8/13/2019 Nancy Bataille http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nancy-bataille 1/12 The Impossible Sacrifice of Poetry: Bataille and the Nancian Critique of Sacrifice Author(s): Elisabeth Arnould Source: Diacritics, Vol. 26, No. 2, Georges Bataille: An Occasion for Misunderstanding (Summer, 1996), pp. 86-96 Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1566299 . Accessed: 05/11/2013 06:56 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 content in 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]. . The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Diacritics. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 194.117.18.99 on Tue, 5 Nov 2013 06:56:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
The Impossible Sacrifice of Poetry: Bataille and the Nancian Critique of Sacrifice
Author(s): Elisabeth ArnouldSource: Diacritics, Vol. 26, No. 2, Georges Bataille: An Occasion for Misunderstanding(Summer, 1996), pp. 86-96Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1566299 .
Accessed: 05/11/2013 06:56
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
content in 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].
.
The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Diacritics.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 194.117.18.99 on Tue, 5 Nov 2013 06:56:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
When, at the very centerof his InnerExperience,Bataillearrivesat whathe calls the
uppermostxtremityof non-meaning, estagesforusoneof theprincipal cenes of his
sacrificeof knowledge. tdepictsRimbaud, urninghis back on his works,makingthe
ultimateand definitive sacrifice of poetry.This scene, which complementstwo other
representationsof the supplice of the experience-the crucifixion of God and the
oncomingmadnessof Hegel-rounds out thetriplesacrificialvocation of anexperienceof nonknowledge,at once a-theological, a-gnoseological, and a-poetological. t
extendstopoetryand anguage he criticalandsovereign mperativeof anexperience hat
can only be called inner nsofar as it renouncestruth,knowledge, and, ultimately,
speech.What exactly, however,does this sacrificial renunciationof words representfor
of abook thatwouldbeannulledbyan mmolationof speech?Indeed,whymakethisfinal
supplice -a sacrificeof wordsperformedanddedicated to nothing -into the core
of the book's interior apture?sn't thisfigureof deathand silence incurablyequivocal?Does it not attribute he traditional raitsof a nothingness o this rapturous eart of
finitude that Bataille always wanted to designate as the impossible object of his
experience?And is it not,therefore, ondemned o appropriate,hrough hisrepresenta-tion, the nonmeaningof a finitude that Bataille, far from conceptualizingas simple
first to point out the problematic nature of the sacrificial model in Bataille's
conceptualization f finitude.AccordingtoNancy,sacrifice, ncluding heself-sacrifice
of Rimbaud o importantoBataille, s the vehicle of an ontotheological ppropriation.And it is throughsacrificethatBataille's reflectionon finitudeattempts o domesticate
death whileclaiming
to abandon t to theaporetic
enunciationof anonknowledge.I shall thus examine the problematic igure of poetry's self-sacrifice in order to
Beforeelucidating hemeaningandfunctionof thisfigure n thespecificcontextofInner
Experienceandquestioning ts possible duplicity,one mustexaminethe generalnotion
uponwhichit is modeled.Poetry'sself-sacrifice s the consummate orm' of asacrifice
that we find in the form of stagingsand commentaries n Bataille's work.As is well
known,thequestionof sacrificehasalwaysoccupieda centralplaceinBataille'sthought.He hasnotonlystudied hisprotean thnologicalphenomenonwe call sacrifice but has
also wantedto give sacrifice,beyond traditional ontotheological nterpretations nd
recent anthropologicalreconstructions,a meaning that far exceeds these restricted
determinations. acrificeis notsimply,forBataille,a theoreticalobject.A paradigmaticmanifestationfthesacredand tstransgressions,t marks ather limittoconceptualizationandconstitutesastumblingblock tothought.As such,it is, forBataille-or, ashe himself
maintains, for all thought-the locus of an interruption.Cross-culturally,sacrifice
delineates the limit thoughtcomes up againstwhen it faces what it cannot think.
As the negationof ourcorporealandintellectual imits, as the bloody excess that
eruptsbefore the fascinatedeyes of a spectator,sacrifice represents, or Bataille,simultaneouslydeath andinterruption.t is this interruptionhathe proposesas amodel
for his a-theological eflection andwriting.It is thesameinterruptionhatpracticallystructures heentiretyof theexperienceof nonknowledge,since each andeveryform of
thisexperience-mystic, erotic,orpoetic-is definedassacrifice:be it thesacrificeof the
profaneworld,of women'sbodies,orof words.InBataille,sacrificeperforms hetask of
something ike anabsolutecomparative,unifyingunder ts nameall empiricalvariations
of the experience;and it is difficultto find, in all of Bataille'swork,a moreexemplarymodel.
