approach o the historicallynew phenomenaembodied nbig-citylife (anotherdirect inkacrosstheentireconstellation o Baudelairehimself):

Onecannotimaginean observersurveying hecharmsof a city-its multitudeof houses, the breath-takingspeed of its traffic, its entertainments-moreunfeelingly hanBrecht. Thislackoffeeling for thecitydecor,combinedwithan extremesensibility or the city-dweller'sspecial ways of reaction,distin-guishes Brecht'scyclefrom all big-citypoetrythatprecedes it. [Brecht61; 2:556-57]

Paradoxically, his turnfrom the architectural xteriorandthe detailof the streetto thenewhabitus he former equiresandgeneratess notonlyconsistentwithBenjamin'sownapproach o the urban in "On Some Motifs of Baudelaire");t also allows for a kind ofperverseandinvertednaturalization f preciselythose new urban eelings-of rageandracism,of the psychology of the underground, nd of "illegality"-culminating in anastonishingmoment in which political graffiti on a wall take on all the "lapidary"naturalityof theLatin classics. Now theactual andscape-the "original"natureof theRomantics,say-betrays the effects of theseoperationsnapeculiarlyBrechtian ashionby way of the fadingandimpoverishment f the decor: the washed-outsky, thepitiful

30


14/17

stick-treeallby itself intheempty ot [Brecht68-69: 2:566]. Meanwhile, nthegloriousfinalpoemon Lao-tse's dictationandpromulgation f theTao, in the momentbefore hecrosses the border nto exile and out of the sightof humanbeings, somethingcrucial srectified about the vengeful God of the opening poem; something is said about therelationshipbetween revelation,poetry,and friendliness. A most unnaturaldoctrinallesson is leftbehind,namelythat he weak can overcome thestrongas waterwearsdownsolidrock. This is notmerely he reversalof the ladderof naturewhose structural resenceis affirmed nthe threeconstitutivemomentsof thisparticularectionof theconstellation;it also readsinto the recordBenjamin'sown relationship o nature,being, andreligion,as the quintessentialcity-dwellerandEnlightenment keptic.This is thensomethingveryliketheverticalstructure f the constellation asopposedto what we have called syntacticalor horizontaloppositions),which respondsto thenecessity of contentandgroundingand of the ideology of the naturalby includingandtransformingt-foregrounding it andturning t into a message about itself. One finalexample now needs to be set forth, namely what might today be described as therelationshipwithinBenjaminof Proustand culturalstudies,of modernismandenlight-enment,of aestheticismandpolitics. Itturnson Benjamin's systematicappropriationfProust'smotifof wakingandsleeping,of rememberingandforgetting, or thepurposesof theEnlightenmentprojectof "wakingupfrom the nineteenth entury"5-thatis, frombourgeoisculture tself, fromthe superstructuref capitalism. It is a wakingthat,as inBenjamin'srelations with the mythic generally,he wishes to stage as a full settlingofaccounts,a passing all the way throughto the other side, rather hana revolutionarypuritanismand iconoclasm wherebythe bourgeois heritageis simply repudiatedanddestroyed. This form of waking and remembering,whose concept Benjaminfindsdevelopedin Proust,constitutesa kind of collective therapy,not to say culturalrevolu-tion-a systematicworking throughand reexperiencingas thoughfor the first time,which,as in Freud,by thecompletenessof its commitment o thepastnow at last allowsthepastto be left behind and morefully forgotten(thedeadfinally buryingtheirdead).Though here s notimetodeveloptheparticulars nd he intricaciesof thisoperation,whichhas muchto do with Proustand with culturalhistoriography,ts formal structuremust be underscored.Itis a structure hatbears some similarities o theconjunctionwithwhichwe began,namelythe oddsharingof a mutualelectronbetween KafkaandBrecht,the way in which the Brechtianconceptof gestus became the Kafkaesquecategoryofnarrative. Here too a Proustian igurebecomesa Benjaminian orat least a nineteenth-centuryarchaeological)methodology.But where nthefirst nstance t wasone aestheticdocument,onepoint ntheconstellation,whichtherebymanaged o linkupwithanother,here it is the entiremethodologicalpracticeof the constellation hat comes into view inconjunctionwith one of its crucialcomponents. It is a mode of relationship which itmightbe betterto call automethodological ather hanautoreferential)n which a part,while remaining n its placeas part,also programs hetotalityand offers its unexpectedmanifesto.We nowhaveaprovisionalconclusionto draw romthesefigures. They displaythetracings, heafterimage,andtheghostlywatermarkeftbytheobjectiveforces of theage,or of the"currentituation."We shouldnot toorapidly ubjectivizeBenjamin'sreadingsby grasping hem as theidiosyncratic"tastes" f analreadyprofoundly diosyncraticandprivatereader(whatmakes Benjamin's idiosyncracies epistemologically privilegedispreciselyhis abhorrenceor the personaland the subjectiveas such). Rather,"tastes,"particularlyn the moder period,are the way in which the forces of the moder age,passing through he mediationof the aesthetic,show up on the individualsensoriumas

