Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
10
thisisnotwhattheseauthorsareafter.Althoughtheirworkoughtnotto
bediscussedintermsofmeaningorsignification,itcanstillbesaidthat
theyarenotinterestedinovercomingmeaning(allscenariosofovercom-
ingareinseparablyinvolvedwiththevaluestheywanttoovercome),but
inwhatwemightcalltheothersideofmeaning,itselusivegroundand
resources.
Theappropriateanalyseswillfollow,butaproblemthatremainstobe
consideredispreciselytheirveryappropriateness.Onecanask:whenart
hascrossedtherampartsofthepolityofmeaning,whatcanbethetaskof
criticism?Isthereany?Afterall,interpretationisalsotheproductofthe
“cosmic”societyand,fromtimesimmemorial,hasalwaysdealtin“objec-
tive”meanings.Soifwecannot,indiscussingCelan,BeckettandNauman,
providemeaninginitspropersense,interpretationmayseemtobe(strictly
speaking)impossible.This,however,doesnotnecessarilymeanthatcriti-
cismhasnothingtosayaboutmeaninglessness.InAestheticTheoryAdorno,
clearlyreferringtoBeckett,writes:“Thenon-objectivestatusofinterpreta-
tiondoesnotdeliverusfromit,asthoughtherewasnothingtointerpret.”10
AndinthefamousessayonEndgameheadds:“Understandingitcanonly
meanunderstandingitsunintelligibility,concretelyreconstructingthemean-
ingofthefactthatithasnomeaning.”11Butisthisnotareturntoideal-
istprinciples?Adorno,tryingtointerpretthemimeticrefusaloftheplay,
seemstobespeakingonceagainaboutassigningmeaningtomeaningless-
ness.This,however,isnotexactlytrue–andthecruxofthematterliesin
theword“concretely.”12
TheworldofEndgameisaworldthathasbeenshatteredintoshards–the
frameofreferencewasdestroyedandwhatboththecharactersintheplay
andtheinterpreterareleftwitharetheconcreteparticularsofanalarm-
clock,toy-dog,ladder,pap,etc.Afterthestorieshavecometotheirendwe
areleftwiththeconcretematerialityoftheirdiscourse,withtheremainder
thatremainsafterthematisationhasbeenexhausted.13This,however,does
notallowusthemetaphysicalcomfortofmeaninglessnessbecauseBeckett’s
meaninglessnessisnotabsolute(meaninglessnesstreatedastheuniversal
stateofthingsdoesnotessentiallydiferfromtheIdea)butispresentedto
usasaproductofthematerial(thatis,incarnated)historyofthought:what
Beckettdoesistodemonstratehowmeaningdefeatsitselfonthewaytosig-
nification.ThusAdornoagain:
10TheodorW.Adorno,AestheticTheory,trans.C.Lenhardt(London:Routledge&Kegan
Paul,1984),p.40.
11TheodorW.Adorno,NotestoLiterature,vol.1,trans.S.WeberNicholsen(NewYork:
ColumbiaUniversityPress,1991),p.243.
12MyshortdiscussionoftheBeckett-AdornoconnectionisindebtedtoSimonCritchley,
VeryLittlełAlmostNothing:Death,Philosophy,Literature(London:Routledge,1997).
13JacquesDerrida,“<Thisstrangeinstitutioncalledliterature’:aninterviewwithJacques
Derrida,”inActsofLiterature,ed.DerekAttridge(London:Routledge,1992),p.61.