Sacrifice is unquestionably he most prominentmodel in Bataille's thinking offinitude. But it is also, if one acceptsNancy's allegations,themost problematic.While
that the characteristicvalorization Bataille grantsto the finite and cruel moment of
immolation n hisrethinkingof sacrifice does nothingbutrepeat,by simplyinverting ts
valence,theclassicalinterpretationf anoccidentalsacrificethatconceives itself as the
ideal sublationof this samemoment.
The philosophicaland Christianversion of sacrifice is understoodas the spiritualtransformationf a sacrificialmomentthefinite natureof which it denounceseven as it
appropriatests power.The Bataillianversion,on the contrary, nsists upon this finite
moment in order o escapethe dialecticalcomedythattransforms acrificeintoanideal
process.Performedn the name of spiritual ebirth,hesacrifices of Plato andChrist, or
instance,reappropriateeathby transfiguringt as resurrection.Grotesqueandrepletewithhorrors,death nBatailleappearsaloneonastagewhosecruelty s neitherexplainednor redeemedthrough ransfiguration. hus,Bataille withholdsnothingfrom the scene
of sacrificebutlets it emergein thefullness of its amorphousviolence.He valorizes itssanguinaryhorrornorder odenounce he dialectic dealizationof adeathnothingshould
domesticate.He exhibits it as it is :opaque,silent,andwithoutmeaning.
According oNancy,however,thevalorization tselfremainscaught nthesacrificial
logic of the idealist tradition.For, he argues, only in light of its ontotheological
conceptualizationansacrificebecome at oncethe nfiniteprocessofdialecticalsublationand theblood-spatteredmomentthisprocessbothnegatesandsublates,simultaneously
1. Consummateacrifice is the termBataille chooses todesignatea completesacrificethat
opposes itsperfectand total immolation opoetry's incompleteorpartialdestructionof words.
diacritics / summer 1996 87
This content downloaded from 194.117.18.99 on Tue, 5 Nov 2013 06:56:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
of the infinite truthof resurrection-it still does nothingbutrepeat ts ontotheologicalscheme.For it also pretends o find,on thecruelstageof sacrifice,a singularandmore
real ruthof death.The stage of the torment s, for Bataille,thatplace where death
appearswith the full strengthof a nonmeaning hat can be exposed only throughthe
immolationof the sacrificial victim. If this is so, then should we not supposethat this
immolationpretendingo give us the inappropriable ruthof death'srapture ppropri-atesinits turn he excess of the excessive meaningof thisrapture?Does it not transform
its excess intoan excessivetruth, o be sureanegativeone,thoughnoless absolute han
thephilosophicalandspiritual ruths o which it opposes itself?At the heart of modern theories of sacrifice is thus, as Nancy puts it, a
transappropriationf sacrifice by itself, even when, as is the case for Bataille, this
theorytries to overcomesacrifice'sspiritualoperation hroughanexcessive andvolatile
negativity.As soonas sacrificethinks tself as revelation,be it thatof a spiritualbeyondorits negativecounterpart,t remainsa sacrifice n thenameof its own transcendence,
loopholeto a finitudepowerlessto think tself in termsother thanthose of a revelation:
therevelationof aclearor obscuregod, symbolof resurrection r of death's blindhorror.