5. This is Benjamin's own description of the ambition of the Arcades Project; see above allthe first reflections in the Kfile [5: 490ff.].



15/17

on aGeigercounteror an EKG. MydeepervisceralfeelingsaboutLeCorbusier anthenbe translatedbackintoa whole philosophyof historyanda wholepoliticalstanceon thenatureof modem times andmodernization-and so for allthe otherswe haveherenamedinpassing. And if it is saidthat tis somehow aremarkable istoricalaccident hata Kafkacomes intoexistence,or if we amuseourselvesby imaginingabodyof modernistwritingof a peculiar,unimaginable ype that failed to come intobeing-thereby failingto giverepresentationo somedeeper orce of theage,which forthatveryreasonremainsunsaidandnon-named-then that, oo,makesupforthenatureof ourhistorical ituation,whosecontingenciesareprecisely nevitable nthe othersenseof the word. It defines ourhistorythataKafkacame intobeing nit,and heaforesaidunnameablemodernist esthetic ailedto do so. It is to that contingent conjunctureof contingencies that the historicalconsciousness of thepresent s a reactionandan articulation.I also want to conclude with a remarkabout what I called the codes and theiressentially historical arbitrariness. Benjamin gives us the suggestive example of asquaringof the circleof the contradictionbetween relativismand absolutenaturality, nexample that consists in keeping faith with a nameless referent that can never findadequate iguration,whiletherepresentationsndcodes thatsimultaneously pproximateitarebothhonoredandrelativized.Benjaminwasutterlynon- andantiphilosophical, ndI suppose that his constellativetranscodingcan in no way be thoughtof as Hegelian.Perhaps t constitutes, rather,an approach o thatpostmoder spatialdialectic thatsomanypeople(mostnotablyHenriLefebvre)have called forinopposition o theHegeliantemporalone.But that amounts o hammeringBenjamin nto an instrumentn thestruggle or ourown present and future. Only a first, provisional lesson can be drawn from theseBenjaminianproceduresf we substitute"narrative"or "representation"n general. Inanycase our achievedreceptionsof anyrepresentationeemattheveryleastsusceptibleto transformationnto narrativeand expressionin narrative orm. Yet it is preciselynarrative hat wears the least well, that shows its age in the outmoded and merely"fashionable"-sheerly conventional-stories the older generationstold themselves(withoutrealizing, often, that these were stories or conventions). This is one of thestrikingfeatures of ourreappropriationf the past, that what separates he usable, therelevant or current, rom the detritusof the junk shop, the uncanonizable, s the linebetween non-narrativeand narrative tself. A structure s reconstructedwhich wetranslate ntocontemporaryerms, eavingbehindaperiodnarrative hatwe can nolongerstomachand thatmust be repressedand gnored, f the older text is to be revivedwithouttoo muchguiltor ntellectual elf-recrimination.Thus he constructed artof aBeethovensonata is tacitly separatedfrom the cloying period melody that comes to stand forVienneseEnlightenment rivolity,class guilt,andluxury,theself-indulgenceof cultureat its most gratuitousand intolerable. Or consider EdwardCurtis's ambitiousPacificNorthwestcoastfilm, in which thelastvestigesof the moststunningKwakiutlmythsandritualsarereorganizedntothemostunlikely"Indianove story,"withpriestlyvillains andstar-crossedovers: we hasten opeeloff this windowdressingand nventa non-narrativerelationship o theterrifying hunderbirdn the warcanoe,beyondall local fashionandlatenineteenth-centuryentimentalism.All separablenarrativemomentsof this kind-which include what are sometimescalled the unconscious"masternarratives" f historyat work in the collective imagi-nary-are by virtueof thatreificationandseparation lready mplicitlytransformedntoimages,whichis to say,intoobjects. Notoriously magessoakup ideologicalinvestmentof a secondarykind, and on some other level thantheir former content(for example,notions of the "expansion"of an empireor a system, its fall, or its "maturation" nddevelopment).

