the narcissistic slave

5/25/2018 The Narcissistic Slave

1/53

Red, White, & Black: Cinema and the Structure of U.S. Antagonisms

Chapter T!o

The 'arcissistic Sla(e

A Culture of Politics

In the Introdu&tion and the pre&eding &hapter, we hae seen how the aporia

between Bla&k being and politi&al ontology has e3isted sin&e rab and 5uropean

enslaement o! !ri&ans, and how the need to &ra!t an ensemble o! Guestions through

whi&h to arrie at an un!lin&hing paradigmati& analysis o! politi&al ontology is repeatedly

thwarted in its attempts to !ind a language that &an e3press the iolen&e o! sla$e/making,

a iolen&e that is both stru&tural and per!ormatie. >umanist dis&ourse, the dis&ourse

whose epistemologi&al ma&hinations proide our &on&eptual !rameworks !or thinking

politi&al ontology, is dierse and &ontrary. But !or all its diersity and &ontrariness it is

sutured by an impli&it rhetori&al &onsensus that iolen&e a&&rues to the >uman body as a

result o! transgressions, whether real or imagined, within the 2ymboli& *rder. +hat is to

say, >umanist dis&ourse &an only think a sub"e&t:s relation to iolen&e as a &ontingen&y

and not as a matri3 that positions the sub"e&t. @ut another way, >umanism has no theory

o! the slae be&ause it imagines a sub"e&t who has been either alienated in language

La&anC andHor alienated !rom hisHher &artographi& and temporal &apa&ities /ar3C. It

&annot imagine an ob"e&t who has been positioned by gratuitous iolen&e and who has no

&artographi& and temporal &apa&ities to lose?a sentient being !or whom re&ognition and

in&orporation is impossible. In short, politi&al ontology, as imagined through >umanism,

&an only produ&e dis&ourse that has as its !oundation alienation and e3ploitation as a

grammar o! su!!ering, when what is needed !or the Bla&k, who is always already a slaeC

%


2/53


is an ensemble o! ontologi&al Guestions that has as its !oundation a&&umulation and

!ungibility as a grammar o! su!!ering >artmanC.

+he iolen&e o! the /iddle @assage and the slae estate 2pillersC, te&hnologies o!

a&&umulation and !ungibility, re&ompose and reena&t their horrors upon ea&h su&&eeding

generation o! Bla&ks. +his iolen&e is both gratuitous, that is, it is not &ontingent upon

transgressions against the hegemony o! &iil so&ietyE and stru&tural, in that it positions

Bla&ks ontologi&ally outside o! humanity and &iil so&iety. 2imultaneously, it renders the

ontologi&al status o! humanity li!e itsel!C wholly dependent on &iil so&iety:s repetition

&ompulsion' the !ren=ied and !ragmented ma&hinations through whi&h &iil so&iety

reena&ts gratuitous iolen&e upon the Bla&k?that &iil so&iety might know itsel! as the

domain o! humans?generation a!ter generation.

gain, we need a new language o! abstra&tion to e3plain this horror. +he

e3planatory power o! >umanist dis&ourse is bankrupt in the !a&e o! the Bla&k. It is

inadeGuate and inessential to, as well as parasiti& on, the ensemble o! Guestions whi&h the

dead but sentient thing, the Bla&k, struggles to arti&ulate in a world o! liing sub"e&ts. /y

work on !ilm, &ultural theory, and politi&al ontology marks my attempt to &ontribute to

this o!ten !ragmented and &onstantly assaulted Guest to !orge a language o! abstra&tion

with e3planatory powers emphati& enough to embra&e the Bla&k, an a&&umulated and

!ungible ob"e&t, in a human world o! e3ploited and alienated sub"e&ts.

+he imposition o! >umanism:s assumptie logi& has en&umbered Bla&k !ilm

studies to the e3tent that it is underwritten by the assumptie logi& o! White or non-Bla&k

!ilm studies. +his is a problem o! )ultural 2tudies writ large. In this &hapter, I want to

o!!er a brie! illustration o! how we might attempt to break the theoreti&al impasse

(


3/53


between, on the one hand, the assumptie logi& o! )ultural 2tudies and, on the other

hand, the theoreti&al aphasia to whi&h )ultural 2tudies is redu&ed when it en&ounters the

nonContologi&al status o! the Bla&k. I will do so not by laun&hing a !rontal atta&k against

White !ilm theory, in parti&ular, or een )ultural 2tudies broadly speaking, but by

interrogating Ja&Gues La&an?be&ause La&anian psy&hoanalysis is one o! the twin pillars

that shoulders !ilm theory and )ultural 2tudies.33iii

/y problem with )ultural 2tudies is that when it theori=es the inter!a&e between

Bla&ks and >umans it is hobbled in its attempts to aC e3pose power relationships and bC

e3amine how relations o! power in!luen&e and shape &ultural pra&ti&e. )ultural 2tudies

insists upon a grammar of sufferingwhi&h assumes that we are all positioned essentially

by way o! the 2ymboli& *rder, what La&an &alls the wall o! language?and as su&h our

potential !or stasis or &hange our &apa&ity !or being oppressed or !reeC is oerdetermined

by our ;uniersal< ability or inability to sei=e and wield dis&ursie weapons. +his idea

&orrupts the e3planatory power o! most so&ially engaged !ilms and een the most radi&al

line o! politi&al a&tion be&ause it produ&es a &inema and a politi&s that &annot a&&ount !or

the grammar o! su!!ering o! the Bla&k?the 2lae. +o put it bluntly, the imaginati$e

labor Jared 2e3ton #440C o! &inema, politi&al a&tion, and )ultural 2tudies are all

a!!li&ted with the same theoreti&al aphasia. +hey are spee&hless in the !a&e o! gratuitous

iolen&e.

+his theoreti&al aphasia is symptomati& o! a debilitated ensemble o! Guestions

regarding politi&al ontology. t its heart are two registers o! imaginatie labor. +he !irst

register is that o! des&ription, the rhetori&al labor aimed at e3plaining the way relations o!

power are named, &ategori=ed, and e3plored. +he se&ond register &an be &hara&teri=ed as
http://0.0.0.0/http://0.0.0.0/


4/53


pres&ription, the rhetori&al labor predi&ated on the notion that eeryone &an be

eman&ipated through some !orm o! dis&ursie, or symboli&, interention.

But eman&ipation through some !orm o! dis&ursie or symboli& interention is

wanting in the !a&e o! a sub"e&t position that is not a sub"e&t position?what /ar3 &alls ;a

speaking implement< or what onald Judy &alls ;an interdi&tion against sub"e&tiity.< In

other words, the Bla&k has sentient &apa&ity but no relational &apa&ity. s an

a&&umulated and !ungible ob"e&t, rather than an e3ploited and alienated sub"e&t, the Bla&k

is openly ulnerable to the whims o! the worldE and so is hisHher &ultural ;produ&tion.ere, howeer again with the notable

e3&eption o! 9earwoodC semioti&, post-stru&turalist, !eminist, and psy&hoanalyti& tools o!

the @oliti&al /odernists were negle&ted in their hunt !or the ;negatie< or ;positiee maintains that Bla&k

!ilmmakers use e3pressie !orms and systems o! signi!i&ation that re!le&t the &ultural and

histori&al priorities o! the Bla&k e3perien&e. In this way, the book resonates with mu&h o!

what is adan&ed in Diawara:s olume o! edited essays Black American Cinema.

>oweer, the !ro-&entrism o! 9earwood:s book, at times, seems to try to isolate the

Bla&k !ilm:s narrational pro&esses !rom Bla&k !ilmmakers: positionality under the

despotism o! White suprema&y.

@art *ne o! 9earwood:s book presents an oeriew o! Bla&k !ilm and an

introdu&tion to Bla&k !ilm &ulture. It sureys the emergen&e o! the Bla&k independent

!ilm moement !rom the perspe&tie o! the Bla&k &ultural tradition. +his marks a shi!t

away !rom mu&h o! what takes pla&e in Diawara:s Black American Cinema, whi&h

lo&ates the emergen&e o! Bla&k independent !ilm in relation to &ertain politi&al te3ts like

Frant= Fanon:s !he Wretched of the arthC and domesti& and international struggles !or

liberation and sel!-determination. 9earwood:s book gies a &lose reading o! !ilms at the

leel o! the diegesis, but it also betrays a kind o! &on&eptual an3iety with respe&t to the

histori&al ob"e&t o! study?in other words, it &lings, an3iously, to the !ilm-as-te3t-as-

legitimate ob"e&t o! Bla&k &inema. 9earwood writes'

+he term Bla&k &inema des&ribes a spe&i!i& body o! !ilms produ&ed in the

!ri&an Diaspora whi&h shares a &ommon problemati&$ primary

assumption is that Bla&k &ulture is syn&reti& in nature and re!le&ts

hybridi=ed !orms that are uniGue to the meri&as. +his pro&ess o!

&reoli=ation, whi&h is eident in !ri&an meri&an &lassi&al musi& Ja==C,

(


13/53


represents the !orging o! a new ontology and epistemology. It is the

produ&t o! &ultural pra&ti&es that hae deeloped !rom the e3perien&e o!

slaery, the struggle !or !reedom !rom oppression and the re&ognition that

interdependen&e is the key to our surial. (C

Later he notes'

s an e3pression that emanates !rom the heart o! the !ri&an meri&an

&ommunity, good Bla&k !ilm &an represent that whi&h is most uniGue and

best in Bla&k &ulture. good Bla&k !ilm &an proide an intelle&tual

&hallenge and engage our &ognitie !a&ulties. It &an o!ten present in&isie

&ommentary on so&ial realities. 4C

+hese two Guotes are emblemati& o! "ust how ague the aestheti& !oundation o!

9earwood:s attempt to &onstru&t a &anon &an be. What:s great about the book is its

synthesis o! so mu&h o! the literature on Bla&k !ilm whi&h pre&edes it in&luding

Diawara:s workC. But in trying to show how Bla&k !ilmmakers di!!er !rom White

!ilmmakers and how the Bla&k !ilm as te3t is a standalone ob"e&t, 9earwood reerts to

&on&lusions general enough to apply to almost any !ilmography and, !urthermore, his

&laims are underwritten by the philosophi&al, and semioti&, treatises o! 5uropean not

!ri&anC theoreti&ians.

James 2nead, Ja&Gueline Bobo, bell hooks, Nalerie 2mith, and /anthia Diawara

belong to what I &all the 2e&ond Wae o! Bla&k !ilm theorists who &ompli&ated the !ield

through the use o! methodologies whi&h aC e3amine the !ilm as a te3t, a dis&ourse, and

bC bring into this e3amination an e3ploration o! &inema:s sub"e&t-e!!e&ts on implied

spe&tators. +he emphasis here should be on implied,!or, in most &ases, these books and


14/53


arti&les are not grounded in oert theories and methodologies o! spe&tatorship. +he

adan&e, i! you will, o! this body o! work oer that o! )ripps and Bogle is two!old. First,

these works &hallenged the binarism o! goodHbad, positieHnegatie images o! &inema.