If one wants to think finitudeaccording o a model differentfromthatof its sacrificial
appropriation, ne should think apart rom sacrifice. If finitudeis, as Bataille hashimselfwanted othink,an accesswithoutaccess toamomentof disappropriation, hen
we mustalso call it unsacrificeable Nancy30].Jean-LucNancygrants hatBataillewas conscious of thefailureof asacrificewhose
Let us return o this figure.To betterunderstandhe context of its sacrifice, t is now necessary o recallwhat is
for Bataillethe experiencewhose most nearlyextrememanifestations representedbyRimbaud's elf-immolation.The inner xperience, ccording o the definitiongivenby
the book bearingthis name, respondso the necessityin which I find myself-humanexistence with me-of challenging everything(of putting everythinginto questionwithoutpermissiblerest ( r6pondAa n6cessit6oi je suis - l'existencehumaineavec
moi----demettre outencause(enquestion)sansreposadmissible ) IE3;El 15].By wayof an incessant contestation, t answers hewill toreach thisepistemologicalnothing-nesswhichforms the brinkof knowledgeand to which thefinitudeof existenceexposesus. It is thus with the unknown hatthe Bataillianexperience attempts o engage an
encounter. tsempty nterioritys what hedisparateormsof itsrapturelaughter,poetry,
mysticismandsacrifice)would like to be able to bring orth.It is easy toguess,however,
that this unknown, which resists thinking and its discourses, similarly resists all
88
This content downloaded from 194.117.18.99 on Tue, 5 Nov 2013 06:56:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
its discursiveorsensorialrapturemaybe. The unknown s never manifest. It does not
offer itself as suchto whomeverwishes to seize it. Bataille, n fact,is not even interested
in the unknown. Rather,heis interestednthemysteryof itsmechanism,nwhatpersistsas witness oits withdrawal.t s,onecouldsay,theknowledgeand, neffect,nonknowledge,of the unknown, non-savoir, hatmakesup whatBataille calls the experience.(This
experiencehasnothing odo with the Sartreanxperience, he existentialexperiencethat
comes toknowand oknowitselfby wayofself-production:tisnot theexperiencewhose
existenceproduces ts essence.)Rimbaud's sacrifice of poetry is the answerof the Bataillianexperience to this
paradoxof an unknown mpervious o anyformof experience.Everyothermodalityof
experiencethat Bataille proposesin InnerExperience s unable to preserve ts alterity.
Mysticismsubordinatestsraptureo therevelationof a divinefoundation, heimagesof
poetry give too familiara form toits mystery,anderoticismalwaysends up limitingits
desiretotheconjugalpossessionof itsobject.Theinnerexperienceandtheprimaryormsof its raptureare insufficient. Their initial sacrifice remains all too partialsince it
conserves-in its mystic, poetic, or erotic destructionof meaning-the possibility of
enunciating hemeaningof thisdestruction. tis thusnecessary oimagine,withBataille,a second sacrifice, a sacrifice to the second degree, able to present,in its repeatedimmolation,the abolitionof the meaningof destruction till conservedin the initial
sacrifice. Such a sacrifice, which Bataille calls a sacrifice in which everythingis a
victim ( unsacrifice oii tout est victime )[IE 152;El 175],is thatof Rimbaud, urninghis backonpoetry:sacrificing heverypossibilityof enunciating speaking,articulating)
his sacrifice.This versionof a sacrificewithoutreserve of speechis thustheabstract quivalent
of the cruel sacrifice Bataille is wont to presentas the authenticversionof sacrificein
general.If Batailleusuallyfocuses his gazeuponthesacrificialmomentwhenthe blood
of the victimbearswitness to therealityorfinitudeof death,heinsistshere,analogically,
uponthepainof the Rimbaldian enunciation. tis thispainthattestifiesto theauthentic
characterof the poetic death and its silence. And for its part, it is this silence that
verbalized.But theprivilegegiventothesilent and ethalefficacyof asupposedly total
sacrifice must be interrogated.The ambiguityof this sacrificewithoutreserve weighsuponall themodalities of
the innerexperienceandbears rrevocablyuponalleffortstodesignatesomething ike an
effective ortruthful viridique)-that is, appropriable-characterof finitude.But,to be
entirelyclear,let usreformulate he dilemma:either hesacrificeof poetrydisappears o
completelyinits silence that t is nolongeranythingbutthecompleteabsence of thought
uniqueto what Hegel called abstractnegativity;or it conceptualizes tself in and as a
disappearance hat t accordinglydialecticizesand masters.Inthis secondalternative-
theonlysignificantonesince the first s,asHegel emphasized,merelyabstract:hinking's
aporia-death and its silence wouldhaveto, again,becomethe consciousness of their
owndisappearing.Yet whatdifference-outside ofasymmetrical eversion-could therebe between the subjectof metaphysicswho survives his own disappearanceand this
nocturnalsubject of the sacrificial experiencewhose true disappearance s also his
supremeaffirmation:his rebirth.
