bataille in theory- afterimages (lascaux)

7/24/2019 Bataille in Theory- Afterimages (Lascaux)

1/13

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

http://www.jstor.org

Bataille in Theory: Afterimages (Lascaux)Author(s): Suzanne GuerlacSource: Diacritics, Vol. 26, No. 2, Georges Bataille: An Occasion for Misunderstanding (Summer,1996), pp. 6-17Published by: The Johns Hopkins University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1566293Accessed: 03-09-2015 18:34 UTC

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 contentin 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].

This content downloaded from 143.107.34.99 on Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:34:28 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1566293http://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/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1566293http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/


2/13

B T ILLE

N

TH ORY

AFTERIMAGES

LASCAUX)

SUZANNE

GUERLAC

If there is a

single

term

poststructuralism

ould not

live without-at least

within

the

intellectual

circles associated

with the review Tel

quel-it

is

"transgression,"

nherited

from Bataille.

"God-meaning," hilippe

Sollers

writes

in

an

early

essay,

"..

.

is a

figure

of

linguistic

interdictionwhereas

writing-which

is

metaphoricity

tself

(Derrida)-

transgresses... the hierarchic rderof discourseandof the worldassociatedwith t"["La

science de Lautr6amont"

08,

my emphasis].

In

their Dictionnaire des sciences

du

langage

Ducrot

and Todorov declare

grandly

that text "has

always

functioned as a

transgressive

field

with

respect

to

the

system according

to

which we

organize

our

perception,

our

grammar,

ur

metaphysics

and

even

our

science"

[443-44,

my

emphasis].

They

describe

he advent

of

poststructuralism

s a

"Copernican

evolution,"

nd

t

became

customary

to characterize he before

and after of this break

by

referring

o Bataille's

distinctionbetween

"restrained" nd

"general"

conomies.

An influential

essay by

Foucault,

"Pr6face

a la

transgression"

1963),

might

be

considered

he

opening

move

in what

would become

Tel

quel's

appropriation

f Bataille.

Foucault's

essay

examinesBataille's L'drotisme

1955),

a

study

hat heorized

ransgres-

sion

in

a

complex

elaborationwhich

articulated

hilosophical

discourse

(Hegel/Kojeve)

with

a

"sociological"

discourse of the sacred

(Caillois).

Foucault's

reading

of the text

removes the

transgression

f

eroticism

from

boththese discursivehorizonsand moves it

toward ate

Heidegger

(an

ontology

of the

limit)

and

Nietzsche. If one

of Bataille's most

radical

gestures

was to insert

he

ethnographic

istinction

acred/profane

nto

philosophi-

cal

discussion,

Foucault's

analysis

reinscribes

ransgression

within

the

intertextual ield

of

philosophy,

radicalized,

of

course,

through

the inclusion of

the

"marginal"

igure,

Nietzsche,

and

the

philosopher

who announced

the end

of

philosophy,

Heidegger.

Foucault'srewritingof Bataillemayreadphilosophyagainst tself,mayevenpropose he

transgression

of

philosophy;

nevertheless,

t

is structured

by

the

vicissitudes of

philo-

sophical

discourse.Batailleon the otherhandhadconfronted

philosophy

with

something

radically

other-tout autre.

In "Pr6face la

transgression,"

oucault

defined

ransgression

s

"a

gesture

concern-

ing

the limit." He

presented

t as a flash of

lightning,

an

image

that

not

only figures

transgression

but also emblematizes he

move into

what will

become the

philosophical

register

of

poststructuralism.

t

traces

a

line,

a line that

igures

he

Heideggerian

ontology

of

limitation,

he

coming

into

being

(or

appearance)

f

beings

on

the

horizonof

Being;

it

suggeststhe limit of the ontologicaldifference betweenBeing andbeings.

Anticipating

Derrida

through

Heidegger,

Foucault

analyzed

transgression

as an

eventof

difference,

alluding

o

Blanchot's

"principe

e

contestation" nd

o a Nietzschean

notionof

affirmation.

"Might

not the instantaneous

lay

of the limit and

transgression

be

today

the essential

test of

a

thinking

of

'origin'

which Nietzsche

bequeathed

o us... a

thinking

hatwould be

absolutely,

and

n

the same

movement,

a

Critique

andan

Ontology,

a

thinking

hatwould

think

finitudeand

being?"

Foucault759].

Transgression

becomes

identifiedwith a

"philosophy

of

eroticism"

which

plays

on Sade's

"philosophie

dans

le

boudoir"),

a

gesture

thattransvalues

philosophy

from

the realm of

cognitive

or

rational

activity

to

"an

experience

of

finitude

and

of

being,

of

the

limit and of

transgression."

he

6

diacritics 26.2: 6-17

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


3/13

"philosophy"

of eroticism

is

thus

a

"test/ordeal

[Vpreuve}

of the

limit,"

one that "no

dialectical

movement,

no

analysis

of fundamental

aws

[constitutions]

and of

their

transcendental

oundation

leur

sol]"

can

help

us think.

Foucaultthen asks a rhetorical

question

hatcould

be said

to

structure

muchof the discourse

of

theory

n the next decade:

"Would

t

be

an

exaggeration,

o

say,"

he

asks,

"..

. that

it

would

be

necessary

to find a

language

for the

transgressive

hat would be

what dialectic

has

been

for contradiction?"

[759].

In this

way

Foucault established

transgression

as an alternative o the

machine

of

dialectical

contradiction.

Attuned

to the recent discoveries

of

structuralism,

which had

begun

to reverse the conventional

understanding

f relations

between the

subject

and

language

(the

subject

s no

longer

considered

master

of his

or

her

anguage

but

structured

by

it),

Foucault

announced hat "the

gesture

of

transgression

eplaces

the

movement of

contradiction

by

plunging

the

philosophical

experience

into

language"

[767].

Here

is

where the

paradox

of the

transgression

of

philosophy

comes in.

For if Foucault

poses

transgressionoreroticism)as a philosophy, he positionof thephilosopher andto this

extent

philosophy

itself)

is said to be

transgressedby

the

limitlessness

of

language:

the

philosopher,

Foucault

writes,

finds

"not

outside

language,

but in it... the

transgression

of his

philosophical

being"

[767].

From his

point

on,

theorists

will

look

to

transgression

as

a

way

of

getting beyond

the constraintsof

Hegelian

dialectic.

Taking

their

cue

from

Foucault,

hey

will

begin

to

identify transgression

with

language.

Foucault's

nterpreta-

tion of

transgression nticipates-we

could even

say programs-the

role

Bataille

will

be

assigned

n the

context

of

poststructuralist

heory.

t

prepares

he

way

forthe

appropriation

of

Bataille-librarian, writer,

editor,

militant,

"madman"-as

theorist.