32


16/17

Thisobjectification trikeskitschandclassic alike; ndeed,thisis thebasison whichboth socialphenomenaareconstructed: he reifiedprojectionof a kind of culturalobjectcapableof absorbing heerconnotation,whether hatof officialcultureand canonizationor the moreshabbydecorationsby whichpovertyseeksto adornandconceal itself (mostoften from itself). In eithercase, the guilt of culture is here reenactedby way of thehollowness of official institutionsor thepitifulfailureof artobjectsto transformhereal.(That here s also a truth oculture s presupposedby thiseffect, which setsin whenthattruthhasbeendispelledorneutralized.)It is thereforeas thoughnarrative-in the senseof hairstyleandclothingfashion, storytellingconventions,the sheerstyle of the socialimaginaryor objective spiritof any given period-inspired what Barthesmight havecalleda veritablenauseaof history,adeepvisceraldisgustwith theephemeralitiesof thepast. This is quitedifferent romthatgenuine nightmare f historywe glimpsewheneverwe beginto sensethepermanence f its failuresand heirredeemability f thegenerationsupon generationsof the dead (even more than the ferocious crueltyof humanbeingsamongthemselves).Whatmustnow be asserted s theidentitybetweenthis narrative ubbish-which thepast s, virtually nitstotality-and ideology proper, tselfalways susceptible o narrativeform. This is thepointat which we can venture heunlikelyproposition hatBenjamin'sconstellationshave afamilylikenesswith Althusserian"structuralausality,"which alsoseeks to elude narrative orm while retaining he elements of deep referentiality.TheAlthusseriandistinctionbetween science and deology is supremelypertinenthere,foritis hardto see how that"representationf the ImaginaryRelationshipof Individuals otheirReal Conditionsof Existence"[162], which he calls ideology, could be anythingotherthannarrative.It is a positionthatblocks the free-fall into sheerfictionality,sincetheelements,thenon-narrative omponentsof therepresentation, rescarcely optionalandmarktheplace of some non-narrative eal,an absentreferentiality.6Onecanalso trytorecodeall of thisin a kind of mathematicalanguage. Itis certainthat one of the casualtiesof a contemporary, roperlypostmodernnausea in the face ofnarrativesand old-fashionedrepresentationss what is takento be theMarxian"masternarrative" f history,by which is meantthe doctrineof the modesof production,whichwe turninto stories-of the now supremelyunfashionabletype of "philosophiesofhistory"or"universalhistories"-about thewayin which one modegavewayto anotherone,how a "civilization"brokedown,how Romedeclined,how some othersocial formwill eventuallytakethe place of the currentone, and so on. As narrativeobjects,thesehistoricalstories,with their transindividual ctors andcharacters, re then availableforall kinds of private libidinal investments,as when depressedindividualspine awaythinking maginary houghtsaboutexistentiallyunrealentities. TheNietzcheandiagno-sis of historyand tsunhealthyeffects is obviously strongestat thispoint. But one wouldalso haveto notetheperiodchangesin the Marxian"masternarratives,"ortheyare notterriblydifferentin their actualizationor in theirtelling at any particulargenerationalmoment fromCurtis'sintolerableromance. Forthe doctrineof modes of productionsnot a narrative ut an axiomatic: it can be used in specificcircumstances,at whichpointit must always be narrativizedandrepresentedn a storyform that then soaks up andregistersall the ephemeralfashions and tastes, the mortalconventions,of the period.