A moredetailedanalysisof InnerExperiencewoulddemonstratehow some of the
descriptionsBataillegives of theapparently total Rimbaldian elf-sacrificebetray ustsuchadialectics and tsnegativesacrificial ubject.Thevocabularyandagreatpartof the
thematic Bataille associates with Rimbaud's sacrificetestify to it. Bataille writes, for
example,of what he calls Rimbaud' virile decisionandgoes on to saythatthisdecision,
chooses its own death.He finallyaddsthat this voluntarydeath is the conditionof self-
rebirth see El 53]. In this topical oppositionbetween virile decisiveness andfeminine
passivity, in this decisive, voluntarydeath of self-sacrifice presentingitself as the
condition of a rebirth, t is difficult not to hearthe echoes of the voluntarismdistinctive
of themetaphysicalsubject
whose decisionism transforms oss into rebirth and thus
accomplishesthe dialectical taskof his own mastery.But if finitude thus appropriatestself in a self-sacrificethatreveals its truth, f it
becomes its own subject, how can we, once again,make a difference between the
philosophical,Christian ersionof sacrificeand hemodernBataillian nterpretation? o
theynot entertain he samegoal: masteryof theunthinkable xcess of finitude?And do
theynot bothpretend o manifesta truthof theexperienceof nonknowledge:a truth hat
is, on the one hand,thatof an ideal or divine resurrectionand,on the other,a purelyimmanentbut nonethelesspresentable ealityof death?
The figureof a self-immolatingRimbaudand the innerexperience t embodiesare,
intentionallyornot,analogous ndesignandpurpose o theontotheological iguresof theidealist and dialectical tradition.And this particular acrificialfigure is all the more
suspect in that it recasts and replays the much-talked-about sacrifice of poetryconstitutiveof theWesternphilosophical radition. tis scarcely necessary o remind he
reader hatthe emblematicscene of the birthof philosophy n theWest hastraditionallybeenrepresentedbothby the sacrifice of thepoetin thepublicsquareandthe legendarytale of self-sacrificedepicting young Platoburninghis poems. Now, Bataille, it would
seem,is merelyreproducinghese scenes. Hisversionresituatesheimmolationof poetryin the contextof a nonknowledge,but this new contextdoes not alter the fundamental
identity of the meaning and purpose of these sacrifices. Plato's sacrifices sought todemonstratehattruth, houghhidden, s accessiblethrough he sacrificialmachination
of a philosophicaldialectic.Similarly,Bataille reasserts hatfinitude,thoughabsent,is
Socrates nformedusthat, norder o obtain heideainitspurity, tmustfirstbeabstracted
from the verbiageof representationalalsificationby way of sacrificing hefalsifier,the
mimetician, o Bataille nformsusthatonlya sacrificeofpoetrywillallowtheexperienceto achieve the innervoid of its nonknowledge.
Hence,theexperienceseparatests inner ruth rom apoeticexteriority hatcould
only simulate, as Bataille himself often writes, itsabsence. And it is as this inner
presence-to-itself f absence presence-a-soide l'absence ) hatBatailleseems to be
conceptualizing initude. Finitude s the impossiblepresence hat one mustpreserveandpurifythrougharenewedsacrificeof meaning.How canwe thusavoidthinking hat
suchanexperience, ntentuponwresting ts finitude rom hebadrepetitionof amimesis,notonly misjudgesthenatureof finitudebut also the natureof a poetrywhose mimetic
imposture ouldactually,asNancysays,teachus a few thingsabout he impossible -or inappropriable -nature f finitude tself.
If thisanalysissupportsNancy's general ntuitionconcerningBataille'sambiguous
theoryof sacrifice,it also supportshis evaluationof Bataille'sthinkingon art.Nancy
asserts that Bataille has notbeen able to overcome the impasseof sacrificethroughhisreflectionon artsince this reflection s structured ccording o an idealsacrificialmodel.InInnerExperience,wherenotonlysacrificebutalsopoetry' valuearemeasuredagainstRimbaud'sself-sacrifice, this is indeed the case. Here, Bataillecontinues to measure
poetic efficacy accordingto the degree of its self-sacrificial truth.In so doing, he
2. JacquesDerrida in his articleonBataille entitled Del'dconomierestreinte lI'&conomiegendrale had alreadynotedthiscomplicityof theBatailliancritique of writingwithPlatonistic
writing.