Fromhere t is buta shortstepto theidentification f transgression nd ext.Phillippe

Sollers

takes this

step

four

years

later n "Le toit:

Essai

de

lecture

syst6matique"

1967),

an

essay

that

updates

Foucault's

analysis

of Bataillefrom

a

perspective

nformed

by

more

recent

developments

n

poststructuralist

hought,

since Derrida's

De

la

grammatologie

had

appeared

n

the interim.Sollers follows the

basic lines of Foucault's

nterpretation,

but he adds

an

important

lement

by

interpreting

nterdictionas

a

discursive

constraint

upon

language.

"Theworld

of

discourse,"

he

writes,

"is the

mode

of

being

of

interdiction

..

interdiction

s the

signifier

itself

(in

the world of

discourse)" ["Le

toit"

29].

This

interpretation,

mplicit

in

the

Foucault

essay,

is not

unjustified,

but Bataille

does not

restrict he

meaning

of

interdiction

n

this

way.

In

L'drotisme,

or

example,

interdiction

is said to

open

up

the worldof

a rationaland ordered

ivilization

which

it

marks

off

from

the animalworld

of

nature,

but

t

is also characterized s an

affective

experience

of horror

before

the sacred.

It

is

precisely

the othernessof the

sacredwhich resists

the

conceptual

unity

of

philosophy.

In

L'drotisme,

nterdiction

s

not so

simple.

It

belongs

to the

profane

world

it

opens,

but also

to

the world of the sacred.

Sollers insists on an

exclusively

linguistic interpretation

of

interdiction,

while

at the same time

retaining

the

broad

philosophical

(or

ontological)

claims

Foucault

had

made

for

eroticism.

The net effect

is

an inflation

of

the claims

made

for

transgression

n

the textualor

poetic register,

claims

that then inform

poststructuralistheory

of

writing

and

text.

Once interdiction is isolated from what Bataille had referred to as the "dual

operation"

f

interdiction/transgression,

ndonce it is

interpreted

s

discursive

constraint,

the next

step

s

to articulatewhat

Foucaulthad

baptized

he

"philosophy

f eroticism"with

psychoanalysis,

the

discourse

that theorizes eroticism. Interdiction

s identified with

repression,

which

reveals

ts

operations hrough inguistic

parapraxis.

t

is

then

associated

with

language

in

the

mode of

representation

nd

opposed

to

transgression,

now

charac-

terized as "a

space

of

organic

effervescence of

language" by analogy

with

various

practices

of

avant-garde

oetics.

A

play

of the

signifier

resists he

constraints hatstructure

meaning

in

the

ordinary

course of useful

communication:

his is

the

meaning given

to

transgressionn the formula"eroticism s the antimatter f realism" "Letoit"36].

diacritics

/

summer 1996

7



4/13

When

transgression

s

analyzed

n

exclusively linguistic

terms,

that

s,

in

relation

o

the "fundamental candal of the arbitrariness

f the

sign,"

it becomes

writing

(in

the

emerging

poststructuralist

ense),

as Sollers announces

bluntly

at the end of

his

essay.

"'Eroticism

represents

a

reversal,'"

Sollers

writes,

citing

Bataille.

He

then

adds

this

programmaticommentary:"writing akeschargeof thisreversal romthispointon...

it

then has

the same statusand

ultimately

he

same

meaning

as

eroticism."With

Sollers,

then,

as he states

categorically,"writing inally

takes over

from

transgression"

"Le

toit"

41].

Construed

as

writing,

transgression

or

the

now-theoretical

erm

"eroticism")

s

inscribedwithinthe

polemical

opposition

hat

pits writing,

as what

Sollers calls

"l'envers

de la

litt6rature,"

gainst

"literature." he

subversionof

"literature"

y

theory,

charged

with

energies

of

cultural

evolt,

remainedat the

heartof

Tel

quel's agenda.

Not

only

does

the

polemical edge,

discernible n

Foucault,

become

more

pronounced

n

this

context;

n

"Le toit"

Sollers

stages

an

epic polemos

within

eroticism

itself,

a

"dialectic

of war"

between

transgression

andinterdiction.

In

L'6rotisme,

Bataille

insists that

the two

moments

of

the

dual

operation

of

eroticism are

so

intimately

bound

up

with

one

another

as

to

be

all

but

indistinguishable.

The

terms

"interdiction" nd

"transgression"

ecome

meaningful

only

subjectively,

hat

is,

as affective

experiences

of

attraction

nd

repulsion,

which

distinguish

he two

realms

of the

sacredandthe

profane.

Bataille

presents

his

as

a

dance,

a

ronde,

or

the

experience

of

seduction

thatmoves us

toward he

sacred

object

and the

feeling

of

horror

hat

repels

us from it

are

closely

interrelated.

When Sollers

stages

the

relation

between

interdiction

and

transgression

as

conflict,

it

becomes a

matter

of

choosing

sides;

in

spite

of his

disclaimer to the contrary,"Le toit" becomes an apology for transgression.Once a

dialectic

of war

replaces

Bataille's

ntimatedance

(ronde),

and

transgression

s

set

against

interdiction,

other

binary

oppositions

are

pulled

into the

argument.

On the side of

interdiction,

"literature"

omes to

standnot

only

for

representational

iscourse

but also

for

bourgeois

oppression;

writing,

which

is

transgressive,

belongs

with

poetry,

madness,

excess,

and

revolution-or

at least a

"revolutionof

poetic language."

When

"Le toit"

transposes

Bataille's notions

of

eroticism

and

transgression

nto

the

register

of

language,

writing,

and

text,

the

signifier

replaces

he

woman

as

erotic

object

and

anguageprovides

a

field of

theory-or

what

Sollers will

call,

looking

back

on

it

"the

dreamof

theory"-

where

linguistics,psychoanalysis,

deconstructive

philosophy(Heidegger,Derrida),

and

a

certain

marxism nteract.I

Transgression

s

thus

reformulated s

text,

and text

(considered

n

relation

to the

productivity

of

signifiance)

is

analyzed

on a

model

of

modern

poetry

that

devolves

from

Mallarm6.

n

the

context

of

poststructuralist

heory,

poetry

s

construed

as

action,

in

an

unusual

displacement

of

Val6ry

and

Sartre. n

philosophical

erms

Hegel)

action

mplies

negativity

(see,

for

example,

Kristeva's

"Po6sie

et

negativit6"

1968])

and is

endowed

with

the

force of

critical

negativity,

which

Adorno

heorized

n

his

analyses

of

modern

art.

Theory,

n

the context of

Tel

quel,

radicalizes

he

modernist

momentwe

find

in

Adorno,

pressing

it

towarda certain

avant-gardism,

nd

it

does so

with

the

help

of

Bataille. The

negativityKristevaascribes owriting s double.Inaddition o the

Hegelian

negativity

of

consciousness

and

of

action that

Blanchot had

brought

to

bear

on

language

in

"La

litt6rature

t

le

droit

t

la

mort,"

Kristevaaffirms

that

another

"irrecuperable"

egativity

is

at

play

on

the

level of

genotext,

or

of

signifiance

proper.

n

"How

Does

One

Speak

to

Literature?"he

writes:

Writing

stablishes

a

different

egality..,

it

brings

together

n

a

heteronomous

space

the

naming

ofphenomena

their

entry

nto

symbolic

aw)

and

the

negation

1. SeeSollers's

preface

o thereedition

f

Theoried'ensemble

1980).

