SEDUCT I ON

Cu l t ur eTex t s
Ar t hu r and Ma r i l ou i se Kroke r Gene r a l Ed i t ors

Cu l tureTexts is a ser i es of creat i ve exp l ora t i ons i n theory , po l i t i cs and cu l ture at the f i n-de -m i l l en i um . Thema t i ca l l y focussed a round key theoret i ca l deba t es i n the pos t mode rn cond i t i on , the Cu l tureTex t s ser i es cha l l enges rece i ved d i scourses i n ar t , soc i a l and po l i t i ca l theory , f em i n i sm, psychoana l ys i s , va l ue i nqu i ry , sc i ence and t echno l ogy , the body , and cr i t i ca l aesthe t i cs . Taken i nd i v i dua l l y , cont r i but i ons to Cu l tureTex t s represent the forward break i ng-edge of pos t mode rn theory and prac t i ce.

T i t l es
Seduc t i on

Jean Baudr i l l ard Ar thur Kroker , Mar i l ou i se Kroker and Dav i d Cook
L i f e Af t er Pos t mode rn i sm : Essays on Va l ue and Cu l ture Pan i c Encyc l oped i a

ed i t ed and i nt roduced by John Feke t e

Body I nvade rs

ed i t ed and i nt roduced by Ar thur and Mar i l ou i se Kroker

The Pos t mode rn Scene : Exc r emen t a l Cu l ture and Hype rAes the t i cs

Ar thur Kroker / Dav i d Cook

SEDUCT I ON

JEAN BAUDR I LLARD

t rans l a t ed by Br i an S i nger

New Wo r l d Pe rspec t i ves Cu l t ureTex t s Ser i es Mon t r ea l

COPYRIGHT NOTICE: Published by CTHEORY BOOKS in partnership with NWP and copyright, 2001, by CTHEORY BOOKS. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher, except for reading and browsing via the World Wide Web. Users are not permitted to mount this file on any network servers. Readers are encouraged to download this material for personal use. Commercial use with permission only.

First published as De la seduction by Editions Galilee, 1979. 9, rue Linne, Paris 5e. Editions Galilee English language copyright New World Perspectives, 1990 .

ISBN 0-920393-25-X Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data Baudrillard, Jean Seduction (CultureTexts series) Translation of: De la seduction. ISBN 0-920393-25-X 1. Seduction-Psychological aspects. (Psychology). 3 . Sex (Psychology) 4. 1 . Title. II . Series . BF637.S36133813 1990 2 . Femininity Postmodernism.z

CONTENTS
I NTRODUCT I ON I. THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX The Ec l ipt i c o f Sex The Eterna l I rony of the Commun i t y St ereo-Porno Seduc t i on / Produc t i on I I . SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES The Sacred Hor i zon of Appearances Trompe l 'oe i l or Enchan t ed S i mu l a t i on I ' l l Be Your M i r ror Dea th i n Sama rkand The Secre t and The Cha l l enge The Ef f i gy o f the Seduc t ress The I ron i c St ra tegy o f the Seducer The Fear o f Be i ng Seduced 53 60 67 72 79 85 98 119 3 12 28 37

I I I . THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON The Pass i on for Ru l es The Dua l , the Po l ar and the D ig i ta l The "Lud i c " and Co l d Seduc t i on Seduc t i on as Des t i ny 131 154 157 179

I NTRODUCT I ON
A f i xed des t i ny we i ghs on seduc t i on . For re l i g i on seduc t i on was a s t ra t egy o f t he dev i l , whe t he r i n t he gu i se o f w i t chc ra f t or l ove . I t is a l ways t he seduc t i on o f ev i l - or o f t he wo r l d. I t i s t he ve r y ar t i f i ce o f t he wor l d . I ts ma l ed i c t i on has been un changed i n e th i cs and ph i l osophy , and t oday i t i s ma i n t a i ned i n psychoana l ys i s and t he ` l i bera t i on o f des i re .' G i ven t he pr esen t -day p romo t i on o f sex , ev i l and pe rve rs i on , a l ong w i t h t he ce l ebr a t i on o f t he o f t t i mes progr amma t i c r esur r ec t i on o f a l l tha t was once accursed , i t m i gh t seem pa r adox i ca l tha t seduc t i on has r ema i ned i n t he shadows - and even r e t urned t he r e t o pe rmanen t l y. The e i gh t een t h cen t ur y st i l l spoke o f seduc t i on . I t was , w i t h va l our and honour , a cen t ra l pr eoccupa t i on o f t he ar i s tocra t i c sphe r es . The bourgeo i s Revo l u t i on pu t an end to th i s pr eoccu pa t i on ( and t he o t he rs , t he l a t er r evo l u t i ons ended i t i r revoca b l y - eve r y revo l u t i on , i n i ts beg i nn i ngs , seeks t o end t he seduc t i on o f appea r ances ) . The bourgeo i s e ra ded i ca t ed i tse l f to na t ur e and produc t i on , t h i ngs qu i t e f ore i gn and even express l y fata l to seduc t i on. And s i nce sexua l i t y ar i ses , as Foucau l t not es , f rom a process o f produc t i on (o f d i scourse , speech or des i re) , i t i s no t a t a l l surpr i s i ng tha t seduc t i on has been a l l t he mo r e cove r ed ove r . We l i ve t oday t he p romo t i on o f na t ure , be i t t he good na t ur e o f t he sou l o f yes t eryear , or t he good ma t e r i a l na t ure o f th i ngs , or even t he psych i c na t ur e o f des i re. Na t ur e pur sues i ts rea l i za t i on t hrough a l l t he me t amorphos i s o f t he r epr essed , and t hrough t he l i bera t i on o f a l l ene rg i es , be t hey

SEDUCT I ON

psych i c , soc i a l or ma ter i a l . Seduc t i on , however , never be l ongs to the order of na ture , but tha t of ar t i f i ce - never to the order of energy , bu t tha t of s i gns and r i tua l s . Th i s is why al l the grea t sys t ems of produc t i on and i nterpre ta t i on have no t ceased to exc l ude seduc t i on - to i ts good for tune - f rom the i r conceptua l f i e l d . For seduct i on cont i nues to haun t t hem f rom w i thout , and f rom deep w i th i n i ts forsaken state, threa t en i ng t hem w i th co l l apse . i t awa i ts the dest ruc t i on of every god l y order , i nc l ud i ng those of produc t i on and des i re. Seduc t i on cont i nues to appear to al l or thodox i es as ma l e f i ce and ar t i f i ce, a b l ack mag i c for the dev i a t i on of al l t ruths , an exa l ta t i on of the ma l i c i ous use of s igns , a consp i racy of s i gns. Every d i scourse is threa t ened w i th thi s sudden rever sibi l i ty, absorbed i nto i ts own s i gns w i thout a t race of meani ng. Th i s is why al l d i sc i p l i nes , wh i ch have as an ax i om the coherence and f ina l i ty of the i r d i scourse , mus t t ry to exorc i ze i t . Th i s is whe r e seduc t i on and f em i n i n i t y are con f ounded , indeed , con f used . Mascu l i n i t y has a l ways been haun t ed by thi s sudden revers i b i l i ty w i th i n the f em i n i ne . Seduc t i on and f emi n i n i ty are i ne l uc t ab l e as the reverse s i de of sex , : mean i ng and powe r. Today the exorc i sm is mor e v i o l ent and sys t ema t i c. We are ent er i ng the era of f ina l so l ut i ons ; for examp l e , tha t of the sexua l revo l ut i on , of the produc t i on and managemen t of al l l imi na l and sub l i m i na l p l easures , the m i cro-process i ng of des i re , w i th the woman who produces herse l f as woman , and as sex , be i ng the l ast ava tar . End i ng seduc t i on . Or e l se the t r i umph of a sof t seduc t i on , a wh i te , d i f fuse f emi n i za t i on and erot i c i za t i on of a l l re l at i ons i n an enerva t ed soc i a l un i verse. Or e l se none of the above. For no th i ng can be grea ter than seduc t i on i tsel f , not even the order that des t roys i t .

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX

No th i ng is l ess cer ta i n today than sex , beh i nd the l i bera t i on of i ts d i scourse. And noth i ng today is l ess cer ta i n than des i re , beh i nd the pro l i f era t i on of i ts i mages . In ma t t ers of sex , the pro l i fera t i on is approach i ng tota l l oss . He re l i es the secre t of the ever i ncreas i ng produc t i on of sex and i ts s igns, and the hyper rea l i sm of sexua l p l easure , par t i cul ar l y f em i n i ne p l easure. The pr i nc i p l e of uncer t a i nty has ext ended to sexua l reason , as we l l as po l i t i ca l and econom i c reason . The state of sex ' s l i bera t i on is a l so that of i ts i nde t erm i nat i on . No mor e want , no mor e proh i b i t i ons , and no mor e l imi ts : i t is the loss of every referent i a l pr i nc i p l e . Econom i c reason is sus t a i ned on l y by penury ; i t is put i nto ques t i on w i th the rea l i za t i on of i ts ob j ec t i ve , the abo l i t i on of the spec t re of penury. Des i re too is sust a i ned on l y by wan t . When des i re is ent i re l y on the s i de of demand , when i t is opera t i ona l i zed w i thout rest r i ct ions, i t l oses i ts i mag i nary and , there fore , i ts rea l i ty ; i t appears everywhere , bu t in genera l i zed s i mu l a t i on . I t is the ghos t o f des i re that haunt s the de func t rea l i ty of sex. Sex is everywhere , except in sexua l i ty (Bar thes) . In sexua l my tho l ogy , the t rans i t i on towards the f em i n i ne is con t emporaneous w i th the passage f rom de t erm i na t i on to genera l i nde t erm i na t i on. The f em i n i ne is no t subst i tut ed for the

6 SEDUCT I ON

mascu l i ne as one sex for another , accord i ng to some st ruc tura l i nvers i on . I t is subst i tut ed as the end of the de t erm i na t e represent a t i on of sex , as the f l otat i on of the l aw~tha t regu l a t es the d i f f erence be t ween the ' sexes . The ascent of the f em i n i ne cor responds to bo t h the apogee of sexua l p l easure and a catast rophe re l at i ve to sex ' s rea l i ty pr i nc i p l e . And so i t is f em i n i n i t y that is gr i pp i ng , i n the present and fata l s i tua t i on of sex ' s hyper rea l i xy - as i t was yesterday , but i n d i rect cont rast , in i rony and seduc t i on . F reud was r i ght : there is but one sexua l i ty , one l i b i do - and i t is mascu l i ne. Sexua l i ty has a st rong , d i scr i mi na t i ve st ruc ture cent ered on the pha l l us , cast rat i on, the Name -of - the Father , and repress i on . The r e is none other. The re is no use dream i ng of some non-pha l l i c , un l ocked , unma r ked sexua l i ty. The re is no use seek i ng , f rom w i th i n thi s st ructure , to have the f em i n i ne pass through to the other s ide , or to cross t erms . E i ther the st ructure rema i ns the same , w i th the f ema l e be i ng ' ent i re l y absorbed by the ma l e , or e l se i t co l l apses , and there is no l onger e i ther f ema l e or ma l e - the degree zero of the st ruc ture . Th i s is very much wha t is happen i ng today : erot i c po l yva l ence , the inf ini te potent i a l i ty of des i re , d i f ferent connec t i ons , d i f f ract i ons , l ibidi na l i ntens i t i es - al l mu l t i p l e var i ants of a l i bera tory a l terna t i ve com i ng f rom the f ront i ers of a psychoana l ys i s f ree of Freud , or f rom the f ront i ers of des i re f ree of psychoana l ys i s . Beh i nd the e f f ervescence of the parad i gm of sex , every th i ng is converg i ng towards the non-d i f f erent i a t i on of the st ruc ture and i ts pot ent i a l neut ra l i za t i on . The danger of the sexua l revo l ut i on for the f ema l e is tha t she wi l l be enc l osed w i th i n a st ruc ture that condemns her to e i ther d i scr i m i na t i on when the st ruc ture is st rong , or a der i sory tr i umph w i th i n a weakened st ruc ture . The f emi n i ne , however , is, and has a l ways been , somewhe r e e l se . Tha t is the secre t of i ts st rength . Just as i t is sa i d tha t some th i ng l asts because i ts ex i s t ence is no t adequa t e to i ts essence , i t mus t be sa i d tha t the f em i n i ne seduces because i t is never whe r e i t th i nks i t is, or whe r e i t th i nks i tse l f . The f em i n i ne is no t f ound in the h i story of suf f er i ng and oppress i on i mpu t ed

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX 7

to i t - women ' s h i stor i ca l t r i bu l at i ons ( though by gu i l e i t concea l s i tse l f there i n) . I t suf fers such serv i tude on l y when ass i gned to and repressed w i th i n thi s st ruc ture - to wh i ch the sexua l revo l ut i on ass i gns and represses i t al l the mor e drama t i ca l l y. Bu t by wha t aber rant comp l i c i t y (comp l i c i t w i th wha t? i f not , prec i se l y, the ma l e) wou l d one have us be l i eve tha t thi s is the fema l e ' s h i story? Repress i on is a l ready here i n ful l force , i n the nar ra t i ve of women ' s sexua l and po l i t i ca l mi sery , to the exc l us i on of every other t ype of st rength and sovere i gnt y. The re is an a l terna t i ve to sex and to power , one tha t psychoana l ys i s cannot know because i ts ax i oma t i cs are sexua l . And yes, thi s a l ternat i ve is undoub t ed l y of the order of the f emi n i ne , unders tood out s i de the oppos i t i on mascu l i ne / f emi n i ne , that oppos i t i on be i ng essent i a l l y mascu l i ne , sexua l in i ntent i on , and i ncapab l e of be i ng over turned w i thou t ceas i ng to ex i st . Th i s s t rength of the f em i n i ne is that of seduc t i on . One may ca t ch a g l i mpse of another , para l l e l un i verse ( the t wo never mee t ) w i th the dec l i ne of psychoana l ys i s and sexua l i ty as s t rong st ructures , and the i r c l eans i ng w i th i n a psy and mo l ecu l ar un i verse ( that of the i r f ina l l i bera t i on) . A un i verse that can no l onger be i nt erpre t ed in t erms of psych i c or psycho l og i ca l re l at ions , nor those of repress i on and the unconsc i ous , but mus t be i nt erpre t ed in the t erms of p l ay , cha l l enges , due l s , the st ra tegy of appearances - that is, the t erms of seduct i on . A un i verse tha t can no l onger be i nt erpre t ed i n t erms of st ruc tures and d i acr i t i ca l oppos i t i ons , but i mp l i es a seduc t i ve revers i b i l i ty - a un i verse whe r e the f em i n i ne is not wha t opposes the mascu l i ne , but wha t seduces the mascu l i ne . In seduc t i on the f em i n i ne is ne i ther a ma r ked nor an unma r ked t erm . I t does not mask the " au t onomy " of des i re , p l easure or the body , or of a speech or wr i t i ng that i t has supposed l y lost (?) . Nor does i t l ay c l a i m to some t ruth of i ts own. I t seduces. To be sure , one ca l l s the sovere i gnt y of seduc t i on f em i n i ne by convent i on , the same convent i on that c l a i ms sexua l i ty to be fundament a l l y mascu l i ne . But the i mpor t ant po i nt is that thi s f orm of sovere i gnt y has a l ways ex i st ed - de l i nea t i ng , f rom a d i stance , the f em i n i ne as some th i ng that is noth i ng , that is never

SEDUCT I ON

" produced , " is neve r whe r e i t is p roduced ( and ce r t a i n l y cannot , there f ore , be f ound i n any " f em i n i s t " demand ) . And th i s no t f rom t he pe rspec t i ve o f a psych i c or b i o l og i ca l b i -sexua l i t y , bu t tha t o f t he t rans -sexua l i t y o f seduc t i on wh i ch t he en t i re organ i za t i on o f sex t ends to re j ec t - as does psychoana l ys i s i n accordance w i t h t he ax i om tha t t he r e is no o t he r s t ruc t ure t han t ha t o f sexua l i t y (wh i ch r ende r s i t i ncapab l e , by de f i n i t i on , o f speak i ng abou t any t h i ng e l se) .

Wha t does t he women ' s movemen t oppose to t he pha l l ocra t i c s t ruc ture? Au t onomy , d i f f erence , a spec i f i c i t y o f des i re and p l easure , a d i f f eren t re l a t i on to t he f ema l e body , a speech , a wr i t i ng - bu t neve r seduc t i on . They a re ashamed o f seduc t i on , as i mp l y i ng an ar t i f i c i a l pr esen t a t i on o f t he body , or a l i fe o f vassa l age and pros t i t u t i on . They do no t unde r s t and tha t seduc t i on

represent s mas t e ry ove r the symbo l i c un i verse , wh i l e powe r represent s on l y mas t e ry o f the rea l un i verse. The sove r e i gn t y
o f seduc t i on is i ncommensu r ab l e w i t h t he possess i on o f po l i t i ca l or sexua l powe r. The r e i s a s t range , f i erce comp l i c i t y be t ween ' t he f em i n i s t movemen t and t he orde r o f t ru t h . For seduc t i on i s res i s t ed and re j ec t ed as a m i sappropr i a t i on o f women ' s t rue be i ng , a t ru t h tha t i n t he l as t i ns t ance i s t o be f ound i nsc r i bed i n the i r bod i es and des i r es . I n one s t roke t he i mmense pr i v i l ege o f t he f em i n i ne i s e f f aced : t he pr i v i l ege o f hav i ng neve r acceded to t ru t h or mean i ng , and o f hav i ng r ema i ned abso l u t e mas t e r o f t he r ea l m o f appea r ances . The capac i t y i mmanen t t o seduc t i on to deny t h i ngs t he i r t ru t h and t urn i t i nto a game , t he pur e p l ay o f appea r ances , and t he r eby fo i l a l l sys t ems o f powe r and mean i ng w i t h a me r e t urn o f t he hand . The ab i l i t y t o t urn appea r ances i n on t hemse l ves , to p l ay on t he body ' s appea r ances , ra ther t han w i t h t he dep t hs o f des i re. Now a l l appea r ances a re revers i b l e . . . on l y a t t he l eve l o f appea r ances a re sys t ems f rag i l e and vu l ne r ab l e . . . mean i ng i s vu l ne r ab l e on l y to enchan t men t . One mus t be i nc r ed i b l y b l i nd to deny t he so l e f or ce tha t is equa l and supe r i or t o a l l o t he rs , s i nce w i t h a s i mp l e p l ay o f t he s t ra t egy o f appea rances , i t t urns t hem ups i de down .

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX 9

Ana t omy is dest i ny , F reud sa i d . One m i gh t be surpr i sed that the f emi n i st movemen t ' s re j ec t i on of thi s de f i n i t i on, pha l l i c by de f i n i t i on, and sea l ed w i th the s t amp of ana tomy , opens onto an a l terna t i ve tha t rema i ns fundament a l l y b i o l og i ca l and anatom i ca l : Indeed , woman ' s p l easure does not have to choose be t ween c l i tora l act i v i ty and vag i na l pass i v i ty, for examp l e. The p l easure of the vag i na l caress does not have to be subst i tut ed for tha t of the c l i tora l caress . They each cont r i but e , i r rep l aceab l y , to woman ' s p l easure . Among other caresses . . . Fond l i ng the breasts, touch i ng the vu l va , spread i ng the l ips, s t rok i ng the post er i or wa l l of the vag i na , brush i ng aga i nst the mou t h of the uterus , and so on . To evoke on l y a f ew of the mos t spec i f i ca l l y f ema l e p l easures . Luce I r i garay Paro l e de f emme? Bu t i t is a l ways an ana tom i ca l speech , a l ways tha t of the body. Wha t is spec i f i c to women l ies in the d i f f rac t i on of the erogenous zones , in a decent ered erot i c i sm, the d i f fuse po l yva l ence of sexua l p l easure and the t ransf i gurat i on of the ent i re body by des i re : thi s is the t heme song that runs through the ent i re f ema l e , sexua l revo l ut i on , bu t a l so through our ent i re cu l ture of the body , f rom the Anagr ammes of Be l l mer to De l euze ' s mechan i zed connec t i ons . I t is a l ways a ques t i on of the body , i f not the ana tomi ca l , then the organ i c , erogenous body , the func t i ona l body that , even i n f ragment ed and me t aphor i ca l form, wou l d have p l easure as i ts ob j ec t and des i re as i ts na tura l man i f es t a t i on . Bu t then e i ther the body is here on l y a me t aphor (and i f thi s is the case , wha t is the sexua l revo l ut i on , and our ent i r t cu l ture , hav i ng become a body cu l ture , ta l k i ng about?) , or e lse, w i th thi s body speech , thi s woman speech , we have , very def in i te l y , ent ered i nto an ana tom i ca l dest i ny , i nto ana t omy as des t i ny. The re is noth i ng here rad i ca l l y opposed to Freud ' s max i m. Nowhe r e is i t a ques t i on of seduc t i on , the body wor ked by ar t i f i ce (and not by des i re) , the body seduced , the body to be

10

SEDUCT I ON

seduced , the body i n i ts pass i on separa t ed f rom i ts t ruth, f rom that e th i ca l t ruth of des i re wh i ch obsesses us - that ser i ous , pro found l y re l i g i ous t ruth that the body today i ncarna tes , and for wh i ch seduc t i on is just as ev i l and dece i t fu l as i t once was for re l i g i on . Nowhe r e is i t a ques t i on of the body de l i vered to appearances . Now , seduc t i on a l one i s rad i ca l l y opposed to ana t omy as des t i ny. Seduc t i on a l one breaks the d i st i nct i ve sexua l i za t i on of bod i es and the i nev i tab l e. pha l l i c economy that resu l ts . Any movemen t that be l i eves i t can subver t a sys t em by i ts i nf ra-st ructure is na i ve. Seduc t i on is mor e inte l l igent , and seemi ng l y spont aneous l y so. Immed i a t e l y obv i ous - seduc t i on need not be demons t ra t ed , nor just i f i ed - i t is there al l at once , in the reversa l of al l the a l l eged dep t h of the rea l , of al l psycho l ogy , ana tomy , t ruth, or powe r. I t knows ( th i s is i ts secret ) that there i s no ana t omy , nor psycho l ogy , that al l s i gns are revers i b l e. Noth i ng be l ongs to i t , except appearances - al l powers e l ude i t , but i t " revers i b i l i zes" al l the i r s i gns . How can ' one oppose seduc t i on? The on l y th i ng t ru l y at stake is mas t ery of the st rategy of ' appearances , aga i nst the force of be i ng and rea l i ty. The re is no need to p l ay be i ng aga i nst be i ng , or t ruth aga i nst t ruth ; why become s tuck unde rm i n i ng founda t i ons , when a l i ght man i pul at i on of appearances wi l l do . Now woman is but appearance . And i t is the f em i n i ne as appearance that thwar t s mascu l i ne dep th . Ins t ead o f r i s i ng up aga i nst such " i nsu l t i ng" counse l , women wou l d do we l l to l et themse l ves be seduced by i ts t ruth, for here l ies the secre t of the i r st rength, wh i ch they are in the process of l os i ng by erect i ng a cont rary , f em i n i ne dep t h. . I t is not qu i t e the f em i n i ne as sur f ace tha t is opposed to the mascu l i ne as depth , but the f em i n i ne as i nd i st i nc tness of sur f ace and dep t h. Or as i nd i f f erence to the authent i c and the ar t i f icial . Joan R i v i ere , in " Fem i n i t e sans mascarade " (La Psychoana l yse no . 7) , makes a fundamen t a l c l a i m - one that cont a i ns w i th i n i t al l seduc t i on : " Whe t he r f emi n i n i ty be authent ic or super f i c i a l , i t is fundament a l l y the same th i ng . " Th i s can be sa i d on l y of the f em i n i ne . The mascu l i ne , by cont rast , possesses unf a i l i ng powe rs of d i scr i m i na t i on and abso-

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX

11

lute cr i ter i a for pronounc i ng the t ruth. The mascu l i ne is cer ta in, the f em i n i ne is i nso l ub l e . Now , surpr i s i ng l y , thi s propos i t i on , that in the f em i n i ne the very d i st i nc t i on be t ween authent i c i ty and ar t i f i ce is w i thou t founda t i on , a l so de f i nes the space of s i mu l a t i on . He re too one cannot d i st i ngu i sh be t ween rea l i ty and i ts mode l s , there be i ng no other rea l i ty than that secre t ed by the s i mu l a t i ve mode l s , just as there is no other f emi n i n i ty than that of appearances . S i mu l a t i on too is i nso l ub l e. Th i s st range co i nc i dence po i nts to the amb i gu i t y of the f emi n i ne : i t s i mu l t aneous l y prov i des rad i ca l ev i dence of s i mu l a t i on , and the on l y poss i b i l i ty of i ts ove rcom i ng - in seduc t i on , prec i se l y.

THE ETERNAL I RONY OF THE COMMUN I TY

Th i s f em i n i n i t y , the e t erna l i rony o f the commun i t y.

Hege l

Fem i n i n i t y as a pr i nc i p l e of uncer t a i nt y. I t causes the sexua l po l es to wave r. I t is not the po l e opposed to mascu l i n i ty , but wha t abo l i shes the d i f ferent i a l oppos i t i on , and thus sexua l i ty i tsel f , as i ncarna t ed h i stor i ca l l y i n the mascu l i ne pha l l ocracy , as i t m i gh t be i ncarna t ed i n the future i n a f ema l e pha l l ocracy. I f f em i n i n i t y is a pr i nc i p l e of uncer ta i nty , i t is whe r e i t is i tse l f uncer t a i n tha t thi s uncer t a i nt y w i l l be greatest : in the p l ay of f emi n i n i ty. Transves t i sm . Ne i ther homosexua l s nor t ransexua l s , t ransvest i tes l i ke to p l ay w i th the i nd i st i nc tness of the sexes . The spe l l they cast , over themse l ves as we l l as others , is born of sexua l vac i l l a t i on and not , as is cus tomary , the a t t rac t i on of one sex for the other. They do not rea l l y l i ke ma l e men or f ema l e women , nor those who de f i ne themse l ves , redundant l y , as d i st i nct sexua l be i ngs . In order for sex to ex i st , s i gns mus t redup l i ca t e b i o l og i ca l be i ng. Here the s i gns are separa t ed f rom b i o l ogy , and consequent l y the sexes no l onger ex i st proper l y speak i ng . Wha t

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX

13

sex i nto s i gns tha t i s the secre t o f a l l seduc t i on .

theater , and seduc t i on . They appear obsessed w i th games of sex , but they are obsessed , f i rst of al l , w i th p l ay i tse l f ; and i f the i r l i ves appear mor e sexua l l y endowed than our own , i t is because they make sex i nto a total , gestura l , sensua l , and r i tua l game , an exa l t ed but i ron i c i nvoca t i on . N i co seemed so beaut i fu l on l y because her f em i n i n i t y appeared so comp l e t e l y pu t on . She emana t ed some t h i ng mor e than beauty , some t h i ng mor e sub l i me , a d i f f erent seduc t i on . And there was decept i on : she was a fa l se drag queen , a rea l woman , i n fact , p l ay i ng the queen. I t is eas i er for a nonf ema l e / f ema l e than for a rea l woman , a l ready l eg i t i ma t ed by her sex , to move amongs t the s i gns and take seduc t i on to the l i mi t . On l y the non- f ema l e / f ema l e can exerc i se an unt a i nt ed fasc i nat i on, because s /he is mor e seduc t i ve than sexua l . The f asc i na t i on is l ost when the rea l sex shows through; to be sure , some other des i re may f i nd some th i ng here , but prec i se l y no l onger in that per f ec t i on that be l ongs to ar t i f i ce a l one. Seduc t i on is a l ways mor e s i ngu l ar and sub l i me than sex , and i t commands the h i gher pr i ce. One mus t not seek to ground t ransvest i sm in b i sexua l i ty . For the sexes and sexua l d i spos i t i ons , whe t he r m i xed or amb i va l ent , i nde f i n i te or i nver ted , are st i l l rea l , and st i l l bear w i tness to the psych i c rea l i ty of sex. Here , however , i t is thi s very def i n i t i on of the sexua l that is ec l i psed . No t tha t thi s game is per verse. Wha t is perverse is wha t perver ts the order of the t erms ; but here there are no l onger any t erms to perver t , on l y s i gns to seduce. Nor shou l d one seek to ground t ransves t i sm i n the unconsc i ous or in " l a tent homosexua l i t y. " The o l d casu i st ry of l atency is i tse l f a produc t of the sexua l i mag i nary of sur f aces and depths , and a l ways i mp l i es a d i agnos i s of symp t oms and prognos i s for the i r cor rec t i on . Bu t here no t h i ng is l a tent , everyth i ng ca l l s i nto ques t i on the very i dea of a secret , de t erm i na t e i nstance of sex , the i dea tha t the deep p l ay of phant as i es cont ro l s the super f i c i a l p l ay of s i gns . On the cont rary , every th i ng is p l ayed out in the ver t i go of th i s i nvers i on , thi s t ranssubs t an t i a t i on o f

seduce the s i gns t hemse l ves . W i t h t hem every th i ng is makeup ,

t ransvest i tes l ove is thi s game of s igns , wha t exc i tes t hem is to

14

SEDUCT I ON

Perhaps the t ransvest i te 's abi l i ty to seduce comes st ra ight f rom pa rody - a pa rody of sex by i ts over -s i gn i f i ca t i on . The prost i tut i on of t ransvest i tes wou l d then have a d i f ferent mean i ng f rom the mor e common prost i tut i on of women. I t wou l d be c l oser to the sacred prost i tut i on prac t i ced by the Anc i ent s (or the sacred status of the hermaphrod i t e) . I t wou l d be cont i guous w i th the theater , or w i th makeup , the r i tua l and bur l esque ost ent a t i on of a sex whose own p l easure is absent . The seduc t i on i tse l f is coup l ed w i th a pa rody in wh i ch an i mp l acab l e host i l i ty to the f em i n i ne shows through , and wh i ch m i gh t be i nt erpre t ed as a ma l e appropr i a t i on of the panop l y of f ema l e a l l urement s. The t ransvest i te wou l d then reproduce the s i tua t i on of the f i rst war r i or -- he a l one was seduc t i ve - the woman be i ng nu l (cons i der f asc i sm, and i ts af f in i ty for t ransvest i tes) . Bu t ra ther than the add i t i on of the sexes is no t thi s the i r i nva l i da t i on? And doesn ' t the mascu l i ne , i n thi s mocke ry of femi n i n i ty , resc i nd i ts status and prerogra t i ves i n order to become a cont rapunt a l e l emen t i n a r i tua l game? In any case , thi s pa rody of f em i n i n i t y is not qu i t e as acerb i c as one m i gh t th i nk , s i nce i t is the pa rody of f em i n i n i t y as men i mag i ne and stage i t , as we l l as phant as i ze i t . A f em i n i n i t y exaggera t ed , degraded , parod i ed (drag queens i n Barce l ona keep the i r mous t aches and expose the i r ha i ry chests) , the c l a i m is that i n thi s soc i e ty f emi n i n i ty is naught but the s i gns w i th wh i ch men r ig i t up . To over -s i mu l a t e f emi n i n i ty is to suggest that woman is but a mascu l i ne mode l of s i mu l a t i on . Here is a cha l l enge to the f ema l e mode l by way of a f ema l e game , a, cha l l enge to the f ema l e / woman by way of the f ema l e / s i gn. And i t is poss i b l e that thi s l i v i ng, f e i gned denunc i a t i on , wh i ch ' p l ays on the fur thermos t bounds of ar t i f i ce, and s i mu l t aneous l y p l ays w i th the mechan i sms of f emi n i n i ty to the po i nt of per fec t i on , is mor e l uc i d and rad i ca l than al l the i dea-po l i t i ca l c l a i ms of a f emi n i ni ty " a l i ena ted in i ts be i ng . " He re f emi n i n i ty is sa i d to have no be i ng (no na ture , wr i t i ng , s i ngu l ar p l easures or , as Freud sa id, par t i cu l ar i zed l i b i do) . Cont rary to every search for an authent i c femi n i n i ty , for a woman ' s speech , e tc ., the c l a i m here is that the f ema l e is noth i ng , and that thi s is her s t rength . Here is a mor e subt l e response than f emi n i sm' s out r i ght den i a l of the l aw of cast ra t i on . For the l at ter encount ers symbo l i c , no t

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX

15

ana tom i ca l fate, one that we i ghs on al l poss i b l e sexua l i ty. The over turn i ng of thi s l aw, therefore , can on l y resul t f rom i ts pa rodi c reso l ut i on , f rom the ex-cent r i c i ty of the s i gns of femi n i n i ty , the redup l i ca t i on of s i gns that put s an end to every i nso l ub l e b i o l ogy , or me t aphys i cs of the sexes . Makeup is noth i ng e l se : a t r i umphant parody , a so l ut i on by excess , the sur f ace hyper s i mu l a t i on of thi s i n-depth s i mu l a t i on tha t is i tse l f the symbo l i c l aw of cast ra t i on - a t ranssexua l game of seduc t i on . The i rony o f ar t i f i c i a l prac t i ces : the pecu l i ar ab i l i ty of the pa i nt ed woman or prost i tute to exaggera t e her features , to turn t hem i nto mor e than a s ign, and by thi s usage of , no t the fa l se as opposed to the t rue , bu t the mor e fa l se than false, to i ncar na t e the peaks of sexua l i ty wh i l e s i mu l t aneous l y be i ng absorbed in the i r s i mu l a t i on . The i rony proper to the const i tut i on of woman as i do l or sex ob j ec t : i n her c l osed per f ec t i on , she put s an end to sex p l ay and refers man , the l ord and mas t er of sexua l rea l i ty , to h i s t ransparency as an i mag i na r y sub j ec t . The i ronic powe r o f the ob j ec t , then , wh i ch she l oses when promo t ed to the status of a sub j ec t . Al l mascu l i ne powe r is a powe r to produce. Al l that is produced , be i t the produc t i on of woman as f ema l e , fa l ls w i th i n the reg i ster of mascu l i ne powe r . The on l y , and i r res i st ibl e , powe r of f em i n i n i t y is the i nverse powe r of seduc t i on . In i tse l f i t is nu l , seduc t i on has no powe r of i ts own , on l y that of annu l i ng the powe r of produc t i on . Bu t i t a l ways annu l s the l at ter . Has there , moreover , ever been a pha l l i c powe r? Th i s ent i re h i story of pat r i archa l dom i na t i on , of pha l l ocracy , the i mmemor i al ma l e pr i v i l ege , is perhaps on l y a story. Beg i nn i ng w i th the exchange of women in pr i mi t i ve soc i et i es , stup i d l y i nterpret ed as the f i rst stage of woman- as-ob j ec t . Al l that we have been asked to be l i eve - the un i versa l d i scourse on the i nequa l i ty of the sexes , the t heme song of an ega l i tar i an and revo l ut i onary mode rn i t y ( re i nforced , these days , w i th al l the energ i es of a f a i l ed revo l ut i on) - is perhaps one g i gant i c m i sunders t and i ng . The oppos i t e hypothes i s is just as p l aus i b l e and , f rom a cer ta i n perspec t i ve , mor e i nterest i ng - that is, that the f em i n i ne has never been dom i na t ed , but has a l ways been dom i nan t . The f emi n i ne cons i dered no t as a sex , but as the f orm t ransversa l to every sex , as we l l as to every power , as the secret , v i ru l ent f orm

16 SEDUCT I ON

of i n-sexua l i ty. The f em i n i ne as a cha l l enge whose devas t a t i on can be exper i enced today throughout the ent i re expanse of sexua l i ty And hasn ' t thi s cha l l enge , wh i ch is a l so that of seduct ion, a l ways been t r i umphant? In thi s sense , the mascu l i ne has a l ways been bu t a res i dua l , secondary and f rag i l e forma t i on , one that mus t be de f ended by re t renchment s , i nst i tut i ons , and ar t i f i ces . The pha l l i c for t ress of fers al l the s i gns of a for t ress , tha t is to say , of weakness . I t can de f end i tse l f on l y f rom the rampar t s of a man i f es t sexual i ty, o f a f ina l i ty of sex tha t exhaus t s i tse l f i n reproduc t i on , or i n the orgasm . One can hypothes i ze tha t the f em i n i ne is the on l y sex , and tha t the mascu l i ne on l y ex i sts by a supe rhuman ef for t to l eave i t . A momen t ' s d i st ract i on, and one fal ls back i nto the f em i n i ne . The f em i n i ne wou l d have a dec i s i ve advant age , the mascu l i ne a de f i n i te hand i cap . One sees how r i d i cu l ous i t is to wan t to " l i berate " the one i n order that i t accede to the f ragi l i ty of the other ' s "power , " to the eccent r i c , paradox i ca l , parano i d and t i resome mascu l i ne state . The pha l l i c fab l e reversed : whe r e woman is crea t ed f rom man by subt rac t i on , here i t is man crea t ed f rom woman by except i on . A fab l e eas i l y s t rengthened by Be t t l ehe i m' s ana l ys i s i n Symbo l i c Wounds , whe r e men are sa i d to have erec t ed the i r powers and i nst i tut i ons i n order to thwar t the or i g i na l l y far super i or powe rs of women. The dr i v i ng force is no t pen i s , envy , bu t on the cont rary , man ' s j ea l ousy of woman ' s powe r of fer t i l i zat ion . Th i s f ema l e advant age cou l d no t be a toned ; a d i f f erent order had to be bu i l t at al l costs , a mascu l i ne soc i a l , po l i t i ca l and econom i c order , whe re i n thi s advant age cou l d be reduced. Thus the r i tua l prac t i ces whe r eby the s i gns of the oppos i t e sex are appropr i a t ed are l arge l y mascu l i ne : scar i f i cat i ons ; mut i l a t i ons , ar t i f i c i a l vag i n i za t i ons , couvades , e tc. Al l thi s is as conv i nc i ng as a paradox i ca l hypothes i s can be (and i t is a l ways mor e interest ing; than the rece i ved w i sdom) , bu t in the end i t on l y reverses the terms , and so turns the f emi n i ne i nto an or i g i na l subst ance , a sor t of anthropo l og i ca l inf rast ruc ture . I t reverses the ana tom i ca l de t erm i na t i on , bu t l ets i t subs i st as des t i ny - and once aga i n the " i rony of f em i n i n i t y " is l ost .

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX

17

The i rony is lost when the f em i n i ne is i nst i tuted as a sex , even and above al l when i t is in order to denounce i ts oppress i on . I t is the e terna l i l lus ion of en l i ght enment human i sm , wh i ch asp i res to l i berate the serv i l e sex, race or c l ass in the very t erms of i ts serv i tude . Tha t the f em i n i ne becomes a sex in i ts own r ight ! An absurd i ty , i f posed i n ne i ther the t erms of sex nor power. The f em i n i ne knows ne i ther equ i va l ence nor va l ue : i t is, therefore , not so l ub l e in powe r . I t is not even subvers i ve , i t is rever s i b l e . Power , on the other hand , is so l ub l e i n the revers i b i l i ty of the f em i n i ne. I f the " facts" canno t dec i de whe t he r i t was the mascu l i ne or f em i n i ne that was dom i nan t throughout the ages (once aga i n, the thes i s of women ' s oppress i on is based on a car i ca tura l pha l l ocra t i c my th) , by cont rast , i t rema i ns c l ear that in ma t t ers of sexua l i ty , the revers i b l e f orm preva i l s over the l i near f orm. The exc l uded f orm preva i l s , secret l y , over the dom i nan t f orm . The seduc t i ve f orm preva i l s over the produc t i ve f orm . Fem i n i n i t y i n thi s sense is on the same s i de as madness . I t is because madness secre t l y preva i l s that i t mus t be norma l i zed ( thanks to, amongs t other th i ngs , the hypothes i s of the unconsc i ous) . I t is because f em i n i n i t y secret l y preva i l s that i t mus t be recyc l ed and norma l i zed ( in sexua l l i bera t i on in par t i cu l ar ) .

And in the orgasm. The despo i l ment of the orgasm, the absence of sexua l p l easure , is of t en advanced as character i st i c of women ' s oppress i on . A f l agrant in just i ce whose i mmed i a t e rect i f i cat i on everyone mus t pursue in accord w i th the i n j unc t i ons of a sor t of l ong-d i st ance race or sex ra l l y. Sexua l p l easure has become a requ i s i te and a fundament a l r i ght . The mos t recent of the r ights of man , i t has acceded to the d i gn i t y of a ca tegor i ca l i mpera t i ve . I t is i mmora l to ac t otherw i se . But thi s i mpera t i ve does not even have the Kant i an cha rm of end l ess f ina l i t i es . As the managemen t and se l f -managemen t of des i re , i ts i mpos i t i on does not , no mor e than that o f the l aw, a l l ow i gnorance as a de f ense. Bu t thi s is to rema i n unawa re that sexua l p l easure too is rever -

18

SEDUCT I ON

s i b l e , tha t i s t o say tha t , i n t he absence or den i a l o f t he orgasm , supe r i or i n t ens i t y is poss i b l e. I t i s here , whe r e t he end o f sex becomes a l ea t ory aga i n , tha t some t h i ng ar i ses tha t can be ca l l ed seduc t i on or de l i ght . Or aga i n , sexua l p l easure can be j ust a pre t ex t f or ano t he r , mo r e exc i t i ng , mo r e pass i ona t e game . Th i s i s wha t occur r ed i n The Emp i r e o f t he Senses , whe r e t he a i m was to push sexua l p l easure t o i ts l i m i t and beyond - a cha l l enge tha t preva i l s ove r t he wor k i ngs o f des i re , because i t i s much mo r e d i zzy i ng , because i t i nvo l ves t he pass i ons wh i l e t he o t he r i mp l i es on l y a dr i ve. Bu t th i s ve r t i go can be equa l l y pr esen t i n t he re j ec t i on o f sexua l p l easure . Who knows i f women , f ar f rom be i ng " despo i l ed , " have no t , f rom t i me i mmemor i a l , been p l ay i ng a game o f the i r own by t r i umphan t l y asse r t i ng a r i gh t t o sexua l re t i cence? I f t hey have not , f rom t he dep t hs o f the i r sexua l i mpass i b i l i t y , been t hrow i ng down a cha l l enge , cha l l eng i ng men ' s p l easur e t o be bu t t he p l easur e o f men a l one? No one knows t o wha t des t ruc t i ve dep t hs such provoca t i on can go , no r wha t omn i po t ence i t i mp l i es . Men , r educed to so l i t ary p l easures , and enmeshed w i t h i n t he d i rec t i ves o f de l i gh t and conques t , neve r d i d f i nd a way ou t . Who won th i s game w i t h i ts d i f f e ren t s t ra t eg i es? Men , apparent l y , a l l down t he l i ne . Bu t i t is by no means cer t a i n tha t t hey d i d no t l ose t hemse l ves i n th i s t er ra i n and become bogged down (as i n tha t o f t he se i zure o f powe r ) consequen t to a sor t o f f orwa rd f l i ght tha t cou l d ne i t he r assure t hem o f sa f e t y , no r re l i eve t hem o f t he i r sec re t despa i r at wha t had escaped t hem - wha t eve r t he i r ga i ns or ca l cu l a t i ons . Th i s had to end : i t was i mpe r a t i ve t ha t women have orgasms . Measur es had t o be t aken to l i ber a t e t hem and make t hem c l i max - - t he r eby end i ng th i s unbea r a b l e cha l l enge tha t u l t i ma t e l y nu l l i f i es sexua l p l easur e i n a poss i b l e s t ra t egy o f non-p l easur e. For sexua l p l easur e knows no s t ra t egy : i t is on l y ene rgy seek i ng an out l e t . I t is there f ore qu i t e i n f er i or to any s t ra t egy tha t uses i t as i ts ma t er i a l , and uses des i re i tse l f as a t ac t i ca l e l emen t . Th i s i s t he cen t ra l t heme o f t he l i ber t i ne sexua l i t y o f t he e i gh t een t h cen tury , f rom Lac l os to Casanova and Sade ( i nc l ud i ng K i e r kegaa rd i n D i a r y o f t he Seduce r ) , f or whom sexua l i t y st i l l re t a i ns i ts ce r emon i a l , r i tua l and s t ra t eg i c charac t er , be f or e s i nk i ng , w i t h t he R i gh t s o f Man; and psycho l ogy , i n t o t he r evea l ed t ru t h o f sex .