diacritics / summer 1996 91
This content downloaded from 194.117.18.99 on Tue, 5 Nov 2013 06:56:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
thinkingpoetry-that is, a certain ypeof sacrifice,withoutcrueltyandwithouttruth-
as theaccesswithoutaccess to a momentof disappropriation Nancy30]. Itwouldlead
us too farastray,at thispoint,todevelopa carefulreadingof thisfigureandto showhow
its variousinstantiations upport his claim.However,a rapidglanceat the text already
gives clear indications that Bataille's poetics borrows most of its features from thetraditional dealist critiqueof poetry and its mimesis. The privilege, for example,accordedto silence in InnerExperience-to the immediacyof something like lived
experience,to ecstasy-is quite telling in thisregard. t gives credenceto the argumentthat Bataille reenactsthe classical gestureof denouncing poetry,indeed, all forms of
imitation,asextraneousandthuscontingentwithrespect o theinner ruthof whichtheyaremeresimulacra.The book of theexperienceaboundswithpassagesopposingtrueand
of poetry is the dialectical condition of philosophy's ascendance.Here, however, in
Bataille,it is the sacrificialrebirthof theexperienceof nonknowledge o whichit gives
way. Finally,we oughtto pointoutthat theprivilegeaccorded o silence thatstructures
Bataille'sentirecontestationof poetry s so essential that t providesboththemodel andthemeof theexperienceandofthe bookoftheexperience.ForBataillehasrefused,despite
thenecessary iterary haracter f thebook,togiveapoeticmodel totheinnerexperience.Marredby contestation,literatureand poetry are accordedonly a minor role. It is
Thus,poetryappears orBatailleas the restricted art lapartrestreinte ) f an
experiencethatcould,in its purity,do without t. Itonlyappends tself to its rapture nd
separatesrom tselfanexperience hat s authentic nlyin itsself-sacrificialpresentationof silence anddeath.In thisrespect, heBatailliancontestation f poetrydoes nothingbutecho the mostancientrumorsof thetradition.Andthenegativefigureof Rimbaud'sself-
sacrifice,which grounds ts critique,canonly be thoughtas the very representionof an
ontotheologicalexperienceof finitude.
But,onceagain,thingsare notso simple.TheyareforBataille atonce less equivocalandmuchmoreambiguous.ThefigureI havepresentedupto now as anideal illustrationofthe impossible might reveal itself to be less a figureof the impossible, that is, asubstantialpresentation f anexperienceof nothingness,andmorea figureof impossi-bility ( figured'impossibilit6 ),presenting, ogetherwithits ontotheological nterpre-tation,the structural ndecidabilityof its sacrifice. Itwouldbe easy to demonstrate hatBataille quickly refuses to ascribemeaning to Rimbaud'sself-sacrifice. I could, for
example,examineotherpassagesof the Supplice TheTorment ),n whichBatailleconteststhevoluntarism f Rimbaud's enunciation-the voluntarismwe saidsupporteda dialecticalinterpretationf Rimbaud'sgesture-to interprett insteadas a weakness
[seeE164,65]. But itis moreeconomical nthisinstance,giventhenecessarysketchinessof the demonstration,o turndirectlyto a section of the book entitled Digressionon
3. Thisassertionneedsofcourseto benuanceda bitsinceBatailleisfarfromblindlyacceptinga mysticalmodel or his innerexperience.Frommysticism,Bataillewantsto keeponlytheexcess
of itsrapture.He categoricallyrefusestherevelation hatthisraptureultimatelybringsandgrantsonlya mixedvalue to its silence. Itremainstrue,however,that thesubstitutionof a mystical or a
poetic model ofexperience
indicates arefusalof writing
andmimesis,
which isambiguouslytraditional.
