Enemies of Mimetic Essence: Lacoue-Labarthe As we can see, Derrida clearly regards mimesis as representation, although mimetic representation has no. Deleuze and Lacoue-Labarthe on the Reversal of Platonism: The Mimetic Abyss. David Lane. Among Friedrich Nietzsche’s many daring philosophical declara-. Renaissance world, as Lacoue-Labarthe suggests) and has nothing to do with the role of mimesis in musical expression. It concerns, rather, a question of.
|Published (Last):||28 July 2004|
|PDF File Size:||4.75 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||17.38 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Find it on Scholar. Print Save Cite Email Share. The second, intertwined with the first, is in fact instrumental in stimulating the rigor with which the first develops. Mimesis in the works of Derrida and Girard plays a decisive role. Lacoue-Labarthe is a philosopher and a comparatist in the highest sense of the word, and the lacoue-labarte of his knowledge and the rigor of his thought are exemplary.
Morality comes into play when the process of mimesis reaches a rivalistic stage. And when we consider mimesis in art, there is always an element of exclusion of the supplement, of that which is different and lacks a clear reference to previous art. Philippe Lacoue-LabartheChristopher Fynsk.
Plato Pursued: Mimesis, Decision, and the Subject – Fordham Scholarship
John Protevi – manuscript. Thus Derrida is preoccupied with originality. When this self-effacement becomes too dominant, it seems to stem from academic rivalry. On the other hand, there is enormous scope within the deconstructionist project for destructing the philosophic and theological tradition, even for attempting to deconstruct the metaphysics of the humanistic sciences as a whole. The supplement mi,esis, in certain expressions, be seen as the original. Stagings of Mimesis an Interview.
Philippe Lacoue-Labarthesubjectal lossliteraturemimesisrepresentationpresentationphilosophysubject. But this book is much mimwsis than a collection of essays: For Girard this would mean imitation without any engendering, which again would mean no mimesis.
In this respect mimetic theory is branded metaphysical and in need of having its own concept of mimesis deconstructed. Like Deleuze, Derrida sees the repetitive elements in writing, not as producing likeness, but as producing something different. In this respect mimesis is supplemental in nature. The act of miming an example of primitive doubling is far from the Girardian concept of an essential mimesis — as it is totally conscious.
Desistance by Jacques Derrida. In the late 20 th century, continuing into the 21 st century, however, lacoue-labadthe seems to be a tendency to reject anything which smacks of imitation.
Philosopher, literary critic, translator of Nietzsche and BenjaminPhilippe Lacoue-Labarthe is one of the leading intellectual figures in France. Philosopher, literary critic, translator of Nietzsche and BenjaminPhilippe Lacoue-Labarthe is one of the leading intellectual figures in France.
Desire in Derrida’s thinking does not seem to be so decisive that representation becomes secondary, which is the case in Girard’s work.
Also, acts of imitation among some modern literary critics seem to be seen as something one can freely adopt and which differs from the original.
Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe, Typography: Mimesis, Philosophy, Politics – PhilPapers
Girard, as a religious thinker, considers reality as basically something lacoue-pabarthe priori and attainable, while Lacoue-Labarthe clearly sees reality as something construed, claiming that maintaining the religious means the denial of representation, as this denial is belief. They are critical of the belief in an inner wisdom, or inner revelation, which may be attained from outside the act of imitating.
Mimesis on the Move: Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in FSO for personal use for details see www. Representation and the Loss of the Subject. Contents Desistance by Jacques Derrida. The essence in every repetition is, according to Deleuze, lacouf-labarthe difference.
While Girard concentrates on the exclusion lacoue-labatrhe the victim, Derrida concentrates on the exclusion of writing. But here there seems to be a certain ideological difference: In this respect there is a scapegoating of the new, the different, which, through mimetic shifts, changes and acquires new forms. Derrida has, according to Girard, substituted the trace for being, in the Heideggerian sense.
In this respect writing is a consequence of violence, becoming a trace back to the sacred violence. Representation is something that comes much later in human history. Daniel Hoolsema – – Critical Horizons 5 1: