Emanations of the Yellow Sign

ghosts and scattered limbs of reading, excisions and marginalia.

Posts tagged Tel Quel

Apr 15
“The ultimate subversion (contra-censorship) does not consist in saying what shocks public opinion, morality, law, the police, but in inventing a paradoxical (pure of any doxa) discourse: invention> (and not provocation) is a revolutionary act: it cannot be accomplished other than in setting up a new language. Roland Barthes, Sade / Fourier / Loyola (1971)

Oct 5
“The passage beyond language requires language or rather a text as a place for the trace of a step that is not (present) elsewhere. That is why the movement of the trace, passing beyond language, is not classical nor does it render the logos either secondary or instrumental. Logos remains as indispensable as the fold folded onto the gift, just like the tongue of my mouth when I tear bread from it to give it to the other. It is also my body.” Jacques Derrida, At This Very Moment in This Work (1987)

Jan 11
“Ideality is death, to be sure, but to be dead—this is the whole question of dissemination—is that to be dead or to be dead? The ever so slight difference of stress, conceptually imperceptible, the inner fragility of each attribute produces the oscillation between the presence of being as death and the death of being as presence.” Jacques Derrida, Glas (1974)

Oct 23
Society of the Friends of the Text: its members would have nothing in common (for there is no necessary agreement on the texts of pleasure) but their enemies: fools of all kinds, who decree the foreclosure of the text and of its pleasure, either by cultural conformism or by intransigeant rationalism (suspecting a ‘mystique’ of literature) or by political moralism or by criticism of the signifier or by stupid pragmatism or by snide vacuity or by destruction of the discourse, loss of verbal desire. Such a society would have no site, could function only in total atopia; yet it would be a kind of Phalanstery, for in it contradictions would be acknowledged (and the risks of ideological imposture thereby restricted), difference would be observed, and conflict rendered insignificant (being unproductive of pleasure)” Roland Barthes, The Pleasure of the Text (1973)

Jul 29
“The world has surely become unhinged, and only violent movements can put it all back together. But it may be that among the instruments for doing so, there is one – tiny, fragile – which requires to be wielded delicately.” Roland Barthes
(via alanreedwrite)

Jul 17
“I would be interested rather in a secret correspondence, obviously: obviously secret, encrypted in the ether of obviousness and truth, too obvious because in this case the cipher remains secret because it is not concealed.” Jacques Derrida, Restitutions of the Truth in Pointing (1978)

Mar 31
“My optimism consists … in saying that so many things can be changed, fragile as they are, bound up more with circumstances than with necessities, more arbitray than self-evident, more a matter of complex, but temporary, historical circumstances than with inevitable anthropological constraints … You know, to say that we are much more recent than we think … [is] to place at the disposal of the work that we can do on ourselves the greatest possible share of what is presented to us as inaccessible.” Foucault, “Practicing Criticism” (via myproxy)

(via nomadologue)


Mar 30
“To take only a few examples: pre-Socratic Greece (Heraclitus, Anaxagoras, Empedocles), the China of the ‘Asiatic mode of production’, and, particularly, capitalist society since the end of the nineteenth century; all propose texts remarkable for a practice in which the unitary subject, as an indispensable pole assuring the capacity to verbalise (putting into words), is annihilated, liquified, exceeded by what we will call the ‘process of signifiance’, that is, by pre-verbal drives and semiotic operations logically if not chronologically anterior to the phenomenon of language. In this process, the unitary subject discovered by psychoanalysis is only one moment, a time of arrest, a stasis, exceeded and threatened by this movement. The process in question is not only a ‘topologization’, or a spacial dynamic which remains subsumable by One (or Unity). It goes as far as rejecting even the Unconscious/Conscious division, the Signifier/Signified division, that is, even the very censoring through which the subject and the social order are constituted.” Julia Kristeva, The Subject in Process (1973).

Mar 25
“[…] all writing is itself this special voice, consisting of several indiscernible voices, and that literature is precisely the invention of this voice, to which we cannot assign a specific origin: literature is that neuter, that composite, that oblique into which every subject escapes, the trap where all identity is lost, beginning with the very identity of the body that writes. Probably this has always been the case: once an action is recounted, for intransitive ends, and no longer in order to act directly upon reality — that is, finally external to any function but the very exercise of the symbol — this disjunction occurs, the voice loses its origin, the author enters his own death, writing begins.” Roland Barthes, The Death of The Author (via toniiu)

Feb 21
“I am at war with myself.” Last Interview - J.Derrida (via circulationwithinmyskull)

(via circulationwithinmyskull-deacti)


Sep 26

1. Language is a skin: I rub my language against the other. It is as if I had words instead of fingers, or fingers at the tip of my words. My language trembles with desire. The emotion derives from a double contact: on the one hand, a whole activity of discourse discreetly, indirectly focuses upon a single signified, which is “I desire you,” and releases, nourishes, ramifies it to the point of explosion (language experiences orgasm upon touching itself); on the other hand, I enwrap the other in my words, I caress, brush against, talk up this contact, I extend myself to make the commentary to which I submit the relation endure.

(To speak amorously is to expend without and end in sign without a crisis; it is to practice a relation without orgasm. There may exist a literary form of this coitus reservatus: what we call Marivaudage.)

Roland Barthes, Talking in A Lover’s Discourse, 1977 (via discursivelacerations)

Sep 12
“We might ask whether the very possibility of neurosis is initially determined by a system of thought that proposes the subject as its origin.” Jean-Louis Baudry, Freud and Literary Creation (1968).

Sep 11
“People know what they do; frequently they know why they do what they do; but what they don’t know is what what they do does” Michel Foucault (via the-altway)

(via rumagin)


Sep 4
“In the last analysis, if one wishes to determine violence as the necessity that the other not appear as what it is, that it not be respected except in, for, and by the same, that it be dissimulated by the same in the very freeing of its phenomenon, then time is violence. This movement of freeing absolute alterity in the absolute same is the movement of temporalisation in its most absolutely unconditioned universal form: the living present. If the living present, the absolute form of the opening of time to the other in itself, is the absolute form of egological life, and if egoity is the absolute form of experience, then the present, the presence of the present, and the present of presence, are all originally and forever violent. The living present is originally marked by death. Presence as violence is the meaning of finitude, the meaning of meaning as history.” Jacques Derrida, Violence and Metaphysics (1964).

“No, we must reverse the terms: ‘other’ is the name, ‘other’ is the meaning of this unthinkable unity of light and night. What ‘other’ means is phenomenality as disappearance.” Jacques Derrida, Violence and Metaphysics (1964).

Page 1 of 3