92
This content downloaded from 194.117.18.99 on Tue, 5 Nov 2013 06:56:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
PoetryandMarcelProust Digressionsur a po6sieet MarcelProust ) IE 135-52; El
156-75], wherethetreatment f thisfiguredifferssubstantially.Wecansee herenotonlya refusalto ascribemeaningto Rimbaud's self-sacrificebutalso an overturningof the
sacrificial ogic andof the poetics it seems to inaugurate.4In the
Digression,he
figureof Rimbaud s, once
again,presentedas
exemplary.It is thus offeredup,as are all the figuresof the Nouvelleth6ologiemystique, o a sort
of imitatio.Earlierin the section, the readerwas asked to imitate the torment of the
crucifiedgod to betterunderstand,hrough his new and radicalversionof the imitatio
christi,therapturous poriaof a new mystical a-theology. He is askedatpresent withthe same aporeticpurpose)to imitate the momentof the poetical ammasabachtani
where thedesperate rucifixionof wordsdefines the impossible aws of anewpoetics.Rimbaud'sadieu to poetry,its dedicationto the aporiaof the impossible, '5hus
outlinesfor Bataille henew field of a modernpoetics.As heasserts nthe Digression,Rimbaudhas extended he possible f poetry y suppressingt orhissuccessors.
No poetof todaywho claims to have heardandunderstoodRimbaud's arewelltopoetrycancontinue osimplywritepoetry.Hemust, nhiswriting, ake ntoaccountRimbaud's
the imperativeof its impossibility.But what does it mean: to heara silentcontestation and imitateits sacrificial
gesture?In whatdoes this imitationconsist?How can one write sacrificeor, for that
matter, heimpossibilityofwriting?Andhowcan oneimitateagesture hat,or so it seems,forever forbids all imitation?Whatcan it possibly mean, then,to imitatea sacrificethatwould be the annihilationof the instruments f imitationandthat would thuscondemn
Rimbaud'sposterity o apoeticsof silence andits absenttruth?Bataille answers hisdilemmabypresentingwoversionsof theimitatiopoetae.The
first, which he clearlycriticizes, is that of the Surrealists: t is, for Bataille, a clearlyontotheologicalrenderingof imitation,a version thatremainsessentiallyfaithfulto an
interpretationf the impossible as truthandto a traditional onceptionof poetry.Thesecond is the imitation f RimbaudbyProust:animitation hat s notreallyanimitation
but,rather,whatone could call animitationby excess, or theexcess of imitation,of an
impossible sacrifice. But let us first examine the Surrealist mitationof Rimbaud'ssacrifice.
TheSurrealists rethosewho,according
o Bataille, nepouvaient
suivreRimbaud,ils ne pouvaientque l'admirer couldnot follow Rimbaud; hey could only admire
him ) [IE148;El 171].OnemustbeattentiveheretowhatthesetermssayandrememberthatBataillehadpreviously, n Lavaleurd'usagede D. A. F. deSade 1929), criticizedthe Surrealists or theiradmiration f Sade. We will not examinethistext here,but it isuseful to notethat, nboth nstances, heobjectof Bataille'scritique s admiration: gazethatexemplifiesitsobjecttothepointof immobilization.ToadmireRimbaud' renuncia-tion orSade'sviolenceis todecideupon tsmeaninganddelimit tspower.Itis, asDenisHolliersaidwithgreatprecision, hypostasier'exces d'une violence that one can thus
4. It is importantomentionherethatthecontestationofthisfiguretakesplace ina digressionon poetry located at the heart of the most importantsection of the book, The New MysticalTheology ( Lanouvelletheologiemystique ). t is quitetellingthatthisnew theology,entirelybased on thehypothesisofa total and unrestrictedacrifice unsacrificeoi toutest victime ( a
sacrificein whicheverythings victim ),shouldhave,in its verycenter,thepoetic contestationofthefigure that was to guaranteeits truth.Thisstructuralanomalyrendersquiteimprobable hatinner experience'sstrict allegiance to a traditionalinterpretationof its self-sacrifice, and the
paradoxof its mise en abimecannot be neglected.5. Letusremember hatthisword,whichservesas thetitleofone ofthe mostimportantpoems
of Unesaison en enfer, became, or Bataille, the substitutenamefor the a-poetics or a-
poetology he tried to definealong withhis newmysticala-theologyin InnerExperience.