+hus, they opened the spa&e !or the i&onography o! third positions like un-wed Bla&k

women, gangsters, gays, and lesbians to enter into the Bla&k &inemati& ;!amily.is &laim' the essentialist

&riteria by whi&h a ;Bla&k< !ilm is understood to be one dire&ted by a person o! !ri&an

meri&an des&ent too !reGuently allows biologi&al &ategories to stand in !or ideologi&al

ones. )onersely, aestheti&ally grounded de!initions o! Bla&k !ilm risk priileging

independent produ&tions un&riti&ally. With this dire&t politi&al &hallenge to both

9earwood and Bogle, he suggests that the notion o! +hird )inema &ould be appropriated

!or Bla&ks. 2u&h appropriation resembles how White !ilm theorists deeloped the

&on&ept o! &ounter-&inema through their translations o! La&an:s writings on the

psy&hoanalyti& &ure o! ;!ull spee&here is Lott:s appropriation o! +hird )inema !or

Bla&k meri&ans?his response to the identity politi&s o! Bogle and 9earwood'


15/53


What makes +hird )inema third i.e., a iable alternatie to Western

&inemaC is not e3&lusiely the ra&ial makeup o! a !ilmmaker, a !ilm:s

aestheti& &hara&ter, or a !ilm:s intended audien&e, but rather a !ilm:s

politi&al orientation within the hegemoni& stru&tures o! post&olonialism.

When a !ilm &ontributes ideologi&ally to the adan&ement o! Bla&k

people, within a &onte3t o! systemati& denial, the a&hieement o! this

politi&al ob"e&tie ought to &ount as a &riterion o! ealuation on a par with

any essentialist &riterion. 7#C

2e&ond Wae Bla&k !ilm theorists su&h as 2nead, Lott, 2mith, Diawara, and

hooks were able to bring a dimension to Bla&k !ilm theory that stemmed !rom their

willingness to interrogate not "ust the narratie in relation to time-worn tropes o! Bla&k

upward mobility, but also !rom their desire to interrogate &inemati& !ormalism as well

i.e., mise-en-s&ene, a&ousti&s, editing strategies, lightingCE in other words, &inema as an

apparatusHinstitution in relation to the dereli&t institutional status o! Bla&k people. But

their drawba&k was in per&eiing Bla&kness as haing either some institutional status or

haing the potential !or institutional status. +hey were not in&lined to meditate on the

ar&hai& persisten&e o! two key ontologi&al Gualities o! the lega&y o! slaery, namely, the

&ondition o! absolute &aptiity and the state o! irtual non-&ommuni&ation within o!!i&ial

&ulture. 2imilarly, I take the re&ent &elebration o! superstars >alle Berry and Den=el

Washington in both the Bla&k press and the White &riti&al establishment as symptomati&

o! a re!usal or inability to &ountenan&e the long shadow o! slaery inso!ar as it writes a

history o! the present. +hat is, the heralding o! Bla&k stardom, now disaowing its

relation to long-standing &inemati& stereotypes, is !ounded upon a belie! in not only the


16/53


possibility o! redress under White suprema&y, but also its relatie ease. )entral to this

belie! is an histori&al redu&tion o! slaery to the relation o! &hattel and a !ormulation o!

Bla&k eman&ipation and en!ran&hisement limited to the most nominal dimensions o! &iil

rights and liberties.

5mbra&ing Bla&k peopleTs agen&y as sub"e&ts o! the law i.e., sub"e&ts o! rights

and libertiesC, and een their potential to a&t as or partner with en!or&ers o! the law i.e.,

Den=el Washington in !raining 3a"C,presents itsel! as an a&ting out o! the histori&

parado3 o! Bla&k non-e3isten&e i.e., the mutable &ontinuity o! so&ial deathC. >ere, Bla&k

Oa&hieementO in popular &ulture and the &ommer&ial arts reGuires the bra&keting out o!

that non-e3isten&e in hopes o! telling a tale o! loss that is intelligible within the national

imagination >artman, ;@osition


17/53


will!ully being beyond, and in spite o!, power. onald Judy, ;*n the

Puestion o! 6igga uthenti&ity< #1#C

In short, a besetting hobble o! the theori=ation itsel! is one whi&h the theory

shares with many o! the Bla&k !ilms it s&rutini=es' both the !ilms and the theory tend to

posit a possibility o!, and a desire !or, Bla&k e3isten&e, instead o! taking &ogni=an&e o!

the ontologi&al &laim o! the so-&alled !ro-@essimists that Bla&kness is both that outside

whi&h makes it possible !or White and non-White i.e., sians and LatinosC positions to

e3ist and, simultaneously, &ontest e3isten&e. s su&h, not only is Bla&kness slaenessC

outside the terrain o! the White the masterC but it is outside the terrain o! the subaltern.

8n!ortunately, almost to a person, the !ilm theorists in Guestion see i.e., their assumptie

logi& takes as gienC themseles as sub5ects?dominated, oppressed, downtrodden,

redu&ed to subaltern status, but sub"e&ts nonetheless?in a world o! other sub"e&ts.33

+he assumptions that Bla&k a&ademi&s are subalterns within the a&ademy rather

than the slaes o! their ;&olleagues


18/53


2ettlerH/aster, not be!ore Fanon,Wretched0(-%(C. Despite haing entured into the !irst

un!ortunate moe?a need to &ommuni&ate with other groups o! people through the

positing o!, and an3iety oer, Bla&k &oheren&e?Lott:s work does make brilliant

interentions. I:m saying, howeer, that not only does the drie toward a presentation o!

a Bla&k !ilm &anon show a desire to parti&ipate in the institutionality o! &inema, but the

work itsel! shows a desire to parti&ipate in the institutionality o! a&ademia. nd

;parti&ipation< is a register unaailable to slaes. Bla&k !ilm theory, as an interention,

would hae a more destru&tie impa&t i! it !oregrounded the impossibility o! a Bla&k

!ilm, the impossibility o! a Bla&k !ilm theory, the impossibility o! a Bla&k !ilm theorist,

and the impossibility o! a Bla&k person e3&ept, and this is key, under ;&leansing< FanonC

&onditions o! iolen&e. *n&e real iolen&e is &oupled with representational ;monstrosityuman?!ilm theoryC

is in !ee to La&an and his underlying thesis on sub"e&tiity and psy&hi& liberation. It does

not seek to disproe La&an:s underlying theory o! how the sub"e&t &omes into sub"e&tiity

ia alienation within the Imaginary and the 2ymboli&E nor does it seek to disproe his

understanding o! psy&hi& stagnation des&ribed as egoi& monumentali=ationC as that

&ondition !rom whi&h the sub"e&t and by e3tension, the so&iusC must be liberated. ather

than attempt to dispro$e La&an:s and, by e3tension non-Bla&k !ilm theory:sC eiden&e

and assumptie logi& I seek to show how, in aspiring to a paradigmati& e3planation o!

