a golden oldie...
how about making stuff up, getting caught at it, and then making more stuff up in defense of the earlier made up stuff, was a time when such a person would be recognized as a liar (perhaps a pathological one), but then this guy is just lame... mh
> * Subject: Zizek on Lafitte & Marx by way of Jameson
> * Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 12:56:15 -0700
In an appendix to last essay of _The Metastases of Enjoyment_ (Verso, 1994) that the author calls 'A Self-Interview,' Slavoj Zizek writes following (pp. 194-195):
> "...Perhaps the most interesting feature of Derrida's approach to Heidegger
> is the way he 'combines the incompatible' - here Derrida is postmodern in
> the best sense of the term. As Fredric Jameson pointed out, one of the key
> features of the 'postmodern sensitivity' consists in bringing face to face
> entities which, although contemporary, belong to different historical epochs.
> "One of the mythical figures of the old American South is the pirate Jean
> Lafitte: his name is associated with his and General Andrew Jackson's
> defence of New Orleans, with the buccaneer romantic, and so on - what is
> less well known is that in his old age, when he retired to England, Lafitte
> made friends with Marx and Engels, and even financed the first English
> translation of the *Communist Manifesto*. This image of Lafitte and Marx
> walking together in Soho, a nonsensical short circuit of two entirely
> different universes, is eminently postmodern. What Derrida does to
> Heidegger is, in a way, quite similar: he often brings Heidegger face to
> face with the 'vulgar', 'ontic' problematic - he links the Heideggerian
> gift of *es gibt* with the 'economic' problematic' of the gift in Marcel
> Mauss..."
Beyond obvious: all analogies are suspect and some more so than others, isn't above spurious use of Jameson (or does no such use exist anymore when nothing is genuine)? Where is 'postmodern sensitivity' found in J? As Zizek describes it, this condition appears to be the pastiche of film like *Body Heat* with its 1930s/1980s motif. If, for sake of discussion, that is accurate association, how is it applicable to Lafitte-Marx anecdote? Moreover, is anecdote - admittedly interesting - true (or should that not be concern anymore when nothing is true)?
I was in New Orleans recently where the specter of Jean Lafitte is everywhere - parks, businesses, restaurants, a town, etc. are named after him. Seems he died in 1820s (there is some debate as to whether this was in 1826 or 1829) in Yucatan peninsula of Mexico. In other words, he never retired to England, he never befriended M&E, he never financed *CM*.
Now, perhaps, we have encountered what Greg Ulmer calls 'mystory', collection of set of elements gathered together temporarily in order to represent nexus of history, politics, language, thought, etc. (_Teletheory: Grammatology in the Age of Video_). And maybe anecdote is akin to Michael Ryan's fictional artist Fiona Burns in his essay *Neo-Political Art After Post-Modernism* (_Politics and Culture: Working Hypotheses for a Post-Revolutionary Society_) that explores boundary between materiality and culture. Or maybe readers have taken something that Zizek made up to be historically accurate. After all, he doesn't present anecdote as fictional truth (or should that be truthful fiction?) nor does he cite source. Perhaps reason that few people know about Lafitte-Marx relationship is that one never existed and only Soho stroll two made together was in Z's head.
>*Re: SZ responds to MH
>*Wed May 17 19:30:15
> Slavoj Zizek - or "Slavoj @i`ek" as his email header says - writes in
> response to Michael Hoover's critique:
> >My God, people REALLY must hate me?!?! First, Jameson EXPLICITLY mentions
> >such non-contemporary contemporary encounters as paradigmatically
> >postmodern. Second point apropos of Lafitte, the guy DIDN´T DO HIS
> >HOMEWORK. In every GOOD biography of Marx or Lafitte you find this fact!!!
> Doug
Above is response? Gee, that clarifies things. What's up with the personalizing? I don't know Slavoj Zizek, how can I either hate him or like him? And words in all-caps (e-mail shouting), guy must have been having a bad day.
Re. Jameson, Z simply repeats what he wrote in _The Metastastes of Enjoyment_ that I cited in previous post. Ain't no flies on him! But ok, ok, been quite some time since I read FJ so maybe I'll revisit him.
And 'speaking' of revisiting, just now did so with number of Marx biographies (of varying quality) that I read over the years and not one mentions Jean Laffite.
These works include: Isaiah Berlin, _Karl Marx: His Life and Environment_ John Lewis, _The Life and Teaching of Karl Marx_ Jerrold Siegel, _Marx's Fate: The Shape of a Life_ David McCllelan, _Karl Marx: His Life and Thought_ Heinrich Gemkov, _Karl Marx: A Biography_ (translated from German) Progress Publishers (multiple authors), _Karl Marx: A Biography_ (translated from Russian by Yuri Sdobnikov) Robert Payne, _Marx_ Saul Padover, _Karl Marx_ Franz Mehring, _Karl Marx: The Story of his Life_ Joel Carmichael, _Karl Marx: The Passionate Logician_ Maximilien Rubel & Margaret Manale, _Marx Without Myth_
As above is not exhaustive list, perhap lister/s could direct me to 'good' biography that includes Laffite-Marx relationship.
As for biographies ('good' or otherwise) of Lafitte, well, they're apparently bit hard to come by (I found mostly secondary source materials intended for 'young adults' and biographical novels). Most scholarly work I came across was James Ramsay, _Jean Lafitte: Prince of Pirates_ (1996). No mention of Marx in any of the books. Maybe someone could suggest reading?
There exists book entitled _The Journal of Jean Lafitte_ published in late 1950s. Purportedly, Lafitte faked his death in 1820s, changed his name, moved to new area and wrote memoirs that he requested not be released for 100 hundred years after his death (which is claimed to be 1854). But questions exist about who wrote this journal: Jean Lafitte in guise as John Lafflin, possible descendent of Lafitte named John Lafflin with access to family documents as well as fertile imagination, well-known 19th century forger John Lafflin who concocted the story (hey, this is starting to get kinda postmodern!). In any event, book's authenticity is subject of controversy.
A Jenifer (not typo, only 1 'n') Marx (what is chance! this pomo stuff is fun!) wrote book entitled _Pirates and Privateers of the Caribbean_ (1992). Book is poorly referenced, has few citations, and said citations are partial. In any event, she has couple of pages on Lafittee ostensibly based upon 'recent research' (her words), none of which she cites. She writes that Lafitte (known as Lafflin) went to Europe in 1847 where he attended some secret revolutionary meetings. He returned to states with copies of some writings by Marx & Engels, whom he had met. His father-in-law, in turn, sent copies to Abraham Lincoln, then a young congressman. Author concludes by saying that Lafitte-Lafflin may have helped finance publication of the *Communist Manifesto*, not that he did so as Slavoj Zizek claims. Her source (as well as that of Rodger Kamenetz who wrote piece at web-site Michael Perelman posted about) is probably _The Journal of Jean Lafitte_ given that it presents same story.
I looked at Marx & Engels _Collected Works_ for years from mid- 1840s to early 1850s for references to Jean Lafitte and came up empty. Both mention Jacques Lafitte (French banker and liberal politician who briefly headed government in 1830-31). And Jenny Marx (in 'Short Sketch of an Uneventful Life" from _Reminiscences of Marx_) notes attending Jacques Lafitte's 1844 Paris burial. Marx was in London for brief time at end of 1847 where he met, among others, Chartist George Julian Harney, who in 1850, published first English translation - by Helen Macfarlane - of *Communist Manifesto* in journal _Red Republican_ (in which M&E were identified for first time as CM's authors). Perhaps, if he were alive, Lafitte was in London at that time and met Marx. Of course, if Jenifer Marx is correct, then he was using name Lafflin. Would he have divulged his real identity? Meanwhile, Slavoj Zizek's Laffitte-Marx anecdote indicates that former 'retired to England', claim that neither _The Journal of Jean Lafitte_ nor Jenifer Marx makes. Did someone say something about homework... Michael Hoover