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX

19

He re then is the era of the pi l l when sexua l p l easure is decreed . The end of the r i ght to sexua l re t i cence . Women mus t rea l i ze tha t they are be i ng d i spossessed of some t h i ng essent i a l for t hem to put up so much res i stance (al l those ghos t s of " m i ssed " acts) to the " ra t i ona l " adopt i on of the pi l l . The same res i stance as that of ent i re genera t i ons to schoo l , med i c i ne , secur i ty and wor k . The same pro f ound i ntu i t i on abou t the ravages of an unf e t t ered l iber ty, speech or p l easure. De f i ance , the other ' s de f i ance , is no l onger poss i b l e : al l symbo l i c l og i c has been e l imi na t ed to the advant age of a pe rmanen t erec t i on and i ts b l ackma i l (w i thout count i ng the t endenc i ous l ower i ng of the rate of sexua l p l easure i tse l f ) . The " t rad i t i ona l " woman ' s sexua l i ty was ne i ther repressed nor forb i dden . W i th i n her ro l e she was ent i re l y herse l f; she was i n no way de f ea t ed , nor pass i ve , nor d i d she dr eam of her future " l i bera t i on . " I t is the beaut i fu l sou l s who , ret rospect i ve l y , see women as a l i ena t ed f rom t i me i mmemor i a l , and then l iber a t ed . And there is a pro f ound d i sda i n i n thi s v i s i on, the same d i sda i n as that shown towards the " a l i enated" masses supposed l y i ncapab l e of be i ng any th i ng but mys t i f i ed sheep. I t is easy to pa i nt a p i c ture of woman a l i ena t ed through the ages , and then open the doors of des i re for her unde r the ausp i ces of the revo l ut i on and psychoana l ys i s . I t is al l so s i mpl e , so obscene in i ts s i mp l i c i ty - worse , i t i mp l i es the very essence of sex i sm and rac i sm : comm i sera t i on. For tuna te l y , the f ema l e has never f i t thi s i mage. She has al ways had he r own st rategy , the unremi t t i ng , w i nn i ng st rategy of cha l l enge (one of whose ma j or forms is seduc t i on) . The re is no need to l amen t the wrongs she suf f ered , nor to wan t to rect i fy t hem . No need to p l ay the l over of j ust i ce for the weak er sex. No need to mor tgage every th i ng for some l i bera t i on or des i re whose secre t had to wa i t t i l l the twent i e th century to be revea l ed . At each momen t of the story the game was p l ayed w i th a ful l deck , w i th al l the cards , i nc l ud i ng the t rumps . And men d i d not w i n , not at al l . On the cont rary , i t is women who are now abou t to lose , prec i se l y unde r the s i gn of sexua l p l eas-

20 SEDUCT I ON

ure - but thi s is another story.

I t is the story of the f em i n i ne i n the present tense , i n a cul ture that produces every th i ng , snakes every th i ng speak , everyth i ng babb l e , every th i ng c l i max . The promot i on ' o f the f ema l e as a sex in i ts own r i ght (equa l r ights , equa l p l easures) , of the f ema l e as va l ue - at the expense of the f ema l e as a pr i nc i p l e of uncer t a i nt y. Al l sexua l l i bera t i on l i es in th i s st ra tegy : the i mpos i t i on of the r ights , status and p l easure of women . The over expos i ng and st ag i ng of the f ema l e as sex , and of the orgasm as the repea t ed proo f of sex . Pornography states thi s c l ear l y A t r i l ogy of spread , sensua l i sm and s i gn i f i cat i on, pornography promo t es f ema l e sexua l p l easure in so exaggera t ed a manner , on l y in order to be t ter bury the uncer t a i nt y tha t hovers over the "b l ack cont i nent . " No mor e of tha t " eterna l i rony of the commun i t y " of wh i ch Hege l spoke. Hence for th women wi l l c l i max , and wi l l know why. Al l f emi n i n i ty wi l l be made v i s i b l e - woman as emb l ema t i c of orgasm, and orgasm as emb l ema t i c of sexua l i ty. No mor e uncer ta inty , no mor e secre ts . Th i s is the rad i ca l obscen i t y tha t is beg i nn i ng .

Paso l in i ' s Sa l o, or a 120 Days -- a ver i tab l e tw i l i ght of seduct i on . Al l revers i b i l i ty has been abo l i shed i n accordance w i th an i mp l acab l e l og i c . Every th i ng is i r revers i b l y mascu l i ne and dead . Even the comp l i c i ty , the prom i scu i t y be t ween execut i oners and v i c t i ms has d i sappeared: i nan i ma t e tor ture , perpe t ra t ed w i thou t emot i on , a co l d mach i na t i on . (Here one perce i ves tha t sexua l grat i f i cat i on is t ru l y the i ndust r i a l usuf ruc t of the body , and the oppos i t e of al l seduc t i on : i t is a produc t of ext ract i on, a t echno l og i ca l produc t of a mach i ne ry of bod i es , a log i st i cs of p l easure wh i ch goes st ra i ght to i ts ob j ec t i ve , on l y to f i nd i ts ob j ec t dead) . The f i l m i l lust rates the t ruth that in a dom i nan t mascu l i ne sys t em, and i n every dom i nan t sys t em (wh i ch thereby becomes

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX 2 1

mascu l i ne) , i t is f emi n i n i ty that i ncarna t es revers ibi l i ty, the poss ibi l i ty of p l ay and symbo l i c i nvo l vement . Sa l o is a un i verse comp l e t e l y san i t i zed of that m i n i mum of seduc t i on that prov i des the stakes not just of sex , but of every re l at ion, i nc l ud i ng dea th and the exchange of dea th ( thi s is expressed i n Sa l o , as in Sade , by the predom i nance of sodomy ) . I t is here tha t i t becomes apparent that the f em i n i ne is not a sex (opposed to the other ) , bu t wha t count ers the sex that a l one has ful l r i ghts and the ful l exerc i se of these r ights , the sex that ho l ds a monopo l y on sex : the mascu l i ne , i tse l f haun t ed by the fear of some t h i ng other , of wh i ch sex i s bu t the d i senchan t ed f orm : seduc t i on . The l at ter is a game , sex is a func t i on . Seduc t i on supposes a r i tua l order , sex and des i re a na tura l order. I t is these t wo fundament a l forms that conf ront each other in the ma l e and fema l e , and no t some b i o l og i ca l d i f f erence or some na i ve r i va l ry of powe r.

The f em i n i ne is not just seduc t i on ; i t a l so suggests a cha l l enge to the ma l e to be the sex , to monopo l i ze sex and sexua l p l easure , a cha l l enge to go to the l imi ts of i ts hegemony and exer c i se i t unto dea th. Today pha l l ocracy is co l l aps i ng unde r the pressure of thi s cha l l enge (present throughout our cu l ture ' s sexua l h i story) , and i ts i nab i l i ty to mee t i t . Our ent i re concept i on of sexua l i ty may be co l l aps i ng because cons t ruc t ed a round the pha l l i c func t i on and the pos i t i ve de f i n i t i on of sex . Everypos i t i ve f orm can accommoda t e i tse l f to i ts nega t i ve form, but unders t ands the cha l l enge of the revers i b l e f orm as mor t a l . Every st ruc ture can adap t to i ts subvers i on or i nvers i on , but not to the revers i on of i ts t erms . Seduc t i on is thi s revers i b l e f orm . No t the seduc t i on to wh i ch women have been h i stor i ca l l y cons i gned : the cu l ture of the gynaeceum , of rouge and l ace , a seduc t i on reworked by the m i r ror stage and the f ema l e i mag i nary , the ter ra i n of sex games and ruses ( though here l i es the on l y bod i l y r i tua l of wes t ern cu l ture lef t , al l the others hav i ng d i sappeared , i nc l ud i ng po l i teness) . Bu t seduc t i on as an i ron i c , a l terna t i ve form, one that breaks the referent i a l i ty of sex and prov i des a space , no t of des i re , but of p l ay and de f i ance.

22

SEDUCT I ON

Th i s is wha t occurs in the mos t bana l games of seduc t i on : I shy away ; i t is not you who wi l l g i ve me p l easure , i t is I who wi l l make you p l ay , and thereby rob you of your p l easure . A game in cont i nuous movemen t -- one canno t assume that sexua l st ra t eg i es a l one are i nvo l ved . There is, above ;al l , a st ra tegy of d i sp l acement (se-ducere : to take as ide , to d i ver t f rom one ' s pa th) tha t i mp l i es a d i stor t i on of sex ' s t ruth. To p l ay is no t to take p l easure . Seduc t i on , as a pass i on and as a game at the l evel of the s i gn, acqu i res a cer ta i n sovere i gnt y ; i t is seduc t i on that preva i l s in the l ong t erm because i t i mp l i es a revers i b l e , i ndeter m i na t e order. The g l amour of seduc t i on is qu i t e super i or to ; the Chr i st i an conso l a t i on of the p l easures of the f l esh. One wan t s us to con, s i der the l at ter a na tura l f ina l i ty- - - and many are dr i ven mad for fa i l ing to at ta in i t . Bu t l ove has noth i ng to do w i th sex dr i ves , i f not i n the l i b i d i na l l ook of our con t empora ry cu l ture . Love is a cha l l enge and a pr i ze : a cha l l enge to the o ther to re turn the l ove. And to be seduced is to cha l l enge the other to be seduced i n turn ( there is no f i ner a rgumen t than to accuse a , woman of be i ng i ncapab l e of be i ng seduced) . Pervers i on , f rom th i s perspec t i ve t akes on a somewha t d i f ferent mean i ng: , i t is to pre t end to be seduced w i thout be i ng seduced , w i thout bei ngcapab l e of be i ng seduced. The l aw of seduc t i on takes the f orm of an un i nt er rupt ed r i tua l exchange whe r e seducer and seduced const ant l y ra i se the stakes i n a game tha t never ends . And cannot end s i nce the d i v i d i ng l i ne . tha t de f i nes the v i c tory of the one and the de f ea t of the other , is i l l eg ib l e . And because there is no l i mi t to, the cha l l enge to l ove mor e than one is l oved , or to be a l ways mor e seduced - i f no t dea th . Sex , on the other hand , has a qu i ck , bana l end: the orgasm, the i mmed i a t e f orm of des i re ' s rea l i za t i on. In ana l ys i s , one can see the ex t reme danger tha t may be i ncur red by a man who beg i ns to l i sten to a woman ' s demand for sexua l p l easure. I f , through her des i re , a woman a l ters the una l terabi l i ty w i th i n wh i ch a man cannot he l p but ' enc l ose her , i f she herse l f becomes an i mmed i a t e and l i mi t l ess demand , i f she no l onger rema i ns w i th i n

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX 23

thi s enc l osure and is no l onger he l d by i t , the man f i nds h i mse l f cast i nto a subsu i c i da l state. A demand tha t to l erates no de l ay , no excuse , tha t is l imi t l ess w i th regard to i ntens i ty and dura t i on , shat ters the abso l ut e represent ed by woman , by f em i n i ne sexua l i ty, and even by f em i n i ne p l easure . . . . Fem i n i ne sexua l p l easure can a l ways be rendered d i v i ne aga i n, and thus cont ro l l ed , reduced to the coo l ness of marb l e breasts , whe reas the demand for en j oymen t made by a woman to the man who is bound to her w i thout be i ng ab l e to f l ee, causes h i m to l ose h i s bear i ngs and the f ee l i ng of pure con t i ngency . . . When al l des i re is channe l l ed i nto the demand for en j oyment , the wor l d turns ups i de down and bursts asunder. Th i s is doubt l ess why our cu l ture has t aught women to demand noth i ng in order to i nduce t hem to des i re noth i ng . . .' And thi s "des i re , al l of wh i ch is channe l l ed i nto the demand for en j oymen t " ? Does i t st i l l concern woman ' s "des i re "? Isn' t thi s a f orm of madness , wh i ch has but l i t t le to do w i th " l iberat i on"? Wha t is thi s new , f em i n i ne f i gure of un l i m i t ed sexua l demand , an un l i m i t ed c l a i m to sexua l grat i f i cat ion? Th i s , in ef fect , is the end po i nt to wh i ch our cu l ture is rush i ng - and Rous t ang is r ight , i t concea l s a f orm of subsu i c i da l co l l ec t i ve v i o l ence . And not just for men , but for women too, and for sexua l i ty i n genera l . We say no to those who l ove on l y women ; those who l ove on l y men; those who l ove on l y ch i l dren ( there are a l so the e lder l y , sados , machos , dogs , cats) . . . The new mi l i tant , w i th h i s re f i ned egocent r i c i sm, c l a i ms a r i ght to h i s sexua l rac i sm . But we say no to al l sec t ar i an i sm . I f one mus t become a m i sogyn i s t to be a pederast , an androphobe to be
1 . Fran i ;o i s Rous t ang , D i re Mas t ery (Ba l t i more : Johns Hopk i ns Press , 1982) , pp. 104-5 .

24 SEDUCT I ON

a l esb i an, . . . i f one mus t re j ect the p l easures of the n i ght , chance encount ers , and p i ck-ups i n order to de f end onese l f aga i nst rape , then i n the name of a st rugg l e aga i nst cer ta i n proh i b i t i ons , one has re turned to other t aboos , mora l i sms , norms , b l i nkers . . . W i th i n our body we exper i ence no t one sex , not two , but a mu l t i tude of sexes . We do not see a man , or woman , bu t a human be i ng , an t hropomorphic( ! ) . . . Our bod i es are t i red of al l the s t ereot yped cu l tura l bar r i ers , al l the phys i o l og i ca l segrega t i on. . . We are ma l e and fema l e , adu l ts and ch i l dren , fai r ies, dykes , and gays , fuckers and fucked , buggers and bugge red . We do no t accept the reduc t i on of al l our sexua l r i chness to a s i ng l e sex . Our sapph i sm is on l y one facet of our sexua l i ty. We re fuse ' to l imi t ourse l ves to wha t soc i e t y demands of us , tha t is, tha t we be e i ther he tero , l esb i an, gay the who l e gamu t of promot i ona l produc t s . We are unreasonab l e in al l our des i res . Jud i th Be l l adonna Barbara Pen ton L i bd, Ju l y 1978 The f renzy of un l i m i t ed sex, an exacerba t ed vent i l a t i on of des i re onto demand and grat i f i cat i on - doesn ' t thi s const i tute a reversa l of wha t Rous t ang descr i bed : i f unt i l now women were t aught to demand noth i ng in order that they des i red noth i ng , are they not now be i ng t aught to demand every th i ng in order to des i re noth i ng? The ent i re b l ack cont i nent decoded by sexua l grat i f i cat i on? Mascu l i n i t y wou l d be c l oser to the Law, f em i n i n i t y c l oser to sexua l p l easure . Bu t is no t such p l easure the ax i oma t i cs of a decoded sexua l un i verse - the f em i n i ne and l i bera t i ng refer ence produced by the gradua l en f eeb l ement of the Law, the Law becom i ng an i n j unc t i on to p l easure a f ter hav i ng been i ts inter d i c t i on . kn e f fect of s i mu l a t i on i nver t ed : i t is when p l easure seeks open l y to be au t onomous , tha t i t is t ru l y a produc t of the Law. Or e l se the Law co l l apses , and whe r e the Law d i sappears , p l easure is i naugura t ed as a new cont rac t . Wha t does i t

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX 2 5

ma t t er : no th i ng has changed , and the i nvers i on of s i gns is bu t a consequence of st rategy. Th i s is the s i gn i f i cance of the present turnaround , and of the tw i n pr i v i l eg i ng of the f em i n i ne and p l easure over the mascu l i ne and proh i b i t i on that once dom i na t ed sexua l reason . The exa l ta t i on of the f em i n i ne is a per f ec t i ns t rument for the unprecedent ed genera l i za t i on and cont ro l l ed ex t ens i on of sexua l Reason . An unexpec t ed fate, one that cuts shor t al l the i l l us i ons of des i re and al l the rat i ona l i zat i ons of l i bera t i on . Ma rcuse: Wha t w i th i n a pa t r i archa l sys t em appears as the f em i n i ne ant i thes i s of mascu l i ne va l ues wou l d then t ru l y const i tut e a repressed soc i a l and h i stor i ca l a l terna t i ve - the soc i a l i st a l ternat i ve . . . To do away w i th pa t r i archa l soc i e ty is to deny al l the par t i cul ar qua l i t i es a t t r i buted to women as women , and thus to ex t end these qua l i t i es to a l l sec tors of soc i a l l i fe, to wor k and l e i sure a l i ke. Women ' s l iber a t i on wou l d then be , s i mu l taneous l y , the l i berat i on of men. . . Ac tue l s , Ga l i lde , p. 33 . Suppose the f em i n i ne l i bera ted and p l aced at the serv i ce of a new co l l ect i ve Eros ( the same modus ope rand i as for the dea th dr i ve - the same d i a l ect i c a l i gned w i th the new soc i a l Eros) . But wha t happens i f the f emi n i ne , far f rom be i ng a se t of spec i f i c qua l i t i es (wh i ch i t may have been when repressed , but on l y then) , proves , once " l iberated, " to be the express i on of an erot i c i nde t e rm i na t i on , and of the l oss of any spec i f i c qua l i t i es, as much i n the soc i a l as the sexua l sphere? The s i tua t i on of the f em i n i ne was qu i t e i ron i c i n seduc t i on , and is just as i ron i c today in i ts i nde t erm i na t i on and equ i vocat i on ; for i ts promo t i on as sub j ec t is accompan i ed by i ts re turn as ob j ec t , that is to say, as genera l i zed pornography. A s t range co i nc i dence . Women ' s l i bera t i on wou l d very much l i ke to cast the dec i d i ng vot e aga i nst thi s ob j ec t i f i ca t i on . Bu t the cause is hope l ess , for the s i gn i f i cance of the l i bera t i on of the f em i n i ne l ies in i ts rad i ca l amb i gu i t y. Even Rous t ang ' s text , wh i ch t ends to suppor t the f l ood of f ema l e demands , canno t bu t have a

26

SEDUCT I ON

present i ment of the ca t ast rophe that the channe l l i ng of al l des i re i nto the demand for grat i f i cat i on const i tut es . Un l ess one cons i ders the subsu i c i da l state of men provoked by thi s demand as a dec i s i ve argument , there is noth i ng that l ets one d i st i ngu i sh the mons t ros i t y of thi s demand for f ema l e grat i f i cat i on f rom the mons t ros i t y of i ts tota l i nterd i c t i on in years pas t . A s i mi l ar amb i gu i t y can be f ound in the ma l e and h i s weak ness . The pan i c men fee l when f aced w i th the ` , ` l iberated" fema l e sub j ec t is equa l l ed on l y by the i r f ragi l i ty be fore the pornograph i c chasm of the " a l i ena t ed" f ema l e sex , the f ema l e sex ob j ec t . Whe t he r a woman demands sexua l sat i sfact i on " by becom i ng consc i ous of the rat i ona l i ty of her des i re , " or of fers herse l f i n a state of tota l prost i tut i on - whe t he r the f ema l e be sub j ec t or ob j ec t , l i bera ted or prost i tuted , her sex is to be devour i ng , a gap i ng vorac i t y. I t is no acc i dent that al l pornography turns a round the f ema l e sex . Th i s is because erec t i ons are never cer ta i n (no scenes of i mpo t ence i n pornography , they are aver t ed by the ha l l uc i na t i on of unres t ra i ned f em i n i ne supp l y) : In a sexua l i ty made prob l ema t i c by demands to prove and demons t ra t e i tse l f w i thout d i scont i nu i ty , the ma r ked pos i t i on , the mascu l i ne pos i t i on , wi l l be f rag i l e . By cont rast , the f ema l e sex rema i ns equa l to i tse l f i n i ts ava i l abi l i ty, in i ts chasm, i ts degree zero. The cont i nu i t y of f ema l e sexua l i ty , as opposed to ma l e i ntermi t tency , is enough to ensure i ts super i or i ty at the l eve l o f the organ i c represent a t i on of sexua l p l easure , the represent a t i on of end l ess sex tha t has come to dom i na t e our fantas i es . Sexua l l i berat i on, l i ke that of the produc t i ve forces , is pot ent i a l l y l imi t l ess . I t demands a profus i on come t rue , a " sexua l l y a f f l uent soc i e t y. " I t can no mor e to l erate a scarc i ty of sexua l goods , than of ma t er i a l goods . Now , th i s u top i an cont i nu i t y and ava i l ab i l i ty can on l y be i ncarna t ed by the f ema l e sex. Th i s is why i n thi s soc i e t y every th i ng - ob j ects , goods , serv i ces , rel at i ons of al l t ypes - wi l l be fern i n i zed , sexua l i zed i n a f emi n i ne f ash i on. In adver t i s i ng i t is not so much a ma t t er of add i ng sex to wash i ng mach i nes (wh i ch is absurd) as conf er r i ng on obj ects the i mag i nary , f ema l e qua l i ty of be i ng ava i l ab l e at wi l l , of never be i ng ret ract i l e or a l ea tory. In pornography sexua l i ty is l u l l ed by thi s yawn i ng mono t o-

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX

27

ny, whe r e f l acc i d or erect i l e men p l ay on l y a nom i na l ro l e. Ha rd core has changed noth i ng : the ma l e is no l onger i nterest i ng because too de t erm i ned , too ma r ked - the pha l l us as canon i ca l s ign i f i er - and thus too f rag i l e . Fasc i na t i on moves towards the neuter , towards an i nde t erm i na t e chasm, a mob i l e , d i f fuse sexua l i ty. The f emi n i ne ' s h i stor i ca l revenge a f ter so many centur i es of repress i on and f r igidi ty? Perhaps , but mor e l ike ly, the exhaus t i on of sexua l i ty , whe t he r i t be the mascu l i ne sexua l i ty that once nour i shed a l l the schemes o f erect i l i ty, ver t i ca l i ty, ascendancy , growth , produc t i on , e tc ., and is at present lost in the obsess i ve s i mu l a t i on of al l these t hemes - or a f em i n i ne sexua l i ty, as i ncarna t ed f rom t i me i mmemor i a l i n seduc t i on . Today, beh i nd the mechan i ca l ob j ec t i f i ca t i on of the s i gns of sex , i t is the mascu l i ne as f ragi l e, and the f em i n i ne as degree zero wh i ch have the uppe r hand . We are i ndeed i n an or i g i na l s i tuat i on as regards sexua l v i ol ence - v i o l ence done to the " subsu i c i da l " ma l e by unbr i d l ed , f ema l e sensua l i sm . Bu t i t is not a ma t t er of a reversa l of the h i stor i ca l v i o l ence done to women by ma l e sexua l force . The v i ol ence i nvo l ved here is re l at i ve to the neut ra l i zat i on, depress i on and co l l apse of the ma r ked t erm be fore the i r rupt i on of the non-ma r ked t erm . I t is not a rea l , gener i c v i o l ence , but a v i ol ence of d i ssuas i on , the v i o l ence of the neuter , the v i o l ence of the degree zero. So too is pornography: the v i o l ence of sex neut ra l i zed .

STEREO - PORNO
Take me to your room and f uck: me. The r e i s some t h i ng i nde f i nab l e i n your vocabu l a ry; some t h i ng l ef t ; to be des i red.

Ph i l i p D i ck

The Sch i zos ' Ba l l 71crn i ng eve ry t h i ng i nto rea l i ty ,

J i mmy Cl i f f

The t rompe l 'oe i l removes a d i mens i on f rom rea l space , and thi s account s for i ts seduc t i on . Pornography by cont rast adds a d i mens i on to the space of sex , i t makes the l at ter mor e rea l than the rea l - and thi s account s for i ts absence of seduc t i on . There is no need to search for the phant as i es that haun t por nography ( fet i sh i sms , pervers i ons , pr i ma l scenes , e tc. ,), for they are bar red by an excess of " rea l i ty. " Perhaps pornography is on l y an a l l egory , that is to say, a forc i ng of s igns, a ba roque enter pr i se o f over -s i gn i f i ca t i on touch i ng on the "grot esque " ( l i tera l ly, "grot esque " garden ar t added to a rocky na ture as pornography adds the v i v i dness; of ana tom i ca l deta i l ) . The obscen i t y i tse l f burns and consumes i ts ob j ec t . One sees f rom up c l ose wha t one has never seen be fore ; to one ' s good for tune , one has never seen one ' s geni ta l s func t i on f rom so c lose , nor for tha t ma t ter , f rom so genera l a perspec t i ve . I t is al l too

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX 29

t rue , too near to be t rue. And i t is thi s tha t is fasc i nat i ng, thi s excess of rea l i ty, thi s hyper rea l i ty of th i ngs . The on l y phant asy i n pornography , i f there is one , is thus no t a phant asy o f sex , but of the rea l , and i ts absorpt i on i nto some th i ng other than the rea l , the hyper rea l . Pornograph i c voyeur i sm is no t a sexua l voyeur i sm, but a voyeur i sm of represent a t i on and i ts perd i t i on , a d i zz i ness born of the l oss of the scene and the i r rupt i on of the obscene. Consequen t to the ana tom i ca l zoom , the d i mens i on of the rea l is abo l i shed , the d i s t ance i mp l i ed by the gaze g i ves way to an i nst ant aneous , exacerba t ed represent a t i on , tha t of sex in i ts pure state, s t r i pped not just of al l seduc t i on , bu t of i ts i mage ' s very potent i a l i ty. Sex so c l ose tha t i t merges w i th i ts own represent a t i on : the end of perspec t i va l space , and therefore , that of the i mag i nary and of phant asy - end of the scene , end of an i l l us i on . Obscen i ty , however , is not pornography. Trad i t i ona l obscen i t y st i l l cont a i ns an e l emen t of t ransgress i on , provoca t i on , or per vers i on . I t p l ays on repress i on , w i th phantas i es of v i o l ence . W i t h sexua l l i bera t i on thi s obscen i t y d i sappears : Marcuse ' s " repress i ve desub l i ma t i on" goes thi s rout e (and even i f i t has not passed i nto genera l mores , the my th i ca l t r i umph of re l ease today , l i ke tha t o f repress i on yesterday , is tota l ) . The new obscen i ty , l i ke the new ph i l osophy ( l a nouve l l e ph i l osophy) ar i ses on the buryi ng grounds of the o l d, and has another mean i ng. I t does not p l ay w i th v i o l ent sex , sex w i th rea l stakes , but w i th sex neut ra l i zed by to l erance . Sex here is out rageous l y " rendered , " but i t is the render i ng of some t h i ng that has been r emoved . Por nography is i ts ar t i f i c i a l synthes i s , i ts ce r emony but no t i ts ce l ebra t i on . Some t h i ng neo or ret ro, l i ke those green spaces that subst i tute the i r ch l orophy l ef fects for a de func t nature , and for thi s reason , par t ake of the same obscen i t y as pornography. Mode rn unrea l i ty no l onger i mp l i es the i mag i nary , i t engages mor e re ference , mor e t ruth, mor e exac t i tude - i t cons i sts i n havi ng every th i ng pass i nto the abso l ut e ev i dence of the rea l . As i n hyper rea l i st pa i nt i ngs ( the pa i nt i ngs of the " mag i c rea l i sts" ) whe r e one can d i scern the gra i n of the face 's sk i n, an unwon t ed m i croscop i cs tha t l acks even the cha rm of the uncanny. Hyper rea l i sm is no t sur rea l i sm, i t is a v i s i on tha t hun t s down

30 SEDUCT I ON

seduc t i on by means of v i s ibi l i ty. One "g i ves you mor e . " Th i s is a l ready t rue of co l our i n f i l m or te l ev i s i on . One g i ves you so much - co l our , lust re , sex , al l in h i gh f ide l i ty; and w i th al l the accent s ( that 's l i fe!) - tha t you have noth i ng to add , that is to say, noth i ng to g i ve in exchange. Abso l ut e represss i on : by g i v i ng you a l i t t l e too much one takes away every th i ng . Bewa re of wha t has been so we l l " rendered , " when i t is be i ng re turned to you w i thou t you ever hav i ng; g i ven i t! A bew i l der i ng , c l aus t rophob i c and obscene i mage , that o f Japanese quadrophon i cs: an i dea l l y cond i t i oned ' room, fantast i c t echn i que , mus i c i n four d i mens i ons , no t just the three o f the env i ron i ng space , bu t a four th , v i scera l d i mens i on of inter na l space. The t echn i ca l de l i r i um of_ the per f ec t rest i tut i on o f mus i c (Bach , Mont everd i , Mozar t ! ) tha t has neve r ex i s t ed , tha t no one has ever heard , and that was not mean t to be heard l i ke thi s . Moreover , one does not "hear " i t , for the d i st ance that al l ows one to hea r mus i c , at a concer t or somewhe r e e l se , is abo l i shed . Ins t ead i t permea t es one f rom al l side's ; there is no l onger any mus i ca l space ; i t is the s i mu l a t i on of a tota l env i ronmen t that d i spossesses one of even the m i n i ma l ana l yt i c per cept i on const i tut i ve of mus i c ' s cha rm . The Japanese have s i mp l e-m i nded l y , and in comp l e t e good fa i th, con fused the rea l w i th the greatest numbe r of d i mens i ons poss i b l e . ' I f they cou l d const ruc t hexaphon i cs , they wou l d do i t . Now , i t is by thi s four th d i mens i on. wh i ch they have added to mus i c , tha t they cast rate you of al l mus i ca l p l easure . Some t h i ng e l se fasc i na tes (but no l onger seduces) you: t echn i ca l per fec t i on , " h i gh f ide l i ty, " wh i ch is just as obsess i ve and pur i tan i ca l as the other , con j uga l f ide l i ty Th i s t i me , however , one no l onger even knows wha t ob j ec t i t is fa i thful to, for no one knows whe r e the rea l beg i ns or ends , nor unders t ands , there fore , the f ever of per fect i b i l i ty that per s i sts in the rea l ' s reproduc t i on . Techn i que i n thi s sense d i gs i ts own grave . For at the same t i me that i t per f ec ts the means of synthes i s , i t deepens the cr i ter ia of ana l ys i s and de f i n i t i on to such an ext ent tha t tota l fa i thfu l ness , exhaus t i veness as regards the rea l becomes forever i mposs i b l e . The rea l becomes a ver t i g i nous phant asy of exact i tude l ost i n the i nf i n i t i sma l . In compa r i son w i th , for examp l e , the t rompe - l be i l , wh i ch

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX

31

saves on one d i mens i on , " norma l " three-d i mens i ona l space is a l ready debased and i mpover i shed by v i r tue of an excess o f me ans (al l tha t is rea l , or wan t s to be rea l , const i tutes a debasemen t of thi s type) . Quadrophon i cs , hyperst ereo , or hi f i const i tut e a conc l us i ve debasemen t . Pornography is the quadrophon i cs of sex. I t adds a th i rd and four th t rack to the sexua l ac t . I t is the ha l l uc i na t i on of deta i l that ru l es . Sc i ence has a l ready hab i tua t ed us to thi s mi croscop i cs , thi s excess of the rea l i n i ts m i croscop i c deta i l , thi s voyeur i sm o f exac t i tude - a c l ose-up of the i nv i s i b l e st ruc tures of the ce l l - to thi s not i on of an i nexorab l e t ruth that can no l onger be measured w i th re f erence to the p l ay of appearances , and tha t can on l y be revea l ed by a soph i st i ca ted techn i ca l appara tus . End o f the secre t . Wha t e l se does pornography do , i n i ts sham v i s ion, than revea l the i nexorab l e , m i croscop i c t ruth of sex? I t is d i rect l y descended f rom a me t aphys i cs that supposes the phant asy of a h i dden t ruth and i ts reve l a t i on , the phant asy of " repressed " energy and i ts produc t i on - on the obscene scene of the rea l . Thus the i mpasse of en l i ght ened though t when asked , shou l d one censure pornography and choose a we l l - t empered repress i on? There can be no de f i n i t i ve response in the a f f i rmat i ve , for pornography has reason on i ts s i de ; i t is par t of the devast a t i on of the rea l , of the i nsane i l lus ion of the rea l and i ts ob j ec t i ve " l i bera t i on . " One cannot l iberate the produc t i ve forces w i thout wan t i ng to " l i bera te " sex in i ts brut e func t i on ; they are bo t h equa l l y obscene . The rea l i st cor rupt i on of sex , the produc t i v i s t cor rupt i on of l abour - same symp t oms , same comba t . The equ i va l ent of the conveyor be l t here , is the Japanese vag i na l cyc l orama - i t outdoes any st r ip- tease. Prost i tutes, the i r th i ghs open , s i t t ing on the edge of a p l a t form, Japanese workers i n the i r sh i r t -s l eeves ( i t is a popu l ar spectac l e) , perm i t t ed to shove the i r noses up to the i r eyeba l l s w i th i n the woman ' s vag i na i n order to see , to see be t ter - bu t wha t ? They c l amber over each other i n order to ga i n access , and al l the wh i l e the prost i tutes speak to t hem gent l y , or rebuke t hem sharp l y for the sake of f orm . The rest of the spectac l e , the f l age l l at ions , the rec i proca l mas turba t i on and t rad i t i ona l st r ip- tease , pa l es be fore thi s momen t of abso l ut e obscen i ty , thi s momen t of v i sua l vorac i ty tha t

32

SEDUCT I ON

goes far beyond sexua l possess i on . A sub l i me pornography : i f they cou l d do i t , these guys wou l d be swa l l owed up who l e w i th i n the prost i tute . An exa l ta t i on w i th dea th? Perhaps , but at the same t i me they are compa r i ng and commen t i ng on the respec t i ve vag i nas in mor t a l ser i ousness , w i thou t ever sm i l i ng or break i ng out i n l aughter , and w i thout ever t ry i ng to touch - except when p l ay i ng by the ru l es . No l ewdness , but an ext reme l y ser i ous , infant i l e ac t borne of an und i v i ded f asc i na t i on w i th the m i r ror of the f ema l e organ , l i ke Narc i ssus ' f asc i na t i on w i th h i s own i mage . Beyond the convent i ona l i dea l i sm of the st r i p- tease (perhaps there m i gh t even be some seduc t i on here) , pornography at i ts mos t sub l i me reverses i tse l f i nto a pur i f i ed obscen i ty , an obscen i t y that is purer , deeper , mor e v i scera l . But why s top w i th nud i ty , or the gen i ta l i a? I f the obscene is a ma t ter of represent a t i on and no t of sex , i t mus t exp l ore the very inter ior of the body and the v i scera . Who knows wha t pro found p l easure is to be f ound in the v i sua l d i smembe rmen t of mucous membr anes and smoo t h musc l es? Our pornography st i l l reta i ns a rest r i cted de f i n i t i on . Obscen i t y has an un l i m i t ed future . Bu t take heed , i t is not a ma t t er of the deepen i ng of a dr i ve ; wha t is i nvo l ved is an orgy of rea l i sm, an orgy of produc t i on . A rage (perhaps a l so a dr i ve , but one that subst i tutes i tse l f for al l the others) to summon every th i ng be fore the j ur i sd i c t i on of s i gns . Le t every th i ng be rendered i n the l ight of the s i gn, i n the l i ght of a v i s i b l e energy. Le t al l speech be l i bera ted and proc l a i m des i re . We are reve l i ng, i n thi s l i bera l i zat i on, wh i ch , i n fact , s i mp l y ma rks the grow i ng; progress of obscen i t y. Al l that is h i dden and st i l l en j oys a forb i dden status , wi l l be unear thed , rendered to speech and made to bow be fore the facts. The rea l is grow i ng ever l arger , some day the ent i re un i verse wi l l be rea l , and when the rea l is un i versa l , there wi l l be dea th.

Pornograph i c s i mu l a t i on : nud i t y is never any th i ng bu t an ext ra s i gn . Nud i t y ve i l ed by c l oth i ng func t i ons as a secret , amb i va l ent re f erent . Unve i l ed , i t sur f aces as a s i gn and re turns to the c i rcu l a t i on of s i gns: nud i t y de-s i gn . The same occurs w i th hard core and b l ue porn : the sexua l organ , whe t he r erec t or

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX 33

open w i de is just another s i gn i n the hypersexua l panop l y. Pha l l us-des i gn . The mor e one advances wi l l y-n i l l y i n sex ' s ver ac i ty, in the exposure of i ts work i ngs , the mor e i mme rsed one becomes i n the accumu l a t i on of s igns , and the mor e enc l osed one becomes in the end l ess over -s i gn i f i ca t i on of a rea l that no l onger ex i sts, and of a body that never ex i sted . Our ent i re body cu l ture , w i th i ts conce rn for the " express i on" of the body ' s "des i res , " for the s t ereophon i cs of des i re , is a cu l ture of i r redeemab l e mons t ros i t y and obscen i t y. Hege l : "Just as when speak i ng o f the exter i or i ty of the human body , we sa i d that i ts ent i re sur face , in cont rast to tha t of the an i ma l wor l d , revea l s the presence and pu l sa t i on of the hear t , we say of ar t tha t i t has as i ts task to crea te in such a way that at al l po i nts of i ts sur f ace the phenomena l , the appearance becomes an eye , the seat of the sou l , render i ng i tse l f v i s i b l e to the spi r i t . " The re is, there fore , never any nud i ty , never any nude body that is s i mp l y nude ; there is never j ust a body. I t is l i ke the Ind i an sa i d when the wh i t e man asked h i m why he ran a round naked: " For me , i t is al l f ace . " In a non- fet i sh i st i c cu l ture (one that does no t fet i sh i ze nud i t y as ob j ec t i ve t ruth) the body is not , as i n our own , opposed to the face , conce i ved as a l one r i ch in express i on and endowed w i th " eyes " : i t is i t se l f a face , and l ooks at you. I t is there fore no t obscene , tha t is to say, made to be seen nude . I t canno t be seen nude , no mor e than the f ace can for us , for the body is - and is on l y - a symbo l i c ve i l ; and i t is by way of thi s p l ay of ve i l s, wh i ch , l i teral ly, abo l i shes the body "as such , " that seduc t i on occurs . Th i s is whe r e seduc t i on is at p l ay and not in the tear i ng away of the ve i l i n the name of some man i f es t a t i on of t ruth or des i re . The i nd i st i nc t i on o f f ace and body i n a tota l cu l ture of appearances - the d i st i nc t i on be t ween f ace and body i n a cul ture of mean i ng ( the body here becomes mons t rous l y v i s ibl e , i t becomes the s i gn of a mons t er ca l l ed des i re) - then the tota l t r i umph i n pornography of the obscene body , to the po i nt whe r e the face is e f f aced . The erot i c mode l s are face l ess , the ac tors are ne i ther beaut i fu l , ug l y , or express i ve ; func t i ona l nud i ty e f f aces every th i ng i n the " spec t acu l ar i ty " of sex. Cer t a i n f i l ms are no mor e than v i scera l sound-e f f ec t s of a co i ta l c l oseup ; even the body d i sappears , d i spersed amongs t overs i ze , par -

34

SEDUCT I ON

t i a l ob j ec t s . Wha t eve r t he f ace , i t r ema i ns i nappropr i a t e , f or i t br eaks t he obscen i t y and r e i n t roduces mean i ng whe r e eve ry t h i ng asp i res to abo l i sh i t i n sexua l excess and a n i h i l i st i c ve r t i go. At t he end o f th i s t er ror i s t debasemen t , whe r e t he body ( and i ts " des i re " ) a re made t o y i e l d t o t he ev i dence , appea r ances no l onge r have any sec r e t . A cu l t ur e o f t he desub l i ma t i on o f appea r ances: eve ry t h i ng is ma t e r i a l i zed i n accord w i t h t he mos t ob j ec t i ve ca t egor i es . A pornogr aph i c cu l t ur epa r exce l l ence ; one tha t pur sues t he wor k i ngs o f t he rea l a t a l l t i mes and i n a l l p l aces . A pornogr aph i c cu l t ur e w i t h i ts i deo l ogy o f t he conc re t e , o f f ac t i c i t y and use , and i ts conce rn w i t h t he p r eem i nence o f use va l ue , t he ma t e r i a l i n f ras t ruc ture o f th i ngs , and t he body as t he ma t e r i a l i n f ras t ruc ture o f des i re. A one -d i mens i ona l cu l t ur e tha t exa l t s eve r y t h i ng i n t he " conc r e t eness o f produc t i on " or o f p l easur e - un l i m i t ed mechan i ca l l abour or copu l a t i on . Wha t is obscene abou t th i s wor l d is tha t no t h i ng is l e f t t o appea r ances , or t o chance . Eve r y t h i ng is a v i s i b l e , necessa r y s i gn . L i ke t hose do l l s , ado rned w i t h gen i t a l i a , tha t t a l k , pee; and w i l l one day make l ove. And t he l i t t l e g i r l ' s reac t i on : " My l i t t l e s i ster , she knows how t o do tha t t oo. Can ' t you g i ve me a rea l one? "

F r om t he d i scour se o f l abour to t he d i scourse o f sex , f rom t he d i scour se o f produc t i ve f or ces to tha t o f dr i ves , one f i nds t he same u l t i ma t um , tha t o f pro -duc t i on i n t he l i tera l sense o f t he t e rm . I ts or i g i na l mean i ng , i n . f ac t , was no t t o f abr i ca t e , bu t to r ende r v i s i b l e or make appea r . Sex i s p roduced l i ke one produces a documen t , or as one says o f an ac t or tha t he pe r f orms (se produ i t ) on s t age. To produce is t o ma t er i a l i ze by f or ce wha t be l ongs to ano t he r order , tha t o f t he sec re t and o f seduc t i on. Seduc t i on is, a t a l l t i mes and i n a l l p l aces , opposed to produc t i on . Seduc t i on re moves some t h i ng f rom t he orde r o f t he v i s i b l e , wh i l e produc t i on cons t ruc t s eve ry t h i ng i n fu l l v i ew , be i t an ob j ec t , a numbe r or concep t . Eve r y t h i ng is t o be produced , eve r y t h i ng i s to be l eg i b l e , eve ry t h i ng is t o become rea l , v i s i b l e , accoun t ab l e ; eve ry t h i ng is t o be t r ansc r i bed i n re l a t i ons o f force , sys t ems o f concep t s

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX 3 5

or measurab l e energy ; every th i ng is to be sa id, accumu l a t ed , i ndexed and recorded . Th i s is sex as i t ex i sts in pornography , but mor e genera l l y , thi s is the enterpr i se of our ent i re cu l ture , whose na tura l cond i t i on is obscene: a cu l ture of mons t ra t i on , of demons t ra t i on , of produc t i ve mons t ros i t y. No seduc t i on here , nor i n pornography , g i ven the abrupt produc t i on of sexua l acts, and the feroc i ty of p l easure i n i ts i mmed i acy. The re is no th i ng seduc t i ve abou t bod i es t raversed by a gaze l i tera l l y sucked i n by a vacuum of t ransparency ; nor can there be even a h i nt of seduc t i on w i th i n the un i verse of produc t i on , whe r e a pr i nc i p l e of t ransparency governs the forces be l ong i ng to the wor l d of v i s ibl e , ca l cu l ab l e phenome na - ob j ects , mach i nes , sexua l acts, or the gross na t i ona l produc t .

The i nso l ub l e equ i voca l ness of pornography: i t put s an end to al l seduc t i on v i a sex , but at the same t i me i t put s an end to sex v i a the accumu l a t i on of the s i gns of sex. Bo t h t r i umphant parody and s i mu l a t ed agony - there l i es i ts amb i gu i t y. In a sense , pornography is t rue : i t owes i ts t ruth to a sys t em of sexua l di ssuas i on by ha l l uc i na t i on , d i ssuas i on of the rea l by the hyper rea l , and of the body by i ts forced ma ter i a l i za t i on . Pornography is usua l l y f au l ted for t wo reasons - for man i pu l a t i ng sex i n order to de fuse the c l ass st rugg l e (a l ways the o l d "myst i f i ed consc i ousness " ) and for cor rupt i ng sex ( the good , t rue sex , the sex to be l i berated, the sex to be cons i dered amongs t our na tura l r i ghts) by i ts commod i f i ca t i on . Pornogra phy , then , is sa i d to mask e i ther the t ruth o f cap i ta l and the inf rast ructure , or that of sex and des i re. Bu t i n fact pornography does not mask any th i ng (yes , that is i ndeed the case) . I t is no t an i deo l ogy , i .e., i t does no t h i de some t ruth ; i t is a s i mu l acrum, i .e. , i t is a t ruth e f fect that h i des the t ruth' s non-ex i s t ence . Pornography says : there mus t be good sex somewhe re , for I am i ts car i ca ture. In i ts grot esque obscen i ty , i t a t t empt s to save sex ' s t ruth and prov i de the fa l ter i ng sexua l mode l w i th some cred i b i l i ty. Now , the who l e ques t i on is whe t he r good sex exists, or whe ther , qu i t e s i mp l y , sex ex i sts, somewhe r e - sex as

36 SEDUCT I ON

the body ' s i dea l use va lue , sex as poss i b l e p l easures wh i ch can and mus t be " l i bera ted . " I t is the same ques t i on demanded of po l i t i ca l economy : is there " good " va l ue , an i dea l use va l ue beyond exchange va l ue unders tood as the i nhuman abst rac t i on of cap i ta l - an i dea l va l ue of goods or soc i a l re l at i ons wh i ch can and mus t be " l i bera ted"?

