[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Theattempts to find again under the assumed innocence of the mosthavoc which he wreaks in the language of the community isunsophisticated relationships, the profound alienation which thisabsolute for him, it fills his assignment to the brim: he must liveinnocence is meant to make one accept.The unveiling which itthis assignment without any hope of going back or any assumptioncarries out is therefore a political act: founded on a responsibleof payment.It is forbidden for him to imagine what the world willidea of language, mythology thereby postulates the freedom of theconcretely be like, when the immediate object of his criticism haslatter.It is certain that in this sense mythology harmonizes with thedisappeared.Utopia is an impossible luxury for him: he greatlyworld, not as it is, but as it wants to create itself (Brecht had fordoubts that tomorrow's truths will be he exact reverse of today'sthis an efficiently ambiguous word: Einverstandnis, at once anlies.History never ensures the triumph pure and simple ofunderstanding of reality and a complicity with it).something over its opposite: it unveils, while making itself,unimaginable solutions, unforeseeable syntheses.The mythologistThis harmony justifies the mythologist but does not fulfil him: hisis not even in a Moses-like situation: he cannot see the Promisedstatus still remains basically one of being excluded.Justified by theLand.For him, tomorrow's positivity is entirely hidden by today'spolitical dimension, the mythologist is still at a distance from it.negativity.All the values of his undertaking appear to him as actsHis speech is a metalanguage, it 'acts' nothing; at the most, itof destruction: the latter accurately cover the former, nothingunveils - or does it? To whom? His task always remainsprotrudes.This subjective grasp of history in which the potent seedambiguous, hampered by its ethical origin.He can liveof the future is nothing but the most profound apocalypse of therevolutionary action only vicariously: hence the self-consciouspresent has been expressed by Saint Just in a strange saying: 'Whatcharacter of his function, this something a little stiff andconstitutes the Republic is the total destruction of what is opposedpainstaking, muddled and excessively simplified which brands anyto it.' This must not, I think, be understood in the trivial sense of:intellectual behaviour with an openly political foundation'One has to clear the way before reconstructing.' The copula has an('uncommitted' types of literature are infinitely more 'elegant'; theyexhaustive meaning: there is for some men a subjective dark nightare in their place in metalanguage).of history where the future becomes an essence, the essentialdestruction of the past.Also, the mythologist cuts himself off from all the myth-consumers, and this is no small matter.If this applied to aparticular section of the collectivity, well and good.29 But when a157 158 One last exclusion threatens the mythologist: he constantly runs for some time yet always to speak excessively about reality.This isthe risk of causing the reality which he purports to protect, to probably because ideologism and its opposite are types ofdisappear.Quite apart from all speech, the D.S.19 is a behaviour which are still magical, terrorized, blinded andtechnologically defined object: it is capable of a certain speed, it fascinated by the split in the social world.And yet, this is what wemeets the wind in a certain way, etc.And this type of reality must seek: a reconciliation between reality and men, betweencannot be spoken of by the mythologist.The mechanic, the description and explanation, between object and knowledge.engineer, even the user, 'speak the object'; but the mythologist is1condemned to metalanguage.This exclusion already has a name: it Innumerable other meanings of the word 'myth' can be citedis what is called ideologism.Zhdanovism has roundly condemned against this.But I have tried to define things, not words.it (without proving, incidentally, that it was, for the time being,2avoidable) in the early Lukacs, in Marr's linguistics, in works like The development of publicity, of a national press, of radio, ofthose of Benichou or Goldmann, opposing to it the reticence of a illustrated news not to speak of the survival of a myriad rites ofreality inaccessible to ideology, such as that of language according communication which rule social appearances makes theto Stalin.It is true that ideologism resolves the contradiction of development of a semiological science more urgent than ever.In aalienated reality by an amputation, not a synthesis (but as for single day, how many really non-signifying fields do we cross?Zhdanovism, it does not even resolve it): wine is objectively good, Very few, sometimes none.Here I am, before the sea; it is true thatand at the same time, the goodness of wine is a myth here is the it bears no message.But on the beach, what material foraporia.The mythologist gets out of this as best he can: he deals semiology! Flags, slogans, signals, sign-boards, clothes, suntanwith the goodness of wine, not with the wine itself, just as the even, which are so many messages to me.historian deals with Pascal's ideology, not with the Pensees in3themselves.30The notion of word is one of the most controversial in linguistics.I keep it here for the sake of simplicity.It seems that this is a difficulty pertaining to our times: there is as4yet only one possible choice, and this choice can bear only on twoTel Quel, II, p.191.equally extreme methods: either to posit a reality which is entirely5permeable to history, and ideologize; or, conversely, to posit aOr perhaps Sinity? Just as if Latin/latinity = Basque/x, x =reality which is ultimately impenetrable, irreducible, and, in thisBasquity.case, poetize.In a word, I do not yet see a synthesis between6ideology and poetry (by poetry I understand, in a very general way,I say 'in Spain' because, in France, petit-bourgeois advancementthe search for the inalienable meaning of things).has caused a whole 'mythical' architecture of the Basque chalet toflourish.The fact that we cannot manage to achieve more than an unstable7grasp of reality doubtless gives the measure of our presentFrom the point of view of ethics, what is disturbing in myth isalienation: we constantly drift between the object and itsprecisely that its form is motivated [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl matkasanepid.xlx.pl
.Theattempts to find again under the assumed innocence of the mosthavoc which he wreaks in the language of the community isunsophisticated relationships, the profound alienation which thisabsolute for him, it fills his assignment to the brim: he must liveinnocence is meant to make one accept.The unveiling which itthis assignment without any hope of going back or any assumptioncarries out is therefore a political act: founded on a responsibleof payment.It is forbidden for him to imagine what the world willidea of language, mythology thereby postulates the freedom of theconcretely be like, when the immediate object of his criticism haslatter.It is certain that in this sense mythology harmonizes with thedisappeared.Utopia is an impossible luxury for him: he greatlyworld, not as it is, but as it wants to create itself (Brecht had fordoubts that tomorrow's truths will be he exact reverse of today'sthis an efficiently ambiguous word: Einverstandnis, at once anlies.History never ensures the triumph pure and simple ofunderstanding of reality and a complicity with it).something over its opposite: it unveils, while making itself,unimaginable solutions, unforeseeable syntheses.The mythologistThis harmony justifies the mythologist but does not fulfil him: hisis not even in a Moses-like situation: he cannot see the Promisedstatus still remains basically one of being excluded.Justified by theLand.For him, tomorrow's positivity is entirely hidden by today'spolitical dimension, the mythologist is still at a distance from it.negativity.All the values of his undertaking appear to him as actsHis speech is a metalanguage, it 'acts' nothing; at the most, itof destruction: the latter accurately cover the former, nothingunveils - or does it? To whom? His task always remainsprotrudes.This subjective grasp of history in which the potent seedambiguous, hampered by its ethical origin.He can liveof the future is nothing but the most profound apocalypse of therevolutionary action only vicariously: hence the self-consciouspresent has been expressed by Saint Just in a strange saying: 'Whatcharacter of his function, this something a little stiff andconstitutes the Republic is the total destruction of what is opposedpainstaking, muddled and excessively simplified which brands anyto it.' This must not, I think, be understood in the trivial sense of:intellectual behaviour with an openly political foundation'One has to clear the way before reconstructing.' The copula has an('uncommitted' types of literature are infinitely more 'elegant'; theyexhaustive meaning: there is for some men a subjective dark nightare in their place in metalanguage).of history where the future becomes an essence, the essentialdestruction of the past.Also, the mythologist cuts himself off from all the myth-consumers, and this is no small matter.If this applied to aparticular section of the collectivity, well and good.29 But when a157 158 One last exclusion threatens the mythologist: he constantly runs for some time yet always to speak excessively about reality.This isthe risk of causing the reality which he purports to protect, to probably because ideologism and its opposite are types ofdisappear.Quite apart from all speech, the D.S.19 is a behaviour which are still magical, terrorized, blinded andtechnologically defined object: it is capable of a certain speed, it fascinated by the split in the social world.And yet, this is what wemeets the wind in a certain way, etc.And this type of reality must seek: a reconciliation between reality and men, betweencannot be spoken of by the mythologist.The mechanic, the description and explanation, between object and knowledge.engineer, even the user, 'speak the object'; but the mythologist is1condemned to metalanguage.This exclusion already has a name: it Innumerable other meanings of the word 'myth' can be citedis what is called ideologism.Zhdanovism has roundly condemned against this.But I have tried to define things, not words.it (without proving, incidentally, that it was, for the time being,2avoidable) in the early Lukacs, in Marr's linguistics, in works like The development of publicity, of a national press, of radio, ofthose of Benichou or Goldmann, opposing to it the reticence of a illustrated news not to speak of the survival of a myriad rites ofreality inaccessible to ideology, such as that of language according communication which rule social appearances makes theto Stalin.It is true that ideologism resolves the contradiction of development of a semiological science more urgent than ever.In aalienated reality by an amputation, not a synthesis (but as for single day, how many really non-signifying fields do we cross?Zhdanovism, it does not even resolve it): wine is objectively good, Very few, sometimes none.Here I am, before the sea; it is true thatand at the same time, the goodness of wine is a myth here is the it bears no message.But on the beach, what material foraporia.The mythologist gets out of this as best he can: he deals semiology! Flags, slogans, signals, sign-boards, clothes, suntanwith the goodness of wine, not with the wine itself, just as the even, which are so many messages to me.historian deals with Pascal's ideology, not with the Pensees in3themselves.30The notion of word is one of the most controversial in linguistics.I keep it here for the sake of simplicity.It seems that this is a difficulty pertaining to our times: there is as4yet only one possible choice, and this choice can bear only on twoTel Quel, II, p.191.equally extreme methods: either to posit a reality which is entirely5permeable to history, and ideologize; or, conversely, to posit aOr perhaps Sinity? Just as if Latin/latinity = Basque/x, x =reality which is ultimately impenetrable, irreducible, and, in thisBasquity.case, poetize.In a word, I do not yet see a synthesis between6ideology and poetry (by poetry I understand, in a very general way,I say 'in Spain' because, in France, petit-bourgeois advancementthe search for the inalienable meaning of things).has caused a whole 'mythical' architecture of the Basque chalet toflourish.The fact that we cannot manage to achieve more than an unstable7grasp of reality doubtless gives the measure of our presentFrom the point of view of ethics, what is disturbing in myth isalienation: we constantly drift between the object and itsprecisely that its form is motivated [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]