diacritics I summer 1996 93
This content downloaded from 194.117.18.99 on Tue, 5 Nov 2013 06:56:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
mettrehorsd'usage ( neutralize ) s well as mettre nr6serve save )[186]. This
first theoreticaloperationallowsthe Surrealistso ascribemeaningto impossibilityand
to reveal ahidden truth.Once this impossibility s determinedas the presentabsence
of a beyond,one candeclare ts idealpurity o be beyondthereach of allrepresentation
(itis indeedabsent),but one can alsoimitate ts sacrificial ruthmore orless faithfully(itis indeedpresent).WhatBataillecalls the holocaust f words L'holocaustedemots )
[IE 146;El 169] of the Surrealists retends obejustsuch a faithful mitation.Sacrificingwordsthrough heclashof thesurrealisticmage,it saysfarewell to ordinarymeanings,dedicatesconceptsandnotions osilence whilekeepingaliveandwell theexpression, he
wordingof thissilence.Surrealist oetrycan thushaveitbothways: t cansacrificewords
andyet wordthissacrifice.Itcanexpresstheimpossibleand be theliteral mitationof a
sacrifice thatwas to be literally mpossible: o be theliteralaffirmation f impossibility.This imitatiopoetae, which literalizes and imitatesRimbaud'sself-sacrifice and
which condemnspoetryto a kind of finalsolution, s not what Batailleadvocates.The
text of the Digression s unambiguouslycritical of the surrealist nterpretation fRimbaud's mmolation: he holocaust f words s not a true mitationof its sacrifice
of meaning. Insofar as it believes to be able to reserve and reproduce, o, in a word,
appropriatets excessof truth, t betrays his excess. And it is Proust,rather han the
Surrealists,who,withoutadmiringRimbaud, anfollow inhis footstepsandabandon he
excess of his sacrifice to a truthwithouttruth: hatof an imitationor writingwithout
guarantor r model.
For Proustby no means admiresRimbaud.He does not pretendto reproducehis
sacrifice and to have access to the singular, nimitable ruthof his renunciation.Onthe
contrary,he appears, n Bataille's text, as one who radically opposes himself to theRimbaldianself-sacrifice, since, far fromsacrificingpoetry,he sacrificeshimself for
poetry.The Proustian elf-sacrifice,however,does notsimplyopposeitself toRimbaud'sacrifice.It does notsimplyreduce t to anotherontotheologicalversion(abetter-known
one),wherethe author acrificeshismortality or theimmortality f thepoetic oeuvre.For Proust,Bataille claims, sacrifices himself for his work ( se sacrifie pour son
oeuvre ),but thiswork is itself sacrifice cetteoeuvre est elle-meme sacrifice )[IE151;El 175].What, hen, s themeaningof thisformula,andwhyshouldwe maintain hat
this is the point at which something like the excess of truth of the Rimbaldianand
Proustian elf-sacrificesexposes itself?Let us return o the statement: he works,that is to say, thegoddess to whom we
sacrifice s herselfsacrifice, earswepttothepointofdying cettedeesse'
laquellenoussacrifionsest elle-memesacrifice,larmespleur6esusqu't en mourir ) IE 151,transla-tionmodified;El 175].What arewe to make of this tautology?Whatdoes it mean to
performa sacrifice to sacrifice ?One usually sacrifices to a God, to an ideal. One
sacrifices,as Proustdid, to a work,to a meaninganda truth, n orderto producethat
meaningand thattruth.Accordingto thestrange autologyof anintentionanda gesturethat nevercoincide, to performa sacrificeto sacrificecan meannothingother than to
sacrifice for sacrifice.The sacrifice tosacrifice s a sacrificethatcan nevertakeplace,a
sacrifice hatperformstselfastheimpossibility,oras theindefinitelyheld-uppossibility,of its realization.To offer a sacrificeto sacrifice is also to sacrificesacrifice itself. Andthe self-sacrifice of Proust not only repeats Rimbaud's negating gesture but also
emphasizes ts nonmeaning.For this formulation learlyindicatesthatthis lastsacrificeis not held up to a sacrificialtruth,be it positive or negative, spiritualor immanent.Sacrificedoes not sacrifice to the revelationof its nothingness.It sacrificessimply to
sacrifice,to the indefiniteadjournment f its day of revelation.Like Rimbaud urningaway frompoetry,it, in the classical sense of the term,apostrophizes6 acrifice,turns