SEDUCT I ON / PRODUCT I ON
In rea l i ty, pornography is but the paradox i ca l l i mi t of the sexua l . A " rea l i st i c " exacerba t i on , a man i aca l obsess i on w i th the rea l : th i s is the obscene , i n the e t ymo l og i ca l and every other sense . But is no t the sexua l i tse l f a l ready a forced ma ter i a l i zat i on? Is no t the advent of sexua l i ty a l ready par t of occ i dent a l rea l i st i cs, the compu l s i on proper to our cu l ture to i nstant i ate and i ns t rument a l i ze every th i ng? I t is absurd , when speak i ng of other cu l tures , to d i ssoc i a te re l ig ion, econom i cs , pol i t i cs, and the l ega l sys t em (i .e ., the soc i a l and other c l ass i f i catory phant asmagor i as) . for the reason that such a d i ssoc i a t i on has not occur red , these concept s be i ng l i ke so many d i seases w i th wh i ch we i nfect these cu l tures in order to be t ter " unders t and " t hem . In the same manner , i t is absurd to au tonom i ze the sexua l as a separa t e i nstance , an i r reduc i b l e g i ven , as some th i ng to wh i ch other i nst ances or g i vens can be reduced . We need a cr i t i que of sexua l Reason , or rather , a geneo l ogy of sexua l Reason s i mi l ar to N i e t zche ' s geneo l ogy of good and evi l , for i t is our new mora l i t y. One m i gh t say of sexua l i ty, as of dea th: " i t is a new wr i nk l e to wh i ch consc i ousness became accus t omed not so l ong ago . " We rema i n perp l exed and vague l y compass i ona t e when conf ront ed w i th cu l tures for wh i ch the sexua l ac t is not a f ina l i ty

38 SEDUCT I ON

i n i tsel f , for wh i ch sexua l i ty does no t have the mor t a l ser i ousness of an energy to be l iberated, of an e j acu l a t i on to be forced , a produc t i on at any pr i ce , or hyg i en i c aud i t i ng of the body. Cu l tures that preserve l engthy procedures of ent i cement and sensua l i ty, l ong ser i es of gi f ts and counter -g i f ts , w i th sex be i ng but one serv i ce amongs t others , and the ac t of l ove one poss i b l e end- t erm to a prescr i bed , r i tua l i st i c i nt erchange . Such proceedi ngs no l onger make sense to us; ;sex has become , st r i ct l y speaking, the ac tua l i za t i on o f des i re i n p l easure - al l e l se is l i terature. An ext raord i nary crysta l i zat i on a round the orgasm i c , and mor e genera l l y , the energ i z i ng func t i on . Ours is a cu l ture of prema ture e j acu l a t i on. Increas i ng l y al l seduc t i on , al l manne r of ent i cement - wh i ch is a l ways a h i ghl y r i tua l i zed process - is e f f aced beh i nd a na t ura l i zed sexua l i mpera t i ve , beh i nd the i mmed i a t e and i mpera t i ve ; rea l i zat i on of des i re . Our center of grav i ty has been d i sp l aced towards a l ibidi na l economy conce rned w i th on l y the na tura l i za t i on o f des i re , a des i re ded i ca t ed to dr i ves , or to a mach i ne- l i ke func t i on i ng , but above al l , to the i mag i nary of repress i on and l i bera t i on . Hence for th one no l onger says : " You have a sou l and i t mus t be saved , " but : ' " You have a sex , and you mus t put i t to good use. " " You have an unconsc i ous , and you mus t . l et the id speak . " " You have a body , and you mus t der i ve p l easure f rom i t . " " You have a l ibido, and you mus t expend i t , " e tc. Th i s pressure towards l iquidi ty, f l ux and the acce l era t ed ar t i cu l a t i on of the sexua l , psych i c and phys i ca l body is an exac t rep l i ca of tha t wh i ch regu l a tes exchange va l ue : cap i ta l mus t c i r cu l a t e , there mus t no l onger be any f i xed po i nt , i nves tment s mus t be cease l ess l y renewed , va l ue mus t rad i ate w i thout resp i te - thi s is the f orm of va l ue ' s present rea l i zat ion, and sexua l i ty , the sexua l mode l , is s i mp l y i ts mode of appearance at the l eve l of the body. As a mode l sex takes the f orm of an i nd i v i dua l ent erpr i se based on na tura l energy : to each h i s des i re and may the bes t man , preva i l ( in ma t t ers of p l easure) . I t is the se l f same f orm as

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX 39

capi ta l , and th i s is why sexua l i ty , des i re and p l easure are suba l t e rn va l ues . When they f i rst appeared , not so l ong ago, as a sys t em of re f erence on the hor i zon of wes t ern cu l ture , i t was as fa l l en, res i dua l va l ues - the i dea l of i nfer i or c l asses , the bourgeo i s i e , then the pe t t y-bourgeo i s i e - re l at i ve to the ar i stocrat i c va l ues of b i r th and b l ood , va l our and seduc t i on , or the co l l ec t i ve va l ues of re l i g i on and sacr i f i ce . Moreover , the body - thi s se l f same body to wh i ch we ceasel ess l y re f er - has no other rea l i ty than that i mp l i ed by the sexua l and produc t i ve , mode l . I t is cap i ta l that , i n a s i ng l e movemen t , g i ves r i se to both the energ i z i ng body of l abour power , and the body o f our dreams , a sanc tuary of des i res and dr i ves , of psych i c energy and the unconsc i ous , the i mpu l s i ve body that , haunt s the pr i mary processes - the body i tse l f havi ng become a pr i mary process , and thereby an ant i -body , an u l t i ma t e revo l ut i onary re f erent . The t wo bod i es are s i mu l t aneous l y engendered i n repress i on , and the i r apparent ant agon i sm is but a consequence of the i r redup l i ca t i on . When one uncovers i n the body ' s secre t p l aces an " unbound " l ib id ina l energy opposed to the " bound " energy of the produc t i ve body , when one uncovers i n des i re the t ruth of the body ' s phan t asms and dr i ves , one is st i l l on l y d i s i nter i ng the psych i c me t aphor . of cap i ta l . He re is your des i re , your unconsc i ous : a psych i c me t aphor of cap i ta l in the rubb i sh heap of po l i t i ca l economy. And the sexua l j ur i sd i c t i on is but a fantast i c ex t ens i on of the common p l ace i dea l of pr i va te-proper ty , whe r e everyone is ass i gned a cer ta i n amoun t of cap i ta l to manage : a psych i c capi ta l , a l ibidi na l , sexua l or unconsc i ous capi ta l , for wh i ch each person wi l l have to answer i nd i v i dua l l y , unde r the s i gn of h i s or her own l i bera t i on . A fantast i c reduc t i on of seduc t i on . Th i s sexua l i ty t rans formed by the revo l ut i on of des i re , thi s mode of bod i l y produc t i on and c i rcu l a t i on has acqu i red i ts present charac ter , has come to be spoken of in t erms of " sexua l re l at ions , " on l y by forge t t i ng al l forms of seduc t i on - just as one can speak of the soc i a l i n t erms of " re l a t i ons " or "soc i a l re l at ions , " on l y a f ter i t has lost al l symbo l i c subs t ance. Whe reve r sex has been erec t ed i nto a func t i on , an autono-

40

SEDUCT I ON

mous i nstance , i t has l i qu i da t ed seduc t i on . Sex today genera l l y occurs on l y i n the p l ace , and in p l ace of a m i ss i ng seduc t i on , or as the res i due and st ag i ng of a fa i l ed seduc t i on . I t i s t hen
the absen t f o rm o f seduc t i on tha t i s ha l l uc i na t ed sexua l l y -

in the f orm of des i re. The mode rn theory of des i re draws i ts force f rom seduc t i on ' s l i qu i da t i on . Hence for th , i n p l ace of a seduc t i ve form, there; is a produc t i ve form, an " economy " of sex : the re t rospec t i ve of a dr i ve , the ha l l uc i na t i on of a s tock of sexua l energy , of an unconsc i ous in wh i ch the repress i on of des i re and i ts c l earance are i nscr i bed . Al l thi s (and the psych i c i n genera l ) resu l ts f rom the au tonom i zat i on of sex - as na ture and the economy were once the prec ip i tate of the autonom i za t i on o f produc t i on . Na ture and des i re , both of t hem i dea l i zed, succeed each other i n the progress i ve des i gns for l i berat i on, yes t erday the l i bera t i on of the produc t i ve forces , today tha t of the body and sex. One can speak of the b i r th of the sexua l and of sex speech - j ust as one speaks of the b i r th of the c l ini c andtc l i n i ca l gaze - whe r e once there was noth i ng , i f not uncor i t ro l l ' ed, unstab l e , i nsensate , or e l se h i gh l y r i tua l i zed forms . Whe r e too, i t fo l l ows , there was no repress i on , thi s thema t i c w i th wh i ch we have bur dened al l prev i ous soc i e t i es even mor e than our own . We condemn t hem as pr i mi t i ve f rom a t echno l og i ca l perspec t i ve , bu t a l so f rom a . sexua l or psych i c perspec t i ve , for they conce i ved of ne i ther the sexua l nor the unconsc i ous . For tuna te l y , psychoana l ys i s has come a l ong to l i f t the burden and revea l wha t was h i dden . The i ncred i b l e rac i sm of the t ruth, the evange l i ca l rac i sm of the Word and i ts access i on . Whe r e the sexua l does no t appear of and for i tsel f , we ac t as though i t we re repressed ; i t is our way of sav i ng i t . And ye t to speak of repressed or sub l i ma t ed sexua l i ty i n pr i mi t i ve , feuda l or other soc i et i es , or s i mp l y to speak of " sexua l i ty " and the unconsc i ous i n such cases , is a s i gn of pro f ound stup i d i ty. I t is not even cer ta i n tha t such ta l k ho l ds the bes t key to unl ock i ng our soc i e t y. On th i s bas i s, tha t is, by ca l l i ng i nto quest i on the very hypothes i s of sexua l i ty , by ques t i on i ng sex and des i re as au t onomous i nstances , i t is poss i b l e to agree w i th Foucau l t and say ( though no t for the same reasons) that i n our cul ture too there is no and neve r has been any repress i on e i ther.

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX 41

Sexua l i ty as a d i scourse is, l i ke po l i t i ca l economy (and every other d i scurs i ve system) , on l y a mon t age or s i mu l ac rum wh i ch has a l ways been t raversed , thwar t ed and exceeded by ac tua l pract i ce . The coherence and t ransparency of homo sexua l i s has no mor e ex i s t ence than the coherence and t ransparency of I t is a l ong process that s i mu l t aneous l y estab l i shes the psych i c and the sexua l , that estab l i shes the "other scene , " that of the phant asy and the unconsc i ous , at the same t i me as the ener gy produced there i n - a psych i c energy that is mere l y a d i rect consequence of the st aged ha l l uc i na t i on of repress i on , an energy ha l l uc i na t ed as sexua l subst ance , wh i ch is then me t aphor i zed and me t onym i zed accord i ng to the var i ous i nst ances ( top i ca l , econom i c , e tc .), and accord i ng to al l the moda l i t i es of secondary and ter t i ary repress i on . Psychoana l ys i s , thi s mos t adm i rab l e edi f i ce , the mos t beaut i fu l ha l l uc i na t i on of the back-wor l d , as N i e t zsche wou l d say. The ext raord i nary e f f ec t i veness of thi s mode l for the s i mu l a t i on of scenes and energ i es - an ext raor d i nary theore t i ca l psychodrama , thi s stag i ng of the psyche , thi s scenar i o of sex as a separa t e i nst ance and i nsurmount ab l e rea l i ty (ak i n to the hypost a t i za t i on of produc t i on) . Wha t does i t ma t t er i f the econom i c , the b i o l og i ca l or the psych i c bear the costs of thi s st ag i ng - of wha t conce rn is the " scene " or " the other scene " : i t is the ent i re scenar i o of sexua l i ty (and psychoana l ys i s) as a mode l of s i mu l a t i on that shou l d be ques t i oned .

homo econom i cus .

I t is t rue that in our cu l ture the sexua l has t r i umphed over seduc t i on , and annexed i t as a suba l t ern f orm. Our i ns t rumental v i s i on has i nver t ed every th i ng . For i n the symbo l i c order seduc t i on is pr i mary , and sex appears on l y as an addendum . Sex in thi s l at ter order is l i ke the recovery i n an ana l yt i c cure , or a b i r th in a story of Lev i -St rauss ; i t comes as an ext ra , w i thout a re l at i on of cause to e f fect . Th i s is the secret of " symbo l i c ef f i cac i ty" : the wor l d ' s work i ngs are the resu l t of a ment a l seduct i on . Thus the but cher Tchouang Tseu whose unders t and i ng enab l ed h i m to descr i be the cow ' s interst i t i a l st ruc ture w i thout ever hav i ng used the b l ade of a kn i f e : a sor t of symbo l i c reso-

42

SEDUCT I ON i

l ut i on that , as an addendum , has a pract i ca l resu l t . Seduc t i on too wor ks on the mode of symbo l i c , , ar t i cu l at i on, of a due l * af f in i ty w i th the st ruc ture of the other - sex may resu l t , as an addendum , but not necessar i l y. Mor e genera l l y , seduc t i on is a cha l l enge to the very ex i st ence of the sexua l order. And i f our " l i bera t i on" seems to have reversed the t erms and success fu l l y cha l l enged the order of seduc t i on , i t is by no me ans cer ta i n tha t i ts v i c tory is not ho l l ow. The ques t i on of the u l t i ma t e super i or i ty of the r i tua l l .ogi cs of cha l l enge and seduct i on over the econom i c l og i cs of sex and produc t i on st i l l rema i ns unreso l ved . For revo l ut i ons and l i bera t i ons are f ragi l e, wh i l e seduc t i on is i nescapab l e. I t is seduc t i on that l ies in wa i t for t hem - seduced as they are, desp i t e every th i ng , by the i mmense se tbacks that turn t hem f rom the i r t ruth - and aga i n i t is seduc t i on that awa i ts t hem even i n the i r t r i umph. The sexua l d i scourse i tse l f is cont i nua l l y threa t ened w i th say i ng some t h i ng other ; than wha t i t says . In an Ame r i can f i l m a guy pursues a st reet -wa l ker , prudent ly, accord i ng to form . The woman responds , aggress i ve l y : " Wha t do you-wan t? Do you wan t to j ump me? Then , change your approach! Say, I wan t to j ump you! " and the guy , ; t roub l ed , rep l i es : "yes , I wan t to j ump you . " " Then go fuck yourse l f ! " And l ater , when he is dr i v i ng . her i n h i s car : " I ' l l make cof fee , and then you can j ump me. " In fact , thi s cyn i ca l conversa t i on , wh i ch appears ob j ec t i ve , func t i ona l , ana tomi ca l , and w i thout nuance , is on l y a game. Pl ay, cha l l enge , and provoca t i on are just benea th the sur f ace. I ts very bruta l i ty is r i ch w i th the i nf l ec t i ons of l ove and comp l i c i t y. I t is a new manne r of seduc t i on . Or thi s conversa t i on t aken f rom The Sch i zophren i cs ' Ba l l by Ph i l i p D i ck : " Take me to your room and fuck me . " " There is some th i ng i nde f i nab l e in your vocabul ary some t h i ng l ef t to be des i red . " i One can unders t and thi s as : Your propos i t i on is unaccept abl e, i t l acks the poe t ry of des i re , i t is too d i rect . But ~in a sense the text says the exac t oppos i t e : tha t the propos i t i on has some *Trans. not e : I n F r ench , t he wo r d due l means bo t h due l / dua l . Baudr i l l a rd i s c l ear l y p l ay i ng on t he doub l e mean i ng o f t he wo rd - agona l re l a t i ons and rec i proca l cha l l enges . I t rans l a t e t he t e rm `due l ' , even in i ts ad j ec t i va l f orm .

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX

43

th i ng " i nde f i nab l e " abou t i t , wh i ch thereby opens the pa th to des i re. A d i rect sexua l i nv i ta t i on is too d i rec t to be t rue , and i mmed i a t e l y refers to some t h i ng e l se. The f i rst vers i on dep l ores the obscen i t y of the conversa t i on . The second is mor e subt l e ; i t is capab l e of d i sc l os i ng a tw i st to obscen i t y - obscen i t y as an ent i cement , and thus as an " i nde f i nab l e " a l l us i on to des i re. An obscen i t y too bruta l to be t rue , and too i mpo l i t e to be d i shones t - obscen i t y as a cha l l enge and there fore , aga i n , as seduc t i on . In the l ast i nstance , a pure l y sexua l st a t ement , a pure demand for sex , is i mposs i b l e. One canno t be f ree of seduc t i on , and the d i scourse of ant i -seduc t i on is bu t i ts l ast me t amorphos i s. I t is not just that a pure d i scourse of sexua l demand is absurd g i ven the comp l ex i t y of a f fect i ve re l a t i ons ; i t qu i t e s i mp l y does not ex i st . To be l i eve i n sex ' s rea l i ty and in the poss i b i l i ty of speak i ng sex w i thout med i a t i on is a de l us i on - the de l us i on of every d i scourse tha t be l i eves i n t ransparency ; i t is a l so tha t of func t i ona l , sc i ent i f i c , and al l other d i scourses w i th c l a i ms to the t ruth . For tuna te l y , the l at ter is cont i nua l l y unde rm i ned , d i ss i pa ted , des t royed , or rather , c i rcumvent ed , d i ver ted , and seduced. Sur rept i t i ous l y they are turned aga i nst themse l ves ; sur rept i t i ous l y they d i sso l ve i nto a d i f ferent game , a d i f ferent se t of stakes . To be sure , ne i ther pornography nor sexua l t ransac t i ons exerc i se any seduc t i on . L i ke nud i ty , and l i ke the t ruth, they are ab j ec t . They are the body ' s d i senchant ed form, j ust as sex is the suppressed and d i senchant ed f orm of seduc t i on , just as use va l ue is the d i senchant ed f orm of the ob j ec t , and j ust as, mor e genera l l y , the rea l is the suppressed and d i senchant ed f orm of the wor l d. Nud i t y wi l l never abo l i sh seduc t i on , for i t i mmed i a t e l y becomes some t h i ng e lse, the hyster i ca l ent i cement s of a di f fer ent game , one tha t goes beyond i t . The re is no degree zero, no ob j ec t i ve re ference , no po i nt of neut ra l i ty , but a l ways and aga in, stakes . Today al l our s i gns appear to be converg i ng - l i ke the body in nud i t y and mean i ng i n t ruth - towards some conc l us i ve ob j ect i v i ty , an ent rop i c and me t as t ab l e f orm of the neut ral . (Wha t e l se is the idea l - typ i ca l , vaca t i on i ng nude body , g i ven over to the sun , i tse l f hygen i c and neut ra l i zed , w i th i ts luc i fer i -

44 SEDUCT I ON

an pa rody of burn i ng) . But is there ever a cessa t i on of s i gns at some zero po i nt of the rea l or the neut ra l ? Isn' t there a l ways a revers i on of the neut ra l i tse l f i nto a new spi ra l of . stakes, seduct i on and dea th . Wha t seduc t i on used to l ie concea l ed i n sex? Wha t new seduct ion, wha t new cha l l enge l ies concea l ed in the abo l i t i on of wha t , w i th i n sex , was once at stake? (The same ques t i on on another p l ane : Wha t cha l l enge , wha t source of fasc inat ion, l ies concea l ed in the masses , i n the abo l i t i on of wha t was once at st ake w i th the soc i a l ?) Al l descr i pt i ons of d i senchant ed systems , al l hypotheses about the d i senchan tmen t of sys t ems - the f l ood of s i mu l a t i on and d i ssuas i on , the abo l i t i on of symbo l i c processes , the dea th of re ferent i a l s - are perhaps fa l se. The neut ra l is never neut ra l ; i t becomes an ob j ec t of f asc i na t i on . But does i t then become an ob j ec t of seduc t i on?

Agon i s t i c l og i cs , l og i cs of r i tua l and seduc t i on ., are s t ronger than sex . L i ke powe r , sex neve r has the l as t word . In The Emp i re o f The Senses , a f i l m that f rom end to end is occup i ed w i th the sex act , the lat ter , by i ts very pers i stence , comes to be possessed by the l og i c of another order . The f i l m is, un i nte l l i g i b l e in t erms of sex , for sexua l p l easure , by i tsel f , l eads to everyth i ng but dea th. But the madness that se i zes ho l d of the coup l e (a madness on l y for us , i n rea l i ty i t is a r i gourous log i c) pushes t hem to ex t remes , whe re: mean i ng no l onger has sense and the exerc i se of the senses is not i n the l east sensua l . Nor is i t inte l l ig ib l e in t erms of mys t i c i sm or me t aphys i cs . I ts l og i c is one of cha l l enge , i mpe l l ed by the t wo par tners outb i dd i ng each other. Or mor e prec i se l y , the key event is the passage f rom a l og i c of p l easure at the beg i nn i ng , whe r e the man l eads the game , to a l og i c of cha l l enge and dea th , that occurs unde r the i mpe tus of the woman - who thereby becomes the game ' s mi st ress, even i f at f i rst she was on l y a. sexua l ob j ec t . I t is the f emi n i ne pr i nc i p l e tha t br i ngs about. the reversa l of sex / va l ue i nto an agon i st i c l og i c of seduc t i on . The re is here no pervers i on or morb i d dr i ve , no i nterpre ta-

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX 45

t i on dr awn f rom our psycho-sexua l f ront i ers , no "af f i n i ty" of Eros for Thana tos nor any amb i va l ence of des i re. I t is not a ma t ter of sex , nor of the unconsc i ous . The sexua l ac t is v i ewed as a r i tua l act , ceremon i a l or war l i ke , for wh i ch (as . in anc i ent t raged i es on the t heme of incest ) dea th is the manda tory denoue men t , the emb l ema t i c f orm of the cha l l enge ' s fu l f i l l ment .

Thus the obscene can seduce , as can sex and p l easure. Even the mos t ant i -seduc t i ve f i gures can become f i gures of seduct i on . ( I t has been sa i d of the f emi n i st d i scourse that , beyond i ts tota l absence of seduc t i on , there l i es a cer ta i n homosexua l a l l ure) . These f i gures need on l y move beyond the i r t ruth i nto a revers i b l e conf i gura t i on , a conf i gura t i on that is a l so that of the i r dea th. The same ho l ds t rue for that f igure of ant i -seduc t i on pa r exce l l ence , powe r. Powe r seduces . But not i n the vu l gar sense of the masses ' des i re for comp l i c i t y (a t auto l ogy that u l t i ma te l y seeks to ground seduc t i on i n the des i re o f others) . No , powe r seduces by v i r tue of the revers i b i l i ty that haunt s i t , and on wh i ch a m i nor cyc l e is i nst i tuted . No mor e dom i nan t and dom i na t ed , no mor e .v i ct i ms and execut i oners (but " exp l o i t ers " and " exp l o i ted , " they cer ta i n l y ex i st , t hough qu i t e separate l y , for there is no revers i bi l i ty in produc t i on - but then no th i ng essent i a l happens at thi s l eve l ) . No mor e sepa ra t e pos i t i ons : powe r is rea l i zed accord i ng to a due l re l at i on, whe r eby i t throws a cha l l enge to soc i ety, and i ts ex i st ence is cha l l enged in re turn . I f powe r canno t be " exchanged " i n accord w i th thi s m i nor cyc l e of seduc t i on , cha l l enge and ruse , then i t qu i te s i mp l y d i sappears . At bot tom, powe r does no t ex i st . The un i l atera l charac t er o f o f the re l at i on of forces on wh i ch the " st ruc ture " and " rea l i t y " of powe r and i ts perpe tua l movemen t are supposed l y inst i tuted, does no t ex i st . Th i s is the dr eam of powe r i mposed by reason , not i ts rea l i ty. Every th i ng seeks i ts own dea th , inc l ud i ng powe r. Or rather , every th i ng demands to be exchanged , reversed , and abo l i shed w i th i n a cyc l e ( thi s is why ne i ther repress i on nor the unconsc i ous ex i st , for revers i b i l i ty is a l ways a l ready there) . Th i s a l one i s pro f ound l y seduc t i ve. Powe r

46

SEDUCT I ON

seduces on l y when i t becomes a cha l l enge to i tse l f ; otherw i se i t is just an exerc i se , and sat i sf i es on l y the hegemon i c l og i c of reason . Seduc t i on is s t ronger than powe r because i t is revers i b l e and mor ta l , wh i l e power , l i ke va lue , seeks to be i r revers ibl e , cumu l a t i ve and i mmor t a l . Powe r par t akes of al l the i l lus ions of produc t ion, and of the rea l ; i t wan t s to be rea l , and so t ends to become i ts own i mag i nary , i ts own superst i t i on (w i th the he l p of theor i es tha t ana l yze i t , be they to cont es t i t ) . Seduc t i on , on the other hand , is no t of the order of the rea l - and is never of the order of force , nor re l a t i ons of force. Bu t prec i se l y for thi s reason , i t enmeshes al l power ' s rea l act i ons , as we l l as the ent i re rea l i ty of produc t i on , in thi s unrem i t t i ng revers i b i l i ty and di saccumu l a t i on - w i t hou t wh i ch there wou l d be ne i ther powe r
nor accumu l a t i on .

I t is the empt i ness beh i nd , or at the very hear t of powe r and produc t i on; i t is th i s empt i ness that today g i ves t hem the i r l ast g l i mme r of rea l i ty. W i t hou t that wh i ch reverses , annu l s , and seduces them, they wou l d never have had the author i t y of rea l i ty. The rea l , moreover , has never i nt erest ed anyone. I t is a p l ace of d i senchantment , a s i mu l acrum of accumu l a t i on aga i nst dea th . And there is noth i ng mor e t i resome. Wha t some t i mes renders the rea l f asc i na t i ng - and the t ruth as we l l - is the i mag i nary ca t as t rophe wh i ch l i es beh i nd i t . Do you th i nk tha t power , sex , econom i cs - al l these rea l , rea l l y b i g th i ngs - wou l d have he l d up for a s i ng l e momen t un l ess sus t a i ned by fasc i nat i on, a fasc i na t i on that comes prec i se l y f rom the m i r ror i mage in wh i ch they are re f l ected, f rom the i r cont i nuous revers i on , the pa l pab l e p l easure borne of the i r i mm i nen t ca t as t rophe? The rea l , par t i cu l ar l y i n the present , is no th i ng mor e than the s tockp i l i ng of dead mat ter , dead bod i es and dead l anguage - a res i dua l sed i ment a t i on . St i l l we fee l mor e secure when the s tock o f rea l i t y is assessed ( the; eco l og i ca l l ament speaks of ma t er i a l energ i es , but i t concea l s that wha t is d i sappear i ng is the rea l ' s energy , the rea l 's rea l i ty, the poss ib i l i ty ' of i ts manage men t , whe t he r cap i ta l i st or revo l ut i onary) . I f the hor i zon of produc t i on is beg i nn i ng to van i sh , tha t of speech , sex or des i re can st i l l take up the s l ack . To l iberate , to g i ve p l easure , to g i ve

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX 47 a speech , t o g i ve speech t o o t he rs : th i s is rea l , i t is some t h i ng subs t ant i a l , w i t h a prospec t o f s t ocks. And , there fore , i t is powe r. Un f or t una t e l y no t . Tha t is t o say , no t for l ong . Th i s " rea l i t y " i s s l ow l y d i ss i pa t i ng. One wan t s sex , l i ke powe r , t o become an i r revers i b l e i ns t ance , and des i re an i r revers i b l e ene rgy (a s t ock o f ene rgy - des i re , need i t be sa i d , i s neve r f ar f rom cap i t a l ) . For we gr an t mean i ng on l y t o wha t i s i r revers i b l e : accumu l a t i on , progress , grow t h , produc t i on . Va l ue , ene rgy and des i re i mp l y i r revers i b l e processes - tha t is t he ve r y mean i ng o f the i r l i bera t i on . ( In j ec t t he sma l l es t dose o f revers i b i l i t y i nto ou r econom i c , po l i t i ca l , sexua l or i ns t i tut i ona l mechan i sms , and eve ry t h i ng co l l apses) . Th i s i s wha t t oday assur es sexua l i t y o f i ts my t h i ca l au t hor i t y ove r hea r t s and bod i es . Bu t i t is a l so wha t l i es beh i nd t he f rag i l i t y o f sex , and o f t he en t i re ed i f i ce o f produc t i on . Seduc t i on is s t ronge r t han produc t i on . I t is s t ronge r t han sexua l i t y , w i t h wh i ch i t mus t neve r be con f used . I t i s no t some t h i ng i n t erna l to sexua l i t y , t hough th i s i s wha t i t i s gene r a l l y r educed to . I t i s a c i rcu l ar , revers i b l e process o f cha l l enges , oneupmansh i p and dea t h . I t i s, on t he con t ra ry , sex t ha t is t he debased f orm , c i r cumsc r i bed as i t is by t he t e rms o f ene rgy and des i re . Seduc t i on ' s en t ang l emen t w i t h produc t i on and powe r , t he i r rup t i on o f a m i n i ma l revers i b i l i t y w i t h i n eve r y i r revers i b l e process , such t ha t t he l a t t er a r e sec re t l y unde rm i ned , wh i l e s i mu l t aneous l y ensur ed o f tha t m i n i ma l con t i nuum o f p l easur e w i t hou t wh i ch t hey wou l d be no t h i ng - th i s i s wha t mus t be ana l yzed . At t he same t i me know i ng tha t produc t i on cons t an t l y seeks t o e l i m i na t e seduc t i on i n orde r to es t ab l i sh i tse l f on an economy o f re l a t i ons o f f or ce a l one ; and tha t sex , t he produc t i on o f sex , seeks to e l i m i na t e seduc t i on i n orde r t o est ab l i sh i tse l f on an economy o f re l a t i ons o f des i re a l one.

Th i s is why one mus t comp l e t e l y t urn round wha t Foucau l t has t o say i n The H i s t or y o f Sexua l i t y I , wh i l e st i l l accep t i ng i ts cen t ra l hypo t hes i s . Foucau l t sees on l y t he produc t i on o f sex as d i scour se. He is f asc i na t ed by t he i r revers i b l e dep l oymen t

48

SEDUCT I ON

and interst i t i a l sa tura t i on of a f i e l d of speech , wh i ch is at the same t i me the i nst i tut i on of a f i e l d of power , cu l m i na t i ng i n a f i e l d of know l edge that ref l ects (or i nvents) i t . Bu t f rom whence does powe r der i ve i ts somnambu l i s t i c funct iona l i ty , thi s i r res i st ibl e voca t i on to saturate space? I f ne i ther ;soc i a l i ty nor sexua l i ty ex i st un l ess rec l a i med and s t aged by power , perhaps powe r too does no t ex i st un l ess rec l a i med and s t aged by know l edge ( theory) . In wh i ch case , the ent i re ensemb l e shou l d be p l aced i n s i mu l a t i on , and thi s too per f ec t m i r ror i nver ted , even i f the " t ruth e f fects" i t produces are marve l ous l y dec i pherab l e . Fur thermore , the equa t i on of powe r w i th know l edge , thi s convergence of mechan i sms over a f i e ld of ru l e they have seemi ng l y swep t c l ean, thi s con j unc t i on descr i bed by Foucau l t as comp l e t e and opera t i ona l , is perhaps on l y the concur rence o f t wo dead stars whose l ast g l i mmer i ngs st i l l i l l umi na te each other , t hough they have lost the i r own rad i ance? In the i r or ig ina l , authent i c phase , know l edge and powe r we re opposed to each other , some t i mes v i o l ent l y (as were , moreover , sex and power ) . But i f today they are merg i ng , is thi s not due to the progress i ve ex t enua t i on of the i r rea l i ty pr i nc i p l e , of the i r d i st i nc t i ve character i st i cs , the i r spec i f i c energ i es? The i r con j unc t i on then wou l d hera l d no t a re i nforced pos i t i v i ty , but a tw i n i nd i f ferent i at ion, at the end of wh i ch on l y the i r phan t oms wou l d , rema i n , m i ng l i ng amongs t themse l ves , l ef t to haun t us . In the last i nstance , beh i nd the apparent stas i s of know l edge and powe r wh i ch appears to ar i se f rom al l s i des , there wou l d l i e on l y the me t as t as i s of power , the cancerous pro l i f era t i on of a d i sturbed , d i sorgan i zed st ruc ture . I f powe r today is gener al , and can be de t ec t ed at al l l eve l s ( "mo l ecu l ar " power ) , i f i t has become cancerous , w i th i ts ce l l s pro l i fera t i ng uncont ro l l abl y, w i thout regard to the good o l d "gene t i c code " of po l i t i cs , thi s is because i t is i tse l f af f l i cted and i n a state of advanced decompos i t i on. Or perhaps i t is af f l i cted. w i th hyper rea l i ty and i n an acut e cr i s i s of s i mu l a t i on ( the cancerous pro l i f era t i on of on l y the s i gns of power ) and , accord i ng l y , has reached a state of genera l d i f fus i on and sa tura t i on . I ts somnambu l i s t i c operat i ona l i ty. One mus t there fore a l ways wage r on s i mu l a t i on and take the

THE ECL I PT I C OF SEX 49

s i gns f rom beh i nd - s i gns that , when t aken at f ace va l ue and in good fa i th, a l ways l ead to the rea l i ty and ev i dence o f powe r. Jus t as they l ead to the rea l i ty and ev i dence of sex and produc t i on . I t is thi s pos i t i v i sm that mus t not be t aken at face va l ue ; and i t is to thi s revers i on of powe r in s i mu l a t i on one mus t devot e one ' s ef for ts . Powe r wi l l never do i t by i tsel f , and Foucau l t ' s text shou l d be cr i t i c i zed for fa i l ing to do i t and , there fore , for rev i v i ng the i l l us i on of powe r. The who l e , obsessed as i t is w i th max i m i z i ng powe r and sex , mus t be ques t i oned as to i ts empt i ness . G i ven i ts obsess i on w i th powe r as cont i nuous expans i on and i nves tment , one mus t ask i t the ques t i on of the revers i on of the space of power , and of the revers i on of the space of sex and i ts speech . G i ven i ts fasc i na t i on w i th produc t i on , one mus t ask i t the ques t i on of seduc t i on .

II
SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

V THE SACRED HOR I ZON OF APPEARANCES

Seduc t i on takes f rom d i scourse i ts sense and turns i t f rom i ts t ruth. I t is, there fore , cont rary to the psychoana l y t i c d i st inct i on be t ween man i f es t and l atent d i scourses . For the l atent di scourse turns the man i f es t d i scourse not f rom i ts t ruth, but t owa rds i ts t ruth . I t makes the man i f es t d i scourse say wha t i t does no t wan t to say ; i t causes de t erm i na t i ons and pro f ound i nde t erm i na t i ons to show through in the man i f es t d i scourse. Dep t h a l ways peeks through f rom beh i nd the break , and meani ng peeks f rom beh i nd the l ine . The man i f es t d i scourse has the status of an appearance , a l aboured appearance , t raversed by the eme rgence of mean i ng. Interpre ta t i on is wha t breaks the appearance and p l ay of the man i f es t d i scourse and , by t ak i ng up w i th the l atent d i scourse , de l i vers the rea l mean i ng. In seduc t i on , by cont rast , i t is the man i f es t d i scourse - di scourse at i ts mos t super f i c i a l - that turns back on the deeper order (whe ther consc i ous or unconsc i ous) in order to inva l i da te i t , subst i tut i ng the cha rm and i l lus ion of appearances. These appearances are not i n the l east f r i vo l ous , but occas i ons for a game and i ts stakes , and a pass i on for dev i a t i on - the seduct i on of the s i gns themse l ves be i ng mor e i mpor t ant than the eme rgence of any t ruth - wh i ch i nterpretat i on neg l ec ts and dest roys i n i ts search for h i dden mean i ngs . Th i s is why i nterpre tat i on is wha t , pa r exce l l ence , is opposed to seduc t i on , and why

5 4 SEDUCT I ON

i t is the l east seduc t i ve of d i scourses . No t on l y does i t sub j ec t the doma i n of appearances to i nca l cu l ab l e damage , but thi s pr i v i l eged search for h i dden mean i ngs may we l l be pro foundl y i n er ror. For i t is no t somewhe r e e lse, in a h i n t erwe l t or an unconsc i ous , that one wi l l f i nd wha t l eads d i scourse ast ray. Wha t t ru l y d i sp l aces d i scourse , " seduces " i t i n the l i tera l sense , and renders i t seduc t i ve , is i ts very appearance , i ts i nf l ect i ons , i ts nuances , the c i rcu l a t i on (whe ther a l eatory and sense l ess , or r i tua l i zed and me t i cu l ous) of s i gns at i ts sur f ace . I t is thi s tha t ef faces mean i ng and is seduc t i ve , wh i l e a d i scourse ' s mean i ng has never seduced anyone . Al l mean i ng f u l d i scourse seeks to end appea r ances : th i s is i ts at t ract i on, and i ts i mpos ture. I t is a l so an i mposs i b l e under t ak i ng . Inexorab l y , d i scourse is lef t to i ts appearances , and thus to the stakes of . seduc t i on , thus to i ts own f a i l ure as d i scourse . Bu t perhaps d i scourse is secre t l y t empt ed by thi s fa i lure, by the bracke t i ng of i ts ob j ec t i ves , of i ts t ruth ef fects wh i ch become absorbed w i th i n a sur f ace that swa l l ows mean i ng . Th i s is wha t happens at f i rst , when d i scourse seduces i tse l f ; i t is the or i g i na l f orm by wh i ch d i scourse becomes absorbed w i th i n i tse l f and emp t i ed of i ts t ruth in order to be t ter f asc i na te others : the pr i mi t i ve seduc t i on of l anguage . Every d i scourse is comp l i c i t i n thi s rapture , i n thi s dev i a t i on , and i f i t does not do i t i tsel f , then others wi l l do : i t i n i ts p l ace . Al l appearances consp i re to comba t and root : out mean i ng (whe ther i ntent i ona l or otherw i se) , and turn i t i nto a game , i nto another of the game ' s rul es, a mor e arb i t rary ru l e - or i nto another e l us i ve r i tua l , one that is mor e adventurous and seduct i ve than the d i rec t i ve l i ne of mean i ng. Wha t d i scourse mus t f i ght aga i nst is not so much the unconsc i ous secre t as the super f i c i a l abyss of i ts own appearance ; and i f d i scourse mus t t r i umph over some th i ng , i t is no t over phant as i es and ha l l uc i na t i ons heavy w i th mean i ng and mi s i nterpre ta t i on , but the sh i ny sur f ace of non-sense and al l the games , that the l at ter renders poss i b l e . I t was on l y a shor t wh i l e ago tha t one succeeeded i n e l i m i na t i ng thi s stake of seduc t i on (wh i ch has as i ts conce rn the sacred hor i zon of appearances) i n order to subst i tute a st ake " i n depth , " a stake i n the unconsc i ous , or in interpre ta t i on . Bu t thi s subst i tut i on is f rag i l e and epheme ra l . No one knows i f the re i gn i ng obsess i on w i th l atent d i scourse one

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

55

f i nds in psychoana l ys i s (wh i ch i n ef fect , genera l i zes the v i ol ence of i nterpre ta t i on to al l l eve l s) , i f thi s mechan i sm w i th wh i ch one has e l i m i na t ed (or sought to e l i mi na te) al l seduc t i on is not i tse l f a mode l of s i mu l a t i on - a ra ther f rag i l e one that g i ves i tse l f the semb l ance of be i ng i nsurmount ab l e i n order to be t ter concea l al l para l l e l ef fects, and mos t notab l y , the e f fects of seduc t i on that are beg i nn i ng to wor k the i r damage. For wha t is mos t damag i ng to psychoana l ys i s is the rea l i za t i on that the unconsc i ous seduces : i t seduces by i ts dreams and by i ts concept ; i t seduces as soon as the i d speaks and even as the i d w i shes to speak . A doub l e st ruc ture emerges , a para l l e l st ruc ture of the conn i vance of the s i gns of the unconsc i ous and the i r exchange , wh i ch ea ts away at the other st ructure , the hard , pure st ructure of unconsc i ous " l abour " and t rans f erence and count er t rans f erence. The ent i re psychoana l y t i c ed i f i ce per i shes of i ts own seduc t i on , and w i th i t al l the others . Le t us be ana l ysts for one b l az i ng instant , and say tha t i t is the revenge of the repressed , the repress i on of seduc t i on , tha t is at the or i g i n of psychoana l ys i s as a " sc i ence , " w i th i n the i nte l l ectura l t ra j ectory of Freud h i mse l f. The Freud i an oeuvr e unfo l ds be t ween t wo po l es_ that rad i ca l l y put i nto ques t i on the i nt ermed i ary const ruc t i on , these po l es be i ng seduc t i on and the dea th dr i ve. We have a l ready spoken in L ' Ecbange symbo l i que e t l a mor t of the lat ter , cons i dered as an i nvers i on of the ear l i er psychoana l y t i c appara tus ( top i ca l , econom i c ) . Regard i ng the former , wh i ch af ter nume r ous turns l i nks up w i th the dea th dr i ve by some secret af f ini ty, one has to say tha t i t appears as psychoana l ys i s ' lost ob j ec t . I t is c l ass i c to cons i der Freud ' s abandonmen t of the theory of seduc t i on (1907) as a dec i s i ve step in the eme rgence of psychoana l y t i c theory and i n mov i ng to the foreground the not i ons of unconsc i ous phant asy , psych i c rea l i ty, i nfant i l e sexua l i ty , e tc. Lap l anche and Ponta l i s
Vocabu l a i re de l a psychana l yse

56

SEDUCT I ON

Seduc t i on , as an or i g i na l form, is cons i dered re l a ted to the state of the " pr i ma l phant asy " and thus t reated, accord i ng to a l og i c tha t is no t l onger i ts own , as a res i due , a vest ige , or screen / forma t i on i n the hence for th t r i umphant l og i c and st ructure of psych i c and sexua l rea l i ty. Bu t i nst ead of cons i der i ng seduc t i on ' s downgr ad i ng as necessary to psychoana l ys i s ' growth , one shoud th i nk of i t as a cruc i a l event , heavy w i th consequences . As we know , seduc t i on wi l l d i sappear f rom psychoana l y t i c d i scourse , or wi l l reappear on l y to be bur r i ed and forgot ten, i n accord w i th a l og i ca l repe t i t i on of the founda t i ona l ac t of den i a l by the mas t er h i mse l f . I t is no t s i mp l y set as i de as some t h i ng secondary re l at i ve to the mor e dec i s i ve e l ement s l i ke i nfant i l e sexua l i ty , repress i on , Oed i pus , e tc. ; i t is den i ed as a dangerous f orm that cou l d we l l threa t en the deve l opmen t and coherence of the u l ter i or ed i f i ce . Exac t l y the same th i ng occurs i n Saussure as i n F reud. Saussure a l so began , i n the Anagr ammes , w i th a descr i pt i on of a f orm of l anguage , or mor e prec i se l y , of i ts subvers i on - a r i tua l i zed, me t i cu l ous f orm of the decons t ruc t i on of mean i ng and va l ue . Bu t then he took i t al l back and moved on to the const ruc t i on of l i ngu i st i cs . Was thi s turn due to the man i f es t fa i lure of h i s a t t empt ed proofs , or d i d i t i nvo l ve a renunc i a t i on of the anagramma t i ca l cha l l enge i n order to under t ake the mor e const ruct i ve , durab l e and sc i ent i f i c deve l opmen t of the mode of produc t i on o f mean i ng , to the exc l us i on of i ts poss i b l e subvers i on? Bu t wha t does i t ma t ter , the fact is tha t l i ngu i st i cs was born f rom thi s i r revocab l e redep l oyment , and i t const i tutes the fundamen t a l ax i om and ru l e for a l l those who cont i nue Saussure ' s wor k . One does no t re turn to the scene of , the cr i me , and the forge t t i ng of the or i g i na l murde r is par t of the l og i ca l and t r i umphant unfo l d i ng of sc i ence . Al l the energy of the dead obj ect and i ts l ast r i tes passes i nto the s i mu l a t ed resur rec t i on of the l i v i ng . St i l l i t mus t be sa i d tha t Saussure , at l east , had the intut i t ion towards the end that h i s l ingui st i c enterpr i se had fa i l ed, l eav i ng a hover i ng uncer ta i nty , the g l i mpse of a weakness , of the poss i b l y i l l usory charac t er of so beaut i fu l a mechan i sm of subst i tut i on . Bu t such scrup l es , w i th i n wh i ch one can perce i ve some t h i ng of the prema ture and v i o l ent bur i a l of the Anagr ammes , wou l d be tota l l y fore i gn to h i s he i rs, who rema i n

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 57

cont ent to manage the d i sc i p l i ne w i thou t ever touch i ng on the i dea of an abyss of l anguage , an abyss of l i ngu i st i c seduc t i on , a rad i ca l l y d i f ferent opera t i on that absorbs rather than produces mean i ng. The sarcophagus of l ingu i st i cs was t i ght l y sea l ed, and fel l upon the shroud of the s ign i f i er.

