Re: [OPE-L] Derrida's ghosts

From: Jerry Levy (Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Fri Oct 28 2005 - 09:04:53 EDT

> The ghost as a cipher of iteration is particularly suggestive. At the
> beginning of Specters of Marx, Derrida talks about the way in
> which the anticipated return of the ghost may be mobilized on
> behalf of a deconstruction of all historicisms that are grounded in a
> rigid sense of chronology.
> 'Haunting is historical, to be sure', he writes, 'but it is not dated, it
> is never docilely given a date in the chain of presents, day after day,
> according to the instituted order of the calendar
> .' The question of the revenant neatly encapsulates deconstructive
> concerns about the  impossibility of conceptually solidifying the past.
> Ghosts arrive from the past and appear in the  present. However, the
> ghost cannot be properly said to belong to the past, even if the
> apparition represents someone who has been dead for many
> centuries, for the simple reason that a ghost is  clearly not the same
> thing as the person who shares its proper name. Does then the
> 'historical'  > person who is identified with the ghost properly belong
> to the present?  Surely not, as the idea of  a return from death
> fractures all traditional conceptions of temporality.
> The temporality to which  the ghost is subject is therefore paradoxical,
> as at once they 'return' and make their  apparitional debut. Derrida has
> been pleased to term this dual movement of return and inauguration
> a 'hauntology', a coinage that suggests a spectrally deferred non- origin
> within grounding  metaphysical terms such as history and identity."
> (Buse & Scott, 1999, p.10-11)

His is a conception of temporality, I think,  which is inconsistent with
_both_  temporalist _and_ simultaneous conceptions of value.  Perhaps
Derrida would have said that both TSS and SSS are locked into the
confines of "traditional schoilarship"?

In solidarity, Jerry

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Oct 29 2005 - 00:00:05 EDT