7#


20/53


relations, his assumptie logi& mysti!ies rather than &lari!ies a paradigmati& e3planation

o! relations, !or it has a iid a&&ount o! the conflictsbetween genders, or, more broadly,

between nar&issisti& &ontemporaries and &ontemporaries who hae learned to lie in a

de&onstru&tie relation to the ego?that is to say, it o!!ers a reliable toolbo3 !or

rigorously e3amining intra->uman &on!li&ts and !or proposing the aestheti& gestures,

i.e., types o! !ilmi& pra&ti&es, whi&h either e3a&erbate >ollywood !ilmsM or redress

&ounter-&inemaM these &on!li&tsC but it has no &apa&ity to gie a paradigmati&

e3planation o! the stru&ture o! antagonisms between Bla&ks and >umans. I argue that the

&laims and &on&lusions whi&h La&anian psy&hoanalysis and by e3tension non-Bla&k !ilm

theoryC makes regarding dispossession and su!!ering are aC insu!!i&ient to the task o!

delineating Bla&k dispossession and su!!ering, and bC parasitic on that ery Bla&k

dispossession and su!!ering !or whi&h it has no words.

In ;+he Fun&tion and Field o! 2pee&h and Language in @sy&hoanalysis< critsC,

La&an illustrates what remains to this day one o! the most brilliant and &omprehensie

s&enarios !or attaining what some beliee to be the only bit o! !reedom we will eer know

2ilerman, World SpectatorsC. La&an:s alue to psy&hoanalysis in parti&ular and &riti&al

theory in general was that he remoed !ear and loathing !rom the word ;alienation.uman and Bla&k, the &onte3t o! masters and slaes.

+he analyti& s&hema o! Ja&Gues La&an:s breakthrough known as ;!ull spee&here we hae a

dismantling o! all the !antasms that &onstitute the patient:s ego and whi&h sHhe pro"e&ts

onto the analyst that resonates with the pro&ess o! attaining what La&an &alls !ull spee&h.

But Fanon takes this a step !urther, !or not only does he want the analysand to surrender

to the oid o! language, but also to ;a&t in the dire&tion o! a &hange$with respe&t to the

real sour&e o! the &on!li&t?that is, toward the so&ial stru&tures< BSW( 144C.

s a psy&hoanalyst, Fanon does not dispute La&an:s &laim that su!!ering and

!reedom are produ&ed and attained, respe&tiely, in the realm o! 2ymboli&E but this, !or

Fanon, is only hal! o! the modality o! e3isten&e. +he other hal! o! su!!ering and !reedom

is iolen&e. By the time Fanon has woen the des&ription o! his patient:s &ondition i.e.,

his own li!e as a Bla&k do&tor in Fran&eC into the pres&ription o! a &ure his &ommitment

to armed struggle in lgeriaC, he has e3tended the logi& o! disorder and death !rom the

2ymboli& into the eal.

De&oloni=ation, whi&h sets out to &hange the order o! the world, is,

obiously, a program o! &omplete disorder$IMt is the meeting o! two

!or&es, opposed to ea&h other by their ery nature$+heir !irst en&ounter

was marked by iolen&e and their e3isten&e together$was &arried on by

dint o! a great array o! bayonets and &annons$+Mhis narrow world,

14#


30/53


strewn with prohibitions, &an only be &alled in Guestion by absolute

iolen&e. !he Wretched of the arth 0-0C

+his is be&ause the stru&tural, or absolute, iolen&e or what Loi& Wa&Guant &alls

the ;&ar&eral &ontinuum,< is not a Bla&k e)perience but a &ondition o! Bla&k ;li!e.< It

remains &onstant, paradigmati&ally, despite &hanges in its ;per!orman&e< oer time?

slae ship, /iddle @assage, slae estate, Jim )row, the ghetto, the prison industrial

&omple3.33iii +here is an un&anny &onne&tion between Fanon:s absolute iolen&e and

La&an:s eal. +hus, by e3tension, the grammar o! su!!ering o! the Bla&k itsel! is on the

leel o! the eal. In this emblemati& passage, Fanon does !or iolen&e what La&an does

!or alienation' namely, he remoes the negatie stigma su&h a term would otherwise in&ur

in the hands o! theorists and pra&titioners who seek &oheren&e and stability. >e also

raises within La&an:s s&hema o! su!!ering and !reedom a &ontradi&tion between the idea

o! uniersal un-ra&ed &ontemporaries and two !or&es opposed to ea&h other, whose !irst

en&ounter and e3isten&e together is marked by iolen&e. In short, he diides the world not

between &ured &ontemporaries and un&ured &ontemporaries, but between &ontemporaries

o! all sorts and slaes. >e lays the groundwork !or a theory o! antagonism oer and aboe

a theory o! &on!li&t.

I! La&an:s !ull spee&h is not, in essen&e, a ;&ure< but a pro&ess promoting psy&hi&

disorder, through whi&h the sub"e&t &omes to know herHhimsel!, not as a stable relation to

a true ;sel!


31/53


pro&ess o! !ull spee&h rests on a tremendous disaowal whi&h re/monumentali=es the

WhiteC ego be&ause it sutures, rather than &an&els, !ormal stagnation by !orti!ying and

e3tending the interlo&utory li!e o! intra->uman dis&ussions.

I am arguing that 1C &iil so&iety, the terrain upon whi&h the analysand per!orms

!ull spee&h, is always already a !ormally stagnated monumentE and #C the pro&ess by

whi&h !ull spee&h is per!ormed brokers simultaneously two relations !or the analysand,

one new and one old, respe&tiely. +he pro&ess by whi&h !ull spee&h is per!ormed

brokers a newC deconstructi$e relationship between the analysand and hisHher !ormal

stagnationithin&iil so&iety and a pre-e3isting orC reconstructi$erelationship between

the analysand and the !ormal stagnation that constitutes&iil so&iety.

Whereas La&an was aware o! how language ;pre&edes and e3&eeds us. /.

>enry a s&holar in no way hostile to slaeryC, !he +olice Control of the Sla$e in South

Carolina, reeals how ital this per!orman&e was in the &onstru&tion o! Whiteness !or the

2ettlers o! the 144s, 144s, and 144s, as well as !or the 2ettler-s&holar >enry himsel!C

o! the 1744s'

+he eolution o! the patrol system is interesting. +he need o! keeping the

slaes !rom roing was !elt !rom the ery !irst. mong the earliest o! the

&olonial a&ts in 1 is one that gae any person the right to apprehend,

properly &hastise, and send home any slae who might be !ound o!! his

master:s plantation without a ti&ket. +his plan was not altogether e!!e&tie,

and in 174 it was made the dut"o! all persons under penalty o! !orty

shillings to arrest and &hastise any slae !oundM out o! his home plantation

without a proper ti&ket. +his plan o! making it eerybody:s business to

punish wandering slaes seems to hae been su!!i&ient at least !or a time.

#-#7C

But today this pro&ess o! spe&ies diision does not turn Bla&ks into spe&ies and produ&e

Whites with the e3istential potential o! !ully reali=ed sub"e&tiity in the same spe&ta&ular

!ashion as the spe&ta&le o! iolen&e that >enry wrote o! in 2outh )arolina and that Fanon

was a&&ustomed to lgeria. In !a&t, /artinot and 2e3ton maintain that attention to the

spe&ta&le &auses us to think o! iolen&e as &ontingent upon symboli& transgressions rather

than thinking o! it as a matri3 !or the simultaneous produ&tion o! Bla&k death and White

&iil so&iety'

111
http://0.0.0.0/http://0.0.0.0/


39/53


+he spe&ta&ular eent &amou!lages the operation o! poli&e law as

&ontempt, poli&e law is the !a&t that there is no recourse to the disruption

of Bla&kMpeople4s li$es b" these acti$ities.C

By ;no re&ourse< the authors are suggesting that Bla&k people themseles sere a ital

!un&tion as the liing markers o! gratuitous iolen&e. nd the spe&ta&ular eent is a s&ene

that draws attention away !rom the paradigm o! iolen&e. It !un&tions as a &rowding out

s&enario. )rowding out our understanding that, where iolen&e is &on&erned, to be Bla&k

is to be beyond the limit o! &ontingen&y. +his thereby gies the bodies o! the rest o!

so&iety >umansC some !orm o! &oheren&e a &ontingent rather than gratuitous

relationship to iolen&eC'

In !a&t, to !o&us on the spe&ta&ular eent o! poli&e iolen&e is to deploy

and thereby a!!irmC the logi& o! poli&e pro!iling itsel!. ?et, e can4t a$oid

this logic once e submit to the demand to pro$ide e)amples or images of

the paradigm on&e we submit to signi!ying pra&ti&esM. s a result, the

attempt to articulate the paradigm of policing renders itself non/

paradigmatic, reaffirms the logic of police profiling and thereb" reduces

itself to the fraudulent ethic b" hich hite ci$il societ" rationali1es its

e)istenceemphasis mineM.-C

;+he !raudulent ethi& by whi&h white &iil so&iety rationali=es its e3isten&e./. >enry:s 17 th&entury 2outh )arolina.

s /artinot and 2e3ton argue, the &ii& stability o! the #1st&entury 8.2. slae estate is no

longer eery White person:s duty to per!orm. In !a&t, many Whites on the Le!t a&tually

per!orm progressie opposition to the poli&e, but ea&h per!orman&e o! progressie

opposition en&ounters what /artinot and 2e3ton &all

$a &ertain internal limitation. $+he supposed se&rets o! white suprema&y

get sleuthed in its spe&ta&ular displays, in pathology and instrumentality,

or pawned o!! on the !igure o! the ;rogue &op.< 5a&h approa&h to ra&e

subordinates it to something that is not ra&e, as i! to &ontinue the noble

epistemologi&al endeaor o! getting to know it better. But what ea&h ends

up talking about is that other thing. In the !a&e o! this, the le!t:s anti-

ra&ism be&omes its passion. But its passion gies it away. It signi!ies the

passie a&&eptan&e o! the idea that ra&e, &onsidered to be either a real

property o! a person or an imaginary pro"e&tion, is not essential to the

so&ial stru&ture, a system o! so&ial meanings and &ategori=ations. It is the

same passie apparatus o! whiteness that in its mainstream guise a&tiely

!orgets in a way in whi&h settlers o! the !irst three &enturies simply &ould

notM that it owes its e3isten&e to the killing and terrori=ing o! those it

11%


42/53


ra&iali=es !or the purpose, e3pelling them !rom the human !old in the same

gesture o! !orgetting. It is the passiity o! bad !aith that ta&itly a&&epts as

;what goes without saying< the postulates o! white suprema&y. nd it

must do so passionately sin&e ;what goes without saying< is empty and

&an be held as ;truth< only through an obsessieness. +he truth is that the

truth is on the sur!a&e, !lat and repetitie, "ust as the law is made by the

uni!orm. -7C

truth without depth, !lat, repetitie, on the sur!a&e +his unrepresentable sub"e&t-e!!e&t

is more &omple3 than >./. >enry:s early 2ettler per!orman&es o! &ommunal solidarity in

part be&ause'