Thus the shroud of psychoana l ys i s has fa l l en over seduc t i on , the shroud of h i dden mean i ngs and of a h i dden excess of meaning, at the expense of the sur f ace o f absorpt i on , the super f i c i a l abyss of appearances , the i ns t ant aneous and pan i cky sur f ace of the exchange and r i va l ry of s i gns cons t i tut ed by seduc t i on (hyster i a be i ng but a " symp toma t i c " man i f es t a t i on of the lat ter , one tha t has a l ready been cont am i na t ed by the l atent st ructure of the symp t om , and is thus pre-psychoana l yt i c , thus degraded - wh i ch is why i t was ab l e to, ,serve as a " convers i on ma t r i x " for psychoana l ys i s) . Freud abo l i shed seduc t i on i n order to put i nto p l ace a mach i ne ry of i nterpretat i on, and of sexua l repress i on , that of f er al l the character i st i cs of ob j ec t i v i ty and coherence . Assum i ng that one d i sregards al l the i nterna l convu l s i ons of psychoana l ys i s , be they persona l or theoret i ca l , that unde rm i ne i ts beaut i fu l coherence - l est al l the cha l l enges and seduc t i ons bur i ed unde r the d i scourse ' s r i gour reemerge l i ke the l i v i ng dead . (But doesn ' t thi s suggest , so the beaut i fu l sou l s wi l l argue , that , at bot tom, psychoana l ys i s is st i l l a l i ve?) . Freud may have broken w i th seduc t i on and t aken the s i de of i nterpretat i on (at l east unt i l the l ast me t apsycho l ogy wh i ch , very def in i te l y , moves in a d i f ferent d i rect i on) , but al l that was repressed by thi s adm i rab l e rea l i gnment has reeme rged w i th i n the conf l i cts and v i c i ss i tudes of psychoana l ys i s ' hi story, and w i th i n the course of a l mos t every cure (one is never f i n i shed w i th hyster i a! ) . And i t is not an i ncons i derab l e source of enter ta i nmen t to see seduc t i on sweep across psychoana l ys i s w i t h Lacan , i n the w i l d-eyed f orm of a p l ay of s ign i f i ers f rom wh i ch psychoana l ys i s - i n the r i gour of i ts demands and i n i ts form, i n the f orm F reud wan t ed - is dy i ng j ust as cer ta in l y , nay even mor e cer ta in l y , as f rom i ts i nst i tut i ona l bana l i za t i on . The seduc t i on of Lacan i an i sm is, no doubt , an i mpos ture ;

5 8 SEDUCT I ON

but in i ts own way i t cor rects , rect i f i es and a tones for the or igi na l i mpos ture of F reud h i mse l f , that of the forc l osure of the form/ seduc t i on to the advant age o f a wou l d-be sc i ence . The Lacan i an d i scourse , wh i ch genera l i zes the seduc t i ve prac t i ces of psychoana l ys i s , avenges thi s forec l osed seduc t i on , bu t i n a manne r tha t is' i tse l f cont am i na t ed by psychoana l ys i s . Tha t is to say, the vengeance a l ways occurs w i th i n the t erms of the Law (of the symbo l i c) , resu l t i ng in an i ns i d i ous seduc t i on exerc i sed i n t erms of the l aw and (of the ef f i gy) of a Mas t er who ru l es by the Word over hyster i ca l masses unf i t for p l easure. . . None the l ess , w i th Lacan i t is st i l l a ma t t er of the dea th of psychoana l ys i s , of a dea th due to the t r i umphan t but pos t humous reeme rgence of wha t at the beg i nn i ng was den i ed . Isn' t thi s the fu l f i l l ment of a dest i ny? At l east psychoana l ys i s wi l l have had the oppor tun i t y to end w i th a Grea t I mpos tor af ter hav i ng begun . w i th a Grea t Den i a l . Tha t the mos t beaut i fu l cons t ruc t i on of mean i ng and i nterpretat i on ever erec t ed thus co l l apses unde r the we i ght of i ts own s igns, wh i ch we re once t erms '. heavy w i th mean ti ng , but have once aga i n become dev i ces in an unres t ra i ned seduc t i on , t erms in an un t r amme l ed exchange that is bo t h comp l i c i t w i th and emp t y of mean i ng ( i nc l ud i ng in the cure) - thi s shou l d exa l t and comfor t us . I t is a s i gn that the t ruth at l east ( that for wh i ch i mpos tors re i gn) wi l l be spared -us . And tha t wha t m i gh t appear as psychoana l ys i s ' fa i l ure is bu t the t empt a t i on common to every : grea t sys t em of mean i ng , to s i nk i nto i ts own i mage and l ose i ts sense - wh i ch i ndeed sugges t s the re turn of pr i mi t i ve seduc t i on ' s- f l ame and the revenge of appearances . But then whe r e is the i mpos ture? Hav i ng re j ec t ed the form/ seduc t i on f rom the star t , psychoana l ys i s -was perhaps on l y an i l l us i on an i l lus ion of t ruth and i nterpretat i on - that wou l d be cont rad i c t ed and count erba l anced by the Lacan i an i l l us i on of seduc t i on . Thus a cyc l e is comp l e t ed , f rom wh i ch perhaps other i nter rogat i ve and seduc t i ve f orms wi l l ar i se . I t was the same w i t h God and the Revo l ut i on . To d i spe l al l appearances so that God ' s t ruth cou l d sh i ne for th was the i l lus i on of the I conoc l as t s . An i l lus ion because God ' s t ruth d i d not ex i st , and perhaps , secre t l y they knew i t , thi s be i ng why the i r fa i lure proceeded f rom the same i ntu i t i on as tha t of the adorers i
a

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

59

of i mages : one can l i ve on l y the i dea o f a l t ered t ruth . I t is the on l y way to l i ve in con form i t y w i th the t ruth. Otherw i se l i fe becomes unbearab l e (prec i se l y because the t ru th does no t exist ) . One need not wan t to d i spe l appearances ( the seduc t i on of i mages) . Bu t i f one does , i t is i mpera t i ve that one not succeed l est the absence of the t ruth become man i f es t . Or the absence of God , or the Revo l ut i on . The Revo l ut i on , and in par t i cu l ar i ts ape- l i ke t ravesty , Sta l i n i sm, l i ves on l y by the i dea that every th i ng is opposed to i t . St a l i n i sm is i ndest ruc t i b l e because i t ex i sts on l y i n order to concea l the non-ex i s t ence of the Revo l ut i on and i ts t ruth, and thereby to restore hope. " The peop l e " R i varo l sa id, "d i d no t wan t a Revo l ut i on , they wan t ed on l y i ts spec t ac l e " - because thi s is the on l y way to preserve the Revo l ut i on ' s appea l , i nst ead of abo l i sh i ng i t i n i ts t ruth . " We do no t be l i eve that the t ruth rema i ns t rue once the ve i l has been l i f ted" (N i e t zsche) .

TROMPE L ' OE I L OR ENCHANTED S I MULAT I ON

D i senchant ed s i mu l a t i on : pornography - t ruer than t rue the he i ght of the s i mu l ac rum . Enchan t ed s i mu l a t i on : the t rompe- l 'oe i l - fa l ser than fa l se the secre t of appearances. Ne i ther fabl e , story or compos i t i on , nor theater , scene or act i on . The t rompe l be i l forge ts al l thi s and bypasses i t by the l ow- l eve l represent a t i on of second- ra t e ob j ec ts. The l at ter f i gure i n the grea t compos i t i ons of the t i me , but here they appear a l one , as t hough the d i scourse on pa i nt i ng had been e l i mi na t ed . Sudden l y they no l onger " represent , " they are no l onger ob j ects , no l onger any th i ng . They are b l ank , , empt y s i gns tha t bespeak a soc i a l , re l i g i ous or ar t i st i c ant i -ceremony or ant i represent a t i on . Scraps of soc i a l l i fe, they turn aga i nst the l at ter and pa rody i ts theat r i ca l i ty ; thi s is why they are scat tered, j uxt aposed at r andom . The i mp l i ca t i on be i ng that these ob j ects are not ob j ects . They do not descr i be a fami l i ar rea l i ty, as does a st i l l l i fe. They descr i be a vo i d , an absence , the absence of every represent a t i ona l h i erarchy tha t organ i zes the e l ement s of a tab l eau, or for tha t ma t ter , the po l i t i ca l order. . . These are no t me r e ext ras d i sp l aced f rom the ma i n scene , bu t ghos t s that haun t the empt i ness of the st age. The i rs is no t the aesthe t i c appea l of pa i nt i ng and resemb l ance , but the acute , me t aphys i ca l appea l of the rea l 's abo l i t i on . Haun t ed ob j ects ,

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 61

me t aphys i ca l ob j ects , in the i r unrea l revers i on they are opposed to the ent i re represent a t i ve space of the Rena i ssance. The i r very i ns i gn i f i cance is of f ens i ve . Ob j ec t s w i thout refer ents , s t r i pped of the i r decor - o l d newspapers , books , na i l s, boards , and scraps of food - i so l ated, decayed , spect ra l ob j ects , d i s i ncarna t ed f rom al l nar rat i ve , they a l one we re ab l e to t race an obsess i on w i th a lost rea l i ty, some t h i ng ak i n to l i fe be fore the sub j ec t and h i s acqu i s i t i on of consc i ousness. " For the t ransparent , a l lus i ve i mage that the ar t l over expects , the t rompe Z be i l t ends to subst i tute the i nt rac tab l e opac i t y of Presence " (Pi er re Charpent ra t ) . S i mu l acra w i thou t perspec t i ve , the f i gures in t rompe l 'oe i l appear sudden l y , w i th l ust rous exac t i tude , as t hough denuded of the aura of mean i ng and ba thed i n e ther. Pure appearances , they have the i rony of too much rea l i ty.

The re is no na ture in the t rompe l be i l , nor l andscapes , sk i es, van i sh i ng po i nt s or na tura l l i ght . Nor faces, psycho l ogy or h i stor i c i ty. Every th i ng is ar t i fact . A ver t i ca l backdrop ra i ses obj ects i so l ated f rom the i r referent i a l cont ex t to the status of pure s i gns . Trans l ucency , suspense , f ragi l i ty, obso l escence - hence the i ns i stence on paper ( f rayed at the edges) , the let ter , the m i r ror or wa t ch , the f aded , unt i me l y s i gns of a t ranscendence that has van i shed i nto the quot i d i an . The m i r ror of worn-ou t boards whose knot s and r i ngs ma rk the t i me , l i ke a c l ock w i thout hands that l eaves one to guess the hour : these are th i ngs that have l asted, in a t i me that has a l ready passed . Anachrony a l one stands out , the i nvo l ut ed represent a t i on o f t i me and space. The re are no f rui ts, mea t s or f l owers , no baske ts or bouque t s , nor any of the de l i ght fu l th i ngs f ound i n (a st i l l ) l i fe. Na ture is carna l , and a st i l l l i fe is a carna l ar rangemen t on a hor i zont a l p l ane , that prov i ded by the ground or a tab l e . A l though a st i l l l i fe may some t i mes p l ay w i th d i sorder , w i th the ragged edge of th i ngs and the f ragi l i ty of the i r use , i t a l ways reta i ns the grav i ty of rea l th i ngs , as underscored by the hor i zont a l ness . Whe reas the t rompe l be i l func t i ons in we i ght l essness , as i nd i ca t ed by the ver t i ca l backdrop , every th i ng be i ng suspended , the ob j ects ,

62

SEDUCT I ON

t i me , even l ight and perspec t i ve. Wh i l e the st i l l l i fe uses c l ass i c shapes and shades , the shadows borne by the t rompe l be i l l ack the dep t h that comes f rom a rea l l um i nous source . L i ke the obso l escence of ob j ec ts , they are the s i gn of a s l ight ver t i go, the ver t i go o f a prev i ous l i fe, of an appearance pr i or to rea l i ty. Th i s mys t er i ous l i ght w i thout or i g i n, whose ob l i que rays are no l onger rea l , is l i ke s t agnant water , wa t er w i thou t depth , sof t to the t ouch l i ke a na tura l dea th . Here th i ngs have l ong s i nce l ost the i r shadows ( the i r subs t ance) . Some t h i ng other than the sun sh i nes on them, a br i ghter star , w i thou t an a tmosphere , or w i th an e ther that doesn ' t ref ract . Perhaps dea th i l l umi na t es these th i ngs d i rect l y , and that is the i r so l e mean i ng? These shadows do not move w i th the sun; they do not grow w i th the even i ng ; w i thou t movemen t , they appear as an i nev i tab l e edgi ng . No t the resu l t of ch i aroscuro , nor a sk i l fu l d i a l ect i c of l i ght and shadow ( for these are st i l l pa i nt er l y ef fects) , they sugges t the t ransparency of ob j ec t s to a b l ack sun . One senses that these ob j ec ts are approach i ng the b l ack ho l e f rom wh i ch , for us , rea l i ty, the rea l wor l d , and norma l t i me eme rge . W i t h thi s forward decent er i ng ef fect , thi s advance towards the sub j ec t of a m i r ror ob j ec t , i t is the appearance of the doub l e , in the gu i se of t r i v i a l ob j ec ts , tha t crea tes the ef fect of seduc t i on , the star t l ing i mpress i on charac ter i st i c of the t rompe l be i l : a tact i l e ver t i go that recount s the sub j ec t ' s i nsane des i re to ob l i terate h i s own i mage , and thereby van i sh . For rea l i ty gr i ps us on l y when we l ose ourse l ves in i t , or when i t reappears as our own , ha l l uc i na t ed dea th . A . vague phys i ca l w i sh to grasp th i ngs , but wh i ch hav i ng been suspended , becomes me t aphys i ca l : the ob j ec t s of the t rompe l oe i l have some th i ng of the same: fantast i c v i vac i ty as the ch i l d' s d i scovery of h i s own i mage , an unmed i a t ed ha l l uc i na t i on anter i or to the perceptua l order . I f there is a mi rac l e of t rompe l be i l , i t does no t l i e i n the rea l i sm of i ts execut i on , l i ke the grapes of Zeux i s wh i ch appeared so rea l that b i rds came to peck at t hem . Th i s is absurd . M i rac l es never resu l t f rom a surp l us of rea l i ty but , on the cont rary, f rom a sudden break in rea l i ty and the g i dd i ness of fee l i ng onese l f fal l . I t is thi s l oss of rea l i ty that the sur rea l fami l i ar i ty o f ob j ec t s t rans l ates . W i t h the d i s i nt egra t i on o f th i s h i erarch i -

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 6 3

ca l organ i za t i on of space tha t pr i v i l eges the eye and v i s i on, of thi s perspec t i va l s i mu l a t i on - for i t is mere l y a s i mu l ac rum some t h i ng eme rges that , for wan t of some th i ng bet ter , we express in t erms of touch , a tact i l e hyperpresence of th i ngs , "as though one cou l d ho l d t hem :" But thi s tact i l e f ant asy has nothi ng to do w i th our sense of touch ; i t is a me t aphor for the "se i zure " resu l t i ng f rom the ann i h i l a t i on of the scene and space of represent a t i on . Sudden l y thi s se i zure rebounds onto the soca l l ed " rea l " wor l d , to revea l that thi s " rea l i ty" is naugh t but a s t aged wor l d , ob j ec t i f i ed i n accord w i th the ru l es of perspect i ve. "Rea l i ty " appears as a pr i nc i p l e , one that de f i nes the pa i nt ing, scu l pture and arch i tec ture o f the per i od , but a pr i nc i p l e none the l ess - that is, a s i mu l ac rum wh i ch the exper i ment a l hypers i mu l a t i on of the t rompe l be i l ) unde rm i nes .

The t rompe l oe i l does not seek to con fuse i tse l f w i th the rea l . Consc i ous l y produced by means of p l ay and ar t i f i ce , i t present s i tse l f as a s i mu l ac rum . By m i m i ck i ng the th i rd d i mens ion, i t ques t i ons the rea l i ty of thi s d i mens i on , and by m i m i ck i ng and exceed i ng the e f fects of the rea l , i t rad i ca l l y ques t i ons the rea l i ty pr i nc i p l e . The rea l is re l i nqu i shed by the ve ry excess o f i ts appea r ances . The ob j ec t s resemb l e themse l ves too much , thi s resemb l ance be i ng l i ke a second state ; and by v i r tue of thi s a l l egor i ca l resemb l ance , and of the d i agona l l ight ing, they po i nt to the i rony of too much rea l i ty. Dep t h appears to have been turned i ns i de out . Wh i l e the Rena i ssance organ i zed al l space in accord w i th a d i stant van i shi ng po i nt , perspec t i ve i n the t rompe l be i l is, i n a sense , pro j ec t ed forward . Ins t ead of f l ee i ng be fore the panoram i c sweep of the eye ( the pr i v i l ege of panopt i c v i s ion) , the ob j ec ts " foo l " the eye ( " t rompen t Z be i l ) by a sor t of i nterna l dep t h - not by causi ng one to be l i eve i n a wor l d that does not ex i st , but by under m i n i ng the pr i v i l eged pos i t i on of the gaze. The eye , i nst ead of genera t i ng a space that spreads out , is but the i nterna l van i shi ng po i nt for a convergence of ob j ec t s . A d i f ferent un i verse occup i es the foreground , a un i verse w i thou t hor i zon or

64

SEDUCT I ON

hor i zonta l i ty , l i ke an opaque m i r ror p l aced be fore the eye , w i th noth i ng beh i nd i t . Th i s is, proper l y speak i ng , the rea l m of appearances , whe r e there is noth i ng to see , whe r e th i ngs see you . They do not f l ee be fore your gaze , but pos i t i on themse l ves in f ront of you , w i th a l ight that seems to come f rom another wor l d , w i th shadows that never qu i t e g i ve t hem a t rue th i rd d i mens i on. For thi s d i mens i on , that of perspec t i ve , a l ways ind i ca tes the bad consc i ence of the s i gn re l at i ve to rea l i ty - a bad consc i ence tha t has ea t en away at al l pa i nt i ng s i nce the Rena i ssance. Whence i ndependen t of the aesthe t i c p l easure , comes the uncann i ness of the t rompe l 'oe i l - the s t range l i ght i t casts on thi s ent i re l y new , wes t ern rea l i ty wh i ch eme rged t r i umphant w i th the Rena i ssance . The t rompe Z be i l is the i ron i c s i mu l ac rum of that rea l i ty. I t is wha t sur rea l i sm was to the funct i ona l i st revol ut i on of the ear l y twent i e th century - sur rea l i sm be i ng but an i ron i c rever i e on the pr i nc i p l e of func t i ona l i ty. And l i ke t rompe l oe i l sur rea l i sm is not qu i t e par t of ar t or ar t h i story , for the i r conce rn is w i th a me t aphys i ca l d i mens i on , and not w i th ma t ters of sty l e . They a t tack our sense of rea l i ty or func t i ona l i ty and , there fore , our sense o f consc i ousness . They seek out the wrong or reverse s i de of th i ngs , and unde rm i ne the wor l d ' s apparent factua l i ty. Th i s is why the p l easure that they g i ve us, the i r seduc t i veness , howeve r sma l l , is rad i ca l ; for i t comes f rom a rad i ca l surpr i se borne of appearances , f rom a l i fe pr i or to the mode of produc t i on o f the rea l wor l d.

The t rompe l oe i l is no l onger conf i ned to pa i nt i ng . L i ke stucco , i ts cont emporary , i t can do any th i ng , m i m i c or pa rody anyth i ng . I t has become the protot ype for the ma l evo l ent use of appearances. Wha t began as a game took on fantast i c d i mens i ons in the XVI t h century , and ended up e l i mi na t i ng the boundar i es be t ween pa i nt i ng, scu l pture and arch i tec ture. In the mura l s and ce i l i ng pa i nt i ngs of the Rena i ssance and Baroque , pa i nt i ng and scu l pture converge . In the t rompe Z'oe i l mura l s and st reets of Los Ange l es , arch i t ec ture is dece i ved and de f aced by i l lus i on . The seduc t i on of space by the s i gns of space . Hav i ng sa i d

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

65

so much abou t the produc t i on of space , is i t not t i me to speak abou t i ts seduc t i on?

And abou t the seduc t i on of po l i t i ca l space. For examp l e. the stud i o l os of the Duke of Urb i no and Feder i go da Mont e f e l t re in the duca l pa l ace of Urb i no and Gubb i o : t i ny sanc tuar i es ent i re l y in t rompe Z'oe i l at the hear t of the i mmense space of the pa l ace. The l at ter exemp l i f i es the t r i umph of an arch i tec tura l perspec t i ve , of a space dep l oyed accord i ng to the rul es, wh i l e the s tud i o l o appears as an i nver t ed m i c rocosm. Cut of f f rom the rest of the st ructure , w i thou t w i ndows , l i tera l l y w i thout space - here space is, ac tua l i zed by s i mu l a t i on . I f the pa l ace as a who l e const i tutes the arch i tec tura l ac t pa r exce l l ence , the man i f es t d i scourse of ar t (and power ) , then wha t is one to make of the m i n i scu l e stud i o l o that ad j o i ns the chape l l i ke ye t another sacred p l ace , but w i th an a i r of bew i t chmen t? I t is not c l ear wha t is happen i ng w i th regard to space , and consequent l y , to the ent i re sys t em of representa t i ons that g i ves order to the pa l ace and repub l i c . I t is a pr i va t i ss i me space , the preroga t i ve of the Pr i nce , l i ke i ncest and t ransgress i on we re once k i ng l y preroga t i ves . A comp l e te reversa l of the ru l es of the game is i n ef fect here , a l l owi ng us to surm i se i roni ca l l y, by the a l l egory of the t rompe Z'oe i l , that the externa l space , that of the pa l ace , and beyond i t , the c i ty, tha t is, the po l i t i ca l space , the l ocus of power , is i tse l f pe rhaps on l y an ef fect of perspec t i ve. Such a dangerous secret , such a rad i ca l hypothes i s , the Pr i nce mus t keep to h i mse l f i n the st r i ctest secrecy : f or i t is the very secre t of h i s powe r. S i nce Mach i ave l l i po l i t i c i ans have perhaps a l ways known that the mas t ery of a s i mu l a t ed space is at the source of the i r power , that po l i t i cs is no t a rea l act i v i ty, but a s i mu l a t i on mode l , whose man i f es t ac ts are but ac tua l i zed i mpress i ons . I t is thi s b l i nd spot w i th i n the pa l ace , cut of f f rom arch i tecture and pub l i c l i fe, wh i ch i n a sense re i gns supreme , not by d i rect de t erm i nat i on, bu t by a sor t of i nterna l revers i on , by an abroga t i on o f the ru l es enac t ed in secret , as i n pr i mi t i ve r i tua l s. A ho l e in rea l i ty, an i ron i c t ransf i gurat i on, an exac t s i mu l acrum h i dden at the

66 SEDUCT I ON

hear t of rea l i ty, and on wh i ch the l at ter depends for i ts funct i on i ng . Th i s i s the secre t o f appea r ances . Thus the Pope , the Gr and Inqu i s i tor , the grea t Jesu i ts and theo l og i ans a l l knew tha t God d i d no t ex i st ; thi s was the i r secret , and the secre t of the i r s t rength . S i mi l ar l y Mont e f e l t re ' s stud i ol o i n t rompe l 'oe i l secre t l y suggests that , in the l ast i nstance , rea l i ty does no t ex i st , that " rea l " i n-depth space , i nc l ud i ng pol i t ica l space , is a l ways pot ent i a l l y revers i b l e - the secret that once commanded po l i t i cs , but wh i ch have s i nce been lost in the i l l us i on of the masses ' " rea l i ty. "

I ' LL BE YOUR M I RROR

In the t r ompe Z oe i l , whe t he r a m i r ror or pa i nt i ng , we are bew i t ched by the spe l l o f the m i ss i ng d i mens i on . I t is the lat ter that estab l i shes the space of seduc t i on and becomes a source of ver t i go. For i f the d i v i ne m i ss i on of al l th i ngs is to f i nd the i r mean i ng , or to f i nd a st ruc ture on wh i ch to base the i r meani ng, they a l so seek , by v i r tue of a d i abo l i ca l nosta l g i a , to l ose themse l ves in appearances , i n the seduc t i on of the i r i mage. Tha t i t to say, they seek to un i te wha t shou l d be separa t ed i nto a s ing l e ef fect of dea th and seduc t i on . Narc i ssus . Seduc t i on cannot poss i b l y be represent ed , because in seduct i on the d i st ance be t ween the rea l and i ts doub l e , and the di stor t i on be t ween the Same and the Other , is abo l i shed . Bend i ng over a poo l of water , Narc i ssus quenches h i s thi rst . H i s i mage is no l onger "other ; " i t is a sur f ace that absorbs and seduces h i m, wh i ch he can approach but never pass beyond . For there is no beyond , just as there is no re f l ex i ve d i st ance be t ween h i m and h i s i mage . The m i r ror of wa t er is not a sur f ace of ref l ect i on, but of absorpt i on . Th i s is why of al l the grea t f i gures of seduc t i on in my tho l ogy and ar t - who seduce by a l ook , a song , an absence , by rouge , beaut y or monst ros i ty , by masks or madness , by the i r f ame , but a l so the i r fa i l ure and dea th - Narc i ssus st ands out w i th s i ngul ar force .

68 SEDUCT I ON

No t a mi r ror - re f l ec t i on , i n wh i ch the sub j ec t f i nds h i mse l f t rans formed - not a m i r ror phase , i n wh i ch the sub j ec t establ i shes h i mse l f w i th i n the i mag i nary. Al l . this be l ongs to the psycho l og i ca l doma i n of a l ter i ty and ident i ty , no t seduc t i on . Al l re f l ec t i on theory is i mpover i shed , par t i cu l ar l y the i dea that seduc t i on is root ed in the a t t rac t i on of l i ke to l i ke, i n a m i me t i c exa l tat i on of one ' s own i mage , or an idea l m i rage of resemb l ance . Thus V i ncent Descombes , in L ' I nconsc i en t ma l gr e l u i , wr i t es : Wha t seduces is not some f em i n i ne wi l e , but the fact that i t is d i rec t ed at you. I t is seduc t i ve to be seduced , and consequent l y , i t is be i ng seduced that is seduc t i ve. In other words , the be i ng seduced f i nds h i mse l f in the person seduc i ng. Wha t the per son seduced sees i n the one who seduces h i m, the un i que ob j ec t of h i s fasc i nat i on, is h i s own seduct ive, cha rm i ng se l f , h i s l ovab l e se l f - i mage . . . I t is a l ways a ma t t er of se l f -seduc t i on and i ts psycho l og i ca l v i c i ss i tudes . In the narc i ss i st i c my th , however , the m i r ror does no t ex i st so that Narc i ssus can f i nd w i th i n h i mse l f some l i v i ng i dea l . I t is a ma t t er o f the m i r ror as an absence of depth , as a super f i c i a l abyss , wh i ch others f i nd seduc t i ve and ver t i g i nous on l y because they are each the f i rst to be swa l l owed up i n i t . Al l seduc t i on in th i s sense is narc i ss i st i c , and i ts secre t l i es w i th thi s mor t a l absorpt i on . Thus women , be i ng c l oser to thi s other , h i dden m i r ror (w i th wh i ch they shroud the i r i mage and body) are a l so c l oser to the ef fects of seduc t i on . Men , by cont rast , have depth , but no secrets ; hence the i r powe r and f ragi l i ty. I f seduc t i on does not proceed f rom some i dea l m i rage of the sub j ect , nor does i t resu l t f rom the m i r ror i dea l of dea th. In Pausan i as ' vers i on : Nark i ssos had a tw i n sister , they we re exac t l y the same to l ook at w i th just the same ha i rsty l e and the same c l othes , and they even used to go hunt i ng toge ther . Nark i ssos was i n l ove w i th h i s sister , and when she d i ed he used to v i s i t the spr i ng ; he

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

69

knew that wha t he saw was h i s own ref l ect ion, but even so he f ound some re l i ef in te l l ing h i mse l f i t was h i s sister 's i mage.
Gu i de to Greece . Vo l . I , p. 376

Accord i ng to H.-P Jeudy , who accept s th i s vers i on , Narc i ssus seduces h i mse l f , and conquers h i s powe r of seduc t i on , on l y by embrac i ng m i me t i ca l l y the lost i mage , res tored by h i s own face , of h i s deceased tw i n s i ster . Bu t is a m i me t i c re l at i on w i th the i mage of the deceased rea l l y necessary to i nvest i ga te narc i ss i st i c ver t i go? In t ruth, the l at ter has no need of a tw i n re f ract i on . I ts own i l lus ion wi l l do - wh i ch is perhaps the i l lus ion of i ts own dea th . Perhaps dea th is al ways i nces tuous - a fact tha t wou l d on l y add to i ts spe l l . The " sou l s i ster " is i ts sp i r i tua l i zed vers i on . The great stor i es of seduct i on, tha t of Phaedra or Iso l de , are stor i es of i ncest , and a l ways end in dea th. Wha t are we to conc l ude , i f no t tha t dea th i tse l f awa i ts us i n the age-o l d t empt a t i on of i ncest , i nc l ud i ng i n the i nces tuous re l a t i on we ma i n t a i n w i t h our own i mage? We are seduced by the l at ter because i t conso l es us w i th the i mm i nen t dea th of our sacr i l egous ex i st ence . Our mor t a l se l f -absorpt i on w i th our i mage conso l es us for the i r revers ib i l i ty of our hav i ng been born and hav i ng to reproduce . I t is by thi s sensua l , inces tuous t ransac t i on w i th our i mage , our doub l e , and our dea th , that we ga i n our powe r of seduc t i on .

t i on" but " I ' l l be your decept i on . "

" I ' l l be your m i r ror " does not s i gn i fy " ' I ' l l be your ref l ec-

an enchan t ed wor l d . I t is the powe r of the seduc t i ve woman who takes herse l f for her own des i re , and de l i ghts i n the se l f decept i on in wh i ch others , in the i r turn , wi l l be caught . Nar c i ssus too l oses h i mse l f in h i s own i l l usory i mage ; tha t is why he turns f rom h i s t ruth, and by h i s examp l e turns others f rom the i r t ruth - and so becomes a mode l of l ove. The st ra tegy of seduc t i on is one of decept i on . I t l ies in wa i t

To seduce i s to d i e as rea l i ty and recons t i tut e onese l f as i l l us i on . I t is to be t aken in by one ' s own i l l us i on and move i n

70 SEDUCT I ON

for al l that t ends to con fuse i tse l f w i th i ts rea l i ty. And i t is pot ent i a l ly a source of f abu l ous s t rength . For i f produc t i on can on l y produce ob j ec t s or rea l s igns, and thereby obt a i n some powe r ; seduc t i on , by produc i ng on l y i l lus ions , obt a i ns al l powers , inc l ud i ng the powe r to re turn produc t i on and rea l i ty to the i r fundament a l i l l us i on . I t even l i es i n wa i t for the unconsc i ous and des i re , by turni ng t hem i nto a m i r ror o f the unconsc i ous and des i re. For the l at ter concerns on l y dr i ves and the i r grat i f i cat i on ; wh i l e the enchan t men t beg i ns on l y a f ter one has been t aken i n by one ' s des i re. I t is the i l l us i on that , happ i l y , saves us f rom "psych i c rea l i ty. " And i t is the i l l us i on of psychoana l ys i s , wh i ch confuses i tse l f w i th i ts own des i re for psychoana l ys i s and thereby enters i nto seduc t i on , i nto auto-seduc t i on , re f ract i ng the lat ter 's powe r for i ts own ends . Thus al l sc i ence , rea l i ty, and produc t i on on l y ' pos tpone the due da te of seduc t i on , wh i ch sh i nes as non-sense , as the sensua l and inte l l igibl e f orm of non-sense , i n the sky of the i r des i re. The decept i on ' s ra i son d e t re. L i ke the hawk tha t re turns to a p i ece of red l ea ther in the f orm o f a b i rd , is i t no t the same i l l us i on that , w i th i n repet i t ion, conf ers an abso l ut e rea l i ty onto the, ob j ec t tha t w i ns? Beyond al l ques t i on of be l i ef , War rant ed or unwar rant ed , the decept i on is, in a sense , recogn i t i on o f the end l ess powe r o f seduc t i on . Nar c i ssus , hav i ng lost h i s tw i n sister , mourns her loss, by const i tut i ng h i s own f ace i nto an i l l usory at t rac t i on . Ne i ther consc i ous nor unconsc i ous , the dupery is fu l l y p l ayed out and suf f i c i ent unto i tse l f . H . I? Jeudy The decept i on can be i nscr i bed i n the sky ; i ts powe r wi l l no t be d i m i n i shed . Every s i gn of the Zod i ac has i ts f orm of seduct i on . For we al l seek the f avour of a mean i ng l ess fate, and p l ace our hopes i n the spe l l tha t m i gh t resu l t f rom some abso l ut e l y i r rat i ona l con j unc ture - here l i es the s t rength of . of the horoscope and zod i aca l s i gns . No one shou l d l augh at : ast ro logy , for he who no l onger seeks to seduce the stars is the sadder for i

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 7 1

i t . In ef fect , many a person ' s m i s for tune comes f rom the i r not hav i ng a p l ace i n the sky, w i th i n a f i e ld of s i gns tha t wou l d agree w i th t hem - that is to say, i n the l ast i nstance , f rom the i r not hav i ng been seduced by the i r b i r th and i ts const e l l a t i on . They wi l l bear thi s fate for l i fe, and the i r very dea th wi l l come at the wrong t i me . To fai l to be seduced by one ' s s i gn is far mor e ser i ous than the fa i lure to have one ' s mer i ts rewarded or one ' s des i re grat i f i ed . Symbo l i c d i scred i t is a l ways much mor e ser i ous than a rea l de f ec t or m i s for tune. Thus the char i tab l e i dea of found i ng an Inst i tute of Zod i aca l Sem i urgy where , just as one ' s phys i ca l appearance can be cor rec t ed by p l ast i c surgery , the in just i ces of the S i gn cou l d be r ight ed and the horoscope ' s orphans f ina l l y rece i ve the S i gn of the i r cho i ce in order that they m i gh t be reconc i l ed w i th themse l ves . I t wou l d be a grea t success , at l east the equa l of that of the sui c i de mot e l s whe r e peop l e wi l l come to d i e in the manne r of the i r choos i ng .

DEATH I N SAMARKAND
An e l l ips i s of the s ign, an ec l i pse of mean i ng: an, i l lus ion . The mor t a l d i st rac t i on tha t a s i ng l e s i gn can cause i ns t ant aneous l y. Cons i der the story of the so l d i er who mee t s Dea th at a crossi ng i n the marke tp l ace , and be l i eves he saw h i m make a menac i ng ges ture i n h i s d i rec t i on . He rushes to the k i ng ' s pa l ace and asks the k i ng for h i s bes t horse i n order that he m i gh t f l ee dur i ng the n i ght far f rom Dea th , as far as Sama r kand. Upon wh i ch the k i ng summons Dea t h to the pa l ace and reproaches h i m for hav i ng f r i ght ened one of h i s bes t servants . ; Bu t Dea th , as ton i shed , rep l i es : " I d i dn ' t mean to f r i ghten h i m . I t was just tha t I was surpr i sed to see th i s so l d i er here , when we had a rendez -vous t omor row i n Sama r kand . " Yes , one runs towards one ' s fate al l the mor e sure l y by seeki ng to escape i t . Yes , everyone seeks h i s own dea th , and the fa i l ed acts are the mos t success fu l . Yes , s i gns fo l l ow an unconsc i ous course. But al l th i s concerns the t ruth of the rendez -vous i n Sama rkand ; i t does not accoun t for the seduc t i on of the story, wh i ch is in no way an apo l ogue of t ruth. Wha t is as tound i ng abou t the story is that thi s seem i ng l y inev i tab l e rendez -vous need no t have t aken p l ace. The re is nothi ng to sugges t tha t the so l d i er wou l d have been i n Sama r kand w i thout thi s chance encount er , and w i thou t the i l l - luck of

SUPERF I CI AL ABYSSES 73

Dea th ' s na i ve gesture , wh i ch ac t ed i n sp i t e o f i tse l f as a ges ture o f seduc t i on . Had Dea t h been cont ent to ca l l the so l d i er back to order , the story wou l d l ose i ts cha rm. Every th i ng here is h i nged on a s ing l e , i nvo l unt ary s i gn . The ges ture does not appear to be par t of a st rategy , nor even an unconsc i ous ruse ; ye t i t takes on the unexpec t ed dep th of seduc t i on , that is, i t appears as some th i ng that moves l atera l ly, as a s i gn that , unbeknowns t to the prot agon i sts ( i nc l ud i ng Dea th , as we l l as the so ld i er ) , advances a dead l y command , an a l ea tory s i gn beh i nd wh i ch another con j unc t i on , marve l ous or d i sast rous , is be i ng enac t ed . A con j unc t i on that g i ves the s ign' s t ra j ec tory al l the charac ter i st i cs of a w i t t i c i sm . No one i n the story has any th i ng to reproach h i mse l f w i th - or e l se the k i ng who l ent h i s horse , is as gu i l ty as anyone e l se. No. Beh i nd the apparent l i ber ty o f the t wo cent ra l charac t ers (Dea th was f ree to make h i s gesture , the so l d i er to f l ee) , they we re bo t h fo l l ow i ng a ru l e o f wh i ch ne i ther we re aware . The ru l e of thi s game , wh i ch , l i ke every fundamen t a l rul e , mus t rema i n secret , is that dea th is not a brut e event , bu t on l y occurs t hrough seduc t i on , that is, by way of an i nst ant aneous , indec i pherab l e comp l i c i ty , by a s i gn or s i gns tha t wi l l no t be dec i phered i n t i me . Dea t h is a rendez -vous , not an ob j ec t i ve des t i ny. Dea t h cannot fai l to go s i nce he is th i s rendez -vous , that is, the a l l us i ve con j unc t i on of s i gns and ru l es wh i ch make up the-game . At the same t i me , Dea t h is an i nnocent p l ayer in the game . Th i s is wha t g i ves the s tory i ts secre t i rony , whose reso l ut i on appears as a st roke of w i t [ t ra i t d espr i t ] , and prov i des us w i th such subl i me p l easure - and d i st i ngu i shes i t f rom a mora l f ab l e or a vu l gar ta l e abou t the dea th i nst i nct . The sp i r i tua l charac t er [ t ra i t sp i r i tue l ] of the story ex t ends the sp i r i ted charac t er [ t ra i t d espr i tges tue l ] of Dea th ' s gesture , and the t wo seduc t i ons , that of Dea t h and of the story, fuse toge ther . Dea th ' s as ton i shment is de l ight fu l , an as ton i shment at the fr i vo l i ty of an ar rangement whe r e th i ngs proceed by chance : "But thi s so l d i er shou l d have known that he was expec t ed i n Samar kand tomor row , and t aken h i s t i me to ge t there . . . " Howeve r Dea t h shows on l y surpr i se , as i f h i s ex i st ence d i d no t depend as much as the so l d i er ' s on the fact tha t they we re to mee t i n

74 SEDUCT I ON

Sama r kand. Dea t h l ets th i ngs happen , and i t i s h i s casua l ness tha t makes h i m appea l i ng - thi s is why the so l d i er has t ens to j o i n h i m. None o f thi s i nvo l ves the unconsc i ous , me t aphys i cs or psycho l ogy. Or even st rategy. Dea th has no p l an . He restores chance w i th a chance ges ture ; thi s is hove he works , ye t every th i ng st i l l ge ts done . There is noth i ng that canno t no t be done , ye t everyth i ng st i l l preserves the l i ghtness of chance , of a fur t i ve gesture , an acc i denta l encount er or an i l l egibl e s i gn . Tha t ' s how i t is w i th seduc t i on . . . Moreover , the so l d i er wen t to mee t dea th because he gave mean i ng to a mean i ng l ess ges ture wh i ch d i d no t even conce rn h i m. He took persona l l y some t h i ng that was not j addressed to h i m, as one m i gh t m i s t ake for onese l f a sm i l e mean t for some one e l se. The he i ght of seduc t i on is to be w i thou t seduc t i on . The man seduced is caught i n sp i te of h i mse l f i n a web of st ray s i gns . And i t is because the s i gn has been turned f rom i ts mean i ng or " seduced , " that the story i tse l f is seduc t i ve. I t is when s i gns are seduced tha t they become seduc t i ve .

On l y s i gns , w i thout referents , empt y , sense l ess , absurd and e l l ipt i ca l s igns , absorb us . A l i t t le boy asks a fa i ry to grant h i m h i s w i shes . The fa i ry agrees on one cond i t i on , tha t he never th i nk of the co l our red in the fox ' s tai l . " Is that a l l?" he rep l i es o f fhanded l y. And of f he goes to f i nd happ i ness . But wha t happens? He is unab l e to r i d h i mse l f of th i s fox ' s tai l , wh i ch he be l i eved . he had a l ready forgot t en . He sees i t everywhere , w i th i ts red co l our , i n h i s thought s , and i n h i s dreams . Desp i t e a l l h i s ef for ts, he cannot make i t d i sappear. He becomes obsessed w i th thi s absurd , ins ign i f i cant , but t enac i ous i mage , augmen t ed by a l l the sp i te that . comes f rom no t hav i ng been ab l e to r i d h i mse l f of i t . No t on l y do the fa i ry's prom i ses no t come t rue , bu t he l oses h i s taste for l i fe . Perhaps he d i es w i thou t ever hav i ng got t en c l ear of i t . An absurd story, but abso l ut e l y p l aus i b l e , for i t demons t r a t es the powe r o f the i ns i gn i f i cant s i gn i f i er , the powe r of a mean i ng-

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

75

l ess s ign i f i er. The fa i ry was m i sch i evous (she wasn ' t a good fa i ry) . She knew that the m i nd is i r res i st ibl y a t t rac ted to a p l ace devo i d of meani ng. He re the empt i ness was seem i ng l y provoked by the ins ign i f i cance ( thi s is why the ch i l d was not on h i s guard) of the co l our red of a fox ' s tai l . E l sewhere words and gestures are empt i ed of the i r mean i ng by unf l agg i ng repe t i t i on and scans i on . To wea r mean i ng out , to t i re i t out i n order to l iberate the pure seduc t i on of the nu l l s ign i f i er or emp t y t erm - such is the s t rength of r i tua l mag i c and i ncant a t i on . But i t can just as we l l be a d i rec t f asc i na t i on w i th the vo i d , as i n the phys i ca l ver t i go of a chasm, or the me t aphor i ca l ver t i go of a door that opens onto the vo i d . I f you we re to see wr i t t en on a door pane l : "Th i s opens onto the vo i d . " - wou l dn ' t you st i l l wan t to open i t? Tha t wh i ch l ooks onto noth i ng has every reason to be opened . Tha t wh i ch doesn ' t say any th i ng has every reason to never be forgot t en . Tha t wh i ch is arb i t rary is s i mu l t aneous l y endowed w i th a tota l necess i ty. The predest i na t i on of the emp t y s i gn, the precess i on of the vo i d , the ver t i go of an ob l i ga t i on devo i d of sense , a pass i on for necess i ty. He re l ies some th i ng of the secret of mag i c ( the fa i ry was a mag i c i an) . The powe r of words , the i r " symbo l i c e f f i cacy " is grea t er when ut t ered i n a vo i d . When they have ne i ther context nor re ferent , they can take on the powe r of a se l f - ful f i l l ing (or se l f -de feat i ng) prophecy. L i ke the co l our red of a fox ' s tai l . Unrea l and i nsubstant i a l , i t proves compe l l i ng because o f i ts nu l l i ty. I f the fa i ry had forb i dden the ch i l d f rom do i ng some th i ng ser i ous or s ign i f i cant , he wou l d have pu l l ed through easi ly, i ns t ead of be i ng seduced aga i nst h i s wi l l . For i t is no t the proh i b i t i on , but i ts non-sense that seduces h i m . Thus , aga i nst al l logi c , i t is the i mprobab l e prophec i es that come t rue ; al l that is requ i red is tha t they not make too much sense . Otherw i se they wou l d not be prophec i es . Such is the bew i t chmen t of magi ca l speech , such is the sorcery of seduc t i on . Th i s is why ne i ther mag i c nor seduc t i on concerns be l i e f or make-be l i eve , for they emp l oy s i gns w i thout cred i b i l i ty and ges tures w i thout re f erents ; the i r l og i c is not one of med i a t i on , bu t of i mmed i acy , wha t ever the s i gn .

76

SEDUCT I ON

Proo f is unnecessary. Eve rybody knows that the i r spe l l is car r i ed by the unmed i a t ed resonance of the s i gns. There is no of f i c i a l , i nt ermed i ary t i me for the s i gn and i ts dec i phe rmen t ; i t is not a ma t t er of be l i ev i ng , do i ng , want i ng , or know i ng . The i r a t t rac t i on is fore i gn to the forms of d i scourse , as we l l as the d i st i nct i ve l og i c of the ut t erance: and s t a t ement . The i r spe l l be l ongs to the order of dec l ama t i on and prophecy , a d i scourse whose symbo l i c e f f ec t i veness requ i res ne i ther dec i phe rmen t nor be l i e f .

Above a l l , seduc t i on supposes no t a s i gn i f i ed des i re , bu t the beau t y o f an ar t i f i ce .

The i mmed i a t e a t t rac t i on of a song , a vo i ce or scent . The a t t rac t i on of the panther ' s scent (Ddt i enne : D i onysos m i s a mor t ) . Accord i ng to the anc i ents , the panther is the on l y an i ma l to em i t a f ragrant odour , wh i ch. i t uses to capture i ts v i c t i ms . The panther has on l y to h i de (hi s appearance st r i kes ter ror ) , and h i s v i c t i ms are bew i t ched by h i s scent - an i nv i s i b l e t rap to wh i ch they come to be caught . Bu t thi s powe r of seduc t i on can be turned aga i nst the panther : one hun t s h i m by us i ng sp i ces , herbs and pe r f umes as ba i t . Bu t wha t does i t mean to say that the panther seduces by i ts scent? Why is i ts scent seduc t i ve? (And why i s thi s l egend i tse l f seduc t i ve? Wha t sor t of f ragrance does i t emi t?) Wha t account s for the seduc t i on of the song of the Si rens , the beaut y of a face , the depths of a chasm, or the i mm i nence o f a catast rophe - as we l l as the scent of the panther or a door that opens onto the vo i d? Is i t some h i dden force of at t ract i on? or a power fu l des i re? No , these are emp t y t erms . Seduc t i on l i es w i th the annu l men t of the s igns , of the i r mean i ng , w i th the i r pure appearance . Eyes tha t seduce have no mean i ng , the i r mean i ng bei ng exhaus t ed in the gaze , as a f ace w i th makeup is exhaus t ed i n i ts appearance , i n the forma l . r i gour o f a sense l ess l abour . The panther ' s scent is a l so a sense l ess message - and beh i nd thi s message the panther is inv i s ibl e , l i ke a woman benea th her makeup . The S i rens too rema i ned unseen . Sorcery is f ormed by wha t l i es h i dden .

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 77

The seduc t i on of eyes . The mos t i mmed i a t e , pures t f orm of seduc t i on , one that bypasses words . Whe r e l ooks a l one j o i n i n a sor t of due l , an i mmed i a t e i nt er tw i n i ng , unbeknowns t to others and the i r d i scourses : the d i scre te cha rm of a s i l ent and i mmob i l e orgasm . Once the de l i ght fu l t ens i on of the gazes g i ves way to words or l ov i ng gestures , the i ntens i ty dec l i nes. A tact i l i ty of gazes that sums up the body ' s ful l pot ent i a l (and tha t of i ts des i res?) in a s ing l e , subt l e instant , as i n a st roke of w i t . A due l tha t is s i mu l t aneou l y sensua l , even vo l uptuous , bu t di si ncarna t ed - a per f ec t foretaste of seduc t i on ' s ver t i go, wh i ch the mor e carna l p l easures that fo l l ow wi l l no t equa l . Tha t these eyes mee t is acc i denta l , bu t i t is as t hough they had been f i xed on each other forever. Devo i d of mean i ng , wha t is exchanged are not the gazes. There is no des i re here , for des i re is not capt i vat ing, wh i l e eyes , l i ke for tu i tous appearances , cast a spe l l composed of pure , due l s igns , w i th ne i ther dep t h nor t empora l i t y.

