i happen to agree. here's a fragment from a discussion on pen-l. i hope louis doesn't mind it being reproduced here. {i like lacoue-labarthe too, but i think nancy has done some more interesting work)
cheers, angela
From: rc&am <rcollins at netlink.com.au>
Thu 4:34
Subject: [PEN-L:1414] Re: Re: Enlightenment insight
To: pen-l at galaxy.csuchico.edu
hi all,
a slightly different take on the pomo stuff...
Louis Proyect wrote:
> Derrida was a reaction against the notion that
> there were any kind of intrinsic "structures" in history or society.
well, i think derrida was a very good student of kant's and hegel', in the sense that he showed, time and again, how kant and hegel could not escape the dialectic or the antinomies. he merely applies this to various other theorists, like levi-straus, etc. of course, derrida himself fails miserably, because he cannot think beyond the inter-relations of the categories to history, which is different from History in his version of the world. about a decade ago, i made a bet with a derridean friend that derrida would never confront marx head on, despite (or i think perhaps because of) the fact that derrida's fan club across the atlantic thought he was an instrument against marxism, which, he most likely was. (i lost the bet, but i think i won the money - more on this below)
a case in point: i think the US version of deconstruction, which subsequently contracted into the outgrowth known as anti-foundationalism (or pragmatism) is perhaps one of the most conservative things about, and deserves as much scorn as can be heaped upon it.
notwithstanding this, there is a distinctly marxist turn in french deconstruction (eg. jean-luc nancy) which occurred before derrida's recentish book on marx, and should not be easily dismissed, even if it contains many problems.
> The
> postmodernists simply extend this analysis and take it in a direction that
> people like Derrida were uncomfortable with. Hence, his "Spectres of Marx".
> What made him uncomfortable obviously was the sort of idiocy that
> Baudrillard indulged in.
baudrillard is supposed to make people uncomfortable, though i agree he is an idiot. (but then, i could never really understand why many french professors thought jerry lewis and walt disney were geniuses - this may explain the drivel
of 'america')
> The basic problem with both the post-structuralists and the postmodernists
> is that they reject the fundamental premises of historical materialism.
> There are no "lessons" in history, they argue. This belief makes
> revolutionary action impossible, because Marxism is predicated on the
> belief that there is a continuing pattern in history, namely the class
> struggle.
well, i don't happen to think there are any 'lessons from history' either, in the sense of unmediated deliveries from some transcendental plane; but maybe you are not talking in these terms.
in any case, i would have thought that the problem with 'spectres of marx' is quite of a different order: namely, in an entire book on ghosts and haunting (which is interesting in only the most banal of ways), not once does derrida confront or think through marx's central critical concept: surplus value. at least spivak had a go. but derrida can't even begin to think through this stuff because he wants to avoid the materiality of marx's use of things like 'spectre' and haunting and reification and objectification, etc as related concepts. so, he does marx a big disservice whilst pretending that he has in fact dealt with marx. i also thought his stuff on deconstruction being the equivalent to perestroika was one of the stoopidest and arrogant things i had read for a long time.
derrida is not an idiot, so i can only think he is determined to avoid a discussion of surplus value because it would make his naff read of ghosts look silly and it would also jeopardize his fan club in the US.
> Voltaire was for enlightened rule over the sans-culotte. He is to the
> French Revolution as the Kadets were to the Russian Revolution. The minute
> the masses got out of hand, they lined up with the Crown.
too true.
all the best,
angela