8



5/13

of

these

names

(phonetic,

semantic

and

syntacticshattering).

This

supplemen-

tary

negation

(derivative

negation,negation

of the homonomic

negation)

eaves

the

homogeneous space

of meaning (of naming

or,

if

one

prefers,

of

the

"symbolic")

and

moves,

without

"imaginary" ntermediary...

towards what

cannot

be

symbolized

one

might

say

toward

the

"real"). [

111,

my emphasis]

This is Kristeva's

passage

to the sacred

(via

psychoanalysis),

for

this account of

the

legality

of

writing

repeats

he movement

of Bataille's

accountof

interdiction/transgres-

sion

inL'6rotisme

and,

even more

explicitly,

n

an earlierversionof

that ext

subsequently

published

as

"L'histoire

de l'6rotisme."Here

interdiction

s

presented

as a

negation

of

nature

le

donne)

which founds

culture,

marking

he

emergence

of

man from

animal.This

negation

hen announcesanother

"un

mouvement... de

contrecoup"),

negation

of

the

order et

up by

the first

negation.

The first

step

corresponds

o interdiction

ndthe

second

to

transgression

n

this

(almost)

narrative ersionof

the "dual

operation"

f

interdiction/

transgression.This is the movement Bataille calls a "renversement es alliances,"to

which we shall

return,

momentarily,

n relation to the miracle of

Lascaux.2

Kristeva's

"negation

of the

homonomic

negation"

epeats

he

second-ordermovement

of

transgres-

sive

negation.

In

theory,

this becomes the law of

writing.

As Foucaulthad

anticipated

n

1963,

then,

ransgression

id

become

the

paradigm

or

a "nondialectical

hinking,"

ne

characterized

y

the

"irrecuperable

egativity"

Kristeva

theorizes first

in

connection

with

the

rejet

and then with

the

abject.3

In

order o

obtain

a

"poststructuralist"

some

would

say

"postmodern")

ataille,

however,

it was

necessary

to

subject

him to

readings

hatevacuated rom

his

writing

not

only

the

dimension

of

the

sacred,butalsoeverytraceof theconstellationof termsassociatedwithwhatBataillecalls

the fictive-the

image,

the

figure,

representation,

ramatization,

nd so

forth.4

When he

is

portrayed

s a dialectical

opposite-a

kind of

"antimatter"-to Breton

whose

fascina-

tion

with the

image

is well

known),

he

can

be identified

with the law

of

writing.

So intense

was the resistance o realism-and

the

distaste

for

Surrealism-that all

modes

of

image

and

figuration

became

suspect.

It

was

necessary

to

subject

Bataille to what

I call

"modernist"

eadings,

where

"modernist"s

understood

n

the sense

of Adorno

and also

in the sense of "modern

art,"

as

this

termwas

deployed by

the art

critic

ClementGreen-

berg

and

by

those who called themselves "new

critics"

n

the

literary

domain.

When

French

theory migrated

to

the

United

States,

it was

received

within this

modernist

atmosphere.

n Blindnessand

Insight

(1971)

PauldeMan

analyzed

hecontact

between American

literary

criticism and French

structuralism,

an

amalgamation

he

labeled

"new new

criticism." As he

points

out,

both

new

criticism

and

stucturalism

2.

Bataille,

"L'histoire de

l'drotisme"

[66-67].

After

presenting

the

"renversementdes

alliances"

narratively sequentially),

Bataille

qualifies

this

gesture:

"I

want..,

to insist

on the

act

that

his doublemovementdoes not

even

imply

distinct

phases.

For

clarity

ofexposition,

I

can

speak

of

two moments

deux

temps].

But it is a

question of

an

ensemble

[ensemble

solidaire]

and one

cannot

truthfully

en

v6rit6]

speak of

the one without

indicating

the other"

["L'histoire

de

l'rotisme"

67].

The "ensemble olidaire" is

presented

n

L'6rotisme

by

the

metaphorof

la

ronde.

3.

In La

r6volution u

angage

o6tique

nd

n Pouvoirs e

l'horreur,

espectively.

he erm

rejet

is

invoked

by

Bataille in "L'histoirede

l'rotisme"

(in

connection

with the

negation

of

the

donn6associated

with the

movement

of

interdiction)

66].

4.

Here

are

just afew

of

the

manyreferences

o

such terms n

"Histoirede

l'drotisme"

alone:

"the

privileged

domain

of

love is

fiction" [141];

"A

sacrifice

is no

less

fictive

than a

novel..,

it

is

not

a

crime

but a

representation, form of play

[un

jeu]"

[92];

"What

xcites animals

directly

...

affects

men

throughsymbolic

igures.

This

is not a

secretion,

but a

meaningful

elaborated

image"

[128].

In

this connectionsee also the discussion

of

the

object

of

erotic

desire,

in contrast

to the eroticism

of

the

orgy

which "has

the

defect of

not

being

clearly

limited,

of

being

informeand

of

never

offering any

clear

feature [aspect

saisissable]

to

desire"

[123].

Concerning

the

erotic

objectand its dialectic,see Guerlac, "Recognition,bya Woman

diacritics

/ summer 1996

9



6/13

refusedauthorial

ntentionand

referentiality

r

representation.

or he

new

critics,

de

Man

writes,

literary

language

was

"entirely

autonomous

and without exterior referent."

Criticism

nvolved

an "an ronic reflexion of the

[formal]

unity

it had

postulated"

28].

Modern

painting

was

likewise consideredas an autonomous

object,

endowednot

merely

with aestheticbut

also with

existential

orce.

Modernist

riticismshared

with Tel

quel

an

appreciation

of Mallarme's

purification

of

meaning

and of the aesthetics of

difficulty

associated

with

it. The two also

sharedan aversion o Surrealism.6

he common

ground,

then,

between

modem

art,

new

criticism,

and French

theory

was a

critique

of

represen-

tation that

implied

a

refusal of

figuration

n all its forms. All of this contributed o

the

reformulation

f

transgression

s "antimatter f

realism."

Bataille's

study

of Lascaux

presents

ransgression

uite

differently,

hat

s,

in

relation o

a "sacredmoment

of

figuration"

hat involves

a visual realism. Childrenwere

playing,

Bataille writes, near a great tree. A tempest turnedthis tree-tree of knowledge,

perhaps-upside

down,

uprooting

t,

andwhere

the rootshad

been,

the entrance o a cave

was

suddenlyexposed.

"Lascauxou

la

naissance

de

l'art"

s

a

parodicmyth

of

origins-

the

story

of a miracle

hat inks the

origin

of art

o the

origin

of the

species,

that

s,

human

beings

as

subjects

of

transgression.