Any sys t em tha t is tota l l y comp l i c i t i n i ts own absorpt i on , such tha t s i gns no l onger make sense , wi l l exerc i se a remarkab l e powe r of fasc i na t i on . Sys t ems fasc i nate by the i r esoter i c i sm, wh i ch preserves t hem f rom externa l l og i cs . The absorpt i on of any th i ng rea l by some th i ng se l f -suf f i c i ent , and se l f -dest ruct i ve , proves f asc i na t i ng . Whe t he r a sys t em of thought , an automa t i c mechan i sm , a per f ec t and per f ec t l y use l ess ob j ec t or a deser t of stones , a woman or st r i p- tease ar t ist (who mus t caress her se l f i n order to " enchant " and exerc i se her power ) - or , to be sure , God tha t mos t beaut i fu l p i ece of esoter i c mach i ne ry. Or the woman w i th makeup , who is absent to herse l f , an absence of a focussed l ook , the absence of a f ace - how can one no t be swa l l owed up i n i t? A beaut y is one who abo l i shes her se l f , thereby const i tut i ng a cha l l enge that we can on l y take up by the dazz l i ng l oss of wha t? O f wha t is no t beaut i fu l . The beaut i ful woman absorbed by the cares tha t her beaut y demands is i mmed i a t e l y i nfec t i ous because , i n her narc i ss i st i c excess , she is r emoved f rom her se l f , and because al l tha t is r emoved f rom the se l f is p l unged i nto secrecy and absorbs i ts sur round i ngs . The a t t rac t i on of the vo i d l ies at the bas i s of seduc t i on : not

78 SEDUCT I ON

the accumu l a t i on of s igns , nor the messages of des i re , bu t an esoter i c comp l i c i t y w i th the absorpt i on of s i gns . ; Seduc t i on beg i ns i n secrecy , i n the s l ow, bruta l exhaus t i on of mean i ng wh i ch estab l i shes a comp l i c i t y amongs t the s i gns ; i t is here , mor e than i n a ' phys i ca l be i ng or the , qua l i ty o f a des i re , tha t seduc t i on is concoc t ed . And i t is wha t account s for the enchan t men t of the games ' s ru l es .

THE SECRET AND THE CHALLENGE

The secre t . The seduc t i ve , in i t i atory qua l i ty of that wh i ch cannot be sa i d because i t makes no sense , and of tha t wh i ch is not sa i d even though i t ge ts a round. Thus I know another ' s secre t but do not revea l i t and he knows that I know , but does not acknow l edge i t : the i ntens i ty be t ween us is s i mp l y thi s secret about the secret . The comp l i c i t y has noth i ng to do w i th some h i dden p i ece of i nforma t i on. Bes i des , even i f we wan t ed to revea l the secret we cou l d not , s i nce there is noth i ng to say . . Every th i ng tha t can be revea l ed l i es out s i de the secre t . For the l at ter is not a h i dden s ign i f i ed, nor the key to some th i ng , but c i rcu l ates through and t raverses every th i ng that can be sa id, just as seduc t i on f l ows benea th the obscen i t y of speech . I t is the oppos i t e of commu n i cat i on, and ye t i t can be shared. The secret ma i nt a i ns i ts powe r on l y at the pr i ce of rema i n i ng unspoken , just as seduc t i on oper ates on l y because never spoken nor i nt ended . The h i dden or the repressed has a t endency to man i f es t i t sel f , whe reas the secre t does not . I t is an i n i t i atory and i mp l os i ve f orm: one enters i nto a secret , but canno t ex i t . The secre t is never revea l ed , never commun i ca t ed , never even " secre t ed" (Zemp l eny , Nouve l l e Revue de Psychana l yse , no . 14) . Whence i ts st rength , the powe r o f an a l lus i ve , r i tua l exchange .

80 SEDUCT I ON

Thus i n K i erkegaard ' s D i a r y c f the Seducer , seduc t i on takes the f orm of an en i gma to be so l ved . The gi r l is an en i gma , and i n order to seduce her , one mus t become an en i gma for her. I t is an en i gma t i c due l , one tha t the seduc t i on so l ves , but w i t hou t d i sc l os i ng the secre t . I f the secre t we re d i sc l osed , sexua l i ty wou l d s t and revea l ed . The story ' s t rue mean i ng , i f i t had one , wou l d be abou t sex - but i n fact i t doesn ' t have one. In that p l ace whe r e mean i ng shou l d be , whe r e sex shou l d occur , whe r e words po i nt to i t , and whe r e others th i nk i't to be - there is no th i ng. And thi s noth i ng / secre t , this, the seduc t i on ' s uns i gn i f i ed moves benea th the words and the i r mean i ng , and moves faster than the i r mean i ng. I t is wha t touches you f i rst , be fore the sent ences ar r i ve , in the t i me i t takes for t hem to f ade away. A seduc t i on benea t h d i scourse , an i nv i s i b l e seduc t i on , mov i ng f rom s i gn to s i gn - a secre t c i rcu l a t i on; I t is the exac t oppos i t e of the psycho l og i ca l re l a t i on : to share someone ' s secrets is no t to share h i s or her phant as i es or des i res, nor i t is to share some th i ng as ye t unspoken . When ' the i d speaks , i t is not seduc t i ve . Al l that i nvo l ves repress i on , express i ve ener g i es or the unconsc i ous , every th i ng that w i shes to speak , everywhe r e the ego has to appear -a l l thi s be l ongs to an exot er i c order tha t cont rad i c ts the esoter i c f orm of : secrecy and seduc t i on . Ye t the unconsc i ous , the " adventure " of the unconsc i ous , appears as the last , l arge-sca l e a t t empt to reestab l i sh secrecy i n a soc i e ty w i thout secrets . The unconsc i ous appears as our secret , our persona l mys t ery i n a conf ess i ona l and t ransparent soc i ety. Bu t i t i sn' t rea l l y a secret , for i t is mere l y psycho l og i ca l . I t does not have an ex i s t ence of i ts own , s i nce the unconsc i ous was crea t ed at the same t i me as psychoana l ys i s , ; that is to say, at the same t i me as the procedures for i ts ass i mi l a t i on , and the t echn i ques for the re t rac t i on of the secre ts l odged in i ts deep st ruc tures . Bu t perhaps some th i ng is tak i ng i ts revenge on al l the i nterpretat ions, and in a subt l e way d i srupt i ng the i r deve l opment? Some th i ng that , mos t dec i ded l y , does not wan t to be sa i d and that , be i ng an en i gma , en i gma t i ca l l y possesses i ts own reso l ut i on , and so asp i res to rema i n in secre t and in the j oys of secrecy. Language re turns to i ts secret seduc t i on desp i t e al l the ef for ts
r

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 81

to uncover and be t ray i t i n order to make i t s igni fy, wh i l e we re turn to our own i nso l ub l e p l easures .

The re is ne i ther a t i me of seduc t i on , nor a t i me for seduct i on, but st i l l i t has i ts own i nd i spensab l e rhy t hm . Un l i ke ins t rument a l st rateg i es , wh i ch proceed by i nt ermed i ary stages , seduc t i on opera t es i nstantaneous l y , i n a s i ng l e movemen t , and is a l ways i ts own end . The cyc l e of seduc t i on canno t be s topped. One can . seduce someone in order to seduce someone e l se , but a l so seduce someone e l se to p l ease onese l f . The i l lus ion that l eads f rom the one to the other is subt l e . Is i t to seduce , or to be seduced , that is seduc t i ve? Bu t to be seduced is the best way to seduce. I t is an end l ess ref ra i n. There is no act i ve or pass i ve mode in seduct ion, no sub j ec t or ob j ec t , no i nter i or or exter i or : seduc t i on p l ays on both s ides, and there is no f ront i er separa t i ng t hem . One cannot seduce others , i f one has not onese l f been seduced. Because seduc t i on never stops at the t ruth of s igns, but oper ates by decept i on and secrecy , i t i naugura t es a mode of c i rcul at i on that is i tse l f secre t i ve and r i tua l ist i c, a sor t of i mmed i a t e i n i t i at i on tha t p l ays by i ts own ru l es . To be seduced is to be turned f rom one ' s t ruth. To seduce is to l ead the other f rom h i s /her t ruth . Th i s t ruth then becomes a secret that escapes h i m/ he r (V i ncent Descombes: L ' i nconsc i ent ma l gre lua) . Seduc t i on is i mmed i a t e l y revers ibl e , and i ts revers ib i l i ty is const i tuted by the cha l l enge i t i mp l i es and the secre t in wh i ch i t is absorbed . I t is a powe r of a t t rac t i on and d i st ract i on, of absorpt i on and fasc i nat i on, a powe r tha t cause the co l l apse of not just sex , but the rea l in genera l - a powe r of de f i ance. I t is never an economy of sex or speech , but an esca l a t i on of v i o l ence and grace , an i ns t ant aneous pass i on that can resu l t i n sex , but wh i ch can just as eas i l y exhaus t i tse l f i n the process of de f i ance and dea th . I t i mp l i es a rad i ca l i nde t erm i na t i on that d i st i ngu i shes i t f rom a dr i ve - dr i ves be i ng i nde t erm i na t e i n re l at i on to the i r ob j ec t , bu t de t erm i ned as force and or i g i n, wh i l e the pass i on of seduc-

82

SEDUCT I ON

t i on has ne i ther subs t ance nor or i g i n . I t is not f rom some l ibidi na l i nves tment , some energy of des i re that thi s pass i on acqu i res i ts intens i ty, bu t f rom gam i ng as pure f orm and f rom pure l y for ma l b l uf f i ng .

L i kew i se , the cha l l enge . I t too has a due l f orm that wears i t se l f out i n no t i me at al l , draw i ng i ts i ntens i ty f rom th i s i nstant aneous revers i on . I t too is bew i t ch i ng , l i ke a mean i ng l ess d i scourse to wh i ch one canno t not respond for , the ve ry reason tha t i t i s absurd. Why does one respond to a cha l l enge? The same mys t er i ous ques t i on as : wha t is i t that seduces? Wha t cou l d be mor e seduc t i ve than a cha l l enge? A seduct i on or cha l l enge a l ways dr i ves the other mad , bu t w i th a ver t i go tha t is rec i proca l - an i nsan i ty borne by the ver t i g i nous absence that un i t es them, and by the i r rec i proca l engu l fmen t . Such is the i nev i tab i l i ty of the cha l l enge , and why one canno t bu t respond to i t . For i t i naugura t es a k i nd of i nsane re l at i on, qu i te un l i ke re l at i ons of commun i ca t i on or exchange : a due l re l at i on t ransac t ed by mean i ng l ess s igns , but he l d toge ther by a fundament a l ru l e and i ts secre t observance. A cha l l enge ter m i na t es al l cont rac ts and exchanges regu l a t ed by the l aw (whe ther the l aw of na ture or va l ue) , subst i tut i ng a h i gh l y convent i ona l and r i tua l i zed pac t , w i th an unceas i ng ob l i ga t i on to respond and respond in spades - an ob l i ga t i on that is governed by a fundamen t a l game ru l e , and proceeds i n accord w i th i ts own rhy t hm . In cont rast to the : law, wh i ch is a l ways i nscr i bed in s tone or the sky, or i n one ' s hear t , thi s fundament a l ru l e never needs to be sta ted ; i ndeed , i t mus t neve r be s t a t ed . I t is i mmed i a t e , i mmanen t , and i nev i tab l e (whereas the l aw is t ranscendent and exp l i c i t ) . The re can never be seduc t i on or cha l l enge by cont rac t . In order for a cha l l enge or seduc t i on to ex i st , al l cont rac tua l re l at i ons mus t d i sappear be fore the due l re l a t i on - a : re l at ion composed of secret s i gns tha t have been w i t hdrawn f rom exchange , and der i ve the i r i ntens i ty f rom the i r forma l d i v i s i on and i mmed i a t e reverbera t i on . In l i ke manner , seduc t i on ' s enchan tmen t put s an end to al l l ib id ina l econom i es , and every sexua l or psy-

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 83

cho l og i ca l cont rac t , rep l ac i ng t hem w i th a d i zzy i ng spi ra l of responses and count er - responses . I t is never an i nves tment but a r i sk ; never a cont rac t bu t a pac t ; never i nd i v i dua l bu t due l ; never psycho l og i ca l but r i tua l ; never na tura l but ar t i f i c i a l . I t is no one ' s st rategy , but a des t i ny.

Cha l l enge and seduc t i on are qu i t e s i mi l ar. And ye t there is a d i f f erence . In a cha l l enge one draws the other i nto one ' s area of st rength , wh i ch , i n v i ew of the pot ent i a l for un l i m i t ed escal at i on, is a l so h i s or her area of st rength . Whe r eas i n a st ra tegy (?) of seduc t i on one draws the other i nto one ' s area of weak ness , wh i ch is a l so h i s or her area of weakness . A ca l cu l a t ed weakness , an i nca l cu l ab l e weakness : one cha l l enges the other to be t aken i n . A weakness or fa i lure : i sn' t the panther ' s scent i tse l f a weakness , an abyss wh i ch the other an i ma l s approach g i dd i l y? In fact , the panther of the my th i ca l scent is s i mp l y the ep i cent er of dea th , and f rom thi s weakness subt l e f ragrances eme rge . To seduce is to appear weak . To seduce is to render weak . We seduce w i th our weakness , never w i th s t rong s i gns or powers. In seduc t i on we enac t thi s weakness , and thi s is wha t g i ves seduc t i on i ts s t rength . We seduce w i th our dea th , our vu l nerab i l i ty , and w i th the vo i d tha t haunt s us . The secre t is to know how to p l ay w i th dea th i n the absence of a gaze or gesture , i n the absence of know l edge or mean i ng. Psychoana l ys i s te l ls us to assume our f ragi l i ty and pass i v i ty , but in a l mos t re l i g i ous terms , turns t hem i nto a f orm of res igna t i on and accept ance in order to promo t e a we l l t empered psych i c equ i l i br i um. Seduc t i on , by cont rast , p l ays t r i umphant l y w i th weakness , mak i ng a game of i t , w i th i ts own ru l es .

Every th i ng is seduc t i on and no th i ng but seduc t i on . They wan t ed us to be l i eve that every th i ng was produc t i on . The t heme song of wor l d t rans forma t i on : the p l ay of produc -

84 SEDUCT I ON

t i ve forces is wha t regu l a tes the course of th i ngs. Seduc t i on is mere l y an i mmora l , f r i vo l ous , super f i c i a l , and super f l uous process , l i mi t ed to the rea l m of s i gns and appearances , devot ed to p l easure and the usuf ruc t of use l ess bod i es . Bu t wha t i f every th i ng , cont rary to appearances - in fact , in accord w i th a secre t ru l e of appearances - opera t es by seduc t i on? the the the the the the momen t o f seduc t i on suspens i on of seduc t i on r i sk of seduc t i on acc i dent of seduc t i on de l i r i um of seduc t i on pause of seduc t i on .

Produc t i on on l y accumu l a t es , w i thout dev i a t i ng f rom i ts end. I t rep l aces a l l i l l us i ons w i th just one , i ts own , wh i ch becomes the rea l i ty pr i nc i p l e . Produc t i on , l i ke revo l ut i on , put s an end to the ep i dem i c of appearances . Bu t seduc t i on is i nev i tab l e. No one l i v ing escapes i t - not even the dead . For the ' dead are on l y dead when there are no l onger any echoes f rom thi s wor l d to seduce them, and no l onger any r i tes cha l l eng i ng t hem to ex i st . For us , on l y those who can no l onger produce are dead . In rea l i ty, on l y those who do no t w i sh to seduce or be seduced are dead . Bu t seduc t i on ge ts ho l d of t hem none the l ess , just as i t ge ts ho l d of al l produc t i on and ends up des t roy i ng i t . For the vo i d - the ho l e that , at any po i nt , is burned out by the re turn of the f l ame of any s i gn, the mean i ng l essness that makes for seduc t i on ' s unexpec t ed cha rm - a l so l i es in wa i t , w i thout i l lus ion, for produc t i on once the l at ter has reached i ts l imi ts. Every th i ng re turns to the vo i d , i nc l ud i ng our words and gestures . Bu t be fore d i sappear i ng , cer ta i n words , and gestures , by ant i c i pa t i ng the i r dem i se , are ab l e to exerc i se a seduc t i on tha t the others wi l l never know Seduc t i on ' s secre t l i es i n thi s evoca t i on and revoca t i on of the other , w i th a s l owness and suspense tha t are poet i c , l i ke the s l ow mo t i on f i l m of a fal l or an exp l os i on , because some t h i ng had the t i me , pr i or to i ts comp l et i on, to makes i ts absence fe l t . And this, i f there is such a th i ng, is the per f ec t i on of "des i re . "

THE EFF I GY OF THE SEDUCTRESS

The pr i sma t i c e f fect of seduc t i on prov i des another space of re f rac t i on . Seduc t i on does not cons i st of a s i mp l e appearance , nor a pure absence , but the ec l i pse of a presence . I ts so l e st rategy is to be- there /not - there , and thereby produce a sor t of f l i cker ing, a hypnot i c mechan i sm that crysta l l i zes a t t ent i on out s i de al l concern w i th mean i ng. Absence here seduces presence . The sovere i gn powe r of the seduc t ress s t ems f rom her abi l i ty to " ec l i pse " any wi l l or cont ex t . She cannot a l l ow other rel at i ons to be est ab l i shed - even the mos t i nt i mate , a f fect i onate , amorous or sexua l (par t i cu l ar l y not the lat ter ) - w i thout break i ng them, or repay i ng t hem w i th a st range f asc i na t i on . She constant l y avo i ds al l re l at i ons in wh i ch , at some g i ven momen t , the ques t i on of t ruth wi l l be posed . She undoes t hem ef for t l ess l y, no t by deny i ng or des t roy i ng them, but by mak i ng t hem sh i mme r. He re l i es her secre t : i n the f l i cker i ng of a presence. She is never whe r e one expec t s her , and never whe r e one wan t s her. Seduc t i on supposes , Vi r i l io wou l d say, an " aesthe t i cs of di sappearance . " The seduc t ress turns des i re i tse l f i nto an i l l us i on or t rap . For her there is no mor e t ruth to des i re - or to the body - than to any th i ng e l se . Love i tsel f , or the .sex act , can become mo men t s i n a seduc t i on i f g i ven the ec l ipt i c form of appearance /di s-

86 SEDUCT I ON

appearance , that i t to say, a d i scont i nuous f orm that cuts shor t every emot i on , p l easure and re l a t i on i n order to rea f f i rm the super i or charac t er of seduc t i on , i ts t ranscendent aesthet i cs re l at i ve to the i mmanen t e th i cs of :p l easure and des i re . Love and the carna l ac t are on l y so much seduc t i ve f inery , the mos t ref i ned and subt l e i nvent ed by women to seduce men. But modes t y and re j ec t i on can p l ay the same ro l e. ; Every th i ng is f i nery i n thi s sense , and be l ongs to the gen i us of appearance . " I do no t wan t to l ove , cher i sh , or even p l ease you , bu t to seduce you - and my on l y concern is not that you; l ove or p l ease me , but that you are seduced. " The game of the seduc t ress invo l ves a cer ta i n ment a l crue l ty, towards herse l f as we l l as others . Any a f f ec t i on on her par t is a weakness re l at i ve to the r i tua l i mpera t i ve. No quar t er can be g i ven i n a cha l l enge whe r e l ove and des i re are d i sso l ved . Nor any respi te , l est th i s f asc i na t i on be reduced to no th i ng. The t rue seduc t ress can on l y ex i st i n a state of seduc t i on . Ou t s i de thi s state, she is no l onger a woman , ne i ther an ob j ec t nor sub j ec t of des i re , face l ess and una t t ract i ve - for she is borne by an a l l -consum i ng pass i on . Seduc t i on is sovere i gn - the on l y r i tua l tha t ec l i pses al l others - but i ts sovere i gnt y is crue l , and car r i es a heavy pr i ce . Thus , when seduc i ng , he r body and des i res are no l onger her own . But then wha t is thi s body , or these des i res? She doesn ' t be l i eve i n t hem - and so p l ays w i th t hem . W i t hou t a body of her own , she turns herse l f i nto a pure appearance , an ar t i f i c i a l cons t ruc t w i th wh i ch to t rap the des i res of others . Seduc t i on cons i sts i n l et t i ng the other be l i eve h i mse l f to be the sub j ec t of h i s des i re , w i thou t onese l f be i ng caught in thi s t rap. I t can a l so cons i st i n becom i ng a. . " seduc t i ve " sex"ob j ec t , i f that is the man ' s "des i re. " The spe l l cast by seduc t i on passes through sexua l a t t rac t i on ; but i ndeed , i t passes through in' order to t ranscend i t . " I am at t ract i ve , but you are capt i va t i ng . " - "L i f e has i ts at t ract i ons , but dea th l eaves one spe l l bound . " For seduc t i on , des i re is no t an end but a hypothe t i ca l pr i ze. Mor e prec i se l y , the ob j ec t i ve is to provoke and dece i ve des i re , wh i ch ex i sts on l y to burn for a momen t and then be d i sappo i nt ed - , i t be i ng de l uded as to i ts power , wh i ch is g i ven to i t on l y i n order to be w i t hdr awn. The person m i gh t no t even know wha t has happened . I t m i gh t be that the person seduc i ng ac tu-

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

87

a l l y l oves or des i res the person seduced , but at a deeper l eve l (or a mor e super f i c i a l l eve l i f one wi l l , i n the super f i c i a l abyss of appearances) another game is be i ng p l ayed out , unbeknowns t to the t wo prot agon i s t s who rema i n me r e puppe t s . For seduc t i on , des i re is a my t h . I f des i re is a wi l l to powe r and possess i on , seduc t i on p l aces be fore i t an equa l wi l l to powe r by the s i mu l ac rum. In form i ng a web of appearances seduct i on bo t h susta i ns thi s hypothe t i ca l powe r of des i re and exor c i zes i t . Jus t as for K i erkegaard ' s seducer the gi r l 's na i ve grace , her spon t aneous erot i c powe r is mere l y a my th , wh i ch is sust a i ned on l y so that i t can be ann i h i l a t ed (perhaps he l oves her , but in the suprasensua l rea l m of seduc t i on the gi r l is but the my th i ca l f i gure of a sacr i f i ce) ; s imi l ar l y, for the seduc t ress , the powe r of man ' s des i re is a my t h that she uses in order to both evoke and des t roy i t . The seducer ' s ar t i f ice, d i rec t ed at the gi r l 's my th i ca l grace , is fu l l y equa l to the seduc t ress ' ar t i f ic ia l rework i ng of her body , wh i ch is d i rec t ed at the man ' s my th i ca l des i re. In both cases the my th i ca l power , whe t he r the powe r of grace or des i re , is to be reduced to noth i ng . Seduc t i on a l ways seeks to over turn and exorc i ze a powe r . I f seduc t i on is ar t i f i ca l , i t is a l so sacr i f i c i a l . One is p l ay i ng w i th dea th , i t a l ways be i ng a ma t ter of captur i ng or i mmo l a t i ng the des i re of the other. Seduc t i on , by cont rast , is i mmor t a l . The seduc t ress , l i ke the hyster i c , wan t s t o be i mmor t a l and l i ve in an e terna l present - much to everyone ' s as ton i shment , g i ven the f i e ld of decept i on and despa i r i n wh i ch she moves , and g i ven the crue l ty of her game . Bu t here she surv i ves because out s i de psycho l ogy , mean i ng or des i re . Wha t des t roys peop l e , wears t hem down , is the mean i ng they g i ve the i r acts . Bu t the seduc t ress does no t a t tach any mean i ng to wha t she does , nor suf fer the we i ght of des i re . Even i f she speaks of reasons or mot i ves , be they gu i l ty or cyn i ca l , i t is a t rap. And her u l t i ma t e t rap is to ask : "Te l l me who I am " - when she is i nd i f ferent to wha t she is, when she is a b l ank , w i th ne i ther age nor h i story. He r powe r l i es in the i rony and e l us i veness of her presence . She may be b l i nd to her own ex i stence , but she is we l l aware of al l the mechan i sms of reason and t ruth peop l e use to prot ec t themse l ves f rom seduct i on ; and she is aware that f rom beh i nd the she l ter of these mechan i sms they wi l l none the l ess , i f hand l ed cor rect l y, let them-

88

SEDUCT I ON

se l ves be seduced. " I am i mmor t a l , " i n other words , re l ent l ess . Wh i ch is to say tha t the game mus t never stop, thi s even be i ng one of i ts fundament a l ru l es . For just as no p l ayer can be grea ter than the game i tsel f , so no seduc t ress can be grea ter than seduc t i on . None of the v i c i ss i tudes of l ove or des i re can be a l l owed to br eak thi s ru l e. One mus t l ove in order to seduce , and no t the reverse . Seduc t i on cons i sts of f inery , i t weaves and unweaves appear ances , as Pene l ope weaved and unweaved her tapest ry , as des i re i tse l f was woven and unwoven benea th her hands. For i t is appearances , and the mas t ery of appearances , that ru l e . No one has ever been d i spossessed of the powe r assoc i a t ed w i th seduc t i on and i ts rul es, thi s fundamen t a l f orm . Yes , women have been d i spossessed of the i r bod i es , the i r des i res , happ i ness and r i ghts . Bu t they have a l ways rema i ned mi st resses of thi s poss i b i l i ty of ec l ipse , of seduc t i ve d i sappearance and t ransl uscence , and so have a l ways been capab l e of ec l i ps i ng the power of the i r mas t ers.

Bu t is there a f em i n i ne f igure , of seduc t i on or , for that ma t ter , a mascu l i ne f i gure? Or is there but one form, var i ants of wh i ch crysta l l i ze a round one or the other sex? Seduc t i on osc i l l ates be t ween t wo po l es , a po l e of st ra tegy and a po l e of an i ma l i t y (and thus ranges f rom the mos t subt l e ca l cu l a t i on to the mos t bruta l phys i ca l sugges t i on) wh i ch we assoc i a t e w i th the f i gures of the seducer and the seduc t ress respec t i ve l y . Bu t doesn ' t thi s d i v i s i on mask a s i ng l e form, an und i v i ded seduc t i on?

An i ma l seduc t i on . W i t h an i ma l s seduc t i on ach i eves i ts pures t form, i n that the seduc t i ve d i sp l ay appears inst inctua l , i mmed i a t e l y g i ven in ref l ex behav i ours and na tura l f i nery. Bu t for al l that , an i ma l seduct i on does not cease to be per f ec t l y r i tua l i st i c. In thi s sense , an i ma l s are the l east na tura l of be i ngs , for w i th t hem ar t i f i ce

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

89

- the e f fects of mascarade and f i nery - is at i ts mos t na i ve. I t is at the hear t of thi s paradox , whe r e the d i st i nc t i on be t ween na ture and cu l ture is suppressed i n the concep t of f i nery , tha t the ana l ogy be t ween an i ma l i t y and f em i n i n i t y p l ays i tse l f ou t . I f an i ma l s are seduc t i ve , is i t not because they are st rateg i c e l ement s i n a campa i gn to der i de our pre t ens i ons to human i ty? I f the f em i n i ne is seduc t i ve , is i t not because i t too thwar t s our c l a i ms to depth? The f r i vo l ous has a powe r of seduc t i on wh i ch concurs w i th tha t of the best i a l . Wha t we f i nd seduc t i ve in an i ma l s is not the i r "na tura l " savagery. For that ma t ter , are an i ma l s rea l l y charac t er i zed by savagery , by a h i gh degree of cont i ngency , unpred i c tab i l i ty , or i mpu l s i veness , or on the cont rary by h i gh degrees of r i tua l i zed behav i our? The same ques t i on can be posed for pr i mi t i ve soc i et i es . The l at ter we re once seen as c l ose to the an i ma l rea l m, and i ndeed , in a sense , they are : for they share a common di sregard for the l aw, t i ed to h i gh l eve l s of observance of f i xed forms , whe t he r in the i r re l at i on to the i r ter r i tory, other an i ma l s or men. Even in the i r dances and bod i l y ornament a t i on , the i r an i ma l grace is a produc t of a ser i es of observances , ru l es and ana l ogi es, wh i ch makes i t the oppos i t e of na tura l chance. Al l the prest i g i ous at t r i butes assoc i a t ed w i th an i ma l s are r i tua l t ra i ts . The "na tura l " f i nery of an i ma l s is s i mi l ar to the ar t i f i c i a l f i nery of humans , who , one m i gh t add , have a l ways sought to i ncorpora t e the former i nto the i r r i tes. I f there is a pre f erence for an i ma l masks , i t is because an i ma l s i mmed i a t e l y appear as r i tua l masks , as a p l ay of s i gns and a st ra tegy of f i nery - as is the case w i th human r i tua l s . The very morpho l ogy of pr i mi t i ve r i tua l s, the i r furs and feathers , ges tures and dances are a protot ype of r i tua l e f f i cacy. Tha t is, they never f orm a func t i ona l sys t em ( reproduct ion, sexua l i ty, eco l ogy , m i m i c ry - the postu l a tes of an ex t reme l y i mpover i shed e tho l ogy reworked and cor rec t ed by func t i ona l i sm) , but an ost ent a t i ous ce r emony for mas t er i ng s igns, and a cyc l e for seduc i ng mean i ng , whe r e the s i gns grav i tate i r resist i b l y a round each other so as to reproduce themse l ves as i f by magne t i c recur rence , resu l t i ng i n d i zz i ness , a l oss of mean i ng , and the sea l i ng of an i ndest ruc t i b l e pac t amongs t the par t i c i pants .

90

SEDUCT I ON

Genera l l y speak i ng , " r i tua l i ty" is, as a form, super i or to "soc i a l i ty" . The l at ter is on l y a recent , and no t very seduc t i ve form of organ i za t i on and exchange , one i nvent ed by humans for humans . R i tua l i ty is a much l arger sys t em, encompass i ng the l ivi ng and the dead , humans and an i ma l s , as we l l as a "na ture " whose per i od i c movemen t s , recur rences and ca t ast rophes serve , seem i ng l y spont aneous l y , as r i tua l s i gns. By compar i son , soc i a l i ty appears ra ther i mpover i shed : unde r the s i gn o f the Law i t is capab l e of br i ng i ng toge ther on l y one spec i es (and even then . . .) . By cont rast , r i tua l i ty succeeds in ma i nt a i n i ng - not by l aws , but by ru l es and the i r inf in i te p l ay of ana l og i es - a f orm of cyc l i ca l order and un i versa l exchange of wh i ch the Law and the soc i a l are qu i t e i ncapab l e. I f we f i nd an i ma l s appea l i ng and seduc t i ve , i t is because they rem i nd us of thi s r i tua l ar rangement . They do not; evoke a nosta l g i a for the savage state, but a fe l ine, theat r i ca l nosta l g i a for f inery, for the seduc t i on and st ra tegy of r i tua l f orms wh i ch t ranscend al l soc i a l i ty and wh i ch , thereby , st i l l enchan t us . In thi s sense one can say that , w i th seduc t i on , !one " becomes an an i ma l , " or that f ema l e seduc t i on is an i ma l - l i ke , w i thou t i mp l y i ng some sor t of i nst i nc t i ve na ture . For one is say i ng that seduc t i on is pro found l y l i nked. to body r i tua l s ; wh i ch , l i ke al l other r i tua l s, serve not to estab l i sh a na ture and uncove r i ts l aw, bu t to -s e t up appearances and organ i ze the i r cyc l e . No t that fema l e seduc t i on is e th i ca l l y i nfer i or. On the *cont rary , i t is aesthet i ca l l y super i or . I t is a st ra tegy of f i nery. Men , moreover , are never seduced by na tura l beauty , but by an ar t i f i c i a l , r i tua l beau t y - because the l at ter is esoter i c and ini t i atory, whereas the former is mere l y express i ve . And because seduc t i on l i es i n the aura of secrecy produced by we i ght l ess , ar t i f i c i a l s igns , and no t i n some , na tura l economy of mean i ng , beaut y or des i re . The c l a i m tha t ana t omy (or -the body) is not ! des t i ny is not recent , but was made far mor e st r i dent l y i n al l ; soc i et i es pr i or to our own. R i tua l s , ceremon i es , ra i ments , masks , des i gns , mut i l at ions and tor ture - al l i n order to seduce . . . ' the gods , the spi r i ts, or the dead . The body was the f i rst grea t med i um of thi s i mmense under t ak i ng. For us a l one does i ntake on an aesthet i c , decora t i ve charac t er. (W i th i ts t rue charac t er. thereby de-

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 91

n i ed : the very i dea of decora t i on i mp l i es a mora l den i a l of al l the body ' s mag i c. For the savages , not to men t i on an i ma l s , i t is not decora t i on , but f i nery. And a un i versa l ru l e. He who is not pa i nt ed is stup i d , say the Caduveo) . We m i gh t f i nd the forms d i sgust i ng : cover i ng the body w i th mud , de f orm i ng the the sku l l or f i l ing the tee th i n Mex i co , de f orm i ng the feet in Ch i na , d i s t end i ng the neck , or mak i ng i nc i s i ons i n the face , no t to men t i on tat toos, j ewe l ry , masks , f i ne ra i ments , r i tua l pa i nt i ngs ; or even the brace l e ts made f rom t in cans worn by present -day Po l ynes i ans. The body is made to s igni fy, but w i th s i gns that , st r i ct l y speaki ng, have no mean i ng. Al l resemb l ance has van i shed , al l represent a t i on is absent . The body is covered w i th appearances , i l lus ions, t raps, an i ma l parod i es and sacr i f i c i a l s i mu l a t i ons , not i n order to d i ssemb l e , nor to revea l (a des i re , say, or a dr i ve) , nor even j ust for fun ( the spon t aneous express i veness of ch i l dren and pr i mi t i ves) . Wha t is i nvo l ved here is an under t ak i ng that Ar t aud wou l d have , t ermed me t aphys i ca l : a sacr i f i c i a l cha l l enge to the wor l d to ex i st . For noth i ng ex i sts natura l l y , powe rs of the wor l d , i nc l ud i ng the gods , are aroused ; i t is by cha l l eng i ng these powe rs tha t they are exorc i zed , seduced and captured ; i t is by the cha l l enge that the game and i ts ru l es are resur rec t ed . Al l thi s requ i res an ar t i f i c i a l b l uf f i ng, tha t i t to say, a syst ema t i c s i mu l a t i on - that t roub l es i tse l f w i th ne i ther a preest ab l i shed state of the wor l d nor bod i l y ana t omy. A rad i ca l me t aphys i cs of s i mu l a t i on , i t need not even conce rn i tse l f w i th "na tura l " ha rmony. In the fac i a l pa i nt i ngs of the Caduveo , the fac i a l features are not respec t ed ; the des i gn ' s d i agrams and symme t r i es be i ng l a id across the f ace f rom one end to the other. (Our makeup subm i t s to the body as a referent i a l sys t em, in order to accentua t e i ts features and or i f i ces . Bu t does thi s mean that i t is c l oser to the na ture of des i re? No t h i ng cou l d be l ess cer ta i n) .
th i ngs ex i st because cha l l enged , and because summoned to r espond to tha t cha l l enge . I t is by be i ng cha l l enged tha t the

Some t h i ng of thi s rad i ca l me t aphys i cs of appearances , thi s

92

SEDUCT I ON

cha l l enge by s i mu l a t i on , st i l l l i ves i n the cosme t i c ar ts and the g l amour of mode rn f ash i on . The Chur ch Fa thers we re we l l aware of this, and denounced i t as d i abo l i ca l . " To be at tent i ve to one ' s body , to care for and pa i nt i t is to se t onese l f up as a r i va l of God and cont es t H i s crea t i on . " Th i s st i gma t i za t i on has cont i nued ever s ince , but is now re f l ec t ed ; i n tha t other re l i g i on, that of the sub j ect ' s l i ber ty and essent i a l des i res . Our ent i re mora l i t y condemns the cons t ruc t i on of the f ema l e as a sex ob j ec t by the fac i a l and bod i l y ar ts . The f ema l e is no l onger denounced by God ' s j udgment , bu t by the d i ctates of mode rn i deo l ogy , for prost i tut i ng her f em i n i n i t y in consume r cu l ture , and sub j ec t i ng her body to the reproduc t i on of cap i ta l . " Fem i n i n i ty is woman ' s a l i ena t ed be i ng . " " Fem i n i n i t y man i f es t s i tse l f as an abst rac t tota l i ty, devo i d of any rea l i ty i t can ca l l i ts own , a produc t of the d i scourse and ; rhetor i c of adver t i s i ng . " " The woman f l ushed w i th her beaut y masks and perpe tua l l y f resh l ips no l onger l i ves he r rea l l i fe, " e tc. , e tc. In oppos i t i on to al l these p i ous d i scourses , we mus t aga i n pra i se the sex ob j ec t ; for i t bears , in the soph i st i ca t i on of appearances , some t h i ng of a cha l l enge to the na i ve order of the wor l d and sex; and i t , and i t a lone , escapes the rea l m of produc t i on ( though one m i gh t l i ke to be l i eve i t sub j ec t ed to the l at ter ) and re turns to tha t o f seduc t i on . In i ts unrea l i ty i n the unrea l de f i ance of i ts prost i tut i on of s igns , the sexua l ob j ec t moves beyond sex and at ta i ns seduc t i on . I t aga i n becomes ceremon i al . The f em i n i ne was a l ways the e f f i gy of thi s r i tua l , and there is a f r i ght fu l con fus i on i n wan t i ng to de-sanc t i fy i t as a cu l t ob j ec t in order to turn i t i nto a sub j ec t o f produc t i on , or i n want i ng to rescue i t f rom ar t i f i ce i n order to re turn i t to i ts own "na tura l " des i res. Woman is we l l w i th i n her r ights , and is i ndeed f orm i ng a sor t of duty , in s tudy i ng to appear magi ca l and superna tura l . I t is necessary that she shou l d as ton i sh and bew i t ch. Be i ng an i do l ; she mus t be g i l ded and adored . She mus t there fore bor row f rom a l l the ar ts the means of ra i s i ng her se l f above nature , the bet ter to sub j uga t e hear ts and st i r sou l s. I t ma t t ers very l i t t le tha t her t r i cks and

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

93

ar t i f i ces shou l d be known to al l , prov i ded that the i r success is cer ta i n and the i r ef fect a l ways i r res i st ibl e. Such cons i dera t i ons prov i de the ar t i st -ph i l osopher w i th a ready j ust i f i cat i on for al l the prac t i ces emp l oyed by women of every per i od to l end subs t ance and , so to speak , d i v i n i ty to the i r f rag i l e beaut y. An enume ra t i on of these prac t i ces wou l d be int erm i nab l e . Bu t to conf i ne ourse l ves to wha t our cont emporar i es vu l gar l y ca l l " the use of cosme t ics, " who can fai l to see that the use of r i ce-powder (so s tup i d l y ana thema t i sed by our cand i d ph i l osophers) has the ob j ec t and resu l t of ban i shi ng f rom the comp l ex i on the b l em i shes wh i ch nature has out rageous l y sown there , and of crea t i ng an abst ract un i t y i n the t exture and co l our of the sk i n ; and that thi s un i ty , l i ke the un i t y produced by the scu l ptor ' s ch i se l , br i ngs the human be i ng d i rect l y nearer to the statue - i n other words , to a be i ng that is d i v i ne and super i or? As for the l ampb l ack that out l i nes the eye , and the rouge that emphas i zes the uppe r par t of the cheek , the p l anned resu l t of these - a l though the i r use ar i ses f rom the same pr i nc i p l e , the need to t ranscend na ture - is to sat i sfy an exac t l y oppos i t e need . The red and the b l ack represent l i fe - a l i fe surpass i ng and exceed i ng that of the na ture. The b l ack f rame around the eye makes the g l ance st ranger and mor e pene t ra t i ng ; i t makes the eye mor e d i st i nct l y resemb l e a w i ndow open on the inf ini te . The red b l aze on the cheek fur ther enhances the br i ght ness of the eye , and l ends a woman ' s l ove l y f ace the mys t er i ous pass i on of a pr i estess . Char l es Baude l a i re , " In Pra i se of Cosme t i cs 112 I f des i re ex i sts - as mode rn i t y hypothes i zes - then noth i ng mus t i nter fere w i th i ts na tura l harmony , and cosme t i cs are hypocr i t i ca l . Bu t i f des i re is a my t h - as seduc t i on hypothe 2 . Char l es Baude l a i re , " In Pra i se of Cosme t i cs " i n My Hear t La i d Ba re and Other Prose Wr i t i ngs (New Yor k : Vangua rd Press , 1951) pp. 63-64 .

94

SEDUCT I ON

s i zes - then noth i ng can prevent i t f rom be i ng put to use by s igns , unres t ra i ned by na tura l l imi ts . The powe r of s i gns l ies in the i r appearance and d i sappearance ; tha t is how they e f f ace the wor l d . Cosme t i cs too are a means of e f f ac i ng the face , ef f ac i ng the eyes beh i nd mor e beaut i fu l eyes , cance l l i ng the l ips beh i nd mor e l uxur i ant l ips . Th i s " abst rac t un i ty that br i ngs the human be i ng nearer to a be i ng that is d i v i ne , " thi s " l i fe surpassi ng and exceed i ng na ture " abou t wh i ch Baude l a i re speaks , resu l ts f rom a s i mp l e ar t i f i c i a l st roke that suppresses al l express i on . Ar t i f i ce does no t a l i enate the sub j ect , but mys t er i ous l y a l ters he r / h i m . Women are aware of thi s t rans forma t i on when , i n f ront of the i r mi r rors , they mus t erase themse l ves i n order to app l y the i r makeup , and when , by app l y i ng the i r makeup , they make themse l ves i nto a pure appearance denuded of meani ng . How can one m i s t ake thi s " exceed i ng of na ture " for a vu l gar camou f l ag i ng of t ruth? On l y f a l sehoods can a l i enate the t ruth, but makeup is not false, or e l se ( l i ke the game of t ransvest i tes) i t is fa l ser than f a l sehood and so recovers a k i nd of super i or i nnocence or t ransparency. I t absorbs a l l express i on w i th i n i ts own sur face , w i thout a t race of b l ood or mean i ng. Cer t a i n l y thi s is cha l l eng i ng , and crue l - but who is a l i ena ted? On l y those who canno t ab i de thi s crue l per f ec t i on , and canno t de f end themse l ves except by mora l repu l s i on - and they are wrong. How can one respond to pure appearances , whe t he r h i erat i c or mob i l e , w i thou t f i rst recogn i z i ng the i r . sovere i gnt y? By t ak i ng of f the makeup , tear i ng of f the ve i l , or en j o i n i ng the appearances to d i sappear? How r i d i cu l ous! An i conoc l ast ' s utop i a . The re is no God beh i nd the i mages , and the very noth i ngness they concea l mus t rema i n a secre t . The seduc t i on , f asc i na t i on and " aesthe t i c " a t t rac t i on of al l the grea t i mag i nary processes l ies here : i n the e f f ac i ng of every i nstance , be i t the f ace and every subst ance , be i t des i re - . in the ar t i f i c i a l per f ect i on of the s i gn .

Undoubt ed l y , the bes t examp l e of thi s is to be f ound i n the on l y i mpor t ant const e l l a t i on of co l l ec t i ve seduc t i on produced by mode rn t i mes , that o f f i l m stars or c i nema i do l s . Now the

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 95

star , even i f a man , is f em i n i ne ; for i f God is mascu l i ne , i do l s are a l ways f em i n i ne . And i n t ruth, the b i ggest stars we re women . They were , however , no l onger be i ngs of f l esh and des i re , but t ransexua l , suprasensua l be i ngs , around whom crysta l l i zed stern r i tua l s and a was t e fu l profus i on wh i ch turned t hem i nto a genera t i on of sacred mons t ers , endowed w i th a powe r of absorpt i on equa l to and r i va l ing the rea l wor l d ' s powers of produc t i on . They we re our on l y my t h in an age i ncapab l e of genera t i ng grea t my t hs or f i gures of seduc t i on compa rab l e to those of my t ho l ogy or ar t . The c i nema ' s powe r l i ves i n i ts my t h . I ts stor i es, i ts psychol og i ca l por t ra i ts , i ts i mag i na t i on or rea l i sm, the mean i ng fu l i mpress i ons i t l eaves - these are al l secondary. On l y the my t h is power fu l , and at the hear t of the c i nema tograph i c my t h l i es seduc t i on - that o f the r enowned seduc t i ve f igure , a man or woman (but above al l a woman) l i nked to the rav i sh i ng but spec i ous powe r of the c i nema tograph i c i mage i tse l f . A m i racu l ous con j unc t i on . _, The star is by no means an i dea l or sub l i me be i ng: she is ar t i f ica l . She need not be an ac t ress i n the psycho l og i ca l sense ; her f ace is no t the re f l ec t i on of a sou l or sens i t i v i ty wh i ch she does not have . On the cont rary , her presence serves to submerge a l l sens i b i l i ty and express i on benea th a r i tua l f asc i na t i on w i th the vo i d , benea th the ecs t acy of her gaze and the nu l l i ty of her sm i l e . Th i s is how she ach i eves my th i ca l status and becomes sub j ec t to co l l ec t i ve r i tes of sacr i f i c i a l adu l a t i on . The ascens i on of the c i nema idol s, the masses ' di v ini t i es, was and rema i ns a cent ra l story of mode rn t i mes - i t st i l l count er ba l ances al l po l i t i ca l or soc i a l events . There is no po i nt i n di sm i ss i ng i t as mere l y the dreams of mys t i f i ed masses . I t is a seduc t i ve occur rence that count erba l ances every produc t i ve occur rence. To be sure , seduc t i on i n the age of the masses is no l onger l i ke that of The Pr i ncess o f C l eves , Les L i a i sons Dange r euses or D i a ry o f the Seducer , nor for tha t ma t ter , l i ke that f ound i n anc i ent my tho l ogy , wh i ch undoub t ed l y cont a i ns the stor i es r i chest i n seduc t i on . In these seduc t i on is hot , wh i l e that of our mode rn i do l s is co l d , be i ng at the i ntersec t i on of t wo co l d med i ums , tha t of the i mage and tha t of the masses .

96 SEDUCT I ON

Th i s l at ter seduc t i on has the spect ra l wh i t eness of the heavenl y stars, af ter wh i ch they are so appropr i a t e l y named. The masses have been " seduced " in the mode rn era by on l y t wo grea t event s : the wh i t e l i ght of the stars, and the b l ack l i ght of ter ror i sm . These t wo phenomena have much i n common . Ter ror i st acts , l i ke the stars, " f l i cker : " they do not no t en l i ght en ; they do no t rad i ate a cont i nuous , wh i t e l ight , but an i ntermi t tent , co l d l i ght ; they d i sappo i nt even as they exa l t ; they fasc i nate by the suddeness of the i r appearance and the i mm i nence of the i r d i sappearance . And they are cons t ant l y be i ng ec l i psed as they each t ry to ou t do each other. The grea t stars or seduc t resses never dazz l e because of the i r ta l ent or i nte l l i gence , but because of the i r absence . They are dazz l i ng i n the i r nul l i ty, and i n the i r co l dness - the co l dness of makeup and r i tua l h i era t i c i sm ( r i tua l s are coo l , accord i ng to McLuhan) . They turn i nto a me t aphor the i mmense g l ac i a l process wh i ch has se i zed ho l d of our un i verse of mean i ng , w i th i ts f l i cker i ng ne tworks of s i gns and i mages; but at the same t i me , at a spec i f i c h i stor i ca l con j unc ture that can no l onger be reproduced , they t rans form i t i nto an ef fect of seduc t i on . The c i nema has never shone except .by pure seduc t i on , by the pure v i brancy of non-sense - a ho t sh i mme r i ng tha t is al l the mor e beaut i fu l for hav i ng come f rom the co l d . Ar t i f i ce and non-sense , they are the ido l ' s esoter i c face , i ts mask of in i t i at ion . The seduc t i on of a f ace purged of al l express i on, except tha t of the r i tua l sm i l e and a no l ess convent i ona l beaut y. A wh i t e face , w i th the wh i t eness of s i gns consecra t ed to r i tua l i zed appearances , no l onger sub j ec t to some deep l aw of s i gn i f i cat i on . The ster i l i ty of i do l s is we l l - known : they do not reproduce , but r i se f rom the ashes , l i ke the phoen i x , or f rom the i r mi r ror , l i ke the seduc t ress . These grea t seduc t i ve ef f igi es are our masks , our Easter Isl and sta tues . But do no t be m i s t aken : i f once , h i stor i ca l l y , there we r e throngs hot w i th adora t i on , re l i g i ous pass i on , sacr i f i ce and i nsur rec t i on , now there are masses co l d w i th seduc t i on and f asc i na t i on . The i r e f f i gy is c i nema tograph i c and i mp l i es a di f fer ent sacr i f i ce . The dea th of the stars is mere l y pun i shmen t for the i r r i tua l i zed i do l a t ry. They mus t di e , they mus t a l ready be dead - so

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 97

that they can be per f ec t and super f i c i a l , w i th or w i thou t the i r makeup . Bu t the i r dea th mus t not l ead us to a nega t i ve abreact i on . For beh i nd the on l y ex i st i ng f orm of i mmor ta l i ty , that of ar t i f i ce, there l i es the i dea i ncarna t ed i n the stars, that dea th i tse l f sh i nes by i ts absence , that dea th can be turned i nto a br i l l i ant and super f i c i a l appearance , that i t is i tse l f a seduc t i ve sur f ace . . .

THE I RON I C STRATEGY OF THE SEDUCER

I f i t is character i st i c of the seduc t ress that she turns herse l f i nto an appearance i n order to d i sturb appearances , wha t is character i st i c of tha t other f i gure , the seducer? He too turns h i mse l f i nto an : i l lus ion in order , to sow confus i on, but cur i ous l y , thi s i l l us i on is par t of a ca l cu l a t i on , w i th f i nery_ g i v i ng way to st ra tegy. Now i f a woman ' s f i nery is a l so st rategi c , a ca l cu l a t ed d i sp l ay , is not the seducer ' s st rategy a di sp l ay of ca l cu l a t i on w i th wh i ch to de f end h i mse l f f rom some oppos i ng force? A st ra tegy of f i nery vs . the f i nery of st ra t egy . . D i scourses tha t are too sure of themse l ves - as w i th st rategi es of l ove - mus t be unders tood d i f ferent l y. Though comp l e t el y " rat i ona l , " they are st i l l on l y the i ns t rument s o f a l arger fate , of wh i ch they are as much the v i c t i ms as the d i rec tors . Doesn ' t the seducer end up l os i ng h i mse l f i n h i s st ra tegy; as i n an emot i ona l l abyr i nth? Doesn ' t he i nvent that st ra tegy in order to l ose h i mse l f in i t? And he who be l i eves h i mse l f the game ' s mast er , i sn' t he the f i rst v i c t i m of st rategy ' s t rag i c my t h? Cons i der the seducer ' s obsess i on w i th the gi r l in K i erkegaard ' s D i a ry o f the Seducer. An obsess i on w i th an i nv i o l ate , st i l l asexua l state, a cha rmed state of grace . And because she is graced , one mus t f i nd grace i n her eyes , for l i ke God she possesses a

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 99

ma t ch l ess vant age . As a resul t , because na tura l l y endowed w i t h a l l seduc t i on , she becomes the ob j ec t of a savage cha l l enge and mus t be des t royed . The seducer ' s ca l l i ng is the ex t erm i na t i on of the gi r l 's na tur al powe r by an ar t i f i c i a l powe r of h i s own. He wi l l de l i bera te l y under t ake to equa l or surpass the na tura l powe r to wh i ch , in sp i te of al l tha t makes h i m appear as the seducer , he has succumbed s i nce the beg i nn i ng . H i s st rategy, h i s i nt ent i on and dest i na t i on are a response to the young gi r l 's grace and seduc t i veness , to a predes t i na t i on that is al l the mor e power ful because unconsc i ous , and that mus t , as a resul t , be exorc i zed . The l ast word cannot be lef t to na ture : this, fundament a l l y , is wha t is at i ssue. He r except i ona l , i nna te grace (wh i ch , l i ke the accursed share , is i mmora l ) mus t be sacr i f i ced by the seducer , who w i l l seek w i th a l l h i s sk i l l to l ead he r to the po i nt of erot i c abandon , the po i nt at wh i ch she wi l l cease to be a seduc t i ve , tha t is, dangerous powe r. The seducer by h i mse l f is noth i ng ; the seduc t i on or i g i na tes ent i re l y w i th the gi r l . Th i s is why Johannes can c l a i m to have l earned every th i ng f rom Corde l i a . He is not be i ng hypocr i t i ca l . The ca l cu l a t ed seduc t i on m i r rors the na tura l seduc t i on , draw i ng f rom the l at ter as f rom i ts source , but al l the be t ter to e l i mi na t e i t . Th i s is a l so why he does not l eave any th i ng to chance , the gi r l be i ng depr i ved of ini t i at i ve, a seem i ng l y de f ense l ess ob j ec t i n the game of seduc t i on . She has a l ready p l ayed he r hand be f ore the seducer beg i ns to p l ay h i s. Every th i ng has a l ready t aken p l ace ; the seduc t i on s i mp l y r i ghts a na tura l i mba l ance by taki ng up the pre-ex i st i ng cha l l enge const i tut ed by the gi r l 's natura l beau t y and grace . Seduc t i on now changes i ts mean i ng. Ins t ead of be i ng an i mmora l and l iber t ine exerc i se , a cyn i ca l decept i on for sexua l ends (and thus w i thout grea t interest ) , i t becomes my th i ca l and acqu i res the d i mens i ons of a sacr i f i ce . Th i s is why the " v i c t i m' s " consen t is so eas i l y obt a i ned . In her abandon she is, in a sense , obey i ng the commands of a d i v i n i ty who wan t s eve ry f orce to be ove r t urned and sacr i f i ced , be i t that of powe r or that of a na tura l seduc t i veness , because al l force , and tha t of beaut y i n par t i cu l ar , is sacr i l eg i ous . Corde l i a is sovere i gn , and is

10 0 SEDUCT I ON

sacr i f i ced to her own sovere i gnt y. The revers i b i l i ty of sacr i f i ce const i tut es a murde rous form of symbo l i c exchange ; i t spares noth i ng , not even l i fe i tsel f , nor even beaut y or seduc t i on , wh i ch is i ts mos t dangerous f orm . In thi s sense , the seducer canno t c l a i m to be the hero of an erot i c mas t er p l an ; he is on l y the agent of a process that goes far beyond h i m. Nor is the v i c t i m ent i re l y i nnocent , s ince , as a beaut i fu l and seduc t i ve v i rg i n, she is in herse l f a cha l l enge wh i ch can on l y be me t by her dea th (or her seduc t i on , the equ i va l ent of her murder ) . The D i a ry of the Seducer is the, scr ipt of a per f ec t cr i me. None of the seducer ' s ca l cu l a t i ons , none of h i s manoeuvres fai l . I t al l un fo l ds w i th an infa l l ibi l i ty tha t is ne i ther rea l nor psychologi ca l , but my th i ca l . The ar t i f i ce 's per f ec t i on , the apparent inev i tab i l i ty tha t gu i des the seducer ' s act i ons , s i mp l y ref l ects , as in a mi r ror , the per f ec t i on of the gi r l 's i nna t e grace , and the inexorab l e necess i ty of her sacr i f i ce . Th i s doesn ' t resu l t f rom any spec i f i c person ' s st ra tegy. I t is fate, Johannes be i ng on l y i ts ins t rument and , there fore , infa l l ibl e . There is some th i ng i mpersona l i n every process of seduc t i on , as in every cr i me , some t h i ng r i tua l i st i c, some t h i ng suprasub j ec t i ve and supra-sensua l , the l i ved exper i ence , whe t he r of the seducer or h i s v i c t i m, be i ng on l y i ts uncons i ous re f l ec t i on . Drama t urgy w i thou t -a sub j ec t . The r i tua l execut i on of a f orm that consumes i ts sub j ec ts . Th i s is why the p i ece takes on bo t h the aesthet i c f orm of a wor k of ar t. and the r i tua l f orm of a cr i me .

In the end , Corde l i a is seduced , de l i vered to the erot i c p l easures of a n i ght and then abandoned . One mus tn ' t be surpr i sed at thi s, nor cons i der Johannes , in. l i ne w i t h bourgeo i s psycho l ogy , a ha te fu l person . Seduc t i on , be i ng a sacr i f i c i a l process , ends w i th a murde r ( the de f l ower i ng) - t hough the l at ter need no t have t aken p l ace. For once Johannes is cer t a i n of h i s v i ctory , Corde l i a is, for h i m, dead . I t is the i mpure seduc t i on that ends i n l ove and p l easure , and is, therefore , no l onger a sacr i f i ce. Sexua l i ty m i gh t be reexam i ned i n thi s l ight , as the econom i c res i due of seduc t i on ' s sacr i f i c i a l process , not un l i ke the res i dua l por t i on that i n anc i ent sacr i f i ces was l ef t to c i rcu l ate w i th i n the

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

101

economy. Sex then wou l d be mere l y the d i scount or ba l ance of a mor e fundament a l process , a cr i me or sacr i f i ce , wh i ch fai ls to at ta in tota l revers ibi l i ty. The gods take the i r par t ; humans share wha t ' s l ef t . The i mpure seducer , a Don Juan or Casanova , ded i ca t es h i mse l f to the accumu l a t i on of thi s res i due . F l y i ng f rom one sexual conques t to another , he seduces for p l easure w i thout at ta in ing wha t K i erkegaard cons i dered the "sp i r i tua l " d i mens i on of seduct i on - whe r e the cha l l enge pushes the woman ' s seduc t i ve resources and powe rs to the i r l imi t , so that , in accord w i th a care fu l l y l a id p l an , they can be turned aga i nst themse l ves . The i nt r i gue whe r eby Corde l i a is s l ow l y d i spossessed of her powers , makes one th i nk of the i nnumerab l e r i tes for the exor c i sm of f ema l e powe rs wh i ch can be f ound throughout pr i mi t i ve soc i et i es (Be t te l he i m) . To cast out women ' s powe r of fer t i l i ty, to enc i rc l e and c i rcumscr i be that power , and eventua l l y s i mul ate and appropr i a t e i t , is the purpose of the couvades , the ar t i f icial i nvag i na t i ons , excor i a t i ons and scar r i ngs - al l the i nnumerab l e symbo l i c wounds (up to and i nc l ud i ng the ini t i at i on and i nst i tut i on of a new powe r : po l i t i ca l power ) for suppress i ng the f ema l es ' i ncomparab l e "na tura l " advant age . One m i gh t a l so cons i der anc i ent Ch i nese i deas on sexua l i ty , accordi ng to wh i ch the ma l e , by ma i nt a i n i ng the orgasm in suspense , draws i nto h i mse l f the powe r of the f ema l e yang . In any case , some t h i ng has been g i ven to women that mus t be exorc i zed by a de l i bera te campa i gn to d i spossess her of her powers . And f rom thi s "sacr i f i c i a l " perspect i ve , there is no di f fer ence be t ween f em i n i ne seduc t i on and the seducer ' s st ra tegy : they bo t h i nvo l ve the other ' s dea th and ment a l spo l i a t i on , the other ' s abduc t i on and the abduc t i on of h i s or her powe r. I t is a l ways the story of a murder , or bet ter of an aesthet i c and sacr i f i c i a l i mmo l a t i on s ince , as K i erkegaard suggests , i t a l ways occurs at a sp i r i tua l l eve l .

Conce rn i ng the "sp i r i tua l " p l easure of seduc t i on . The scenar i o of seduc t i on is, accord i ng to K i erkegaard , sp i r i tua l . I t demands a cer ta i n sp i r i t i n the e i ght eenth century

10 2 SEDUCT I ON sense , tha t is t o say , i nt e l l i gence , cha rm and r e f i nemen t , bu t a l so i n t he mode r n sense o f t he W i t z or s t roke o f w i t . Seduc t i on neve r p l ays on t he o t he r ' s des i r es or amo rous proc l i v i t i es , th i s be i ng vu l gar , carna l , mechan i ca l and , i n shor t , un i n t e res t i ng. Eve ry t h i ng mus t r espond by subt l e ' a l l us i ons , w i t h a l l t he s i gns enmeshed i n t he t r ap. Thus t he seduce r ' s ar t i f i ces re f l ec t t he g i r l ' s seduc t i ve na t ure , as t hough t he l a t t er was pa r t o f an i ron i c s t age produc t i on , a decep t i on made to measur e , t o wh i ch she wou l d , e f for t l ess l y , come and be ' caugh t . I t i s no t , there f ore , a ma t t e r o f a f ron t a l a t t ack , bu t o f a d i agona l seduc t i on t ha t g l i des l i ke a (brush?) s t roke ( and wha t is mo r e seduc t i ve t han a s t roke o f w i t?) , w i t h i ts v i vac i t y and economy , and i ts use o f t he same dup l i ca t ed ma t er i a l s , to use F r eud ' s t e rms . The seduce r ' s weapons a re t he same as t hose o f t he g i r l , bu t t urned aga i ns t he r ; and i t is th i s revers i b i l i t y tha t g i ves t he s t ra t egy i ts sp i r i tua l appea l . I t has been sa i d , and j us t i f i ab l y so , t ha t m i r ror s a re sp i r i tua l - t he re f l ec t i on i tse l f be i ng a s t roke o f w i t . For t he m i r ror ' s spe l l does no t l i e w i t h t he f ac t tha t one r ecogn i zes onese l f i n i t i n i tse l f a r a t he r appa l l i ng co i nc i dence - bu t w i t h t he i ron i c and mys t e r i ous s t roke o f such a redup l i ca t i on . Now t he seduce r ' s s t ra t egy is prec i se l y tha t o f t he m i r ror . Tha t i s why , u l t i ma t e l y , he doesn ' t dece i ve anyone , and why he neve r dece i ves h i mse l f : f or t he m i r ror i s i nf a l l i b l e ( i f h i s manoeuv r es and sna r es we r e t aken f rom ou t s i de , he wou l d undoub t ed l y comm i t some e r ror ) .

Cons i de r ano t he r s t roke o f th i s t ype , wor t hy o f be i ng i nc l uded i n t he anna l s o f seduc t i on : t he same l e t t er wr i t t en by t wo d i f f er en t women - and wr i t t en no t ou t o f pervers i t y , bu t f rom a t ranspa r ency o f hea r t and sou l . Bo t h l e t t ers con t a i n t he same amo rous emo t i ons , t hese emo t i ons a r e rea l , t hey each have t he i r own qua l i t y. Bu t t he l a t t er mus t no t be con f used w i t h t he " sp i r i tua l " p l easur e t ha t emana t es f rom t he m i r ror e f f ec t p roduced by t he t wo l e t t ers , and be t ween t he t wo women , wh i ch i s, st r i c t l y speak i ng , a p l easur e o f seduc t i on . I t is an en t i re l y d i f f erent , l i ve l i er , mo r e sub t l e r ap t ur e t han l ove . The emo t i ons born o f

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

10 3

des i re can never equa l the exuberant , secret j oy one exper i ences when p l ay i ng w i th des i re i tse l f . Des i re is s i mp l y a re f erent l i ke any other , wh i ch seduc t i on i mmed i a t e l y bet ters and t ranscends , prec i se l y by v i r tue of i ts i ts sp i r i t . Seduc t i on is a st roke : here i t shor t -c i rcu i ts the t wo rec i p i ents i n a k i nd of i mag i nary over pr i nt i ng , whe re i n des i re perhaps confuses t hem . At any rate, thi s st roke confuses des i re , renders i t indi st int , produc i ng a s l ight g i dd i ness that proceeds f rom a super i or i nd i f ference , and f rom the l aught er that unde rm i nes i ts st i l l too ser i ous ent ang l ement . To seduce , then , is to make bo t h the f i gures and the s i gns - the l at ter he l d by the i r own i l l us i ons - p l ay amongs t themse l ves . Seduc t i on is never the resu l t of phys i ca l at t ract ion, a conj unc t i on of af fects or an economy of des i re . For seduc t i on to occur an i l lus ion mus t i nt ervene and m i x up the i mages ; a st roke has to br i ng d i sconnec t ed th i ngs together , as i f in a dream, or sudden l y d i sconnec t und i v i ded th i ngs . Thus the second woman is i r res i st ibl y t emp t ed to rewr i t e the f i rst let ter , as i f a t empt at i on cou l d func t i on au t onomous l y and i roni ca l l y, as i f the very i dea cou l d be seduc t i ve. A game w i thout end , in wh i ch the s i gns par t i c i pa te spont aneous l y , as i f f rom a cont i nuous sense of i rony. Perhaps the s i gns wan t to be seduced , perhaps they des i re , mor e pro found l y than men , to seduce and be seduced.

Perhaps s i gns are not des t i ned to ent er i nto f i xed oppos i t i ons for mean i ng fu l ends , that be i ng on l y the i r present des t i na t i on . The i r ac tua l des t i ny is perhaps qu i t e d i f ferent : to seduce each other and , thereby , seduce us . I f such is the case , an ent i re l y d i f ferent l og i c wou l d l ie beh i nd the i r ' secret c i rcu l a t i on . Can one i mag i ne a theory that wou l d t reat s i gns i n t erms o f the i r seduc t i ve at t ract i on, ra ther than the i r cont rasts and oppos i t i ons? Wh i ch wou l d break w i th the specu l ar na ture of the s i gn and the encoumbr ance of the re ferent? An in wh i ch the t erms wou l d p l ay amongs t themse l ves w i th i n the f ramework of an en i gma t i c due l and an i nexorab l e revers ib i l i ty? Suppose that al l the ma j or , di acr i t i ca l oppos i t i ons w i th wh i ch we order our wor l d we re t raversed by seduc t i on , i nst ead of bei ng based on cont rasts and oppos i t i ons. Suppose not just that

104 SEDUCT I ON

the f em i n i ne seduces the mascu l i ne , but tha t absence seduces presence , co l d seduces hot , the sub j ec t seduces the ob j ect , and to be sure , the reverse . For seduc t i on supposes that m i n i mum revers i b i l i ty wh i ch put s an end to every f i xed oppos i t i on and , there fore , every convent i ona l sem i o l ogy. Towa rds an i nver t ed sem i o l ogy? One m i gh t i mag i ne (but why i mag i ne i t , when i t occured i n anc i ent Greece ) that gods and mor ta l s , i nst ead of be i ng separa ted by the mora l abyss of re l ig ion, sought to seduce each other and , i ndeed , ma i nt a i ned no other re l at i ons but those of seduct i on . Moreover , perhaps al l the :ma j or d i st i nc t i ons we use to dec i pher the wor l d and con f i ne i t w i th i n i ts pr i son of meaning, those be tween , for examp l e , good and evi l , or t rue and fa l se - al l the t erms that have been so care fu l l y d i s t i ngu i shed at such enormous costs of energy - have no t a l ways succeeded . The rea l ca t ast rophes , the rea l revo l ut i ons a l ways cons i st in the i mp l os i on of one of these two- t erm sys t ems . A un i verse , or f ragment of the un i verse , then comes to an end - t hough usua l l y thi s i mp l os i on occurs s l owl y , the t erms be i ng gradua l l y worn down . At present we are w i tness i ng the s l ow and s i mu l t aneous eros i on of al l the po l ar st ruc tures , and the movemen t towards a un i verse that is l os i ng the very d i mens i on of meani ng. D i s i nvested , d i senchant ed , and d i sa f f ec ted - the end of the wor l d as wi l l and represent a t i on . Bu t thi s neut ra l i za t i on is no t seduc t i ve . Seduc t i on pushes the t erms towards each other , and un i tes t hem at a po i nt of max i mum energy and cha rm; i t does not b l ur t hem toge ther i n a state of m i n i mum i ntens i ty. Now suppose that wherever re l at ions of oppos i t i on present l y ex i st , re l a t i ons of seduc t i on are pu t i nto p l ay. I mag i ne a f l ash of seduc t i on that causes the po l ar or d i f ferent i a l , t rans i stor i zed c i rcu i ts of mean i ng to me l t? The re are examp l es of of a nond i acr i t i ca l sem i o l ogy ( that is to say, a non-sem i o l ogy) . The e l emen t s of the anc i ent cosmogony; for examp l e , d i d no t ent er i nto st ruc tura l re l a t i ons of c l ass i f i cat i on (water / f i re , a i r / ear th, e tc .) : they we re not "d i st i nct i ve " e l ement s , bu t " at t ract i ve " e l emen t s that seduced each other : wa t er seduces f i re, wa t er seduced by f i re . Such seduc t i on is st i l l qu i t e s t rong in the due l , re l at i ons of

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 10 5

non- i nd i v i dua l i zed castes and h i erarch i es , and i n the ana l og i ca l sys t ems that preceded our l og i ca l sys t ems of d i f ferent i at i on. And no doub t l og i ca l sequences of mean i ng are st i l l wor ked over by ana l og i ca l sequences of seduc t i on - l i ke an i mmense f l ash of i nsp i ra t i on that , at a s i ng l e st roke , br i ngs oppos i t es toge ther . Benea t h mean i ng l ies the secre t c i rcu l a t i on of seduct i ve ana l og i es . We are not , however , dea l i ng w i th a new vers i on o f un i ver sa l a t t rac t i on . The d i agona l s or t ransversa l s of seduc t i on may we l l break the oppos i t i ons be t ween t erms ; they do no t l ead to fused or con- fused re l at i ons ( that 's mys t i c i sm) but to dua l re l at i ons . I t is not a ma t t er of a myst i ca l fus i on of sub j ec t or ob j ec t , or s ign i f i er and s i gn i f i ed, mascu l i ne and f emi n i ne , e tc ., but of a seduc t i on , that is, a due l and agon i s t i c re l at i on .

A m i r ror hangs on the oppos i t e wa l l she does not ref l ect on i t but the m i r ror ref l ects her D i a ry of the Seducer3 The seducer ' s s t ra t egm wi l l be to me rge w i th the m i r ror on the oppos i t e wa l l i n wh i ch the gi r l is re f l ec ted . She does not g i ve i t a thought , bu t the m i r ror is re f l ect i ng on her. One shou l d d i st rust the humi l i ty of mi r rors. The humb l e ser vant s of appearances , they can ref l ect on l y the ob j ec ts that f ace them, w i thou t be i ng ab l e to concea l themse l ves . The who l e wor l d is grate fu l to t hem (except in dea th when , for thi s reason , one ve i l s t hem) ; they are the wa t chdogs of appearance. Bu t the i r fa i thfu l ness is spec i ous , for they are wa i t i ng for some one to ca t ch h i mse l f i n the i r re f l ec t i on . One does not eas i l y forge t the i r s i de l ong gaze. They recogn i ze you , and when they surpr i se you when you l east expec t i t , your t i me has come. Such is the seducer ' s st rategy : he g i ves h i mse l f the hum i l i t y of the mi r ror , but a sk i l ful mi r ror , l i ke Perseus ' sh i e l d, in wh i ch
3 . Sor en K i e r kegaa rd , D i a r y o f the Seducer , appended to Pr i nce t on Un i ve rs i t y Press , 1971) p. 311 .

E i ther l Or

(Pr i nce t on :

l ob SEDUCT I ON Medusa f ound herse l f pet r i f i ed . The gi r l too is go i ng to fal l capt i ve to the m i r ror that ref l ects and ana l yzes her ' , w i thou t her know l edge. He who does not know how to compass. a gi r l abou t so that she l oses s i ght of every th i ng wh i ch he does not w i sh her to see , he who does no t know how to poe t i ze h i mse l f i n a gi r l 's f ee l i ng so that i t is f rom her that every th i ng i ssues as he w i shes i t , he is and rema i ns a bung l er ; I do not begrudge h i m h i s en j oymen t . A bung l er he ' i s and rema i ns , a seducer , some t h i ng one can by no me ans ca l l me . I am an aesthete , an erot i c i st , one who has unders tood the na ture and mean i ng of love , who be l i eves i n l ove and knows i t f rom the ground up . . . I know , too, that the h i ghes t conce i vab l e enj oymen t l i es i n be i ng l oved . . . To poe t i ze onese l f i nto a young gi r l is an ar t , to poe t i ze onese l f out of her is a mas t erp i ece . ( pp. 363 - 64) Seduc t i on is never l inear , and does not wea r a mask ( that is vu l gar seduc t i on) - i t is ob l i que. . . wha t weapon is so sharp, so pene t ra t i ng , so, f l ashi ng in ac t i on , and hence so decept i ve , as the eye? You fe i nt a h i gh quar t , as f encers say, and a t tack i n second . . . The momen t o f the fe i nt is i ndescr i bab l e . The opponen t , as i t were , fee l s the s l ash, he is touched! Aye , that is t rue , but in qu i t e a d i f fer ent p l ace f rom whe r e he thought . (p . 314) ' I do no t mee t her , I touch on l y the per i phery of her ex i s t ence I pre f er to ar r i ve a l i t t le ear l y and then to mee t her , i f poss i b l e , at the door or ' upon the st eps as she is com i ng and I am l eav i ng, when I pass her by i nd i f ferent l y. Th i s is the f i rst ne t in wh i ch she mus t be ent ang l ed . I never s top he r on the st reet ; I may bow to her , but I never come ; c l ose to her , but a l ways keep my d i s t ance . Our cont i nu-

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

107

al encount ers are cer ta i n l y not i ceab l e to her ; she does i ndeed perce i ve that a new body has appeared on her hor i zon whose orb i t in a st range l y i mper turbab l e manne r af fects her own d i sturb i ngly, but she has no concept i on of the l aw governi ng thi s movemen t ; she is ra ther i nc l i ned to l ook abou t to see i f she can d i scover the po i nt cont ro l l i ng i t , bu t she is as i gnorant of be i ng herse l f thi s focus as i f she we r e a Ch i naman . (pp. 336-37) There is another t ype of i nd i rect reverbera t i on : hypnos i s , a sor t of psych i c m i r ror in wh i ch , once aga i n, the gi r l is ref l ect ed w i thou t her awareness , unde r someone e l se 's gaze : Today my eyes have for the f i rst t i me rest ed upon her. Someone has sa i d that s l eep can make the eyel ids so heavy that they c l ose of themse l ves ; perhaps my g l ance has a s i mi l ar ef fect upon Corde l i a . He re eyes c lose , and ye t an obscure force st i rs w i th i n her. She does no t see that I am l ook i ng at her , she fee l s i t , fee l s i t through her who l e body. He r eyes c lose , and i t is n i ght ; but w i th i n her i t is l um i nous day. (pp. 360-61) Th i s ob l i qu i ty of seduc t i on is not dup l i c i ty. Whe r e a l i near movemen t knocks aga i nst the wa l l of consc i ousness and acqu i res on l y meager ga ins, seduc t i on has the ob l i qu i ty of a dr eam e l emen t or st roke of wi t , and as such t raverses the psych i c un i verse and i ts d i f ferent l eve l s i n a s i ng l e d i agona l , i n order to touch , at the far end , the unknown b l i nd spot , the secre t that l i es sea l ed , the en i gma that const i tutes the gi r l , even to herse l f. Seduc t i on has t wo s i mu l t aneous momen t s , or t wo i nstants of a s i ng l e momen t . He r ent i re charac ter , al l her f em i n i ne resources mus t be mob i l i zed , and s i mu l t aneous l y suspended. I t is not a ques t i on of surpr i s i ng her i n the pass i v i ty of her innocence ; her f reedom of ac t i on mus t be i n p l ay. Because i t is by thi s f reedom, by i ts movemen t - and by the curves and sudden twi sts i mpar t ed to i t by seduc t i on - that she mus t , seemi ng l y spont aneous l y , reach that po i nt where , unbeknowns t to

10 8

SEDUCT I ON

herse l f , she wi l l be lost . Seduc t i on engages a fate ; and i n order for i t to be rea l i zed, she mus t be comp l e t e l y f ree , but i n her f reedom . she mus t reach out , as i f somnabu l i st i ca l l y , towards he r own fal l . The gi r l mus t be : p l unged i nto thi s second state wh i ch redup l i ca t es the f i rst , the state of grace and sovere i gnt y. And thi s second , somnambu l i s t i c state mus t be susta i ned , so that a pass i on , once awakened and i ntox i ca t ed w i th i tsel f , s l ips i nto the t rap fate has set for i t . " He r eyes c lose , and i t is n i ght , bu t w i th i n her i t is l um i nous day. " Om i ss i ons , den i a l s , de f l ec t i ons , decept i ons , d i vers i ons and hum i l i t y - al l a i med at provok i ng thi s second state, the secre t of t rue seduc t i on . Vu l gar seduc t i on m i gh t proceed by pers i stence , but t rue seduc t i on proceeds by absence ; or be t ter i t invents a k i nd of curved space , whe r e the s i gns are de f l ec t ed f rom the i r t ra j ec tory and re turned to the i r source . Th i s state of suspense is essent i a l : i t is the momen t of the gi r l 's d i sar ray be fore wha t awa i ts her , even as she knows - and thi s is some th i ng new and a l ready fata l - that some th i ng awa i ts her. A momen t of h i gh intens i ty , a "sp i r i tua l " momen t ( in K i erkegaard ' s sense) , s i mi l ar to tha t i n games of chance be t ween the t hrow and the momen t when the d i ce s top ro l l i ng . Thus the f i rst t i me he hears he r g i ve out her address , he refuses to r emembe r i t : I wi l l not l i sten to i t , for I do not w i sh to depr i ve myse l f of surpr i se ; I sha l l cer ta i n l y mee t her aga i n i n l i fe, I sha l l recogn i ze her , and perhaps she wi l l recogn i ze me. . . I f she does not recogn i ze me , i f her g l ance does not i mmed i a t e l y conv i nce me of that , then I sha l l sure l y f i nd an oppor tun i t y to l ook at her f rom the s i de. I prom i se that she wi l l r emember the s i tua t i on . No i mpa t i ence , no greed i ness , every th i ng shou l d be en j oyed i n l e i sure l y draught s ; she is ma r ked out , she sha l l be run down . (p. 312) The seducer is p l ay i ng w i th h i mse l f . At thi s po i nt i t is no t even a ruse , w i th the seducer be i ng the one de l i ght ed at the seduc t i on ' s de f ermen t . Th i s , the p l easure of the approach , shou l d no t be s l i ghted ; for i t is in thi s i nterva l that he beg i ns

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 10 9

to d i g the p i t i nto wh i ch she wi l l fal l . I t is l i ke f enc i ng : one needs a f i e l d for the fe i nt . Throughou t thi s per i od , the seducer , far f rom seek i ng to c l ose i n on her , seeks to ma i nt a i n h i s d i s t ance by var i ous p l oys : he does not speak d i rect l y to her but on l y to her aunt , and then abou t t r i v i a l or s tup i d sub j ec ts ; he neut ra l i zes every th i ng by i rony and f e i gned pedant i c i sm ; he fa i ls to respond to any f em i n i ne or erot i c movemen t , and even f i nds he r a s i t com su i tor to d i senchant her of her l ove . To keep one ' s d i stance , to pu t her of f , to d i senchant and dece i ve her , to the po i nt whe r e she herse l f t akes the ini t i at i ve and breaks of f he r engagemen t , thus comp l e t i ng the seduc t i on and crea t i ng the i dea l s i tua t i on for her tota l abandon. The seducer knows how to l et the s i gns hang . He knows that they are f avourab l e on l y when l ef t suspended , and w i l l move of themse l ves towards the i r appo i nt ed des t i ny. He does no t use the s i gns up al l at once , but wa i t s for the momen t when they wi l l al l respond , one af ter the other , crea t i ng an ent i re l y un i que con j unc ture of g i dd i ness and co l l apse. When she is i n the company of the three Jansens she ta l ks very l i t t le, the i r cha t ter ev i dent l y bores her , and cer ta i n l y the sm i l e on her l ips seems to i nd i ca te i t . I am r e l y i ng on t ha t sm i l e. Today I wen t to Mrs. Jansen ' s . I ha l f opened the door w i thou t knock i ng . . . She sat a l one at the p i ano. . . I m i gh t have rushed in, se i zed the momen t - tha t wou l d have been foo l i sh . . . . She is ev i dent l y concea l i ng the fact that she p l ays . . . When some t i me I can ta l k mor e conf i dent i a l l y w i th her , I sha l l s l y l y l ead her to thi s po i nt and l et her fal l i nto the t rap . (pp. 338-9) . He has not reached the vu l gar d i vers i ons , the bi ts of l iber t i ne bravura , the erot i c wh i ms (wh i ch wi l l occupy an i ncreasi ng l y l arge par t of the story, w i th Corde l i a hard l y ever appear i ng except benea th a l ively, l iber t ine i mag i na t i on : "To l ove one a l one is too l i t t le ; to l ove t hem a l l sugges t s the l i ghtness of a super f i c i a l charac t er ; but to l ove as many as poss i b l e . . . Wha t p l easure! Wha t a l i fe! " ) He has no t acceded to the f r i vo l ous seduc t i on

11 0

SEDUCT I ON

wh i ch is not par t of the "grand game " of seduc t i on , w i th i ts ph i l osophy of ob l i qu i ty and d i vers i on . The " grand " seduc t i on may make i ts way secre t l y a l ong the same pa ths as v i l e seduct ion, but wi l l p l ay t hem as suspense or pa rody. Con f us i on is no t poss i b l e : the one is a game of love , the other a sp i r i tua l due l . Al l the i nt er l udes on l y accentua t e the s l ow, ca l cu l a ted , and i nev i tab l e rhy t hm of "h i gh " seduc t i on . The m i r ror st i l l hangs on the oppos i t e wa l l , even i f we are no l onger aware of i t - and t i me i n Corde l i a ' s hear t is on the ma r ch . The process seems to reach i ts l owest po i nt w i th the~seducer ' s be t rotha l . Here one has the i mpress i on of hav i ng at ta i ned a po i nt of ex t reme numbness , whe r e the seducer pushes the subt er fuge of d i senchan tmen t or d i ssuas i on to an a l mos t perverse degree of mor t i f i ca t i on . And one has the i mpress i on that , as a resul t , Corde l i a ' s spi r i t is broken , her f em i n i n i t y run down , neut ra l i zed by the i l l us i ons that sur round her. The momen t of the engagemen t - wh i ch "has so much i mpor t ance for a young gi r l that her ent i re sou l can be f i xed on i t , l i ke that of a dy i ng man on h i s l ast w i l l " - thi s momen t , Corde l i a wi l l l i ve w i thou t unders t and i ng , depr i ved o f every reac t i on , muzz l ed , c i rcumvent ed . One word , and she wou l d have l aughed at me , one word , and she wou l d have been moved , one word , and she wou l d have f l ed f rom me ; bu t no word crossed my l ips, I rema i ned sto l i d l y ser i ous , and kept exac t l y to the r i tua l . As regards my engage men t , I do not boas t tha t i t is poet i c , i t is i n every way ph i l i st i ne and bourgeo i s . So now I ' am engaged; so is Corde l i a (so is Corde l i a! ) and that is a l l she knows abou t the who l e ma t t er . (pp. 370-71) I t is al l a k i nd of ordea l , as f ound in i n i t i at i on r i tes . The ini t i ated mus t pass through a phase tha t ma r ks h i s. or her dea th , no t as pa the t i c suf fer i ng, but as noth i ngness , as empt i ness the f ina l momen t be fore the pass i on ' s i l l umi na t i on and the erot i c abandon . In a sense , the seducer adds an asce t i c momen t to the aesthe t i c movemen t he i mpar t s to the who l e .

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

III

Genera l l y I can assure any gi r l who ent rusts her se l f to me a per f ec t aesthet i c conduc t : on l y i t ends w i th her be i ng dece i ved . . . (p . 375) The re is a sor t of humour in the fact that the engagemen t co i nc i des w i th the apparent d i sappearance of a l l tha t was at stake i n the seduc t i on . Wha t i n the bourgeo i s v i s i on of the n i ne t eenth century const i tut es a j oyous pre l ude to mar r i age , is here an aust ere i n i t i at i on i nto the sub l i me ends of pass i on (wh i ch are, s i mu l t aneous l y , the ca l cu l a t ed ends of seduc t i on) by the somnabu l i s t passage across the deser t s of be t rotha l . (Don ' t forge t tha t the engagemen t was a cruc i a l momen t in the l i fe of many a romant i c , i nc l ud i ng K i erkegaard , but a l so and mor e drama t i ca l l y of Kl e i st , Ho l der l i n , Nova l i s and Ka f ka . A pa i nfu l momen t of seem i ng l y end l ess f rust rat i on, the a l mos t myst i ca l pass i on sus t a i ned by the engagemen t was perhaps ( l et us drop al l ta l k of sexua l i mpot ence ! ) a ma t t er of suspens i on , of a suspended enchantment , haun t ed by the fear of sexua l or ma t r i mon i a l d i senchan tmen t .) However , Johannes cont i nues to l i ve the i nv i s i b l e dance of seduc t i on , even as h i s ob j ec t i ve and i ts presence appear to have f aded. Indeed , he wi l l never l i ve i t mor e intense l y , for i t is here , i n the nul l i ty, i n the absence , i n the mi r ror ' s f ace that i ts t r i umph is assured: she canno t but break of f he r former engage men t and t hrow herse l f i nto h i s a rms . Al l the f i re of her pass i on l i es revea l ed , j ust benea th the sur face , i n i ts t ransparence. He wi l l never aga i n f i nd i t as beaut i fu l as i n thi s premon i t i on , for at thi s momen t the gi r l st i l l rema i ns predes t i ned - wh i ch wi l l no l onger be the case once thi s momen t is over . Now the g i dd i ness of seduc t i on , as of every pass i on , l ies above al l w i th i ts predes t i na t i on . The l at ter a l one prov i des that fata l qua l i ty at the bas i s of al l p l easure - that st roke of wi t , as i t were , wh i ch t ies, as i f in advance , a movemen t o f the sou l to i ts dest i ny and i ts dea th . He re l i es the seducer ' s t r i umph . And here , i n the i nv i s i b l e dance of the be t rotha l , one is ab l e to see h i s know l edge of seduc t i on , of t rue seduc t i on , as a sp i r i tua l economy. My re l at i on to her is that o f an unseen par tner in

11 2

SEDUCT I ON

a dance wh i ch is danced by. on l y one , when i t shou l d rea l l y be danced by t wo. She moves as in a dream, and ye t she dances w i th another , and thi s other is myse l f , who , i n so far as I am v i s i b l y present , am inv i s ibl e , in so far I am inv i s ibl e , am v i s i b l e. The movemen t s of the dance requ i re a par t ner , she bows to h i m, she takes h i s hand , she f l ees, she draws near h i m aga i n . I take her hand , I comp l e t e he r thought as i f i t were comp l e t ed ' i n her se l f . She moves to the i nner me l ody of her own sou l ; I am on l y the occas i on for her movemen t . I am no t amorous , tha t wou l d on l y awaken her ; I am easy , y i e l d i ng, i mpersona l , a l mos t l i ke a mood . (p . 376) . Thus seduc t i on is present ed i n a s i ng l e movemen t as : - a consp i racy of powe r : a sacr i f i c i a l f orm . - a murde r and , u l t i mate l y , a per f ec t cr i me. - a wor k of ar t : " Seduc t i on cons i dered as one of the BeauxAr t s " ( l i ke murder , to be sure) . - a st roke of w i t or f l ash o f i nsp i ra t i on : a "sp i r i tua l " economy. W i t h the same due l comp l i t y as a st roke o f wi t , here everyth i ng is exchanged a l lus i ve l y , w i thou t be i ng spe l l ed out , the equ i va l ent of the a l lus i ve , ceremon i a l exchange , of a secre t . - an ascet i c f orm of a spi r i tua l , but a l so pedagog i ca l ordea l : a sor t of schoo l of pass i on , a s i mu l t aneous l y erot i c and i ron i c ma i eut i cs . I sha l l a l ways acknow l edge tha t a young gi r l is a born teacher , f rom whor e one can a l ways l earn, i f no th i ng e l se , how to dece i ve her - for one on l y l earns thi s bes t f rom the gi r l s themse l ves . . . (pp. 382-83) Eve ry young gi r l is, in re l at i on to the l abry i nth of her hear t , an Ar i adne ; she ho l ds the thread by wh i ch one f i nds h i s way through i t , bu t she has i t , w i thout herse l f know i ng how to use i t . (p . 396)

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 113 - a f orm o f due l or wa r , an agona l f orm . I t neve r t akes t he f orm o f v i o l ence or a re l a t i on o f force , bu t o f a wa r game . I n i t one d i scove rs t he t wo s i mu l t aneous movemen t s o f seduc t i on , as f ound i n eve r y s t ra t egy: So now t he f i rst wa r w i t h Corde l i a beg i ns , i n wh i ch I f l ee , and t he r eby t each he r t o t r i umph i n pursui ng me. I cons t an t l y re t rea t be f or e her , and i n th i s re t rea t , I t each he r t hrough myse l f t o know a l l t he powe r o f l ove , i ts unqu i e t t hough t s , i ts pass i on , wha t l ong i ng i s, and hope , and i mpa t i en t expec t a t i on . . . She w i l l ga i n cour age to be l i eve i n l ove . . . She mus t neve r suspec t tha t she owes th i s f r eedom to me . . . When she at l ast f ee l s f ree , so f ree tha t she is a l mos t t emp t ed to br eak w i t h me , t hen t he se cond wa r beg i ns . Now she has powe r and pass i on , and t he s t rugg l e becomes wor t hwh i l e t o me . Le t he r f orsake me , t he second wa r i s j us t beg i nn i ng . . . The f i rst wa r was a wa r o f l i bera t i on , i t was on l y a game ; t he second i s a wa r o f conques t , i t is f or l i fe and dea t h . (pp. 379-80) The s t akes a re a l l organ i zed a round t he g i r l as my t h i ca l f i gure . Bo t h adve r sa r y and ob j ec t i ve i n th i s many - s i ded due l , she i s, there f ore , ne i t he r a sex ob j ec t no r a f i gure o f t he Et e rna l Fem i n i ne - t he t wo grea t , Wes t e rn r e f e r ences to woman a re equa l l y f or e i gn t o seduc t i on . And t he r e is no mo r e an i dea l v i c t i m or . i dea l sub j ec t ( t he g i r l and he r seduce r respec t i ve l y) , t han t he r e is an execu t i one r and v i c t i m i n a sacr i f i ce . The f asc i na t i on she exe rc i ses i s t ha t o f a my t h i ca l f i gure , an en i gma t i c par tner , a pro t agon i s t equa l t o t he seduce r i n th i s a l mos t l i turg i ca l r ea l m o f cha l l enge and due l .