+he gratuitousness o! its repetition bestows uponwhite suprema&y

an inherent dis&ontinuity. It stops and starts sel!-re!erentially, at whim. +o

theori=e some politi&al, e&onomi&, or psy&hologi&al ne&essity !or its

repetition, its unending return to iolen&e, its need to kill is to lose a grasp

on that gratuitousness by thinking its per!orman&e is representable. 6ts

acts of repetition are its access to unrepresentabilit" E they dissole its

e3&essieness into inisibility as simply daily o&&urren&e. Whateer

mythi& &ontent it pretends to &laim is a priori empty. 6ts secret is that it

has no depth. !here is no dark corner that, once brought to the light of

reason, ill unra$el its s"stem$IMts truth lies in the rituals that sustain its

&ir&uitous &ontentless logi&E it is, in !a&t, nothing but its ery pra&ti&es

emphasis mineM. 14C

11(


43/53


+o &laim that the paradigm o! poli&ing has no ;mythi& &ontent,< that its

per!orman&e is ;unrepresentable,< and that there is no ;politi&al, e&onomi&, or

psy&hologi&al ne&essity !or its repletion< is to say something more pro!ound than merely

;&iil so&iety e3ists in an inerse relation to its own &laims.< It is to say something more

than what the authors say outright' that this inersion translates today in the poli&e

making &laims and demands on the institutionality o! &iil so&iety and not the other way

around. +he e3tended impli&ation o! 2e3ton and /artinot:s &laim is mu&h more

deastating. For this &laim, with its emphasis on the gratuitousness o! iolen&e?a

iolen&e that &annot be represented but whi&h positions spe&ies nonetheless?

rearti&ulates Fanon:s notion that, !or Bla&ks, iolen&e is a matri3 o! imCpossibility, a

paradigm o! ontology as opposed to a performance that is &ontingent upon symboli&

transgressions.

lienation, howeer, that La&anian matri3 o! symboli& and imaginary &astration,

on whi&h &odes are made and broken and !ull or emptyC spee&h is possible, &omes to

appear, by way o! the psy&hoanalyti& en&ounter, as the essentialmatri3 o! e3isten&e. We

are in our pla&e, La&an insists, on thisside o! the wall o! language. crits141C It is the

grid on whi&h the analysand &an short &ir&uit somati& &omplian&e with hysteri&al

symptoms and bring to a halt, howeer temporarily, the egoi& monumentali=ation o!

empty spee&h. +hus, the psy&hoanalyti& en&ounter in general, and La&anian !ull spee&h in

parti&ular, work to &rowd out the White sub"e&t:s reali=ation o! hisHher positionality by

way o! iolen&e. It is this &rowding-out s&enario that allows the analysand o! !ull spee&h

to remain White, but ;&ured< a liberated masterC. nd, in addition, the s&enario itsel!

11


44/53


weighs in as one more o! &iil so&iety:s enabling a&&ompaniments like oting, &oalition

building, and interra&ial ;loeal! o! this &ontradi&tion &ould be

soled i! we simply re-named !ull-spee&h ;White spee&h< or >uman spee&hC and

atta&hed to the analyst:s shingleBlacks need not appl". ;+hey may not need apply but

they are still essential in positing di!!eren&e.


45/53


labor through whi&h the analysand has redis&oered hisHher !undamental alienation, there

will still be a nigger in the woodpile.

)hat *asters +ediscover in Slaves

+he di!!eren&e between Jesus and Buddha is that, though some people may

be&ome )hrist-like, the &hur&h does not take kindly to the idea o! Jesus being mass-

produ&ed. +here is only one Jesus. >e &ame on&e. *ne day, so goes the legend, he will

&ome again. men. In the meantime we will "ust hae to wait. psy&hoanalysis modeled

on )hristianity would hae a hard row to hoe. But by be&oming toward death in a most

un!lin&hing manner anyone canbe&ome a Buddha. 2mall wonder La&an:s pres&ription

!or the analyti& en&ounter looks toward this nonCreligion with neither a &hur&h nor a god.

+oward the end o! ;+he Fun&tion and Field o! 2pee&h and Language in @sy&hoanalysis,er des&ription o! the pro&ess as a

kind o! e&stasy o! pain is noteworthy'

/aso&histi& e&stasyimplies a sublation o! sorts, a li!ting o! the psy&he

up and out o! the body into other sites o! su!!ering and hen&e a sel!-

estrangement. It turnsupon a narcissistic deferraland so works against

the consolidationo! the isolated ego emphasis mineM. (ale Sub5ecti$it"

#(C

For 2ilerman, the eman&ipatory agen&y o! this kind o! psy&hi& death enables ;a

kind o! heteropathi& &hain-rea&tion asM the sub"e&tM inhabits multiple sites o!

su!!ering.< +hus the ;e3teriori=ation o! one psy&he neer !un&tions to e3alt another and

identity is stripped o! all Rpresen&e:< #C.