Bataille rewrites he

miracle of

Greece,

substituting

a

primitive

worldfor

the

classical

one,

a

worldof the sacred

or a worldof

reason.

We

are

carried

back in time to another

hreshold,

hat of the archaic and the

animal-la

bite

humaine.

If

the miracle

of Greece

gives

us the

rational

animal,

the miracle

of Lascaux

yields

man as

"religious

animal."Lascaux

ransfigures

s,

Bataille

writes,

and it does so

througha force of figurationthat transfixes and fascinates, trans-figuresand trans-

fascinates.

Lascaux

transfigures

us-and

doubly

so.

First

there

is the

question

of

origins,

of

a

passage

from animal to

man

that

opened up

our future

(and

our

present).

From bite

humaine,

we are

transfigured

nto etre humain.

But there

s

also

the

question

of

our

ends,

that

is,

of our

transfiguration

nto our

proper

selves,

"religious

animals"-"the man of

work

and

of

technique

reduces himself to

a

means,

of which the

being

who is not

subjugatedby

work,

the animal

being

without

echnique,

s the end"

["Lascaux"

8].

The

defining

characteristic

le

propre]

of the

human

species

is a "desire to

be

filled with

wonder,"

an

"anticipation

f

miracles"

16].

This is the miracle

figured

on

the

walls

and

ceilings

of the

cave, where,

at the same

time,

this desire

and

anticipation

receive

their

response.

If Lascaux

transfigures

us

(of

course much

is

at stake

in

the

identity

of "us" and

"them"),

t also

transfigures

nimality,

andonce

again,

his involves

a

double

gesture.

The

paintings

n the cave

transfigure

he animal

hey

figure, giving

it

not

only

beautiful

orm

but

also a force of

prestige.

It

is

precisely

this

transfiguration-one

that

passes through

the

figure-that

transfigures

us. But at

the same

time,

the

very

seductive force of the

painted

igures

also

transfigures

he

artistswho

created

hem,

transforming

he cavemen

from

animal

(bate

humaine)

into

man,

that

is,

into someone who "resembles us."

Followingin the footstepsof Bataille,moving throughhis text, we enter the ronde,the

circulardance of the

animals

set in

motion

by

our movement

through

he

cave.

At

the

sight

of these

figures

we are

overwhelmed:

"this

ncomparable

eauty

andthe

sympathy

t awakens n us

leave us

painfullysuspended

suspendu]"

14].

Our

religious

emotion

is

doubled,

according

o

Bataille,

by

our sense of the

prestige

the

images

must

have held for those

contemporary

o theircreation. f art"is

bornof emotion

andaddresses

5. De Man

speaks

of

"American

ormalism"

in

this

context.

6.

I

am

referring

o the critical

writingsof

Greenberg

in

practice,

artists in New York

elt

the

impactof Cubismand of Surrealismmore or less together).

10



7/13

itself to emotion"

(in

a

dynamic circularity

igured

by

the animal

ronde),

the

sentiment

experienced

by prehistoric

man

is felt

by

us to

parallel

our

own;

it is

a

question

of

the

"sense

of

the miraculous

[sentiment

de

miracle]"

declared o be the

identifying

trait

[le

propre]

of man as

opposed

to the animal.

What

overwhelms

us at Lascaux s

the

"useless

figuration

of these

signs

thatseduce"

[13].

The emotionalcommunication

f

these

figures

requires

he

temporal eap

of

millenniaand s

catastrophic

n its

effect. It

overwhelms

us

(nous renverse)

ike the tree

overturned

renverse)

by

the

tempest

at the

entrance

o

the

cave

and

exposes

our

roots,

leaving

us

suspended.

Our emotional

response

to

the

communicationof these

figures-our

renversement-is the

sign

of our

transfiguration,

which

performs

or

completes

the

transfiguration

f

the

other-that of

the bete

humaine

into etre

humain.

This

circuit of

emotion,

of

emerveillement,

s

the

miracle.

Communi-

cation,

the

one

that

inks art

and

the

sacred,

performs

he

origin

of art

andthe

origin

of

man

at the

same time-it is a

veritable

origin of

the

work

of

art,

in the

double

sense

of

the

genitive

of the

difference.

All thismeanders,but heconceptual tartingpoint s simple:man s opposed obeast.

The

opposition

s

performed

inguistically

n

the

pronominal

istinction

betweennous

and

il-pronoun

"of

the

nonperson"

see

Benv6niste].

If

the

question

is,

how

to

pass

from

nonperson

o

person?

he

answerwe

receive is

this:

through

an act

of

figuration

eceived

(by

Bataille)

as

an act of

address.

t

is

a

question

of the

origin

of the

species,

but

here we

are

dealing

with a

quite

different kind of

survival-an

afterlife

of

images.

Figuration

performs

the

"enduring

urvival"

of

an

address,

an

address

that crosses

time,

figuring

across

death

with

the

kind

of

posthumous

each

hat

so

movedVictor

Hugo.

WhatBataille

calls "thesacred

moment

of

figuration"

63]

is

catastrophic

n

its

effect,

according

o the

specificmeaningBataillegives to thistermwhenhespeaksof sacrifice: tcollapseslinear

time.7

The

painted igures

communicate o

us,

transferring

ntimate

motion,

and

through

this

operation

the

nonperson

that was

the

man-beast

comes

to resemble

us-"nous

pouvons

dire

qu'il

nous

ressemblait."The

nonperson-il-passes

to the

discursive

position

nous.

The

imperfect

tense of

the

verb

ressembler

traces the

trajectory

of

the

image,

its

survivalto

the

present.

It

signals

the

"enduring

urvival"of

figuration,

which

lets art

communicate

"from

afar"

and

"through

ime

[dans

le

temps]."

"Every

profound

pirit

needs a

mask,"

Nietzsche

wrote

[Beyond

Good

and Evil

51].

Aurignacian

manwas

such

a

spirit-"to

designate

himselfhe

hadto

give

himself

the

mask

of

another..,

he

hid his

features

beneath

he

mask of

the

animal"

63].

At the

same

time,

these

images

of the

nonpersongive

us the "sensible

sign

of our

presence."

Thus,

if

part

of

the miracle

of Lascaux

nvolves the

survival

(durable

survie)

of an

address-the

fact

that,

miraculously,

"these

paintings

have

reached

us

[nous

somme

parvenues]"-this

arrivalmarksour

arrival

oo. When the

animal

bete

humaine)

passes

across

to

resemble

us,

this

marks

the

moment

not

only

of

our

origin

but also of

our end. We

also come

to

resemble

t

as

subject

of

transgression,

r "animal

divin";

his

is the

"secret"

of

the

cave.

Lascaux involves

"the

paradox

of man

adorned

with the

prestige

of

the beast"

[63],

but t

also

involves

a

temporal

paradox.