How d i f f eren t f rom Les L i a i sons Dange r euses ! I n Lac l os t he woman t o be seduced appea r s as a s t rongho l d t o be t aken , i n t he manne r o f t he m i l i t ary s t ra t egy o f t he pe r i od - t he s t ra t egy

11 4

SEDUCT I ON

may be l ess stat i c than be fore , but the ob j ec t i ve rema i ns the same , her sur render. The Pres i dent e is a for t ress to be bes i eged , and she mus t fal l . The re is no seduc t i on here - on l y s i egecra f t . Whe r e there is seduc t i on is no t i n the re l a t i on be t ween seducer and v i c t i m, but i n tha t be t ween the seducers , de Va l mon t and Mer teu i l , who share a cr i mi na l consp i racy by int erposed v i c t i ms . S i mi l ar l y in the Marqu i s de Sade , there is on l y the secre t soc i e t y g l or i fy i ng in i ts cr i mes , wh i l e the v i c t i ms are nu l l i t i es . The re is none of the subt l e ar t of the turnaround wh i ch al ready appears in SunTseu ' s Ar t of War , or i n zen ph i l osophy and the or i enta l mar t i a l ar ts . Or as here , in seduc t i on , whe r e the gi r l , her pass i on and l iber ty, are very much .a par t of the st rategy ' s unfo l d i ng . " She was an en i gma that , en i gma t i ca l l y , possessed in her i ts own reso l ut i on . " i

In thi s due l , every th i ng turns on the movemen t f rom e th i cs to aesthet i cs , f rom a na i ve to a consc i ous pass i on : So far I shou l d ca l l her pass i on a na i ve pass i on. When the change comes , and I beg i n to draw back in earnes t then she wi l l rea l l y mus t er al l her resources in order to capt i va te me. She has no way to accomp l i sh th i s except by means of the ;erot i c, but thi s w i l l now appear on a very d i f ferent sca l e . I t then becomes the weapon i n her hand wh i ch she sw i ngs aga i nst me. Then I have the re f l ec ted pass i on . She f ights for her own sake because she knows tha t I possess the erot i c ; she f ights for her own sake i n order to ove r come me. She deve l ops in herse l f a h i gher form of the erot i c . Wha t I t aught her to suspec t by i nf l am i ng her , my co l dness now t eaches her to unders t and , bu t i n such a way that she be l i eves she d i scovered i t herse l f . Through thi s she w i l l t ry to take me by surpr i se ; she w i l l bel i eve tha t her bo l dness has out s t r i pped me , and tha t she has thereby caught me . Then her pass i on

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

11 5

becomes def ini te , energet i c , conc l us i ve , l og i ca l ; her k i ss tota l , her embr ace f i rm . (p . 406) The e th i cs is f ormed of s i mp l i c i ty and na tura l ness ( i nc l udi ng the s i mp l i c i ty of des i re) , of wh i ch the gi r l 's na i ve grace and spont ane i t y are a par t . The aesthe t i cs is f ormed of ar t i f i ce, the p l ay of s i gns - i t is seduc t i on . Every e th i cs mus t reso l ve i tse l f i nto an aesthe t i cs . For K i erkegaard ' s seducer , as for Sch i l l er , Hb l der l i n , or even Marcuse , the passage to aesthe t i cs is the h i ghest movemen t grant ed the human spec i es . But the seducer ' s aesthe t i cs is qu i t e d i f ferent : i t is not d i v i ne and t ranscendent , bu t i ron i c and d i abo l i ca l ; i t does not have the f orm of an idea l , bu t of a st roke of w i t ; i t does not go beyond e th i cs ; i t is de f l ect ion, i nf l ect i on, seduc t i on , and t ransf i gurat i on, as rea l i zed by the m i r ror of decept i on . Th i s , however , is not to say that the seducer ' s st rategy is perverse ; i t is a par t of that aesthe t i cs of i rony wh i ch seeks to t rans form a vu l gar , phys i ca l erot i c i sm i nto a pass i on , and st roke of w i t . I have not i ced that she a l ways ca l l s me m i ne when she wr i t es to me ; bu t she l acks the courage to say i t to me . Today I begged her to do i t , w i th al l the i ns i nua t i ng and erot i c wa rmt h poss i b l e . She star t ed to do so ; an i ron i c g l ance , i ndescr i bab l y sw i f t and br i ef , was enough to make i t i mposs i b l e for her , a l though my l ips urged her w i th al l the i r m i gh t . Th i s mood is ent i re l y norma l . (p . 419) Erot i ca l l y she is comp l e t e l y equ i pped for the st ruggl e, she f ights w i th the dar ts of her eyes , w i th the command of her brows , w i th the secre t i veness of her forehead , w i th the e l oquence of her bosom , w i th the dangerous a l l urement of the embrace , w i th the prayer of her l ips, w i th the . smi l e on her face , w i th al l the swee t l ong i ng of her ent i re bei ng. The re is a powe r in her , an energy , as i f she we re a va l kyr i e ; but thi s erot i c force is i n turn t empe red by a cer ta i n l angu i sh i ng weakness wh i ch is brea thed out over her. - She mus t no t be he l d too l ong a t th i s peak . . . (p. 419)

116 SEDUCT I ON

I rony a l ways prevent s the mor t a l emot i ona l demons t ra t i ons that ant i c i pa te the game ' s end and threa t en to cut . shor t the unt r i ed poss i b i l i t i es he l d by each of the p l ayers. Seduc t i on a l one can dep l oy the lat ter , but on l y by keep i ng th i ngs i n suspense , by an i ron i c c l i namen , and by tha t d i s i l l us i on wh i ch l eaves the f i e l d of aesthe t i cs open . Some t i mes the seducer has h i s weaknesses . Thus i t happens tha t i n a sur fe i t of emo t i on he l aunches i nto a panegyr i c to fema l e beaut y i n i ts inf ini te divisibi l i ty, deta i l ed in i ts' m i nut e erot i c var i a t i ons (pp. 423-24) , and then assemb l ed i nto a s i ng l e f igure , w i th i n the hea t ed i mag i na t i on of an i n f l amed des i re . A v i s i on of God - bu t i mmed i a t e l y t aken up and~turned a round i n the i mag i na t i on of the Dev i l , in the co l d i mag i na t i on of appearances . Woman is man ' s dr eam - God , moreover , dr ew her f rom man when he was as l eep. She there fore has al l the t ra i ts of a dream, and i n her , one m i gh t say, the d i urna l scraps of the rea l comb i ne to f orm a m i rage . ' She awakens f i rst at the touch of l ove ; be fore that t i me she is a dr eam. Ye t in her dr eam l i fe we can d i st i ngu i sh t wo stages : i n the f i rst l ove dreams abou t her ; i n the second , she dreams abou t l ove (p. 425) The end comes when she has g i ven herse l f fu l l y. She is dead , she has l ost the grace of her appearance and become her sex ; she becomes a woman . For one l ast momen t . " [W]hen she then st ands decked out as a br i de , and al l the magn i f i cence of her at t i re pa l es be fore he r beauty , and she herse l f turns pa l e . . . " (p . 431) , she st i l l has the sp l endour of appearances - but soon i t wi l l be too l ate. Such is the me t aphys i ca l lot of the seducer . Beauty , meaning, subst ance , and above every th i ng e l se , God a re e th i ca l l y j ea l ous o f themse l ves. Mos t th i ngs are eth i ca l l y possess i ve ; they keep the i r secrets , and wa t ch over the i r mean i ngs . Seduc t i on , be i ng on the s i de of the appearances and the Dev i l , is aes the t i ca l l y possess i ve.

Af ter the f ina l abandonmen t (Corde l i a abandons herse l f , and

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

11 7

she is i mmed i a t e l y abandoned) , Johannes asks h i mse l f: " Have I been cons t ant l y fa i thfu l to my pac t i n my re l at i on to Cordel ia? Tha t is to say, my pac t w i th the aesthe t i c. For i t is thi s wh i ch makes me st rong , that I a l ways have the i dea on my s i de . . . Has the i nterest i ng a l ways been preserved?" (p. 432) . Mere l y to seduce is i nterest i ng on l y in the f i rst degree ; but here i t is a ma t t er of wha t i s i nt eres t i ng i n the second degree. Th i s doub l i ng is the secre t of the aesthe t i cs . On l y wha t is i nterest i ng abou t the i nterest i ng has seduc t i on ' s aesthe t i c force . In a sense , the seducer st r i ves to have the gi r l 's na tura l charms r i se to and sh i ne in the wor l d of pure appearances , i .e. , in the sphere of seduc t i on - and there des t roy t hem . For mos t th i ngs , a l as, have mean i ng and dep t h; but on l y some o f t hem r i se to the l eve l o f appea r ances , and they a l one are t ru l y seduc t i ve. Seduc t i on l i es in the t rans forma t i on of th i ngs i nto pure appearances .

Tha t is how seduc t i on is rea l i zed as my th , in the g i dd i ness of appearances , just be fore be i ng comm i t t ed to rea l i ty. "Everyth i ng is symbo l ; I myse l f am a my t h abou t myse l f , for is i t not as a my t h that I has t en to thi s mee t i ng? . . . Dr i ve now for dear l i fe, even i f the horses drop dead , on l y no t a s i ng l e second before we reach the p l ace . " (p . 439) A s i ng l e n i ght , and i t 's al l over. " I hope never to see her aga i n . " She g i ves every th i ng and fal ls, l i ke those count l ess v i rg i ns of Greek my t ho l ogy who were t rans formed i nto f lowers , and thereby ach i eved a vege t a t i ve and l ugubr i ous grace , the echo of the seduc t i on grace of the i r f i rst l i fe . But , adds K i erkegaard ' s seducer crue l l y : ". . : the t i me is past when a gi r l suf f er i ng the pa i n of a fa i th l ess l ove can be changed i nto a sun f l ower . " (p . 439) And i n a st i l l mor e crue l and unexpec t ed manne r : " I f I we r e a god , I wou l d do for her wha t Nep t une d i d for a nymph: I wou l d change her i nto a man. " (p . 440) . In a word , the woman does no t ex i st . On l y the gi r l ex i sts by the sub l i me na ture of her state, and the man , by h i s powe r to des t roy her. Bu t the my th i ca l pass i on of seduc t i on does no t cease to be i ron i c. I t is c rowned w i th one l ast me l ancho l y st roke : the ar -

11 8

SEDUCT I ON

rangemen t of the i nter i or that wi l l be the set t i ng for the l overs ' abandon . One l ast momen t of suspense as the seducer br i ngs toge ther al l the sca t t ered l i nes of h i s st rategy and cont emp l a t es t hem as t hough be fore dea th. Wha t shou l d have been a t r i umphan t set t i ng is a l ready no mor e than the do l e fu l si te of a de func t story. Every th i ng i n thi s house is recons t i tut ed so as to se i ze ho l d of Corde l i a ' s i mag i na t i on at a st roke , at that f ina l momen t when she is to be topp l ed . The re is the cab i ne t in wh i ch they me t , w i th the same sofa , the same l amp , the same tea tabl e , as i t was a l l " purpor t ed to be " yesterday , and is here today , by v i r tue of an exac t resemb l ance . On the open p i ano , on the mus i crest the same l i t t le Swed i sh me l ody - Corde l i a wi l l ent er by the door at the back . Every th i ng is foreseen : she wi l l d i scover al l the scenes they l i ved toge ther recap i tu l a t ed . The i l l us i on is per f ec t . In fact , the game has reached i ts end , but t the seducer reaches new he i ghts of i rony by br i ng i ng toge ther al l the threads he has woven s i nce the beg i nn i ng in one l ast d i sp l ay of f i reworks , wh i ch is, at the same t i me , a parod i c funera l ora t i on to . the i r consumma t ed l ove. Af t er wh i ch Corde l i a wi l l no l onger appear , except i n sever a l despera t e l et ters that open the story, and even her despa i r is s t range. She was not exac t l y dece i ved or d i spossessed , but sp i r i tua l l y d i ver t ed by a game whose ru l es she was no t aware of . She was p l ayed w i th , as t hough unde r a spe l l . She has the i mpress i on of hav i ng been , w i thou t rea l i z i ng i t , the t rophy i n some very i nt i ma te and devasta t i ng p lot , the ob j ec t of a sp i r i tua l abduc t i on . In ef fect , she was robbed of her own seduc t i on , wh i ch was then turned aga i nst her. Hers is a name l ess fate, and the s tupor that resu l ts is d i f ferent f rom me r e despa i r . Such v i c t i ms we re of a qu i te d i st inct ' na ture . . . .There was no v i s i b l e change in the i r appearance ; they ma i nt a i ned the i r cus tomary re l a t i onsh i ps , as respec t ed as ever , and ye t they we re changed , a l mos t i nexp l i cab l y to themse l ves . . . The i r l i ves we re not l i ke those snapped of f or broken , but they had become i nt rospec t i ve ; lost to others , they va i n l y sought to f i nd themse l ves . (p . 303)

THE FEAR OF BE I NG SEDUCED

I f seduc t i on is a pass i on or dest iny , i t is usua l l y the oppos i t e pass i on that preva i l s - that o f not be i ng seduced. We st rugg l e to con f i rm ourse l ves i n our t ruth : we f i ght aga i nst that wh i ch seeks to seduce us . In thi s st rugg l e al l means are acceptab l e , rang i ng f rom re l ent l ess l y seduc i ng the other in order not to be seduced onese l f , to pre t end i ng to be seduced in order to cut al l seduc t i on shor t .

The hyster i c comb i nes the pass i on of seduc t i on w i th that of s i mu l a t i on . She prot ec ts herse l f f rom seduc t i on by of f er i ng booby- t rapped s i gns wh i ch , even as they put themse l ves for wa rd i n exaggera t ed fash i on, cannot be be l i eved . The scrup l es , the excess i ve remorse , the pa the t i c advances and end l ess ent reat i es, her way of sp i nn i ng events so that they d i sso l ve and she herse l f becomes e lus i ve , the g i dd i ness she i mposes on others , and the decept i on - i t is al l seduc t i ve de ter rence , whose obscure ob j ec t i ve is l ess to seduce than to never l et onese l f seduce . The hyster i c has no i nt i macy , emot i ons , or secre ts . She is ent i re l y g i ven over to ext erna l b l ackma i l , to the ephemera l but tota l cred i b i l i ty of her " symp toms , " the abso l ut e need to be be-

12 0 SEDUCT I ON

l i eved ( l i ke the my t homan i ac w i th h i s stor i es) bu t at the same t i me , to d i sappo i nt al l be l i e f - and thi s w i thou t appea l i ng to some shared de l us i on . An uncomprom i s i ng demand , bu t comp l e te l y i nsens i t i ve as to i ts response . A demand that is put i nto ques t i on by i ts choreography , and by the e f fect of i ts s i gns. Seduc t i on too mocks the t ruth of s igns, but makes i t i nto a rever s i b l e appearance , wh i l e the hyster i c p l ays w i th the s i gns but w i thout shar i ng t hem . I t is as i f she appropr i a t ed the ent i re process of seduc t i on for herse l f; , as i f she was b i dd i ng w i th her se l f , wh i l e l eav i ng the other on l y the u l t i ma tum of her hyster i ca l convers i on , w i thou t any poss i b l e revers i on . The hyster i c succeeds i n mak i ng her own body a bar r i er to seduc t i on : a seduc t ress para l yzed by her own body and f asc i na t ed by her own symp t oms . And who seeks to pe t r i fy others in turn , by an e l us i veness tha t seeks to a l l ay susp i c i ons , bu t rema i ns on l y a pa the t i c psychodr ama. I f seduc t i on is a cha l l enge , hyster i a is b l ackma i l . Mos t s i gns and messages today sol i c i t us i n thi s hyster i ca l manner. They wou l d make-us-be l i eve , make -us-speak and make-uscome by d i ssuas i on . They wou l d b l ackma i l us w i th a b l i nd, psychodrama t i c t ransac t i on , us i ng s i gns devo i d of mean i ng , that mu l t i p l y and hyper t rophy prec i se l y because they no l onger have any secre ts or cred i b i l i ty. S i gns w i thou t fa i th, w i thou t af fect or h i story , s i gns ter r i f i ed at the i dea of s i gn i fy i ng - just as the hyster i c is ter r i f i ed at the i dea of be i ng seduced . In rea l i ty, the i nner absence that i nheres i n the se l f ter r i f i es the hyster i c . She mus t dra i n herse l f , w i th her cont i nua l p l ay , of thi s absence i n the secrecy of wh i ch she cou l dbe l oved , and cou l d l ove herse l f . In thi s way she forms a m i r ror beh i nd wh i ch - near su i c i de , bu t turn i ng su i c i de , l i ke every th i ng e lse, i nto a bothersome , theat r i ca l process of seduc t i on - she rema i ns i mmor t a l i n her " spec t acu l ar " doma i n . The same process , but reversed , can be f ound in anorex i a , f r ig id i ty and i mpo t ence. By turn i ng one ' s body i nto a m i r ror - but a m i r ror that has, as i t were , been turned aga i nst the wa l l by e f f ac i ng the pot ent i a l seduc t i veness of one ' s body - by di senchant i ng and desexua l i z i ng i t , one is st i l l resor t i ng to b l ackma i l and de l i ver i ng an u l t i ma tum : " You w i l l no t seduce me , I dare you to t ry. " Seduc t i on , however , shows through in i ts very

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

12 1

nega t i on , s i nce the dare is one of i ts fundamen t a l forms. A cha l l enge mus t be me t w i th a response , (w i thout wan t i ng to) a cha l l enge has to l et i tse l f seduce - but here the game has been c l osed down . And c l osed down al l the mor e empha t i ca l l y by the body , by i ts drama t i za t i on of a re fusa l of seduc t i on - wh i l e the hyster i c ge ts out of the game by drama t i z i ng a demand for seduc t i on . In bo t h cases , however , seduc t i on , whe t he r as seducer or seduced , is den i ed . The prob l em, there fore , is not one of sexua l or a l i ment ary i mpot ence , w i th i ts t ra in of psychoana l y t i c reasons and unreason , but concerns an i mpot ence as regards seduc t i on . The di sa f fect i on, neuros i s , angu i sh and f rust ra t i on encoun t ered by psychoana l ys i s comes no doub t f rom be i ng unab l e to l ove or to be l oved , f rom be i ng unab l e to g i ve or take p l easure , but the rad i ca l d i senchan tmen t comes f rom seduc t i on and i ts fa i l ure. On l y those who l i e comp l e t e l y out s i de seduc t i on are i l l , even i f they rema i n fu l l y capab l e o f l ov i ng and mak i ng l ove. Psychoana l ys i s be l i eves i t t reats the d i sorders of sex and des i re , but in rea l i ty i t is dea l i ng w i th the d i sorders of seduc t i on (wh i ch i t has he l ped , not i ncons i derab l y , to p l ace out s i de seduc t i on and i mpr i son w i th i n the d i l emma of sex) . The mos t ser i ous def i c i enc i es a l ways conce rn cha rm and not p l easure , enchan t men t and not some v i ta l or sexua l sat i sfact i on, the (game ' s) ru l e and not the (symbo l i c) Law. To be depr i ved of seduc t i on is the on l y t rue f orm of cast ra t i on . For tuna te l y , the l at ter cont i nuous l y fai ls . Seduc t i on r i ses l i ke the phoen i x f rom the ashes , w i th the sub j ec t be i ng unab l e to prevent al l thi s f rom aga i n becom i ng , as w i th anorex i a or i mpot ence , a l ast despera t e a t t empt at seduc t i on , and the den i a l f rom aga i n becom i ng a dare. Perhaps i t is i n these aggrava t ed forms of sexua l se l f -den i a l that seduc t i on expresses i tse l f i n i ts purest form, s i nce i t st i l l asks the other to : " Prove to me that i t 's no t just a ma t t er of ` that : "

The re are other pass i ons opposed to seduc t i on , t hough for tunate l y , they too usua l l y fai l when t aken to ex t remes . The pass i on for co l l ec t i ng , for examp l e , the f e t i sh i sm of the co l l ec tor.

12 2

SEDUCT I ON

I ts ant agon i st i c af f in i ty w i th seduc t i on is st rong , perhaps because i t too i nvo l ves a game w i th rul es, whose i ntens i ty is such that i t can subst i tute i tse l f for any other game . For i t too i nvokes a pass i on for an abst rac t i on tha t de f i es every mora l l aw, in order to ma i nt a i n the r i g i d ceremon i a l of the c l osed un i verse w i th i n wh i ch the sub j ec t conf i nes h i mse l f. The co l l ec tor is possess i ve . He seeks exc l us i ve r ights over the dead ob j ec t w i th wh i ch he appeases h i s fet i shi st pass i on . Rec l us i on and con f i nemen t : beyond al l e l se he is co l l ec t i ng h i mse l f . And he is not to be d i st rac ted f rom h i s madness , s i nce h i s l ove of the ob j ec t , the amorous st ra t agems w i th wh i ch he sur rounds i t , d i sp l ay a ha t red and fear of seduc t i on . And not just the seduct i veness of the ob j ec t : he is just as repe l l ed by any seduc t i on that m i gh t emana t e f rom h i mse l f. The Co l l ector , the f i l m and nove l , i l lust rate thi s de l i r i um . The prot agon i st , be i ng unab l e to seduce or be l oved (but does he wan t seduc t i on and the spont ane i t y of l ove? cer t a i n l y not - he wan t s to force the seduc t i on , he wan t s to force love) , k i dnaps a young woman and conf i nes her in the basemen t of h i s count ry house , wh i ch has been spec i a l l y equ i pped for the purpose. He insta l l s her , cares for her , sur rounds her w i th nume rous cour tes i es , but checks al l a t t empt s at escape , out smar t s al l her ruses , and wi l l spare her on l y i f she adm i t s herse l f de f ea t ed and She l oves h i m spont aneous l y. In seduced , on l y i f , in the , end , t i me , however , w i th thi s forced promi scu i t y , an i ndec i s i ve and t roub l ed conn i vence f orms be t ween t hem - and one even i ng he- i nv i tes her to d i ne upsta i rs , w i th al l precaut i ons t aken . And wha t happens? She genu i ne l y t r i es to seduce h i m and of fers herse l f to h i m. Perhaps she l oves h i m at thi s momen t , perhaps she on l y wan t s to d i sarm h i m. Bo t h no doub t . 'But wha t ever the case , her behav i our provokes a pan i c reac t i on , and he hi ts her , i nsu l ts her and throws her back i n the cave. . He no l onger respec ts her , he undresses her and takes pornograph i c p i c tures wh i ch he p l aces i n a pho t o a l bum (he co l l ects but ter f l i es , and has shown her h i s co l l ec t i on w i th pr i de) . She ge ts s i ck and fa l ls i nto a sor t of coma : he no l onger cares for her : she d i es and he bur i es her i n h i s yard . In the l ast scene , he is seen l ook i ng for another woman to k i dnap and seduce at wha t ever cos t . A need to be l oved , bu t an i nab i l i ty to be seduced. When ,

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 12 3

f ina l l y, the woman is seduced ( i t is enough tha t she wan t s to seduce h i m) he canno t accept h i s v i c tory : he pre f ers to see i t as a sexua l ma l ed i c t i on and pun i shes her. I t is not a ques t i on o f i mpo t ence ( i t is never a ques t i on o f i mpot ence ) . He pre f ers the possess i ve spe l l cast by a co l l ec t i on of dead ob j ec t s - the dead sex ob j ec t be i ng as beaut i fu l as a but ter f l y w i th f l orescent w i ngs - to the seduc t i on of a l i v i ng be i ng who wou l d demand h i s l ove i n re turn . He pre fers the mono t onous f asc i na t i on of the co l l ec t i on , the f asc i na t i on w i th dead d i f ferences , thi s obsess i on w i th the same , over the seduc t i on of the other. Th i s is why one senses f rom the beg i nn i ng that she wi l l di e , no t because he is a dangerous madman , but because he is logi ca l , mot i va t ed by an i r revers ib l e l og i c. To seduce w i thout be i ng seduced - w i thou t revers i b i l i ty. In thi s case , one of the t wo t erms mus t di e, and i t is a l ways the same s i nce the other is a l ready dead . The other is i mmor tal and i ndest ruct i b l e , as i n every pervers i on . Th i s is i l lust rated by the fact tha t the f i l m ends whe r e i t began (and not w i thout humour - possess i ve peop l e , l i ke perverse peop l e , have a good sense of humour out s i de the sphere of the i r obsess i on , i nc l ud i ng i n the m i nut i ae of the i r proceed i ngs) . In any case , the co l l ector has enc l osed h i mse l f w i th i n an i nso l ub l e l og i c : al l the s i gns of l ove she can g i ve h i m wi l l be i nt erpre t ed in a cont rary manner. And the mos t t ender wi l l be the mos t suspec t . He m i gh t perhaps be sat i sf i ed w i th the appropr i a t e s igns, but he canno t bear the genu i ne ent i cement s of l ove. W i th i n h i s logi c , she has s i gned her own dea th war rant . Th i s is not a story abou t sad i sm - i t is too mov i ng . Who sa i d that the bes t proo f of l ove is to respec t the other and h i s or her des i res? Perhaps the pr i ce pa i d by beaut y and seduc t i on is to be con f i ned and pu t to dea th , because they are too dangerous , and because one wi l l never be ab l e to render her wha t she has g i ven. One can then on l y reward her w i th her dea th. In a sense , the gi r l recogn i zes thi s s i nce she responds to thi s h i gher seduc t i on of f ered her in the me t aphor of her conf i nemen t . I t is just that she cannot respond except by of f er i ng her se l f sexua l l y - and thi s appears t r i v i a l re l at i ve to the cha l l enge she herse l f poses by her beaut y. Sexua l p l easure wi l l never abo l i sh the need for seduc t i on . Former l y a l l mor t a l s we re ob l i ged

12 4

SEDUCT I ON

to r edeem the i r l i v i ng bod i es w i th a sacr i f i ce ; today al l seduct i ve forms , perhaps al l l i v i ng forms , have to r edeem themse l ves by the i r dea th . Th i s is a symbo l i c l aw - wh i ch is, moreover , not a l aw but an unavo i dab l e rul e, that is, we adhere to i t w i thout grounds , as some t h i ng arb i t rary ye t obv i ous , and not i n accord w i th some t ranscendent pr i nc i p l e. Shou l d one conc l ude that every a t t empt at seduc t i on ends w i th the murde r of the ob j ec t , or that i t a l ways - and thi s is a var i a t i on on the same t heme - i nvo l ves an a t t empt to dr i ve the other mad? Is the spe l l one exerc i ses over the other a l ways harmfu l ? Is one on l y seek i ng to avenge the spe l l , that the other exerc i ses over you? Is the gams : be i ng p l ayed here a game of l i fe or dea th , or at l east c l oser to dea th than the serene exchange of sexua l p l easure? To seduce i mp l i es that the other wi l l pay for the fact of be i ng seduced , that is, for hav i ng been torn f rom h i m/ herse l f and made i nto an ob j ec t of sorcery. He re everyth i ng obeys the symbo l i c ru l e of i mmed i a t e appor t i onmen t wh i ch d i ctates the sacr i f i c i a l re l at i ons be t ween men and the i r gods i n cu l tures of crue l ty , that is, re l at i ons of recogn i t i on and d i spensa t i on of un l i m i t ed v i o l ence. Now seduc t i on be l ongs to cu l tures of crue l ty , and is the on l y ceremon i a l f orm of the lat ter l ef t to us . I t is wha t draws our a t t ent i on to dea th , not in i ts organ i c and acc i dent a l form, bu t as some t h i ng necessary and r i gorous , the i nev i tab l e consequence of the game ' s ru l es . Dea t h rema i ns the u l t i ma t e r i sk in every symbo l i c pact , be i t that supposed by a cha l l enge , a secret , a seduc t i on or a pervers i on .

Seduc t i on and pervers i on ma i nt a i n subt l e re l at i ons . Doesn ' t seduc t i on i mp l y a f orm of the d i vers i on of the wor l d ' s order? And yet , of al l the pass i ons , of al l the movemen t s of the sou l , pervers i on is perhaps the mos t opposed to seduc t i on . Bo t h are crue l and i nd i f f erent re l at i ve to sex .. Seduc t i on is some t h i ng tha t se i zes ho l d of a l l p l easures , af fects and representa t i ons , and ge ts aho l d of dreams themse l ves in order to rerout e t hem f rom the i r pr i mary course , turn i ng t hem i nto a sharper , mor e subt l e game , whose stakes have ne i ther an end nor an or i g i n, and concerns ne i ther dr i ves nor des i res .

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES

12 5

I f sex has a na tura l l aw, a p l easure pr i nc i p l e , then seduc t i on cons i sts i n deny i ng that pr i nc i p l e and rep l ac i ng i t w i th a rul e , the arb i t rary ru l e of a game . In th i s sense , seduc t i on is per verse. The i mmora l i t y of pervers i on , l i ke that of seduc t i on , does no t come f rom abandon i ng onese l f to the j oys of sex in oppos i t i on to a l l mora l i t y ; i t resu l ts f rom some th i ng mor e ser i ous and subt l e , the abandonmen t of sex i tse l f as a re f erent and a mora l i ty , even i n i ts " j oys . " Pl ay , not sensua l p l easure . The perver t is co l d when i t comes to sex. He t ransmut es sex and sexua l i ty i nto a r i tua l car r i er , a r i tua l and ceremon i a l abst ract i on, a burn i ng concern w i th s i gns ra ther than an exchange o f des i res . W i t h the perver t , a l l the i ntens i ty of sex is d i spaced onto the s i gns and the i r sequence , just as i n Ar t aud thi s i ntens i ty is d i sp l aced onto the theater i ca l unfo l d i ng ( the savage i r rupt i on of s i gns i nto rea l i ty) . The i r v i ol ence is ceremon i a l - and by no means i nst i nc tua l ; on l y the r i te is v i o l ent , on l y the ru l es of the game are v i o l ent , because they pu t an end to the sys t em f ormed by rea l i ty. Th i s is t rue crue l ty , and has noth i ng to do w i th b l ood l us t . And in thi s sense , pervers i on is crue l . Pervers i on ' s powe r of f asc i na t i on comes f rom a r i tua l cu l t based on ru l es. The perver t is not someone who t ransgresses the l aw, but someone who e l udes the l aw in order to ded i ca t e h i mse l f to the ru l e , someone , then , who evades not just the reproduc t i ve f ina l i ty of the sexua l order , bu t tha t order i tsel f , w i th i ts symbo l i c l aw, in order to l i nk up w i th a regu l a ted , r i tua l i zed, ceremon i a l f orm. Pervers i on supposes a cont rac t that is not a cont rac t , that is, a t ransac t i on be t ween t wo f ree agents , but a pac t upho l d i ng the obsevance of a ru l e . As such i t estab l i shes a due l re l at i on ( l i ke a cha l l enge) tha t exc l udes al l th i rd par t i es (un l i ke a cont ract ) and canno t be d i ssoc i a t ed i nto i ts i nd i v i dua l t erms . I t is thi s pac t , thi s due l re l at i on, w i th i ts web of ob l i ga t i ons fore i gn to the l aw, wh i ch renders pervers i on i nvu l nerab l e to the exter na l wor l d - and i mpene t rab l e to ana l ys i s in t erms of the ind i v i dua l unconsc i ous , and thus to psychoana l ys i s . For the rea l m of the ru l e is no t par t of psychoana l ys i s ' s j ur i sd i ct i on, wh i ch concerns l aw a l one . Pervers i on , on the other hand , be l ongs to th i s other un i verse.

12 6 SEDUCT I ON

of pervers i on abo l i sh sex ' s na tura l l aw. Arb i t rary , l i ke the ru l es of a game , the cont ent s are of l i t t le consequence ; wha t is essent i a l is the i mpos i t i on of a ru l e or s i gn, or sys t em of s igns, wh i ch abst rac ts f rom the sexua l order ( i t m i gh t be , as w i th K l ossowsk i , co i ns that , ob l i v i ous to the na tura l l aw of exchange , become the r i tua l car r i er of pervers i on) . Hence the af f ini ty be t ween convent s , secre t soc i et i es , Sade ' s cha t eaux , and the un i verse of pervers i on . The oa ths , the r i tes, the i nt erm i nab l e Sad i an protoco l s . Wha t j o i ns t hem toge ther is a cu l t of the ru l e - and no t i ts absence i n l i cent i ousness . And w i th i n these rul es, the perver t or perverse coup l e can adm i t soc i a l st ra i ns and d i stor t i ons w i thou t di f f i cul ty, s i nce the l at ter conce rn the l aw a l one ( thus, accord i ng to Gob l ot , w i th i n the the bourgeo i s c l ass, one can do any th i ng prov i ded the c l ass rul e , the sys t em of arb i t rary s i gns that de f i nes i t as a caste , rema i ns unha rmed) . Al l t ransgress i ons are poss i b l e , bu t no t an i nf ract i on-of the Ru l e. Thus , in the i r common cha l l enge to the na tura l order , per vers i on and seduc t i on resemb l e each other. But .on nume rous occas i ons they are v i o l ent l y opposed , as i n the story of The Co l l ec tor , whe r e a perverse , possess i ve pass i on t r i umphs over seduc t i on . Or in the story of " The Dance r " re l a ted by Leo Scheer : A concent ra t i on camp guard forces a young Jewess to dance for h i m be fore her dea th. She does so, and as her danc i ng l eaves h i m spe l l bound , she is ab l e to approach h i m, stea l h i s weapon and ki l l h i m. O f the t wo un i verses , that of the SS, exemp l i f y i ng a stagger i ng , perverse power , a powe r of fasc i nat i on ( that ves t ed in the sovere i gnt y of the person who ho l ds a l i fe i n h i s hands) , and that of the gi r l , exemp l i f y i ng seduc t i on by the dance , the l at ter t r i umphs . Seduc t i on i nvades the order of f asc i na t i on and turns i t ups i de down ( though mos t of the t i me i t is no t even g i ven the chance to enter ) . I t; is c l ear here tha t the t wo l og i cs exc l ude each other , and tha t each represents a mor t a l danger for the other. Bu t i sn' t there a cont i nuous cyc l e of revers i on ; be t ween the two? The co l l ector ' s pass i on ends up , af ter al l , exerc i s i ng a k i nd of seduc t i on over the gi r l (or is i t on l y f asc i na t i on? But , once aga i n, where ' s the d i f f erence?) . A cer ta i n ver t igo' resu l ts f rom

The due l re l a t i on abo l i shes the l aw o f exchange. The ru l es

SUPERF I C I AL ABYSSES 12 7

her despera t e a t t empt to c i rcumscr i be a forec l osed un i verse , whereby , at the same t i me , she d i sc l oses a s i nk ho l e or vo i d that exerc i ses , by i ts ant i -seduc t i on , a new f orm of a t t rac t i on . A cer ta i n k i nd of seduc t i on is perverse : hyster i a , s i nce i t uses seduc t i on to de f end i tse l f f rom seduc t i on . But a cer ta i n per vers i on is seduc t i ve , s i nce i t uses the de tour o f pervers i on to seduce . W i t h hyster i a seduc t i on becomes obscene. But i n cer ta i n forms of pornography , obscen i t y aga i n becomes seduc t i ve. Vi ol ence can seduce , and even rape . The od i ous and the ab j ec t can seduce . Whe r e does the de tour of seduc t i on stop? Whe r e does the cyc l e of revers i on end , and shou l d i t be s topped? However , a pro f ound d i f f erence rema i ns : the perver t is rad i ca l l y susp i c i ous of seduc t i on and t r i es to cod i f y i t . He t r i es to f i x i ts ru l es , forma l i ze t hem i n a text , express t hem i n a pac t . In so do i ng , he breaks a bas i c rul e , tha t o f the secre t . Ins t ead of upho l d i ng seduc t i on ' s supp l e ceremon i a l , the perver t wan t s a f i xed ceremon i a l , a f i xed due l . By mak i ng the ru l e i nto some th i ng sacred and obscene , by des i gna t i ng i t as an end , tha t is to say , as a l aw, he t races an uncomprom i s i ng de f ense : for i t is the thea ter of the ru l e that ga i ns ascendancy , as i n hyster i a the thea t er of the body. Mor e genera l l y , al l the perverse f orms of seduc t i on have the fo l l ow i ng in common : they be t ray i ts secre t and the fundamen t a l ru l e , wh i ch is that the ru l e rema i n unspoken . In thi s sense , the seducer h i mse l f is perverse. For he too de f l ec ts seduc t i on f rom i ts ru l e of secrecy , and does so i ntent i ona l l y. He is to seduc t i on wha t the chea t er is to the game . I f the purpose of the game is to w i n , then the chea t er is the on l y t rue p l ayer . I f seduc t i on had an ob j ec t i ve , then the seducer wou l d be i ts i dea l f i gure . Bu t ne i ther seduc t i on nor the game can be thus charac ter i zed , and there is a good chance that wha t de t erm i nes the chea ter ' s act i ons , h i s cyn i ca l s t ra t agems to w i n at al l costs , is h i s ha t red of the game , h i s re j ec t i on of the seduct i on proper to the game - just as there is a good chance that the seducer ' s behav i our is de t erm i ned by h i s f ear of be i ng seduced , and of hav i ng to face the r i sk of a cha l l enge to h i s own t ruth. Th i s is wha t l eads h i m to h i s f i rst sexua l conques t , and then to the count l ess conques t s whe r e he can fet i sh i ze h i s

12 8 SEDUCT I ON

st ra tegy. The perver t a l ways ge ts i nvo l ved i n a man i aca l un i verse of mas t ery and the l aw. He seeks mas t ery over the fe t i sh i zed ru l e and abso l ut e r i tua l c i rcumscr i pt i on . The l at ter is no l onger p l ayfu l . I t no l onger moves. I t is dead , and can no l ong put anyth i ng i nto p l ay except i ts own dea th . Fe t i sh i sm is the seduc t i on of dea th , i nc l ud i ng the dea th of the ru l e i n pervers i on . Pervers i on is a f rozen cha l l enge ; seduc t i on , a l i v ing cha l l enge . Seduc t i on is sh i f t i ng and ephemera l ; pervers i on , mono t onous and i nt erm i nab l e . Pervers i on is theat r i ca l and comp l i c i t ; seduct i on, secre t and revers i b l e .

Sys t ems obsessed w i th the i r systema t i c i ty are fasc i nat i ng: they tune i n dea th as an energy of f asc i na t i on . Thus the co l l ec tor ' s pass i on t r i es to c i rcumscr i be and i mmob i l i ze seduc t i on be fore t rans form i ng i t i nto a dea th energy. I t is then the f l aw o f such sys t ems tha t becomes seduc t i ve. Ter ror is d i ss i pa t ed by i rony. Or e l se seduc t i on l i es i n wa i t for sys t ems at the i r po i nt of i ner t ia, that po i nt at wh i ch they stop, whe r e there is no l onger any beyond , nor any poss i b l e represent a t i on - a po i nt of no re turn whe r e the t ra j ector i es s l ow down and the ob j ec t is absorbed by i ts own force of res i stance and dens i t y. Wha t happens in the env i rons of thi s po i nt of iner t i a? The ob j ec t is d i stor t ed l i ke the sun re f rac ted by the d i f ferent l ayers of the hor i zon ; crushed by i ts own mass , i t no l onger obeys i ts own l aws . We know a l mos t noth i ng abou t such processes of iner t i a , except that at the edge of th i s b l ack ho l e the po i nt of no re turn becomes a po i nt of tota l revers ibi l i ty, a ca t ast roph i c po i nt whe r e dea th is pu l l ed t i ght to be re l eased in a new seduc t i on e f fect .

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON

V THE PASS I ON FOR RULES

No p l aye r mus t be grea t er t han the game i tse l f

Ro l l erba l l

The D i a r y o f the Seduce r c l a i ms that in seduc t i on the subj ect is never the mas t er of h i s mas t er p l an , and even when the l at ter is dep l oyed in ful l consc i ousness , i t st i l l subm i t s to the ru l es of a game that goes beyond i t . A r i tua l drama turgy beyond the l aw, seduc t i on is both game and fate, and as such pushes the protagon i sts towards the i r i nev i tab l e end w i thout the ru l e be i ng broken - for i t is the ru l e that b i nds t hem . And the rul e ' s bas i c d i c tum is that the game cont i nue wha t ever the cost , be i t dea th i tse l f . The re is, then , a sor t of pass i on that b i nds the p l ayers to the ru l e tha t t i es t hem toge ther - w i thou t wh i ch the game wou l d no t be poss i b l e . Ord i nar i l y we l i ve w i th i n the rea l m of the Law, even when f antas i z i ng i ts abo l i t i on . Beyond the l aw we see on l y i ts t ransgress i on or the l i f t ing of a proh i b i t i on . For the d i scourse of l aw and i nterd i c t i on de t erm i nes the i nverse d i scourse of t ransgress i on and l i bera t i on . Howeve r , i t i s no t the absence o f the l aw The Ru l e p l ays on an i mmanen t sequence of arb i t rary s igns , wh i l e the Law is based on a t ranscendent sequence of necessary s i gns . The one concerns cyc l es , the recur rence of convent i ona l procedures , wh i l e the other is an i ns t ance based i n an i r revers ib l e cont i nu i ty. The one i nvo l ves ob l i ga t i ons , the other const ra i nts and proh i b i t i ons . Because the Law estab l i shes a l ine, i t can and mus t be t ransgressed . By cont rast , i t makes no sense
tha t i s opposed to the l aw, bu t the Ru l e .

13 2 SEDUCT I ON

to " t ransgress " a game ' s ru l es ; w i th i n a cyc l e ' s recur rence , there is no l i ne one can j ump ( instead, one s i mp l y l eaves the game ) . Because the Law - whe t he r that of the s igni f i er , cast ra t i on , or a soc i a l i nterd i c t i on - c l a i ms to be the d i scurs i ve s i gn of a l ega l i nst ance and h i dden t ruth, i t resu l ts in repress i on and proh i b i t ions, and thus the d i v i s i on i nto a man i f es t and a l atent d i scourse. G i ven tha t the ru l e is convent i ona l and arb i t rary , and has no h i dden t ruth, i t knows ne i ther repress i on nor the d i st i nc t i on be t ween the man i f est and the l atent . I t does no t car ry any meani ng, i t does no t l ead anywhe re ; by cont rast , the Law has a det erm i na t e f ina l i ty. The end l ess , revers i b l e cyc l e of the Ru l e is opposed to the l inear , f i na l i zed. progress i on of the Law. S i gns do not have the same status i n the one as i n the other. The Law is par t of the wor l d of represent a t i on , and is therefore sub j ec t to i nterpre ta t i on or dec i phe rmen t . I t i nvo l ves decrees or st a t ements , and is no t i nd i f f erent to the sub j ec t . I t is a text , and fa l ls unde r the i nf l uence of mean i ng and re ferent i a l i ty. By cont rast , the Ru l e has no sub j ec t , and the f orm of i ts ut t erance is o f l i t t le consequence ; one does not dec i pher the rul es, nor der i ve p l easure f rom the i r comprehens i on - on l y the i r observance ma t ters , and the resu l t i ng g i dd i ness . Th i s a l so d i st i ngu i shes the pass i on for the game ' s r i tua l s and i ntens i ty f rom the p l easure that a t t aches to obed i ence to the Law , or i ts t ransgress i on .

In order to unders t and the i ntens i ty of r i tua l forms , one mus t r i d onese l f of the i dea tha t al l happ i ness der i ves f rom na ture , and al l p l easure f rom the sat i sfact i on of a des i re . On the cont rary, games , the sphere of p l ay , revea l a pass i on for rul es, a g i dd i ness born of rul es, and a force tha t comes f rom ceremony , and no t des i re. Does the de l i ght one exper i ences in a game come f rom a dream- l i ke s i tuat ion, whe r e one moves f ree of rea l i ty, but wh i ch one can qu i t at any t i me? No t at al l . Games , un l i ke dreams , are sub j ec t to rul es, and one just doesn ' t l eave a game . Games crea te ob l i ga t i ons l i ke those f ound in cha l l enges . To l eave a game is unspor t sman l i ke. And the fact tha t one canno t re fuse to p l ay

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 13 3

a game f rom w i th i n - a fact tha t exp l a i ns i ts enchan t men t and d i f ferent i ates i t f rom " rea l i ty" - crea tes a symbo l i c pac t wh i ch compe l s one to observe the ru l es w i thou t reserve , and to pur sue the game to the end , as one pursues a cha l l enge to the end . The order i nst i tuted by the game , be i ng convent i ona l , is incommensur ab l e w i th the necessary order o f the rea l wor l d: i t is ne i ther eth i ca l nor psycho l og i ca l , and i ts accept ance ( the accept ance of the rul es) i mp l i es ne i ther res i gna t i on nor const ra i nt . As such , there is no f reedom in our mora l and i nd i v i dua l sense of that t erm, i n games . They are no t to be equa t ed w i th l i ber ty. Games do not obey the d i a l ect i c of f ree wi l l , tha t hypothe t i ca l d i a l ect i c of the sphere of the rea l and the l aw. To ent er i nto a game is to ent er a sys t em of r i tua l ob l i ga t i ons. I ts i ntens i ty der i ves f rom i ts in i t i atory form - not f rom our l iber ty, as we wou l d l i ke to be l i eve , fo l l ow i ng an i deo l ogy tha t sees on l y a s ing l e , "na tura l " source of happ i ness and p l easure . The game ' s so l e pr i nc i p l e , though i t is never posed as un i ver sal , is tha t by choos i ng the ru l e one i s de l i vered f rom the l aw. W i t hou t a psycho l og i ca l or me t aphys i ca l founda t i on , the ru l e has no ground i ng in be l i e f . One ne i ther be l i eves nor d i sbe l i eves a ru l e - one observes i t . The d i f fuse sphere of be l i ef , the need for cred i b i l i ty that encompasses the rea l , is d i sso l ved i n the game. Hence the i r i mmora l i t y : to proceed w i t hou t be l i ev i ng i n i t , to sanc t i on a d i rect f asc i na t i on w i th convent i ona l s i gns and ground l ess ru l es . Deb t s too are annu l ed. In games there is no th i ng to redeem , no account s to set t l e w i th the past . For thi s reason , games appear unawa re of the d i a l ect i c of the poss i b l e and i mposs i b l e , there be i ng no account s to set t l e w i th the future . There is nothi ng "poss i b l e , " s i nce every th i ng is p l ayed , every th i ng dec i ded , w i thou t hope and w i thout a l ternat i ves , accord i ng to a re l ent l ess, unmed i a t ed l og i c. Tha t is why there is no l aught er a round the poker tabl e , , for i ts l og i c is coo l (but not casua l ) ; and the game be i ng w i thou t hope , is never obscene and never l ends i tse l f to l aught er . Games are ser i ous , mor e ser i ous than l i fe, as seen in the paradox i ca l fact tha t i n a game l i ves can be at stake . Games , there fore , are no mor e based on the p l easure pr i nc i p l e than the rea l i ty pr i nc i p l e . _They suppose the enchan t men t of the ru l e , and the sphere that the ru l e descr i bes . And the lat -

13 4 SEDUCT I ON

ter is no t a sphere of i l l us i on or d i vers i on , bu t i nvo l ves another logi c , an ar t i f i c i a l , i n i t i atory l og i c whe re i n the na tura l deter m i nant s of l i fe and dea th have been abo l i shed. Th i s const i tutes the spec i f i c i ty of games and the i r stakes . I t makes no sense to reduce t hem to an econom i c l og i c that wou l d speak of consc i ous i nves tment , or to a l og i c of des i re tha t wou l d speak of unconsc i ous mot i ves . Consc i ous or unconsc i ous - thi s doub l e de t erm i na t i on may be va l i d for the sphere of . mean i ng and l aw, but not for ru l es and games .

