Critchley on Tragedy

Tilburg Philosophy Summer School – ‘On the Tragic and its Limits’

A Seminar with Simon Critchley | July 12-21, 2011

Is the tragic an adequate category for thinking about the nature of contemporary conflicts, and their cycles of revenge, violence and claims to justice and state legitimacy? Was 9/11 a tragedy? Is the Israel/Palestine conflict tragic? Iraq? Afghanistan? The list goes on.

What is the nature of the tragic and what is questionable in its constant invocation in the contemporary world? What is the availability of the tragic for us, as an aesthetic genre, a mode of experience and a critique of the present? Are we perhaps approaching the limits of the tragic?

These are some of the general questions that will guide this second Tilburg Summer School. Based in a close, constant, but critical attention to the texts of Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides, we will examine philosophical appropriations and misappropriations of the tragic in Plato and Aristotle. We will also consider the function of the tragic in a number of modern thinkers, such as Rousseau, Hoelderlin, Hegel, Schelling, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Benjamin and Schmitt. Attention will also be paid to the nature of modern tragedy in Shakespeare, Ibsen and Beckett.

A persistent and common concern will be the question of violence in relation to the constitution of the state and legality and the stakes of a critique of violence in relation to the possibility of a provisional anarchism.

Update: further details here; original source here.

Posted in Conferences, Simon Critchley | 1 Comment

Pocock, Barbarism and Religion

Update 2015: all six volumes have now been published; volumes 1-5 in paperback; 6 earlier this year in hardback.

This is a  work of jaw-dropping ambition and erudition. J.G.A. Pocock, Barbarism and Religion, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Four Volumes to date, 1999-2005.

I was aware of this before, but only today did I take it off the shelf. Given what I said about my intent to write a book about a book – in my case Foucault’s History of Sexuality – Pocock’s project is a cautionary tale. I don’t mean it shouldn’t be done, but that if it is to be done, this is the standard by which things might be judged, though I can’t even begin to see it as something to aspire to. It is an intellectual history of Edward Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Pocock says that “Barbarism and Religion is not a contribution to the historiography of the Roman empire, but to that of European culture in the eighteenth century” (Vol I, p. 1).

What’s remarkable about it, from my initial look, is that Pocock doesn’t actually begin reading Gibbon’s book until Vol III, p. 419. He begins that volume as far back as Tacitus, outlining the centuries of intellectual context that allow us to make sense of Gibbon. Along the way there are discussions of Appian, Orosius, Augustine, Otto of Freising, Machiavelli, Lipsius, Montesquieu, Hume and many others. And that’s just the third volume. Volume I is a history of the first thirty years of Gibbon’s life, setting out the path and context to make sense of his first prospectus for his book, especially in terms of the Enlightenment. Volume II is a series of accounts of other authors who wrote grand scale histories in this period before Gibbon – including Voltaire, Hume, Adam Smith and Adam Ferguson. The aim is to see how Gibbon continues or differs from their practices. Vol IV offers a monumental analysis of how barbarism was conceived at the time, to make sense of what Gibbon does with the category. Volume V is forthcoming later this year, and is intended to do the same for religion; Vol VI for Europe will follow.

From some of Pocock’s comments it’s clear that he doesn’t know how many volumes there will be in total. He says at the end of Volume IV that he will provisionally end his study in 1781, when Gibbon completed his third volume. Gibbon took a year off before continuing, completing the sixth volume in 1787. For Pocock 1781 is thus “a moment at which to pause and consider his achievement”, but while “the reader need not feel obliged to look further… the author does not rule out a continuation of the journey” (p. 342). Pocock was already in his mid 70s when the first volume came out, over a decade ago.

I’ve long realised that what little use I make of Gibbon in my work on territory will be as a secondary source on some of the events I do discuss, since Gibbon tells us so much about his own time and its preoccupations that to do it justice would require reading it as a text of the eighteenth century. Obviously that’s what Pocock does; but it’s outside the temporal limits of my book. But I can’t help wondering if Pocock’s account will come to be looked at as telling us as much about twentieth and twenty-first century practices in the history of ideas as it tells us about its ostensible subject.

Posted in Edward Gibbon, J.G.A. Pocock | 1 Comment

Foucault, Territory, etc.

Over at Philosophy in a Time of Error, Peter Gratton responds to my update on Chapter One from a couple of days ago. Peter mentions the piece I published on Foucault’s ‘Society Must Be Defended’ back in 2002. That piece, and certainly the 2007 piece on the two governmentality courses ‘Governmentality, Calculation, Territory’, were really the collision of two projects. One is the history of the concept of territory that I am now finishing up. The other is a book I still intend to write on Foucault. At the moment this is under the draft title of Foucault’s Last Decade: A History of the ‘History of Sexuality’. I’ve published several pieces about the lecture courses, and some of the collaborative projects Foucault worked on during the 1970s, with a view to using these together as the basis for a book. It’s a book about a book. It’s not the next book, but my plan is that it is the one after that.

Posted in Michel Foucault, My Publications, The Birth of Territory | 2 Comments

Wendy Brown lecture

This happened a while ago, and I knew it was on You Tube, but the Vimeo is better as it is complete instead of in several parts. It’s a lecture by Wendy Brown at Centre for Citizenship, Identities and Governance at the Open University – with responses by Raia Prokovnik and me, and then a quite extensive discussion.

Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, dozens of walls have been erected between and within nation-states. Why? What are these walls doing–materially, performatively, symbolically? What is their relationship to the erosion of state sovereignty? What is the nature of state and popular investments in them, especially when they don’t ‘work’?

Posted in Boundaries, Territory, Wendy Brown | 1 Comment

Chapter One

Chapter One is now in pretty good shape. The issue of word length has meant that I’ve been fairly minimal in terms of what I have added.

The chapter begins with readings of Greek myths of autochthony, drawing on a range of sources – Plato, Euripides, Isocrates, Thucydides, Homer, Heraclitus, Apollodorus, Hyginus, Pseudo-Eratosthenes, Strabo, Aristophanes, Sophocles… Of contemporary writers, I probably draw most on Nicole Loraux. One bit I did add – on the suggestion of Veronica della Dora – was a paragraph on the founding of Alexandria, a story that is told in Plutarch, Arrian and Pseudo-Callisthenes. This is where Alexander is marking out the bounds of this new polis, but has no chalk to do so. So his soldiers suggest that they use the barley from their rations to mark it out. The story is that the birds from the nearby lagoon swooped down and ate the meal. The soothsayers said this would mean not simply that the city would have enough for itself, but could also provide for the neighbouring lands.

The chapter then moves through a longer discussion of Sophocles’ Antigone – which draws in part on a piece I published some time ago on Judith Butler’s Antigone’s Claim – and a discussion of Kleisthenes’ urban reforms of Athens. That too draws on previously published material – here. The next two sections are readings of Plato’s Laws and Aristotle’s Politics, before a concluding section on the polis as site and community. More of this chapter is previously published than any other, but since it was also the oldest material (dating back to a summer at the University of Virginia in 2001) it needed quite a lot of stylistic work.

Chapter Two – on Ancient Rome – should hopefully present less work, since I finished the draft in February this year. Although I did a lot of work on that chapter back in 2006, it took me much longer to work out what I was trying to argue in that chapter so I didn’t begin the actual drafting until autumn 2009.

Posted in The Birth of Territory | 2 Comments

Red Quill Books

Early days, but Red Quill Books looks like an interesting publishing venture. Have a look at their mission statement, for instance.

Consciousness Raising:  We are committed to disseminating critical academic works to a mass readership in formats that are accessible and that raise awareness and promote political engagement. 

Ecology: We aim to build a sustainable and Green publishing house. Our processes are digital with minimal supply-chain waste.  We are an on-demand producer of books, which also ensures our books are never out of print.

Community:  We will be offering academic prizes and graduate research grants to support the next generation of critical scholars.  We seek to actively promote future critical scholarship. 

…the literary proletarian… who fabricates books… under the direction of his publisher, is a productive labourer; for his product is from the outset subsumed under capital, and comes into being only for the purpose of increasing that capital.      

Karl Marx, Theories of Surplus Value I

Posted in Karl Marx, Publishing | 1 Comment

Roundup – Cuts, Leaks and Harvey on Method

K-Punk – Mark Fisher, author of the excellent Capitalist Realism -has an impassioned piece about the UK cuts here.

Over at Open Geography, Jeremy Crampton discusses the new Wikileaks documents.

And David Harvey’s lecture on Marx’s method is available here.

Posted in David Harvey, Jeremy Crampton, Politics | Leave a comment

Irnerius

In the talk today I will use this image for the first time. It was one I stumbled upon in a book about Philipp Melanchthon (briefly mentioned here). To date this is the best version I have – a scan from the book. There are colour versions of details here and here.

The painting is of the Roman jurist Irnerius, who was one of the first glossators of the Roman law in the eleventh century. It’s a remarkable image for all sorts of reasons, but I particularly like the way that there is a background of a city, landscape and armies, with a priest blessing the troops as they prepare to go to battle. This is the background to the legal work Irnerius is doing in the foreground.

And yet, it is the work of Irnerius and those who followed him (notably Bartolus and Baldus) that provides the basis for the politics of land and conflict that are taking place at the same time. The lawyers are working on behalf of kings and cities, and the influence of their work continues into later legal theorists such as Francisco de Vitoria – who discussed the Spanish conquest of the new world – and Hugo Grotius in his work on the rights of war and peace.

So far I’ve found it difficult to source a better quality colour image of the whole scene – although I have some friends helping out. The painting is by Luigi Serra, and is on the ceiling of one of the rooms of the Palazzo d’Accursio in Bologna.

Posted in Baldus de Ubaldis, Bartolus of Sassoferrato, Francisco de Vitoria, Hugo Grotius, Irnerius, Philipp Melanchthon, The Birth of Territory | 1 Comment

University of Washington seminar

Tomorrow I give my first talk of this North America trip, at the University of Washington. Details here. There will be an informal lunch with postgraduates first, discussing the ‘Land, Terrain, Territory’ paper forthcoming in Progress in Human Geography. Although the audience should be broader at the talk, the paper leads nicely into it so it may allow me to shortcut some of the windup and get straight to the detail.

Posted in Conferences, My Publications, The Birth of Territory | Leave a comment

China Miéville’s ‘Letter to a progressive Liberal Democrat’

China Miéville reacts to the cuts, and particularly Liberal Democrat complicity. Strong stuff, and strong language, here.

Posted in China Mieville, Politics | 1 Comment