The cave

artists,

Bataille

writes,

createdwhat

they

represented.

The

figuration

hat

survives

to

arriveat us

(nousparvenir)

s

at the

same

time

areturn:"Theyreturnedo this worldof thesavagery[sauvagerie]of thenight."Bataille

writes

of the cave

artists,

"they

figured

t

with

fervor,

n

anxiety"

70].

The

Aurignacian

man-beastscome

to

resemble

us

just

at

the

moment

hat

we

find

tracesof

ourselves-the

sign

of

our

sensible

presence-in

them,

that

s,

in

their

way

of

becoming

what

they

are

by

7.

The

question

oftime

is

crucial to

Bataille's

notion

ofsacrifice.

See

"Sacrifices"

concerning

timeand

catastrophe:

"La

catastrophe-le

temps

vecu"

[94].

The

discussion

of

time

here

refers

us

to

Bergson

(as

the

abrupt

passage

to

the

question

of

revolution

uggests

Sorel).

For

an

extensive

discussion

of

Bergson

see

my Literary

Polemics:

Bataille,

Sartre,

Val6ry,

Breton

[forthcoming,

StanfordUP, spring1997].

diacritics

/

summer

1996

11



8/13

figuring

where

hey

have

been.

"Could

we

miss thefact

that,

entering

he

grotto,

n

unusual

conditions,

we

are,

deep

in the

ground,

n some

way

lost

[egares]

'a' a recherchedu

temps

perdu?'"

[43].

"Lascaux

ou

la

naissance

de l'art"

puts

usa la

recherchedu

tempsperdu

as we enter

the marvelous

grotto

a la

recherche d'un instant

sacre,

only

to meet our

primitivecounterparts

nd

to find ourselves nscribed

hrough

heiract of remembrance

and

sensible return.

Lascaux s

a

parody

of the

miracle

of

Greece,

and of the miracle of

art

(Proust).8

t s a

question,

as Nietzsche

wrote

n

Ecce

Homo,

of "howone becomes what

one

is"

[253].

At

Lascaux,

his

happens

hrough

igurative

art,

and the movementoccurs

in two directionsat

once,

forwardand back

ike the ronde.In

"trans-figuring"

he human

through

he

animalacross time to

us,

Aurignacian

man

se

transfigure

n nous

and

at

the

same time

transfigures

us-transforming

us

from

rational

man

into

religious

animal

by

these

figures

that transfix.

It is not

by

chance

that Lascaux is the miracle of

a

double

transfiguration-of

the

animal

andof the human

being.

Forthe

story

Bataille

projects

n the

cave

presents

he two

momentsof the renversement esalliances

already

mentioned, hat s, thedual

operation

of

the sacred: nterdiction

nd

transgression,hrough

which

it

is

possible

to renewcontact

with

the sensible world-retrouver le sensible.

In

L'6rotisme

this movement is

figured

metaphorically,

as we have

seen,

by

the

ronde,

a

two-step

dance of

attraction

o and

repulsion

rom

the

sacred,

he same dancerefracted

by

the

prism

of the cave

("this

cavern

is

a

prism"

[17],

Bataille

writes,

in what could

only

be called

a

surrealist

mage)

and

danced

over

the millennia.

What Bataille calls

"transfiguration"

t

Lascaux,

then,

is linked to

transgression.

Both

require

he

figure-not

the

resembling imaginary)

ne,

where

resemblance ollows

the pathof address n a gestureof mirroring-as if, for example, prehistoricmanhad

spoken

directly

to

us

by

sending

us a

self-portrait-but

the useless

one,

the

image

of the

nonperson.

t

requires

a

trans-figuring

which

passes

across

the

system

of

enunciationand

through

he third

person,

"il,"

he animal

and he

mask-figure

inutile.These

figurescarry

prestige

in the

etymological

sense of the

term,

as

"illusion,"

o be understoodnot as

mimetic

representation

in

the

service of instrumental

eason)

but

in

its derivation rom

the

Latin word for

play:

ludere.

Transgression

nvolves the

passage

from

homofaber

to

homo

ludens.

It

is in this sense that

iguration along

with

representation, arody,

andthe

fictive)

is

transgressive

n

Batailleand

that

ransgression

inds its

origin

(if

not its

end)

in

figurative

art.

"Transgression,"

ataille

writes,

"only

exists

from the moment art

itself

appears que

l'art

lui-meme

se

manifeste]"

41].

The

figural

andthe fictive have been

suppressed

n

Bataille

by readings

hat

dentify

transgression

with

writing.

f "Lascaux"

resents

moreor less the same

story

of the sacred

thatreturns

n

L'Protisme,

what t adds s the

relation

between

ransgression

nd

igurative

art,

an art of the

image-even

a

"naturalism

f

the marvelous

[merveilleux]."

For the

reversalof alliances is

presented

here before it is theorizedas

eroticism,

which

will then

be

transposed

nto the

register

of

text. "Lascaux u

la

naissancede l'art"

reveals thatwhat

became the

law of

writing

for Kristeva-antimatter of

realism-emerged

more

primi-

tively

in

relation

to visual realism.

Although

various

types

of

signs

are

present

in

the

cave-"grotesque" representations f the humanmale, "deformed" culpturesof the

female

form,

and

"abstract"

markings

on the wall-Bataille identifies

transgression

with

the iconic

sign. Transgression

ccurs

in

and

through

he "sacred

moment

of

figuration,"

8.

The

ull

citation-a

veritable

pastiche

of

Proust-reads as

follows:

"Upon entering

the

cave,

could we

mistake the

fact

that,

in unusual

conditions,

in

the

depths of

the

earth,

we

are

somehow 'a la recherchedu

tempsperdu?'

A

vain

search,

it is

true:

nothing

will ever enable us

to

authentically

relive this

past

which oses

itself

in the

night....

What

hese dead have

left

us

would

matter ittle to

us,

were it

notfor

the

hope

we

have,

even

or

afleeting

instant,

of being

able to make

them live again in us" [43].

12



9/13

figuration

of the

nonperson

n the mode of "divine"

animality

which is

the

spiritual

ruth

of

man-"le

divin,

dont

le

caractere

nfini

s'exprimait

sous forme

animale."9

Bataille's interest

in the

genesis

of

figurative

art can be tracedback

to his

article

"L'art

primitif"

1933),

which examined

G. H.

Luquet's

theory

of

primitive

art.

Luquet,

whose

methodwas to

compareprehistoric

art

o children'sartand make

inferencesfrom

the latter to the

former,

had introduced

a

concept

of

"intellectual

realism" which

he

distinguished

rom"visualrealism."

Visual

realism

s

mimetic;

t

aimsto show

things ust

as

they

appear.

ntellectual ealism

represents hings

as

the mind knows them

to be.

Since

a

human head

is known

to have

two

eyes,

for

example,

the

representation

f

a

human

profile

might

include

both

eyes.