+his e3teriori=ation o! the White male psy&he in a Guest to inhabit multiple sites

o! su!!ering, i.e. White women, has its &osts. +he politi&al &osts to White men stripped o!

all presen&e in relation to White women are death-like but not deadly. 6or do most White

!eminists wish it to be deadly. 2ilerman:s &aution, ;I in no way mean to propose

117


47/53


&atastrophe as the antidote to a mass meconnaissance< %C, dierges dramati&ally !rom

Fanon:s demand that ;morality is ery &on&reteE it is to silen&e the settler:s de!ian&e, to

break his !launting iolen&e?in a word, to put him out o! the pi&ture< Wretched %%C.

+he same settler won:t weather both storms in Guite the same way. Fanon:s brand o! ;!ull

spee&h< makes this &lear' ;+he iolen&e whi&h has ruled o$er the orderingo! the &olonial

world$will be claimed and taken o$erby the natie at the moment when, de&iding to

embody history in his own person, he surges into the !orbidden Guarters< %4C. For

!eminists like 2ilerman, !ull spee&h is that pro&ess through whi&h the analysand has

;&laimed and taken oer< the alienation whi&h rules oer the ordering o! her world. +he

analysand &omes to hear and assume her spee&h, in other words, as she assumes her

desire. +his is not simply a Guest !or personal liberation but instead the assumptie logi&

that underwrites two imbri&atedC reolutionary pro"e&ts' the politi&al pro"e&t o! !or

2ilerman et alC institutional, or paradigmati&, &hangeE &oupled with an aestheti& pro"e&t

i.e., &ounter-&inemaC that a&&ompanies the politi&al pro"e&t?the two, then, work in relay

with ea&h other, a mutually enabling diale&ti&. In !he Acoustic (irror: !he %emale

oice in +s"choanal"sis and Cinema, 2ilerman unders&ores the ulnerability in the

armor o! the *edipal paradigm that point most ulnerable to atta&k in what !or her is a

world ordering paradigmC. >er &lose reading o! Freud:sgo and the 6d reminds us that

there are ;two ersions o! the *edipus &omple3, one $whi&h$works to align the

sub"e&t smoothly with heterose3uality and the dominant alues o! the symboli& order, and

the other $whi&h is &ulturally disaowed and organi=es sub"e&tiity in !undamentally

Rpererse' and homose3ual ways:< 1#4C. *edipus, there!ore, &an be claimed and taken

o$er!or a reolutionary !eminist agenda.

1#4


48/53


Fanon, howeer, demonstrates how the tools o! spe&ies diision are ;&laimed and

taken oer< by that spe&ies o! absolute dereli&tionE how iolen&e is turned to the natie:s

adantage. +his notion o! embodying ;history in his own person< &an be likened to a

sub"e&t be&oming lost in language re&ognition o! the oidC. But it:s important not to lose

sight o! the di!!eren&e between the Fanonian impli&ations o! ;spe&ies< and the La&anian

impli&ations o! ;sub"e&ts< be&ause history, !or Fanon, is in e3&ess o! signi!i&ation. In

addition, !or the La&anian sub"e&t, the grid o! alienation holds out the possibility o! some

sort o! &ommuni&ation between sub"e&ts?a higher unity o! &ontemporaries. Whereas !or

Fanon'

+o break up the &olonial world does not mean that a!ter the

!rontiers hae been abolished lines o! &ommuni&ation will be set up

between the two =ones. +he destru&tion o! the &olonial world is no more

and no less than the abolition o! one =one, its burial in the depths o! the

earth. %4-%1C

+o say, as 2ilerman does, ;I in no way mean to propose &atastrophe as the

antidote to a mass meconnaissance< is, I &ontend, to say that the two antagonists are o!

the same spe&ies?they hae been =oned not apart but together. 2o, they are not reall"

antagonists. +o be pre&ise, iolen&e as it pertains to and stru&tures gender relations

between White men and White women and it doesAC is o! a &ontingent nature' White

women who ;transgress< their positionality in the 2ymboli& order run the risk o! atta&k.

But as 2aidiya >artman and FanonC makes &lear, &ontingen&y is not what stru&tures

iolen&e between White men and Bla&k women, White women and Bla&k women, White

women and Bla&k men, or White men and Bla&k men. +hese White on Bla&k relations

1#1


49/53


share, as their &onstituent element, an absen&e o! &ontingen&y where iolen&e is

&on&erned. +he absen&e o! &ontingen&y eliminates the ne&essity o! transgression whi&h is

a pre-&ondition o! intra-settler White men to White womenC iolen&e.

/ore is at work here than the monumentali=ation o! White suprema&y through the

imposition o! &ultural signi!iers. Important Guestions emerge regarding the possibility o!

!ull spee&h, the possibility o! an analysand speaking in the language o! his

;&ontemporaries< when the !ield is made up o! Whites and Bla&ks. @ut another way, how

does one de!er the nar&issism o! a eal relation >ow &an spee&h alone strip Whites o!

all presen&e in the !a&e o! Bla&ks What is the real danger entailed in li!ting the White

psy&he up and out o! the body into Bla&k sites o! su!!ering In short, what kind o!

per!orman&e would that be We hae &ome up against La&an:s &aution not to take

Buddhist te&hniGues beyond ;certain limitations imposed b" @ps"choanal"sis,- the

limitations o! spee&h.

In e3amining the spe&ta&les o! the slae &o!!le, plantation slae parties, the

musi&al per!orman&es o! slaes !or masters, and the s&enes o! ;intima&y< and ;sedu&tionartman illustrates how no dis&ursie a&t

by Bla&ks towards Whites or by Whites towards Bla&ks, !rom the mundane and

Guotidian, to the horri!ying and outlandish &an be disentangled !rom the gratuitousness o!

iolen&e that stru&tures Bla&k su!!ering. +his stru&tural su!!ering, whi&h undergirds the

spe&trum o! Bla&k li!e, !rom tender words o! ;loe< spoken between slae women and

White men to s&reaming at the whipping post, is imbri&ated in the ;!ungibility o! the

&aptie body< >artman 17C. Bla&k ;!ungibility< is a iolen&e-e!!e&t that marks the

1##


50/53


di!!eren&e between Bla&k positionality and White positionality and, as >artman makes

&lear, this di!!eren&e in positionality marks a di!!eren&e between &apa&ities o! spee&h.

+he iolen&e-indu&ed !ungibility o! Bla&kness allows !or its appropriation by

White psy&hes as ;property o! en"oyment< #0-#(C. What:s more remarkable is that Bla&k

!ungibility is also that property whi&h inaugurates White empathy toardBla&k su!!ering

#0-#(C. We might say Bla&k !ungibility &ataly=es a ;heteropathi& &hain-rea&tion< that

allows a White sub"e&t to inhabit multiple sites o! su!!ering. But, again, does the

e3teriori=ation o! one psy&he 2ilerman #C, enabled by Bla&kness, su&&ess!ully strip

White identity o! all presen&e >artman poses this Guestion in her &ritiGue o! a 6orthern

White man:s !antasy that repla&es the body o! slaes with the bodies o! himsel! and his

!amily, as the slaes are being beaten'

BMy e3porting the ulnerability o! the &aptie body as a essel !or the

uses, thoughts, and !eelings o! others, the humanity e3tended to the slae

inadertently &on!irms the e3pe&tations and desires de!initie o! the

relations o! &hattel slaery. In other words, the &ase o! ankin:s

empatheti& identi!i&ation is as mu&h due to his good intentions and

heart!elt opposition to slaery as to the !ungibility o! the &aptie body$

In the !antasy o! being beaten$ankin be&omes a pro3y and the other:s

pain is a&knowledged to the degree that it &an be imagined, yet by irtue

o! this substitution the ob"e&t o! identi!i&ation threatens to disappear. 17C

>artman &alls into Guestion the eman&ipatory &laims !or both the indiidual

psy&he and the so&iusC o! heteropathi& identi!i&ation and maso&histi& sel!-&an&ellation

loss o! sel! in the other, a pro&ess germane to !ull spee&hC when these &laims are not

1#0


51/53


&ir&ums&ribed by a White so&ial !ormation?when they &laim to be more than intra-

>uman dis&ussions. For no web o! analogy &an be spun between, on the one hand, the

!ree body that mounts!ungible !lesh on an eman&ipatory "ourney toward sel!-&an&ellation

and, on the other hand, that !ungible being that has "ust been mounted. +he two positions

are stru&turally irre&on&ilable, whi&h is to say they are not ;&ontemporaries.< >artman

puts a !iner point on it'

$the e!!ort to &ountera&t the &ommonpla&e &allousness to bla&k su!!ering

reGuires that the white body be positioned in the pla&e o! the bla&k body in

order to make this su!!ering isible and intelligible. 9et, i! this iolen&e

&an be&ome palpable and indignation &an be !ully aroused only through

the maso&histi& !antasy, then it be&omes &lear that empathy is double-

edged, !or in making the other:s su!!ering one:s own, this su!!ering is

o&&luded by the other:s obliteration. 17C

It:s worth repeating the lessons o! &ultural historians' that the Bla&k e3perien&e is

a ;phenomena without analog< KenoeseCE that ;natal alienation< is a &onstituent

element o! slaery @attersonE >artmanCE that Bla&k people are so&ially deadE and natal

alienation endows the spe&ies with a past but not a heritage @attersonC. +here!ore, een

i!, through the i&ono&lasm o! be&oming toward death, the analysand dismantles his

monuments, een i! he de&onstru&ts his heritage, he will still e3ist in a relation to

heritage, howeer de&onstru&ted, and it is the possibilit" of heritage itself, a li!e o! not

magneti=ing bullets /artinot and 2e3tonC, a li!e o! &ontingent rather than gratuitousC

iolen&e, whi&h diides his spe&ies !rom those with a li!e o! gratuitous iolen&e. By

si!ting through the ob"e&t &hoi&es o! his meaning-!ull heritage, rather than a Bla&k and

1#%


52/53


sense-less past, he &omes to assume his desire where he is the goal o! !ull spee&hC. But

though where he is may not be where he began in his relationship be!ore heteropathi&

identi!i&ation with Bla&knessC to his ;&ontemporaries,< it is indeed een more intensely

where he began in his relationship to Bla&ks.

Conclusion

nti-Bla&kness mani!ests as the monumentali=ation and !orti!i&ation o! &iil so&iety

against so&ial death. ;6ar&issism &an be de&onstru&ted in pursuit o! sub"e&tiity but &iil

so&iety remains strengthened.uman patriar&hy. But, as Fanon so iidly warns, White suprema&y:s

and >umanism:s !oundations are alsobuilt on a grid o! iolen&e, where positions o!

&ontingent iolen&e are diided !rom positions o! gratuitous iolen&e !rom the slae

positionC. >ere two kinds o! ;spe&ies< are produ&ed and =oned beyond the pale o! spee&h.

+he so&ial distin&tion between Whites or >umansC and Bla&ks &an be neither assessed

nor redressed by way o! signi!ying pra&ti&es alone be&ause the so&ial distin&tion between

li!e and death &annot be spoken. ;It is impossible to !ully redress this pained &ondition

1#(
http://0.0.0.0/http://0.0.0.0/


53/53


without the o&&urren&e o! an eent o! epi& and reolutionary proportions* the

destruction of a racist social order< my emphasisM >artman C. In li!e, identi!i&ation is

limited only by the play o! endless analogies, but death is like nothing at all. @erhaps

psy&hoanalysis and the promise o! !ull spee&h are not ready !or the end o! the world.

1#

the narcissistic slave

Documents

iolene o

ensemble o

tehnologies o

aresult o

agrammar o

hegemony o

world o

uropeanenslaement o