6. On the moregeneral turnaway rom "linear" or narrative)causality,Adorno s thoughtsbear reflection: "Causalityhas similarly withdrawn nto totality ... each state of things ishorizontallyandverticallyconnected o all theothers, lluminatesall ofthemjustas it is illuminatedbyall in turn" Negative Dialectics(New York:Continuum, 973) 267]. Whether hissynchronicor structural ausalityisfiundamentallyesistant onarrativizations a matterfordebate. Insomenarrativizedor cultural orm, transformed nto doxa, synchronicor constellatedcausalitymaysome day seem as old-fashioned, n the strong,nauseoussense, as Hegelian universalhistory.diacritics / fall-winter 1992 33


17/17

The basic elementsof what s thuswronglycalled"themode of productionnarrative" rethusnon-narrative, ut can only come before us in narrative orm.This is thebenefit or ustodayofBenjamin'sowndeepformalsuspicionsofnarrativeas such(evenas it is embodied n the conventionalessay formor inconventional iteraryhistory). Theupshot-the constellationas such-is not ammunition gainsthistoryandreferentiality utrather wayof sustaining hese valuesagainstnarrative epresentation,in all its sheer fictionality. The Arcades notes and files project the imperativetonarrativize,o reorganize hemintoarepresentationnd a kind of story,at the sametimethat ortragicallycontingent easons heyresistanydefinitiverepresentationalorm. Yetwhat this immense ruin does by its sheerimmobilityandbulk acrossthe landscapewasaccomplishedbythe earlierprogram-essays ysheermomentum,movingtoofast foranyrepresentationoharden, urning workof meditation ntoa seriesofrapid ransitions hatelude the capacityof the mindto retain them and transform hemback into an image.Neither of these solutions can work for us: thematizedand reified, they are therebyalready ransformednto a period style and a nauseoushistorical ashion. But theform-problem heyforce us to workthrough-even if we stripawaytheperiodnames,such assynchronyanddiachrony-is bound to be good for us in new andunforeseeableways.

WORKS CITEDAlthusser,Louis. Leninand Philosophy. New York:Verso, 1971.Benjamin,Walter. Benjamin:Philosophy,Aesthetics,History. Ed. GarySmith. Chi-cago: U of ChicagoP, 1989.. "Commentaries n Poems by Brecht." Trans.Anna Bostock. UnderstandingBrecht. New York: New LeftBooks, 1973.. GesammelteSchriften.Ed. Rolf Tiedemannand HermannSchweppenhiuser.7vols. to date. Frankfurt m Main:Suhrkamp,1972-. [GS]-- . Illuminations.Ed. HannahArendt. Trans.HarryZohn. New York:Schocken,1969.. "N[RetheTheoryof Knowledge,Theoryof Progress]."Trans.Leigh HafreyandRichardSieburth.Benjamin43-83.. Reflections. Ed.PeterDemetz. Trans.EdmundJephcott.New York:Schocken,1986.Levi-Strauss,Claude. "TheEffectivenessof Symbols." Vol. 1of StructuralAnthropol-

ogy. New York:Harper,1963.. "TheSorcererandHis Magic." Vol. 1 of StructuralAnthropology.New York:Harper,1963.

34

Documents

Jameson on Benjamin