Intellectual ealism was a

way

to

account for

primitive

modes of

figuration,

which are

mimetically

inexact.

For

Luquet

this

concept

was the

defining

characteristic

f

prehistoric

art.

In

his review

of

Luquet's

book,

Bataille

expresses

both his

admiration

or

Luquet's

theory

andhis reservations

oncerning

methodsandresults.He is

concerned

hat

Luquet'

analysisnecessarilyneglectsprehistoric culpture,which was notrealistatall. He is also

concerned hat

Luquet'

theory

cannotaccount

or

the artof

the

Aurignacians,

where the

animal

mages,

for the most

part,display

visual,

not

intellectual,

realism. If one

were

to

follow

Luquet,

Bataille

observes

wryly,

one would be forced

to

conclude that

"[the]

first

men who

made what

we call a

work

of

art would

have known

nothing

of

primitive

art"

[25,

original

emphasis].

Inspiredby

Luquet,

Bataille

proposes

a

revised

theory

of

primitive

art and of

the

genesis

of

figurative

art,

one that

turns

on a

notion of

alteration

adapted

rom R.

Otto's

study

of

the sacred.

This

concept,

defined as

a desire to

alter

whatever

s

at

hand,

can

encompasseverythingLuquetgainedfrom thecomparisonbetweenprimitiveman and

children,

but it

also

enables

Bataille to

find

a

place

for

the

art

of

Aurignacian

man

within

the domain of

primitive

art,

and

to

include

the

sculptures

neglectedby

Luquet.

For

even

if

the

animal

paintings

display

a

visual

realism,

the

representations

f

human

beings

(especially

the "alterations

olontaires" f

the

sculptures

f

female

forms)

are

nforme

and

display

traces

of

the

process

of

deformation

Bataille calls

alteration.

This reformulation f

Luquet's

thesis

leaves

Bataille

with

a new

puzzle,

however,

namely

the

fundamental

difference

between

representations

f

humans

and

representa-

tions of animals in

prehistoric

art.In

"L'art

primitif"

Bataille

makes a

stab

at

analyzing

the

"categorical uality"

he has

brought

o

light.

He

sketchesout

the

basic

lines of

a

theory

of

primitive

art

that enables

him

to

overcome the

fundamental

opposition

between

figurative

representations

and

nonfigurative

or

informe)

ones,

though

he

cannot

yet

account for the

fact that the first

represent

animals and

the

second,

human

beings.

The

genesis

of

figuration,

he

argues,

s an

instinct

of

alteration,

desire to

alter

whatever

s

at

hand---existing

objects,

such as

toys,

in

the case

of

children,

or

surfacessuch

as walls

or

paper.

n the

process,figures

are

recognized

n

(or

projected

nto)

the

random

cribblings,

yielding

a

virtual

object

of

representation

which is

then

alteredand

deformed

n

turn.

Art,

Bataille writes

"proceeds

by

successive

destructions"

253].10

But

it can also

take

another

path,

or

go

in the

other

direction:

another

way

out

is

available to

figural

representation

rom

the

moment

magi-

nation

substitutes a new

object for

the

destroyed

support.

Instead

of

treating

the

new

object

in the

same

manner as

the

support,

it is

possible,

in the

course

of

9.

In "L'histoire

de

l'drotisme"

Bataille

distinguishes

betwen

"l'animal

banal"

(before

interdiction)

and

"l'animal

divin,"

linked

to

transgression.

n

"Lascaux" he

presentation

of

the

former

occurs

textually,

n Bataille's

depiction

of

the

stereotypeof

the

cavemen

as

subhuman,

as

"classes

inhumaines."This

description

s

crucial

or

the

igure

of

divine

animality

to

emerge.

10. RosalindKrauss

discusses the

notion

of

alteration

and

the

informe)from

a

quitedifferent

angle n TheOpticalUnconscious.

diacritics I

summer 1996

13



10/13

repetition,

o submit

t to

progressive appropriation

with

respect

to

the

repre-

sented

original.

In this

way

one

passes

quite rapidly

to the

increasingly

resembling

mage

[1'

mage

de

plus

en

plus

conforme]

ofan

animal,

or

example.

It

is

a

question

then

of

a

real

change

of

meaning

at

the

beginning

of

the

development[il s'agit alors d'un v6ritablechangementde sens au d6butdu

d6veloppement].

253,

originalemphasis]

Bataille

argues

that such a

change

of

meaning

occurred for the

Aurignacian

man

in

relation o

representations

f

animals,

but not to

representations

f

human

beings

[253].

However,

and

his s the

mportant oint,

both

n

thecase

of the

mages

he

will

characterize

as

informe

the

representations

f the

human)

and

in

the

case of the

images

that

are

"de

plus

en

plus conforme"

the

animal

mages),

the

fiction of

a

form is

presupposed.

f the

inhuman

images

are

characterizedas

informe,

this is

not

because there

never

was a

figurative

moment,

butbecause

he

figure

projected

nto

the

scribblings

hatalter

he

given

material

(in

a mode reminiscentof what Max Ernstcalls the "Lesson of Leonardo"n

Beyond

Painting,

andwhich

Val6ry

had alluded o much

earlier

n his

study

of

Leonardo)

is

subsequently

negated

or deformedand in

this sense rendered

nforme.

The alternative

gesture

s

to

appropriate

his fictive

figure

and

to

develop

it

until

it

is

with

form,

that

s,

until

it

conforms

o the virtualor fictive

figure.

If we

consider

this

analysis

in

theoretical

terms,

what Bataille

appears

to

have

discovered

n

his

adaptation

f

Luquet's

theory

of

primitive

art

s the basic

structureof

the movement he will

subsequently

call

"renversement

es

alliances"

n

"L'histoirede

l'6rotisme."

Bataille

closes his short

essay

by

noting

the

importance

of

considering

"psychologicalmotives" hatmightaccount orthecategoricaldualityconcerning he two

modes of

representation

nd

their

meaning.

This is

precisely

what

Bataille will

return o

two decades later in his

study

of

Lascaux,

where

interdictionand

transgression

are

associated

with the

representation

f

human

beings

and of

animals,

respectively,

and

analyzed

as

"ways

of

seeing."

The

"reversalof alliances"

provides

a

"psychological

motive"

(in

Bataille's

sense)

for

the

"change

of

meaning"

he

discerns

n

the

movement

of alteration

hat

yields

the

figurative

mage.

The

firstmode of

alteration,

he

negative

one,

opens

the world of

interdiction;

he second

opens

the

world of

transgression

as

an

appropriation

f

the

image.

This

corresponds

o what

Bataille

speaks

of

as

renewed

contact with

the

sensible world in

the

experience

of

religioustransgression.

"Lascaux"

ives

us "the

mage

of the

origin

of art"

36]

inasmuchas it

gives

us the

origin

of

artas

image.

It

also

suggests

one

origin

of

the

meaning

of the

story

of

interdiction/

transgression,

namely

Bataille's

meditationon the

origin

of

prehistoric

igurative

art.