6. In classical Greek,apostrophemeant iterally toturnaway and wasused todesignatethemovementof the chorus.
94
This content downloaded from 194.117.18.99 on Tue, 5 Nov 2013 06:56:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
While concealing t,Proust husrepeats hetruthofRimbaud'sgesture.Heasserts,
onthe onehand, hatsacrifice s impossible, hat tisnothingbut anaccesswithoutaccess
to a momentof disappropriation, uthe also assertsthatthispowerlessandimpossibletruth s notthatof a suppressionof poetry.Rather, t is throughpoetry,the infinitequest( recherche ) f an effectivity of sacrifice,that is always already ost-past or yet to
come. Accordingly,one can say that Proust mitatesRimbaud,but he imitates him in a
sense thatmustbe distinguished romtheSurrealists'understanding f the term.Proust
presents he true ersionoftheimitatiopoetae:hepresentsapoiesis imitationior,better,a poiesisof imitation. ProustmitatesRimbaud r,rather, eobligesRimbaud o imitate
himself,obliges sacrificeto sacrifice,to imitate, tself andthusto adjourn heinevitable,the realizationof a hiddenorpotential ruth, n thenameof whatis merelypossible, or,what is the same, in the name of the impossibilityof fully achieving its potentialand
becoming its oeuvre. His is not a literal imitation of Rimbaud's immolation, not a
meta-,a sur-real,mmolation,as itmustbe for theSurrealists,whobelievethemselves na positionto copy the transmissible ruthof his holocaust.7Proust,rather,mimics thesimulacrum f theRimbaldian acrifice.Refusingtobelieve thatself-sacrificepossessesanythingbeyondtheinarticulate ecret of anexcess ordifference,he offers this sacrificetothe ncessantrepetitionof amimesisthatcanonlywrite tsconcealment. fsacrificecan,indeed,onlyaddress tsimmolation oitsownimpossibility,whatelse can tdo thanrepeata gesturethatasserts both its necessityand its uselessness,a gesturethatcan no longerdistinguishbetween its realityand its simulacrum,betweena realdeathandits poetic
rendition.8And if this sacrifice is nothingbut its own simulacrum,what can it do but
indefinitelywrite thetragicomicstoryand vainhopeof its end or vain hankering or itsorigin?
Proust thus writes the comedy andhopeless hope of sacrifice. He writes toward
Rimbaud;he writes toandawayfromRimbaud'ssacrifice.His quest( recherche ),heworkthatbears t, is thealwaysrenewed llusion of animmolation hatescapesandwhosefinite truthcan neverbe presented.There is no timeregained tempsretrouv6 )ofsacrifice.It is to be foundneither n silence nor in thewritingwhere it loses itself. Andthis loss of sacrificeasserts hat initude s, asNancydeemsit, unsacrificeable. initudecannotberevealed hrough hesacrificeof writing.Rather,tsontotheologicalrevelationcanbe concealedthrougha writing f sacrifice. It is only through hiswritingthatthe
inappropriable, r impossible, haracterof finitudecan emerge.
It is atthispoint nBataille'stext,theimitationof Rimbaud's elf-sacrificebyProust, hatthe traditionalogic of sacrifice and its accompanyingcriticismof poetryareupturned.Proust'sinterpretationf theRimbaldian elf-sacrifice,his writingof its impossibility,
7. In his critiqueofthe Surrealists see inparticularthe article 'La'vieilletaupe'et leprefixesurdans es mots'surhomme' t 'surr6alistes '), atailleidentifiedhesur nsurrealism sevidence
oftheiressentially meta -physicaleanings: theirfaith n thepossibilityoftheoreticallydepictingthe
experiential,of discoveringits
adequaterepresentation,metaphor,or
meta-articulation.8. InthelastsectionofInnerExperience,Batailleunderlines, nhiswritingplay, the ictitiouscharacterofall effective xperiencesofdeath. Byintroducing,for xample, nthevery astpagesof the book, a staging of his own death, whose purpose is, once again, to testify to a certain
authenticityof death-since thatdeath is the totalsacrifice of the bookand its author-Bataille
presentsthisstagingas a comedyentitled Pureand UltimateJestingofFever [157] ( Derniere
plaisanteriede lafivre [181]). Also, thisself-sacrifice,meanttopresenttheabsolutelyuniquecharacterof the inimitablemomentof death,is the exactpalimpsestof a textbyProustquotedinInnerExperience.Themostauthenticmomentof death is thus or Bataille the comic repetitionofa romanesqueandfictivedeath. It is neveruniqueandoriginal,anditspresentation s nothingbuttheperpetualrepetitionof its fiction, 'comedy,or imposture, which s,for Bataille,theonly
real characterof death.
diacritics / summer 1996 95
This content downloaded from 194.117.18.99 on Tue, 5 Nov 2013 06:56:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions