The past week has been good for new books: last week Foucault’s lectures on Psychiatric Power arrived and, this morning, Althusser’s Philosophy of the Encounter arrived. Haven’t had the opportunity to look at Foucault yet, aside from reading the index. Based upon the index, it looks far more interesting than I had expected: there are, for instance, numerous references to Kantorowicz, which suggests there are a few ‘new’ nuggets of Foucault’s understanding of sovereignty – something people haven”t bothered putting much thought into.
Here’s a short piece from the new Althusser, about America and trains.
Portrait of the Materialist Philosopher
[290] The man’s age doesn’t matter. He can be very old or very young. The important thing is that he doesn’t know where he is, and wants to go somewhere. That’s why he always catches a moving train, the way they do in American Westerns. Without knowing where he comes from (origin) or where he’s going (goal). And he gets off somewhere along the way, in a four-horse town with a ridiculous train station in the middle of it.
Saloon, beer, whisky. ‘Where d’ya hail from, bud?’ ‘From a long ways off.’ ‘Where ya headed?’ ‘Dunno!’ ‘Might have some work for ya.’ ‘Okay.’
And so our friend Nikos goes to work. He’s a Greek by birth who has immigrated to the USA like so many others before him, and he doesn’t have a penny in his pockets. He works hard and, a year later, marries the prettiest girl in town. He scrapes together a little stake and buys the first cattle in his herd. Thanks to his intelligence and knack for picking out young livestock (horses, cattle), he ends up with the best bunch of animals around – after ten years of hard work.
The best bunch of animals = the best bunch of categories and concepts. He competes with other landowners, but peacefully. Everyone admits that he’s the best and that his categories and concepts (his herd) are the best. His reputation spreads throughout the West, and then the whole country.
[291] From time to time, he catches the moving train in order to see, talk, listen – like Gorbachev in the streets of Moscow. Besides, one an catch the train wherever one happens to be!
More popular than anyone else, he could be elected to the White House, although he started out from nothing. But no, he’d rather travel, go out and walk the streets; that’s how one comes to understand the true philosophy, the one that people have in their heads and that is always contradictory.
This is when he reads the Hindus and the Chinese (Zen), as well as Machiavelli, Spinoza, Kant, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Cavailles, Canguilheim, Vuillemin, Heidegger, Derrida, Deleuze, and so on. Thus, without having intended to, he comes a quasi-professional materialist philosopher – not that horror, a dialectical materialist, but an aleatory materialist.
He attains the level of classical wisdom, Spinoza’s third kind of ‘knowledge’, Nietzsche’s superman, and an understanding of eternal return: viz., that everything is repeated and exists only through differential repetition. Now he can engage in discussions with the great idealists. He not only understands them, but also explains the reasons for their theses to them! The others sometimes come round to his views with great bitterness, but after all,
Amicus Plato, magis amica Veritas!
11 Comments
WTF? Is it all like this? It’s like crap I wrote when I was a stoned undergrad!
Made me smile.
Perhaps you don’t have the patience to become a materialist philosopher in Althusser’s sense, Mark? What’s there not to like – the Marxist imaginary of America? an outline of a materialist tradition in philosophy? the relation between philosophy and power? the antithesis of materialism and idealism? our friend Nikos?
Guess you’re right. Reading ‘Contradiction and Overdetermination’ means nothing if I can’t see the deep mysteries of this blur of references and observation. Come on, this is stream of consciousness stuff; it’s not even Baudrillard’s American—and you didn’t answer my question as to whether it is all like this.
I didn’t mean to type that ‘n’ on the end of the Baudrillard title ( . . . or did I?)
No, it’s not all like that. There are two substantial pieces and a few smaller ones, “Portrait” included.
I think Mark may suffer from Intermittent N-typing Disorder. Anyone know what the final exclamation pointed line means?
A literal translation is “friend Plato, [more completely] friend Truth”. The problem is the severe ambiguity/syncretism of “magis” which could mean everything up to “of a dish”. But I suspect what it wants to say is something like, “Plato is a friend, but Truth is a greater friend.”
Also, there’s no verb in the sentence, but when Latin drops a verb, and you don’t know what it is, you can usually assume it’s just dropping “to be”. Latin doesn’t drop verbs all that often, but then you have Seneca’s saying, “Nihil novum sub sole.” (“There is nothing new under the sun.”) Also Latin frequently drops the verb in coordinate clauses, expecting the reader to reconstruct the verb from the first clause. “John loves fish, Mary beef, Bill lobster.”
Greek, on the other hand, drops verbs entirely practically all the time. Arabic even worse. Writing about other languages, me in English…
The second translation provided by Mandos is more or less in line with the standard rendering of it. The comment is attributed to Aristotle. Husserl wrote it in his copy of Being and Time.
Thanks for that.
Post a Comment