Interdiction

and

transgression

do

not

give

us the

key

to

Lascaux.

Rather,

primitive

art

yields

the

secretof the

theory

of

alteration-and

provides

he

interpretation

f

its

"change

of

meaning"-through

the

dual

operation

of the

sacred.

"Lascaux"

s

the

story

of

this

story,

that

s,

the

origin

of

artas

origin

of

transgression.

t

is

perhaps

n

this

sense thatwe

are to understand

Bataille's

otherwise

puzzling

remark:

"transgression

oes not exist

before

the moment when

art tself

appears"

41].

ThereasonBataille

gives

a

specialplace

to the

figurative

mages

of theanimals s not

only

that

they

illustrate

his

theoretical

iction

(especially

the

hybrid

figure

of

the man-

beast)

but

because,

when

they

are

nterpreted

s a

reversalof

meaning hrough

he

theory

of

alteration,

they

bear

witness

to

the

refusal of the

human world of

work,

which

corresponds

o the

moment of

sacred

transgression.

The

visual realism

of the

animal

figures

gives

a

meaning

of

refusal o the

informe

epresentations

f the

human,

which

are

construed as

having

been

denied

the

light

of

appearance

or

subjected

to

"willful

deformation,"

ince the

animal

mages

attest to the

figurative

powers

of

the

prehistoric

artists. The

difference

implies

that

the

humanwas

represented

as

inhuman

and

guides

Bataille's interpretationf this gestureas a refusal of thehumanworldof work.

14



11/13

This all

depends,

however,

on

the

uselessness of these

figures,

for it is

only

as

such

that

they

can inscribe

the

sacred moment of

transgression

n their

figuration.

Bataille

refuses

the

conventional

nterpretation

f

the

animal

paintings,

which

endows them

with

magical

force

in an

instrumental

ense,

placing

them in the

service of a ritualwhose

aim

was to enhance

huntingprospects,

or

example.

He allows

that he creationof these

figures

was a

magical operation,

but

he

insulates his notion of

the

magical

from

any

instrumen-

tality.

For

Bataille,

the

magical

nature

of artistic

creation

mplies

that

a value of

work has

been

superseded

by

a value of the

sacred;

t

implies

a

recognition

hat

no

amountof

work

could obtain he desired

result,

andhence

abnegates

human

nstrumental

owers.

Bataille

wants

to

convince

us

that

these

paintings

were

useless to

primitive

man,

created n

sheer

exuberance

as a celebrationof

the

magical per

se,

the sacred.

What

he

does not

explicitly

say,

however,

is that it is

just

as

important

hat

these

images

remain

useless

to us.

Otherwise

hey

would ose

their

power

of

seduction

andcease

to

communicate.

"[O]n

pouvait

dire

qu'il

nous

ressemblait,"

Bataille

says

of

the

primitive

artist,bite humaine.Butthepaintingsdo notoperate hisresemblanceby a self-portrait

that would allow us to see

ourselves

in

an

image

of

him,

and so

verify

the

resemblance.

Instead

t

is the inhuman

igure

that marks

the

passage

to the

human;

we see

only

the

nonperson.

As

Bataille

wrote

in

"L'art

primitif":

The

reindeer,

the

bison,

or

the

horse are

represented

n

such

perfectly

minute

detail that

if

we could

see

equally

scrupulous

mages of

the

men

themselves,

he

strangestperiod

in the

metamorphosis f

the human

la

p6riode

a

plus

6trange

des avatars

humains]

would

immediately

ease to

be the

most

inaccessible.

But

the drawingsand sculptureswhichhave been chargedwith representingthe

Aurignacians

are

almost all informe

and much

less

human than

those

that

represent

the animals.

[251,

original

emphasis]

The

paintings

do not

give

us the

image

our

curiosity

demands: he

portrait

f

the

caveman.

They convey

no

useful

information,

et

in

their

uselessness

they

seduce us and

enable

us

to find

our "sensible

presence"

n

the cave.

It is the

mask,

the

inhuman

all

too

human)

figure

of the

animalthat

guarantees

he

uselessness of

these

images-to

us.

And it

is the

figural

image

that bears

witness to

transgression

and

performs

our

transfiguration

nto

"divine animal."

We enter

he cave

"a

a

recherche

d'un instant acr6"

42].

Once

inside,

"a

feeling

of

presence imposes

itself

[un

sentimentde

presence

s'impose]."

A

sensible

sign

of

our

presence

is

given

as

tempsperdu-not

only

time

past

but

time

lost,

lost

in

uselessness.

This is the sacred

moment

of

figuration,

f

lafite,

and

of

sacrifice.

Sacrifice

iberates

ived

time

(le

temps

vicu)

ordinarily

ocked

in

(enferme'),

bsorbed

by

useful tasks

and

systems

of

measurement.

Sacrifice

opens

up

a

different

dimension of

time-lost

time-for

sacrifice is

"the

catastrophe

f

time" as

experience

of

being,

that

is,

of

time as

being,

or

being

as time-"il

y

ale

temps.""

Toward

he

very

end of

his

career,

Heidegger

reaches

a

similarconclusion: "time s a

kind of

Being"

[13].

He

writes

thatthe

future

dimension

of time(as thewithholdingof presence)and thepastdimensionof time(as therefusalof

presence) together"grant

and shield

presence

n

a

reciprocal

relationship,"

nd he

adds,

"nowhere do we

find

time

as

something

that is like

a

thing"

[3].

Heidegger's

remark

can

help

us

read Bataille's

statement

concerning

art as an

expression

of

religious

transgres-

sion.

"The forms of art

have no

other

origin

than

laifte

de tous les

temps"

[41],

Bataille

writes,

and sacrifice

is the moment

of

paroxysm

of this

carnival.

Laifte

de tous

les

temps

is

to be

understood

in

terms of sacrifice as

catastrophe

of

time,

and

thus as a

carnival de

11.

"Sacrifices"

96]--"there

s

neither

eing

nor

nothingness

here,

here s

time

il

y

a le

temps]."

diacritics

/ summer

1996

15



12/13

tous

les

temps-of past,

present,

andfuture

imes.

"Being

as

presence,"Heidegger

writes,

"is

determined

by

time"-the

catastrophe

of

time,

Bataille would

say.

In

"Lascaux,"

transgression

ccurs

through

he

figure

or

the

fiction-for Bataille there is

nothing

ess

like

a

thing

han

he

useless

figure.Figuration

s

necessary

o

that

he

play

of

dissimulation

can occur and

inscribe the animal

(the nonperson-il--excluded

from the structureof

linguistic

enunciation)

nto

a

second-order ircuit

of addresswhich

passes through

he

image.

The

figure

s

necessary

or

an act

of

address

o communicate crosstime-to trans-

figure.

It

is the fictive

figure-figure

inutile-that

operates

he

reciprocal elationship

of

future,

past,

and

present

ime in the

afterlifeof

images.

Tel

quel

had much

to

gain by reading

Bataille as a kind

of

(anti)matter

o Breton's

"idealism."As

transgression

became

writing,

the fictive

and the

image

in Bataille

were

suppressed,

ust

as

they

were within Tel

quel

itself.12

In

his

study

of

Foucault,

Deleuze

alludes to "areactionagainstphenomenology"hatresulted n a "aprivilegeof the word

over

the

visible"

[58].

In this

context,

the fictive

was

considered

on

the realist model

as

a simulacrum

f the real

and

was

therefore

mplicated

n

relation o

discoursesof

truth

or

reference.

In

the world

of

digital

imagery,

however,

where

images

no

longer

guarantee

truth,

here is

no

longer

a

need to draw back from

the

visible."3

WORKS CITED

All

translations

of

Frenchworks are

mine.

Adorno,

Theodor

W.

Negative

Dialectics. Trans.E. B.

Ashton. New York:

Herder

and

Herder,1973.

. Prisms.

Trans.Samuel

and

Shierry

Weber.

London:

Spearman,

1967.

Barthes,

Roland.

"Drame,

poeme,

roman."

Critique

21.218

(1965):

591-603.

Bataille,

Georges.

"L'art

primitif."

OC

1: 247-54.

. L'drotisme.

Paris:

Minuit,

1957.

.

"L'histoirede

l'6rotisme."

OC 8:

7-165.

.

"Lascauxou la

naissancede l'art."

OC

9:

7-101.

.

Oeuvres

completes.

12

vols.

Paris:

Gallimard,

1970-88.

[OC]

.

"Sacrifices."

OC

1:

87-96.

Benveniste,

Emile. "La

naturedes

pronoms."

Problemesde

linguistiquegindrale.

Vol.

1.

Paris:

Gallimard,

1966.

Blanchot,

Maurice.

"La litterature t le

droit

a

la

mort."

La

part

du

feu.

1949. Paris:

Gallimard,

1980.

Deleuze,

Gilles.

Foucault. Paris:

Minuit,

1986.

de

Man,

Paul. Blindnessand

Insight.

New York:

Oxford

UP,

1971.

12. The

suppression

of

the

image

or

the

ictive

in Bataille

corresponds

with an

erasure

of

the

term

'fiction"

within the

pages of

Tel

quel.

In an

early essay,

"Logique

de la

Fiction,"

Sollers

appealed

to the

visual dimension

ofthefictive

in

the

phenomenologicalregister.

He cites

Mallarmn

concerning anguage

as

instrument

ffiction

whichhe

construes n relation o

imagination,

dream,

and the

surrealist

image.

After

the

publication of

Derrida's

critique

of

phenomenology,

the

elaboration

of

the

fictive

dries

up.

We hear

no more

of

what

Barthes had called

a

"chaine de

signifies"

in his

early

essay

on

Sollers's

Drame/["Drame,

oeme,

roman"

599].

By

1969

("Survol/

rapports

blocs)/conflit")

the

notion

offiction

has

been

rephrased

n terms

of

the

signifier;

it

has

become "the

ongoing

movement

[mouvance]

attained

by

inscription

itself

whose

oscillation

[battement]

s

presented

to

us...

by

Un

Coup

de des"

[11]-something

like what

Valdry

alled

a

'figure

de

la

pensde"

when

he

too

looked

at

this

book.

13. As William

Mitchellput

t

in The

ReconfiguredEye,

if

"photographs

eemed to

bond

mage

to

referent

with

superglue"

28],

with

digital

imagery

"the

referent

has come

unstuck"

[31]--"We

have now entered theage of electrobricolage"[7].

16



13/13

Derrida,

Jacques.

De la

grammatologie.

Paris:

Minuit,

1967.

Ducrot,Osvald,

and

Tzvetan

Todorov.Dictionnaire

des sciences

du

langage.

Paris:

Seuil,

1972.

Ernst,

Max.

Beyond

Painting.

New

York:

Wittenborn,

Schultz,

1948.

Foucault,

Michel.

"Pr6face

a la

transgression."

Critique

19.195-96

(1963):

751-69.

Greenberg,

Clement.

Art and Culture:

Critical

Essays.

Boston:

Beacon,

1965.

Guerlac,

Suzanne.

"'Recognition'

by

aWoman "Yale

French

Studies78

(1990):

90-105.

Heidegger,

Martin.

On

Time

and

Being.

Trans.

Joan

Stambaugh.

New York:

Harper

and

Row,

1977.

Krauss,

Rosalind. The

Optical

Unconscious.

Cambridge:

MIT

P,

1993.

Kristeva,

Julia.

"How Does One

Speak

to

Literature?" esire in

Language.

Trans.Leon

S. Roudiez.

New

York:Columbia

UP,1980.

.

"Po6sie

et

negativit6."

L'homme

8.2

(1968):

36-63.

.

Pouvoirs de l'horreur:Essai sur

l'abjection.

Paris:

Seuil,

1980.

. La revolution du langage poitique: L'avantgarde

a

la fin du XIXe sidcle:

Lautreamont

t Mallarm6.Paris:

Seuil,

1974.

Luquet,

Georges

Henri. L'art

primitif

Paris:

Doin,

1930.

Mitchell,

William J.

The

Reconfigured

Eye:

VisualTruth n the

Post-Photographic

Era.

Cambridge:

MIT

P,

1994.

Nietzsche,

Friedrich.

Beyond

Good

and Evil.

Trans.

Walter

Kaufmann.New

York,

Vintage,

1966.

.

Ecce

Homo.

Trans.Walter

Kaufmann.

New

York,

Vintage,

1969.

Otto,

Rudolf.

The

Idea

of

the

Holy:

An

Inquiry

nto the

Non-rational

Factor in

the Idea

of the Divine and Its Relation to theRational.Trans.JohnW. Harvey.New York:

Oxford

UP,

1958.

[Trans.

of

Das

Heilige.

1917.

Munich:

Beck,

1979.]

Sollers,

Philippe.

"Logique

de la

fiction." Tel

quel

15

(1964):

3-29.

.

"La

science de

Lautr6amont."

ritique

23.245

(1967):

791-833.

.

"Survol

rapports

blocs)

/

conflit." Tel

quel

36

(1969):

3-17.

.

Thdorie

d'ensemble. Paris:

Seuil,

1980.

.

"Le

toit: Essai

de lecture

syst6matique."

Tel

quel

29

(1967):

25-46.

Adapted

npartfrom

he

manuscript

fIntimate

Mechanics,

y

Suzanne

Guerlac,forthcomingfrom

StanfordUniversity ress.MaterialromIntimateMechanicss usedwith the

permission

f

StanfordUniversity

ress,

and

may

notbe

reproduced

ithout

heir

written

ermission.

diacritics / summer

1996

17

bataille in theory- afterimages (lascaux)

Documents