The Law descr i bes a potent i a l l y un i versa l sys t em of meani ng and va l ue . I t a i ms at ob j ec t i ve recogn i t i on . On the bas i s of i ts under l y i ng t ranscendence , the Law const i tut es i tse l f i nto an i ns t ance for the tota l i zat i on of the rea l , w i th al l the revo l ut i ons and t ransgress i ons c l ear i ng the way to the l aw' s un i versa l i zat i on . By cont rast , the Ru l e is i mmanen t to a l i mi t ed and rest r i cted sys t em, wh i ch i t descr i bes w i thout t ranscend i ng , and w i th i n wh i ch i t is i mmu t ab l e. The ru l e does not asp i re to un i ver sa l i ty and , st r i ct l y speak i ng , i t l acks al l exter i or i ty s i nce i t does no t inst i tute an i nterna l sc i ss i on . I t is the Law ' s t ranscendence tha t estab l i shes the i r revers ib i l i ty of mean i ng and va l ue . And i t is the rul e ' s i mmanence , i ts arb i t rary , c i rcumscr i pt i ve character , tha t l eads , i n i ts own sphere , to the revers i b i l i ty of mean i ng and the revers i on of the Law. The i nscr i pt i on of ru l es i n a sphere w i thou t a beyond ( i t 's no l onger a un i verse , s i nce i t no l onger asp i res to un i versa l i ty) is as d i f f i cu l t to unders t and as the i dea of a f ini te un i verse. A bounda ry w i thou t some t h i ng beyond i t is un i mag i nab l e. For us the f ini te is a l ways se t aga i nst the inf in i te ; bu t the sphere of games is ne i ther f ini te nor inf in i te - t ransf i n i te perhaps . I t has i ts own f ini te contours , w i th wh i ch i t res i sts the i nf i n i ty of ana l yt i c space. To re i nvent a ru l e is to res i st the l i near inf ini tude of ana l yt i c space i n order to recover a revers i b l e space . For a ru l e has i ts own revo l ut i on , in the l i teral sense of the word: the convec t i on towards a cent ra l po i nt and the cyc l e ' s rever s i on ( th i s is how r i tua l s func t i on . w i th i n a cyc l i ca l wor l d) , independen t of every l og i c of cause and ef fect , or i g i n and end .

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 13 5

Th i s ma r ks the end of the cent r i fuga l d i mens i on: the sudden , i ntens i ve grav i ta t i on of space and abo l i t i on of t i me , wh i ch i mp l odes in a f l ash to become so dense that i t escapes the t radi t i ona l l aws of phys i cs - i ts ent i re course sp i ra l i ng i nwards towards the cent er whe r e the dens i t y is greatest . Th i s is the game ' s fasc i na t i on , the crysta l l i ne pass i on tha t erases memor y t races and for fe i ts mean i ng. Al l pass i on comes c lose , i n i ts form, to the lat ter , but the pass i on for gam i ng is the purest . The bes t ana l ogy wou l d be w i th pr i mi t i ve cu l tures , wh i ch have been descr i bed as c l osed i n on themse l ves , i ncapab l e of conce i v i ng of the rest of the wor l d. But in our soc i e t y the rest of the wor l d ex i sts on l y for us . The i r c l osure , far f rom be i ng rest r i ct i ve , der i ves f rom a d i f ferent l og i c wh i ch , because we are t rapped w i th i n the i mag i nary of the un i versa l , can no l onger conce i ve of except pe j orat i ve l y , as l i mi ted . The symbo l i c sphere of these cu l tures knows no rema i ns. In games too, un l i ke the rea l , there is noth i ng lef t over . Because they have ne i ther h i story , memor y nor i nterna l accumu l a t i on ( the stakes are cons t ant l y be i ng consumed and reversed , i t bei ng an unspoken ru l e that , wh i l e the game is in progress , one cannot w i t hdraw any th i ng i n the f orm of a ga i n or " surp l us va l ue " ) , they l eave no res i due w i th i n . Nor is there any th i ng that rema i ns out s i de the game. The " rema i nder " supposes an unso l ved equa t i on , an unrea l i zed dest i ny , some t h i ng subt rac t ed or repressed . Bu t a game ' s equa t i on i s a l ways per f ec t l y ba l anced , and i ts des t i ny a l ways ful f i l l ed, w i thout l eav i ng any t races (some th i ng that d i st i ngu i shes i t f rom the unconsc i ous) . The theory of the unconsc i ous supposes that cer ta i n af fects, scenes or s ign i f i ers can no l onger be put i nto p l ay , that they are forec l osed , out s i de- the-game. The game , on the other hand , is based on the hypothes i s that every th i ng can be put i nto p l ay. Otherw i se i t wou l d have to be adm i t t ed that one has a l ways a l ready lost , that one is p l ay i ng i n order to a l ways l ose . In the game , however , no ob j ec t s are was t ed . The re is noth i ng i r reduc i b l e to the game wh i ch precedes the game - and i n par t i cu l ar , no prev i ous debt s . I f w i th i n games , some t h i ng is exorc i sed , i t is no t some debt cont rac t ed v i s-a-v i s the l aw. I t is the Law i t se l f tha t i s exorc i sed as an un f org i vab l e cr i me , as d i scr i mi natory, an i r reconc i l ab l e t ranscendence w i th i n the rea l . And i ts

13 6 SEDUCT I ON

t ransgress i on on l y adds a new cr i me to that of the l aw - and new debt s and gr i efs . The Law estab l i shes equa l i ty as a pr i nc i p l e : in pr i nc i p l e everyone is equa l be fore the Law. By cont rast , there is no equa l i ty be fore the ru l e ; for the l at ter has no j ur i sd i c t i on over pr i nc i p l es . Moreover , i n order for everyone to be equa l they mus t be separa t ed . The p l ayers , however , are no t separa te or i nd i v i dua l i zed : they are i nst i tuted i n a dua l and agon i st i c re l at i on . They are not even so l i dary - so l i dar i ty suppos i ng a forma l concept i on of the soc i a l , the mora l i dea l of a group i n compe t i t i on . The p l ayers are t i ed to each other ; the i r par i ty enta i l s an ob l i ga t i on that does no t requ i re sol idar i ty, at l east not as some th i ng that needs to be conceptua l i zed or i nter i or i zed . The ru l e has no need of a forma l st ruc ture or supers t ruc ture - whe t he r mora l or psycho l og i ca l - to func t i on . Prec i se l y because ru l es are arb i t rary and ungrounded , because they have no referents , they do no t requ i re: a consensus , nor any co l l ect i ve wi l l or t ruth. They ex i st , that 's al l . And they ex i st on l y when shared , wh i l e the Law f loats above sca t t ered i nd i v i dua l s . The i r l og i c is c l ear l y i l l ust rated by wha t Gob l o t c l a i ms , i n La Bar r i ere et le N i veau , is the cu l tura l ru l e of castes (and of the bourgeo i s c l ass as we l l ) : 1 . Tota l par i ty amongs t the p l ayers w i th i n the space crea t ed by the Ru l e : thi s is the " l eve l . " 2 . Beyond the Ru l e , the forec l os i ng of the rest of the wor l d : th i s is the "bar r i er . " W i th i n i ts own doma i n , ext rater r i tor i a l i ty, in the ob l i ga t i ons and pr i v i l eges , abso l ut e rec i proc i ty : games restore thi s l og i c in i ts pure state . The agon i st i c re l at i on be t ween the p l ayers can never j eopard i ze the i r rec iproca l , , pr i v i l eged status . The game m i gh t come to naught and i ts stakes l ost - st i l l the rec i proca l enchantment , and the arb i t rar iness of the Ru l e at i ts source , mus t be preserved . Th i s is why due l re l at i ons can exc l ude al l ef for t , mer i t or per sona l qua l i t i es (above al l , in the pure form of games of chance) . Persona l t ra i ts are adm i t t ed on l y as a k i nd of f avour or ent i cement , and have no psycho l og i ca l equ i va l ents. Th i s is how games go - as demanded by the d i v i ne t ransparency of the Ru l e . In a f ini te space , one is de l i vered f rom the un i versa l - w i th

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 13 7

an i mmed i a t e , due l par i ty, one is de l i vered f rom equa l i ty - w i th ob l i ga t i ons one is de l i vered f rom f reedom - in the arbi t rar i ness of the Ru l e and i ts ceremon i a l , one is de l i vered f rom the l aw. Thus the enchan t men t of games .

In a sense , we are mor e equa l w i th i n ceremon i a l s than before the Law (perhaps thi s account s for the i ns i stence on pol i teness, on ceremon i a l conformi ty , par t i cu l ar l y amongs t the l ess cu l t i va ted c l asses ; i t be i ng eas i er to share convent i ona l s i gns than s i gns l aden w i th mean i ng or s i gns of " i nte l l i gence " ) . We a l so have mor e f reedom in games than anywhe re e l se , for we do no t have to i nterna l i ze the ru l es ; we owe the ru l es on l y a token f ide l i ty, and do no t fee l we have to t ransgress them, as is the case w i th the l aw. W i t h the ru l e we are f ree o f the Law - and of al l the const ra i nts of cho i ce , f reedom, respons i b i l i ty and mean i ng! The t er ror i sm of mean i ng can on l y be d i ss ipat ed by arb i t rary s i gns. However , make no m i s t ake abou t i t : convent i ona l or r i tua l s i gns are b i nd i ng . One is not f ree to s i gn i fy i n i so l at i on wh i l e st i l l ma i nt a i n i ng a coherent re l at i on w i th rea l i ty or t ruth . The f reedom demanded by mode rn s igns, l i ke mode rn i nd i v i dua l s , to ar t i cu l ate themse l ves accord i ng to the i r af fects or des i re ( for mean i ng) does no t ex i st for convent i ona l s i gns . The l at ter canno t set of f a i ml ess l y , w i th the i r own re ferent or scrap of meani ng as ba l l ast . Each s i gn is t i ed to others , no t w i th i n the abst ract st ruc ture of l anguage , but w i th i n the sense l ess unfo l d i ng of a ceremon i a l ; they echo each other and redup l i ca t e themse l ves i n other , equa l l y arb i t rary s i gns . The r i tua l s i gn is not a represent a t i ve s i gn . I t is not , therefore , some th i ng wor t h unders t and i ng . Instead, i t de l i vers us f rom mean i ng. Th i s is why we are so comm i t t ed to such s i gns . The gam i ng debt is a debt of honour ; every th i ng concern i ng the game is sacred because convent i ona l .

In A Lover ' s D i scourse Ro l and Bar thes just i f i es h i s cho i ce of

13 8 SEDUCT I ON

an a l phabe t i ca l order i n the fo l l ow i ng t erms : " to d i scourage the t empt a t i on of mean i ng , i t was necessary to choose , an abso l ut e l y i ns i gn i f i cant order , " tha t is to say, ne i ther an i nt ended order , nor one of pure chance , but a per f ec t l y convent i ona l order. For " we mus t not , " he wr i tes , c i t ing a ma thema t i c i an , "underest i ma t e the powe r o f chance to engende r mons t ers , " that is, log i ca l sequences - mean i ng. In other words , tota l l iber ty, or tota l i nde t erm i nacy are not opposed to mean i ng. One can produce mean i ng s i mp l y by p l ayi ng w i th chance or d i sorder . New d i agona l s of mean i ng , new sequences can be engende red f rom the un t amed f l ood t i des of des i re - as i n cer ta i n mode rn ph i l osoph i es , the mo l ecu l ar or i nt ens i ve ph i l osoph i es , wh i ch c l a i m to unde rm i ne mean i ng by di f f ract ion, hook -ups and the Brown i an movemen t s of des i re. As w i th chance , we mus t not underes t i ma t e the powe r o f des i re to engender ( log i ca l ) mons t ers . One does not escape mean i ng by d i ssoc i a t i on , d i sconnect i on or deter r i tor i a l i zat i on . One escapes mean i ng by rep l ac i ng i t w i th a mor e rad i ca l s i mu l acrum, a st i l l mor e convent i ona l order - l i ke the a l phabe t i ca l order for Bar thes , or the ru l es of a game , or the i nnumerab l e r i tua l s of everyday l i fe wh i ch f rust rate bo t h the (pol i t i ca l , h i stor i ca l or soc i a l ) order of mean i ng and the d i sorder (chance) wh i ch one wou l d i mpose on t hem . Inde t erm i nacy , d i ssoc i a t i on or pro l i f era t i on i n the f orm of a star or rh i zome on l y genera l i ze mean i ng ' s sphere of i nf l uence to the ent i re sphere o f non-sense. Tha t is, they me re l y genera l i ze mean i ng ' s pure form, an abst ract f ina l i ty w i th ne i ther a det erm i na t e end nor cont ent s . On l y r i tua l s abo l i sh mean i ng.

Th i s is why there are no " r i tua l s of t ransgress i on . " The very express i on makes no sense , espec i a l l y when app l i ed to the fest iva l . The l at ter has proved very prob l ema t i c fo i our revo l ut i onar i es : is the fest i va l a t ransgress i on or regenera t i on of the Law? An absurd quest i on , for r i tua l s, i nc l ud i ng the r i tua l l i tur gy of the fest i va l , be l ong to ne i ther the doma i n of the Law, nor i ts t ransgress i on , bu t to tha t of the Ru l e . The same app l i es to mag i c. We are const ant l y i nterpre t i ng

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 13 9

wha t fa l ls unde r the ru l e i n the t erms of the l aw. Thus , mag i c is seen as an a t t empt to outw i t the l aws of produc t i on and hard wor k . Pr i mi t i ves have the same "ut i l i tar i an" ends as us, but i n order to rea l i ze them, they wou l d ra ther avo i d rat i ona l exer t i on . Mag i c , however , is some th i ng very d i f ferent : i t is a r i tua l for the ma i n t enance of the wor l d as a p l ay o f ana l og i ca l re l at ions, a cyc l i ca l progress i on whe r e every th i ng is l i nked toge ther by the i r s i gns. An i mmense game , ru l e governs mag i c , and the bas i c prob l em is to ensure , by means o f r i tua l , that every th i ng cont i nues to p l ay thus , by ana l og i ca l cont i gu i ty and creep i ng seduc t i on . I t has noth i ng to do w i th l inear re l a t i ons of cause and ef fect . The l at ter - our way of unders t and i ng the wor l d - is ob j ec t i ve but unse t t l ed . For i t has broken the ru l e . Mag i c does no t seek to foo l the l aw. I t doesn ' t chea t - and to j udge i t as such is absurd . One m i gh t just as we l l d i sput e the arb i t rar i ness of a game ' s ru l es i n t erms of the "ob j ec t i ve " g i vens of na ture. The same s i mp l i st i c and ob j ect i v i st i c m i sunders t and i ng occurs w i th gamb l i ng . He re the ob j ec t i ve wou l d be econom i c : to become r i ch w i thout exer t i ng onese l f. The same a t t empt to sk i p steps as i n mag i c. The same t ransgress i on of the pr i nc i p l e of equ i va l ence and hard wor k wh i ch ru l es the " rea l " wor l d. The c l a i m, then , is that gamb l i ng ' s t ruth is to be f ound i n the t r i cks i t p l ays on va l ue . Bu t one is forge t t i ng here the game ' s powe r of seduc t i on . No t just the powe r one exper i ences when moment ar i l y car r i ed away , but the powe r to t ransmut e va l ues that comes w i th the ru l e . In gamb l i ng money is seduced , de f l ec t ed f rom i ts t ruth. Havi ng been cut of f f rom the l aw of equ i va l ences ( i t "burns " ) and the l aw of representa t i on , money is no l onger a s i gn or representat i on once t rans formed i nto a stake . And a st ake is no t some th i ng one i nvests . As an i nves tment money takes the f orm of capi ta l , bu t as a stake i t appears i n the f orm of a cha l l enge. P l aci ng a be t has as l i t t le to do w i th p l ac i ng an i nves tment , as l ibidi na l i nves tment w i th the stakes of seduc t i on . Inves tment s and count er - i nves tment s - they be l ong to the psych i c economy of dr i ves and sex. Games , stakes and cha l l enges are the f i gures of pass i on and seduc t i on . Mor e gener al ly, al l the stuf f of money , l anguage , sex and af fect unde rgo

14 0 SEDUCT I ON

a comp l e t e change of mean i ng depend i ng on whe t he r they are mob i l i zed as an i nves tment or t ransposed i nto a stake . The t wo momen t s are i r reduc i b l e .

I f games had a f ina l i ty, the on l y t rue p l ayer wou l d be the chea t er . Now , i f a cer t a i n amoun t of prest i ge can be acqu i red by t ransgress i ng the l aw, there is no prest i ge i n chea t i ng or t ransgress i ng a ru l e. In t ruth, the chea t er canno t t ransgress the ru l es s i nce the game , not be i ng a sys t em of i nterd i ct i ons , does no t have l i nes one can cross. One does not " t rangress " a ru l e , one fa i ls to observe i t . And non-observance does no t l ead to a state o f t ransgress i on ; i t br i ngs one back unde r the j ur i sd i c t i on of the l aw. Th i s is the case w i th the cheater , who den i es or , even bet ter , prof anes the game ' s ceremon i a l convent i ons for econom i c reasons (or psycho l og i ca l reasons , i f he chea ts s i mp l y for the p l easure of w i nn i ng) , and thereby restores the l aws of the rea l wor l d. By i nt roduc i ng factors of an i nd i v i dua l na ture , he des t roys the game ' s "due l " enchan t men t . I f chea t i ng was once pun i shed by dea th and is st i l l condemned st rong l y , i t is because , as a cr i me , i t resemb l es i ncest : cu l tura l ru l es be i ng broken to the so l e prof i t of the " l aws of na ture . " For the cheater , there is no l onger any th i ng at stake . He confuses the stakes w i th surp l us-va l ue. Bu t the stakes are wha t enab l es one to p l ay , and to turn t hem i nto the game ' s purpose is to abuse one ' s pos i t i on of t rust . In a s i mi l ar manner , the ru l es estab l i sh the very poss i b i l i ty of p l ay i ng, the space w i th i n wh i ch the s i des conf ront each other. To t reat the ru l es as ends (or as l aws or t ruths) is to des t roy both the game and i ts stakes. The ru l es have no autonomy , that qua l i ty wh i ch , accord i ng to Marx , charac t er i zes commod i t i es , bo t h i nd i v i dua l l y and in genera l , and is the sacrosanc t va l ue of the econom i c doma i n . The chea t er too is au t onomous: he estab l i shes a l aw, h i s own l aw, aga i nst the arb i t rary r i tua l s of the ru l e - thi s is wha t d i squa l i f i es h i m . And he is f ree - thi s exp l a i ns h i s downf a l l . Moreover , he is ra ther dreary , because he no l onger exposes h i mse l f to the seduc t i on o f games , because he re fuses the ver t i go of seduc t i on . By way

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON

141

o f hypothes i s , one m i gh t postu l a t e that persona l advant age is on l y an a l ibi : in rea l i ty he chea t s i n orde r to escape seduc t i on ; he chea t s because he is af ra id of be i ng seduced.

The cha l l enge o f a game is very d i f ferent , and games are al ways a cha l l enge - and not j ust when p l ayed a round a tab l e. Cons i der the Ame r i can who had the fo l l ow i ng c l ass i f i ed adver t i sement pr i nt ed in the paper : " Send me a do l l ar ! " And then rece i ved tens of thousands of do l l ars . He d i d no t prom i se anyth i ng - he was not , there fore , sw i nd l i ng anyone. Nor d i d he say: " I need a do l l ar " - nobody wou l d have ever g i ven h i m a do l l ar unde r such c i rcums t ances. Somewhe r e he had l et f loat the of f -chance of a m i racu l ous exchange . Some t h i ng mor e t han an equ i va l ence . A b l uf f. He was of fer i ng the pub l i c a cha l l enge. . . Wha t sor t of sub l i me t ransac t i on we re they negot i a t i ng when , i nst ead of buy i ng a do l l ar ' s wor t h of i ce cream, they sent i n the i r money? They never rea l l y be l i eved they wou l d rece i ve ten thousand do l l ars i n re turn . In t ruth, they took up the cha l l enge in the i r own way , and i t was as va l i d as any other , for they we re be i ng of f ered a w i shbone whe r e one w i ns on bo t h count s : One never knows , i t m i ght wor k ( ten thousand do l l ars i n the ma i l ) , in wh i ch case , one has rece i ved a s i gn of the Gods ' f avour (wh i ch Gods? those who had pr i nt ed the ad) . I f i t doesn ' t work , i t is because the obscure i nstance that gave me the s i gn d i d not take up my cha l l enge . So much the be t ter . Psycho l og i ca l l y I have bea t en the Gods . A doub l e cha l l enge : the con man cha l l enges the sucker and the l at ter cha l l enges fate . I f he is ove rwhe l med by fate, he is i n the c l ear. One can a l ways coun t on cu l pab i l i ty to l ook for ways of be i ng exorc i sed , but i t rea l l y isn' t a ques t i on of gu i l t . To send a do l l ar i n response to the absurd cha l l enge of the adver t i sement , is the sacr i f i c i a l response pa r exce l l ence. I t can be

14 2

SEDUCT I ON

summed up as : " There mus t be some t h i ng beh i nd thi s . I wi l l summon the Gods to respond or e l se to d i sappear " - and reduci ng the Gods to noth i ng is a l ways a source of p l easure .

Stakes and cha l l enges , summon i ng and b l uf f i ng - there is no ques t i on of be l i e f in al l thi s . Moreover , one never "be l i eves " i n any th i ng . I t is never a ques t i on of be l i ev i ng or not be l i evi ng, no mor e than for Sant a C l aus . Be l i e f is an absurd concept , o f the same t ype as mot i va t i on , need , inst inct , i .e, dr i ve , des i re , and , God knows wha t e l se - fac i l e t auto l og i es that h i de f rom us the fact tha t our ac t i ons are never grounded psycho l og i ca l l y i n be l i ef , but i n stakes and cha l l enges . I t is never a ma t t er of care fu l l y reasoned specu l a t i on on ex i st ence (on the ex i st ence of God , or of someone w i th a do l l ar ) , but of cont i nua l provoca t i on , of a game. One does no t be l i eve in God , just as one does not "be l i eve " in chance -- except in the humdrum di scourses of re l i g i on or psycho l ogy. One cha l l enges them, they cha l l enge you , one p l ays w i th them, and they p l ay w i th you : for thi s one does no t have to be l i eve i n t hem . Thus fa i th i n the re l i g i ous sphere is s i mi l ar to seduc t i on i n the game of l ove. Be l i e f is turned to the ex i s t ence o f God - and ex i st ence has on l y an i mpover i shed , res i dua l status, be i ng wha t is lef t when al l e l se has been removed - wh i l e fa i th is a cha l l enge to God ' s ex i s t ence , a cha l l enge to God to ex i st , and i n return, to d i e. One seduces God w i th fai th, and He cannot but respond , for seduc t i on , l i ke the cha l l enge , is a revers i b l e f orm . And He responds a hundred fo l d by H i s grace to the cha l l enge of fa i th. As w i th al l r i tua l exchanges , the who l e forms a sys t em of ob l i gat i ons , w i th God be i ng ob l i ged and even compe l l ed to respond - even as He i s neve r compe l l ed to ex i s t . Be l i e f is sats i f i ed w i th ask i ng H i m to ex i st and underwr i t e the wor l d ' s ex i st ence - i t is the d i senchant ed , cont rac tua l f orm. Bu t fa i th turns God i nto a stake : God cha l l enges man to ex i st (and he can respond to thi s cha l l enge w i t h h i s dea th) , and man cha l l enges God to respond to h i s sacr i f i ce , tha t is, to d i sappear i n re turn . One a l ways asp i res to some th i ng mor e than me r e ex i stence , and some t h i ng mor e than an equ i va l ent va l ue - and thi s some -

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 14 3

th i ng more , the cha l l enge ' s i mmodera t i on compa red to the cont ract , i ts i nt emperance compa r ed to the equ i va l ence of cause and ef fect , is c l ear l y the resu l t of seduc t i on - that of games and mag i c. I f we have exper i enced thi s i n amorous seduc t i on , why no t in our re l at i ons w i th the wor l d? Symbo l i c e f f i cacy is not an emp t y concep t . I t ref l ects the ex i s t ence of another f orm of the c i rcu l a t i on of goods and s igns, a f orm far mor e e f fect i ve and power fu l than econom i c c i rcu l a t i on . Wha t is f asc i na t i ng abou t a m i racu l ous w i n at the gam i ng tab l es is no t the money: i t is the resump t i on of t i es w i th these other , symbo l i c c i rcu i ts of unmed i a t ed and i mmode ra t e b i dd i ng , wh i ch concern the In the l ast ana l ys i s , there is noth i ng to prevent th i ngs f rom be i ng seduced l i ke be i ngs - one s i mp l y has to f i nd the game ' s ru l es . The ent i re prob l em of chance appears here. Mag i c , as a wager , is s i mi l ar to our games of chance. Wha t is at stake is the par t i c l e of va l ue t hrown in the f ace of chance cons i dered as a t ranscendent i nstance , not in order to w i n i ts favours , but to d i smi ss i ts t ranscendence , i ts abst rac t i on , and turn i t i nto a par tner , an adversary. The stake is a summons , the game a due l : chance is summoned to respond , ob l i ged by the p l ayer ' s wage r to dec l are i tse l f e i ther f avourab l e or host i l e . Chance is never neut ral , the game t ranforms i t i nto a p l ayer and agon i st i c f i gure . Wh i ch is another way of say i ng that the bas i c assump t i on beh i nd the game is that chance does no t ex i st . Chance i n i ts mode rn , rat i ona l sense , chance as an a l ea tory mechan i sm , pure probab i l i ty sub j ec t ed to the l aws of probabi l i ty (and no t to the ru l es of a game ) - a sor t of Grea t Neut ra l A l ea tor i um (G .N .A .), the ep i tome of a f l uc tua t i ng un i verse dom i na t ed by stat ist i ca l abst ract i ons , a secu l ar i zed, d i senchant ed and unbound d i v i n i ty. Th i s k i nd of chance does not ex i st i n games ; they ex i st to wa rd i t of f. Games of chance deny that the wor l d is ar ranged cont i ngent l y ; on the cont rary they seek to over r i de any such neut ra l order and recreate a r i tua l order of ob l i ga t i ons wh i ch unde rm i nes the f ree wor l d of equ i va l ences . In thi s manner games are rad i ca l l y opposed to the economy and Law. They ques t i on the rea l i t y of chance as an ob j ec t i ve l aw and rep l ace i t w i th an i nt er -connec t ed , prop i t i ous , due l , agon i st i c and nonseduc t i on o f the orde r o f th i ngs .

144

SEDUCT I ON

cont i ngent un i verse - a cha rmed un i verse (charmed , i n the s t rong sense of the term) , a un i verse of seduc t i on . Thus the superst i t i ous man i pu l a t i ons sur round i ng games , wh i ch many (Ca i l loi s) v i ew on l y in t erms of debasemen t . The resor t to mag i ca l pract i ces , f rom p l ay i ng one ' s b i r th da te to l ooki ng for recur rent ser i es ( the e l even came up e l even t i mes runn i ng i n Mon t e Car l o) , f rom the mos t subt l e w i nn i ng formu l as to the rabb i t ' s foot i n one ' s coa t pocke t , they a l l f eed on the i dea that chance does not ex i st , tha t the wor l d is bu i l t of ne t wor ks of symbo l i c re l at i ons - not cont i ngent connec t i ons , but webs of ob l i ga t i on , webs of seduc t i on . One has on l y to p l ay one ' s hand r i ght . . . The be t tor de f ends h i mse l f at al l costs f rom the ' i dea of a neut ra l un i verse , of wh i ch ob j ec t i ve chance is a par t . The be t tor c l a i ms tha t any th i ng can be seduced - numbers , l et ters, or the l aws tha t govern the i r d i st r i but i on . He wou l d seduce the Law i tse l f. The l east s i gn, the l east ges ture has a mean i ng , wh i ch is not to say tha t i t is par t of some rat i ona l progress i on , but that every s i gn is vu l nerab l e to, and can be seduced by other s i gns . The wor l d is he l d toge ther by unbreakab l e cha i ns , but they are no t those of the Law. Here l ies the " i mmora l i t y " of games , of t en a t t r i buted to the fact that they encourage one to wan t to w i n too much too qu i ckl y. But thi s is to g i ve t hem too much cred i t . Games are mor e i mmora l than tha t . They are i mmora l because they subst i tute an order of seduc t i on for an order of produc t i on .

I f a game is a ven ture f or the seduc t i on o f chance that a t taches i tse l f to comb i na t i ons of s i gns (but not those of , cause and ef fect , nor those of cont i ngent ser i es) and i f games t end to e l i mi na t e the ob j ec t i ve neut ra l i ty of chance and i ts stat i st i ca l " l i ber ty " by harness i ng t hem to the f orm of the due l , the cha l l enge , and order l y b i dd i ng -- then i t is absurd to i mag i ne , as does G i l l es De l euze i n Log i que du Sens , an " i dea l game " tha t wou l d cons i st of a fury of cont i ngenc i es and , thus , of a rad i ca l l y i ncreased i nde t erm i nacy wh i ch , i n turn, wou l d g i ve r i se to the s i mu l t aneous p l ay of every ser i es and , there fore , to the

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 14 5 rad i ca l expr ess i on o f becom i ng and des i r e. The probab i l i t y tha t t wo sequences w i l l neve r - or ha rd l y eve r - c ross e l i m i na t es t he game ' s ve r y poss i b i l i t y ( i f sequences neve r c ross one canno t even speak o f chance ) . Bu t so does t he l i ke l i hood tha t an i nde f i n i t e numbe r o f sequences w i l l c ross each o t he r at any g i ven momen t . For games a re on l y conce i ved f rom t he j unc t i on o f a f ew sequences w i t h i n a t i me - space f r ame l i m i t ed by ru l es . I ndeed , t he l a t t er i s a cond i t i on f or t he produc t i on o f chance ; t he ru l es do no t res t r i c t t he f r eedom o f a " tot a l " chance , bu t cons t i t u t e t he ve r y mode o f t he game ' s appea r ance . I t is no t t he case tha t t he " mor e " chance t he r e i s, t he mo r e i n t ense t he -g ame . Th i s i s t o concep t ua l i ze bo t h games and chance i n t e rms o f a sor t o f " f r eedom " o f comb i na t i on , an i mmanen t dr i f t i ng , a cons t an t d i ssoc i a t i on o f orde rs and sequences , an unbr i d l ed i mprov i sa t i on o f des i re - a k i nd o f da i mon who b l ows i n a l l d i rec t i ons , br ea t h i ng a l i t t l e unce r t a i n t y , an add i t i ona l i nc i dence i n t o t he wor l d ' s orde r l y economy. Now a l l th i s is absurd . Becom i ng is no t a ma t t e r o f mo r e or l ess . The r e is no dose or ove rdose . E i t he r t he wor l d is engaged i n a cyc l e o f becom i ng , and i s so engaged a t a l l t i mes , or i t i s no t . At any ra t e , i t makes no sense to " t ake t he s i de " o f becomi ng , assum i ng i t ex i s t s - no mo r e t han tha t o f chance , or des i re. For one has no cho i ce : " To t ake t he s i de o f t he pr i ma r y process is st i l l a consequence o f seconda r y processes " (Lyo t a rd) . The ve r y i dea t ha t games can be i n t ens i f i ed by t he acce l e ra t i on o f chance (as t hough one we r e speak i ng o f t he ac i d i c cont ent o f a chem i ca l so l ut i on) , t he i dea tha t becom i ng can t he r eby be ex t ended exponen t i a l l y , t urns chance i nto an ene rg i z i ng f unc t i on , and s t ems d i rec t l y f rom a con f us i on w i t h t he no t i on o f des i r e. Bu t th i s is no t chance . Pe rhaps one shou l d even adm i t , as t he be t t or sec re t l y pos tu l a t es , tha t chance does no t ex i s t . Qu i t e a numbe r o f cu l t ures have ne i t he r t he wo r d no r t he concep t , f or t hey do no t v i ew any t h i ng i n t e rms o f con t i ngency , no r even i n t e rms o f probab i l i t y. On l y our cu l t ur e has i nven t ed t he poss i b i l i t y o f a st a t i st i ca l r esponse , an i norgan i c , ob j ec t i ve and f l uc t ua t i ng r esponse , t he dead r esponse o f t he phenomena ' s ob j ec t i ve i nde t e rm i nacy and i ns t ab i l i t y. When one t h i nks abou t i t , t he assump t i on o f a con t i ngen t un i ve rse ,

146 SEDUCT I ON

s t r i pped of al l ob l i ga t i ons and purged of every symbo l i c or for ma l. ru l e , the i dea that the wor l d of th i ngs is sub j ec t ed to a mo l ecu l ar and ob j ec t i ve d i sorde r - the same d i sorder that is i dea l i zed and g l or i f i ed in the mo l ecu l ar v i s i on of des i re - thi s assump t i on is i nsane . Scarce l y l ess demen t ed than the assumpt i on of an ob j ec t i ve order , of an unbroken cha i n of cause and ef fect , wh i ch be l ongs to the g l ory days of c l ass i ca l reason , and f rom wh i ch , fur thermore , the assump t i on of d i sorder fo l l ows i n accord w i th the l og i c of res i dues . The i dea of chance f i rst eme rged as the res i due of a l og i ca l order of de t erm i na t i on . But even hypos t as i zed as a revo l ut i onary var i ab l e , i t st i l l rema i ns the m i r ror i mage of ; the pr i nc i p l e of causa l i ty. I ts genera l i za t i on , i ts uncond i t i ona l " l i berat i on, " as in De l euze ' s " i dea l game , " is par t of the po l i t i ca l and myst i ca l economy of res i dues at wor k eve rywhe re today , w i th i ts st ruc tura l i nvers i on of weak i nto s t rong t erms . Chance , once perce i ved as obscene and i ns i gn i f i cant , is to be ' rev i ved i n i ts i ns i gn i f i cance and so become the mo t t o of a nomad i c economy of des i re.

Games are no t to be con fused w i th " becom i ng , " they are not nomad i c , and do not be l ong to the rea l m of des i re . They are charac t er i zed , even when games of chance , by the i r capac i t y to reproduce a g i ven arb i t rary const e l l a t i on i n the same t erms an i nde f i n i te numbe r of t i mes . The i r t rue f orm is cyc l i ca l or recur rent . And as such they , and they a l one , put a de f i n i te s top to causa l i ty and i ts pr i nc i p l e - not by the mass i ve i nt roduc t i on o f r andom ser i es (wh i ch resu l ts on l y in the d i spersa l of causa l i ty, i ts reduc t i on to sca t t ered f ragment s , and not i ts ove rcomi ng) - but by the potent i a l re turn ( the eterna l re turn i f one wi l l ) to an order l y , convent i ona l s i tua t i on . Ne i ther the t empora l i t y of des i re and i ts " f reedom, " nor tha t of some na tura l deve l opmen t (as w i th the p l ay of ch i l dren , or the p l ay of the wor l d descr i bed by Herac l i tus) , but that of the e t erna l re turn of a r i tua l f orm - and w i l l ed as such . Thus each o f the game ' s sequences de l i vers us f rom the l i near i ty of l i fe and dea th.

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 14 7

The re are t wo k i nds of e terna l re turn . The stat i st i ca l k i nd neut ra l , ob j ec t i ve and i ns i p i d - where , g i ven that the comb i nat i ons , howeve r numerous , in a f ini te sys t em cannot be inf ini te, probab i l i t y demands that the same ar rangemen t eventua l l y recur , accord i ng to an i mmense cyc l e . A th i n me t aphys i cs : i t is a na t ura l e terna l re turn , in accord w i th a natura l , stat i st i ca l causa l i ty. The other v i s i on is t rag i c and r i tua l : i t is the w i l l ed recur rence , as in games , of an arb i t rary and non-causa l conf i gura t i on of s igns, whe r e each s i gn seeks out the nex t re l ent l essly, as in the course of a ceremon i a l . I t is the e terna l re turn demanded by ru l es - as i n a manda t ory success i on of throws and wagers . And i t makes no d i f f erence whe t he r they be the ru l es of the game of the un i verse i tse l f : there is no me t aphysi cs l oom i ng on the hor i zon of the game ' s i nde f i n i te l y revers i b l e cyc l e - and cer ta i n l y not the me t aphys i cs of des i re , wh i ch is st i l l dependen t on the wor l d ' s na tura l order , or na tura l d i sorder . Des i re may we l l be the Law o f the un i verse , but the e t erna l re turn is i ts ru l e . Luck i l y for us - otherw i se , whe r e wou l d be the p l easure i n p l ay i ng?

The consumma t e ver t i go i nduced by a game : when the t hrow of the d i ce ends up " e l i mi na t i ng chance , " when , for examp l e , the same numbe r appears aga i nst al l odds severa l t i mes i n a row. A game ' s u l t i ma t e fantasy , the ecst asy of check i ng chance when , in the gr i p of a cha l l enge , the same t hrow is repea t ed , the pr i soner of a recur r i ng ser i es, and as a resu l t the l aw and chance are abo l i shed . One p l ays in ant i c i pa t i on of thi s symbo l i c t ranscurs i on , that is to say, i n ant i c i pa t i on of an event tha t
w i l l pu t an end to a r andom process w i thout , howeve r , fa l l i ng pr ey to an ob j ec t i ve l aw . By i tse l f each t hrow produces

on l y a modera t e g i dd i ness , but when fate ra i ses the b i d - a s i gn tha t i t is t ru l y caught up in the game - when fate i tse l f seems to t hrow a cha l l enge to the na tura l order of th i ngs and enters i nto a f renzy or r i tua l ver t i go, then the pass i ons are un l eashed and the spi r i ts se i zed by a t ru l y dead l y f asc i na t i on . The re is noth i ng i mag i nary abou t this, bu t an i mper i ous

148 SEDUCT I ON

necess i t y to pu t a s top to the na tura l p l ay of d i f f erences as we l l as the h i stor i ca l deve l opmen t of the l aw. The re is no grea t er momen t . The on l y way to respond to the na tura l advances of des i re is i n t erms of the r i tua l one -upmansh i p of seduc t i on and games ; and the on l y way to respond to the cont rac tua l proposa l s of the l aw is i n t erms of the one -upmansh i p and forma l ver t i go of ru l es . A crysta l l i ne pass i on w i thou t equa l .

Games do not be l ong to the rea l m of fantasy , and the i r recur rence is not the repe t i t i on of a phant asy. The l at ter proceeds f rom an- "other " scene , and is a f igure of dea th . The game ' s recur rence proceeds f rom a ru l e , and is a f i gure of seduc t i on and p l easure . Eve ry repe t i t i ve f i gure of mean i ng , whe t he r af fect or represent a t i on , is a f i gure of dea th . P l easure is re l eased on l y by a mean i ng l ess recur rence , one that proceeds f rom ne i ther a consc i ous order nor an unconsc i ous d i sorder , but resu l ts f rom the revers i on and re i terat i on of a pure f orm that cha l l enges and ou tdoes the l aw of cont ent s and the i r accumu l a t i on . The game ' s recur rence proceeds d i rect l y f rom fate, and exi sts as fate . No t as a dea th dr i ve or tendent i a l l ower i ng of the rate of d i f ference , resu l t i ng in the ent rop i c tw i l i ghts of sys t ems o f mean i ng , bu t as a f orm of r i tua l i ncant a t i on - a f orm of ceremon i a l whe r e the s igns , because they are so v i o l ent l y at t rac ted to each other , no l onger l eave any room for mean i ng , and can on l y dup l i ca t e themse l ves . Here too one f i nds the ver t i go of seduc t i on , the ver t i go tha t comes of be i ng absorbed i n a recur rent fate . Al l soc i et i es other than our own are fami l i ar w i th thi s thea t er of r i tua l , wh i ch is a l so a thea t er of crue l t y. Games red i scover some t h i ng of thi s crue l t y. Compa r ed w i th games , every th i ng rea l is sent i ment a l . The t ruth, , and the Law i tse l f are sent i ment a l re l at i ve to the pure forms of repe t i t i on . Just as i t is not l i ber ty tha t is opposed to the l aw, but the ru l e , s i mi l ar l y i t i s no t i nde t e rm i nacy tha t i s opposed ; to causa l i t y , bu t ob l i ga t i on . The l at ter is ne i ther a l inear cha i n , nor an uncha i n i ng (wh i ch is mere l y the rornant i c i sm of a deranged causa l i ty) ; i t forms a revers i b l e cha i n that , mov i ng f rom s i gn to s i gn, i nexorab l y comp l e t es i ts cyc l e , turn i ng i ts or i g i n i nto an e l l i pse

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 14 9

and econom i z i ng on i ts end , l i ke the she l l s and brace l ets i n Po l ynes i an exchange re l a t i onsh i ps . The cyc l e of ob l i ga t i ons is no t a code. We have con f used ob l i ga t i on in the s t rong sense , in i ts t i me l ess , r i tua l sense , w i th l aws and codes , and the i r common p l ace const ra i nts , wh i ch ru l e over us unde r the oppos i t e s i gn, that of l i ber ty. In De l euze ' s pure , nomad i c chance , in h i s " i dea l game , " there is on l y d i s j unc t i on and d i spersed causa l i ty. But on l y a conceptua l er ror a l l ows one to d i ssoc i a te the game f rom i ts ru l es in order to rad i ca l i ze i ts utop i an f orm. And the same i nt emper ance , or the same faci l i ty, a l l ows one to d i ssoc i a te chance f rom wha t de f i nes i t - an ob j ec t i ve ca l cu l us of ser i es and probab i l i t i es - i n order to turn i t i nto the t heme song for an i dea l inde t erm i nacy , an i dea l des i re composed of the end l ess occur rence of count l ess ser i es . Bu t why mor e ser i es? Why no t a pure Brown i an movemen t ? But then the lat ter , though i t seems to have become the phys i ca l mode l for rad i ca l des i re , has i ts l aws , and is not a game . To genera l i ze chance , i n the form of an " i dea l game , " w i thout s i mu l t aneous l y genera l i z i ng the game ' s rul es, is ak i n to the fantasy of rad i ca l i z i ng des i re by r i dd i ng i t of every l aw and every l ack . The ob j ec t i ve i dea l i sm of the " i dea l game , " and the subj ect i ve i dea l i sm of des i re .

A game forms a sys t em w i th ne i ther cont rad i c t i on nor inter na l nega t i v i ty. Tha t is why one canno t l augh at i t . And i f i t canno t be parod i ed , i t is because i ts ent i re organ i za t i on is parod i c . The ru l e func t i ons as the parod i c s i mu l acrum of the l aw. Ne i ther an i nvers i on nor subver i on of the l aw, but i ts revers i on in s i mul at i on . The p l easure of the game is two fo l d : the i nva l i da t i on of t i me and space w i th i n the enchant ed sphere of an i ndest ruc t i b l e f orm of rec i proc i ty - pure seduc t i on - and the parody i ng of rea l i ty, the forma l outb i dd i ng of the l aw' s const ra i nts . Can one produce a f i ner parody of the eth i cs of va l ue than by subm i t t i ng onese l f , w i th al l the i nt rans i gence of v i r tue , to the ou t comes of chance or the absurd i t y of a ru l e? Can there be a f i ner pa rody of the va l ues of work , economy , produc t i on

15 0

SEDUCT I ON

and ca l cu l a t i on than the cha l l enge and the wager , or the fantast i c non-equ i va l ence be t ween wha t is at stake and wha t m i gh t be won (or lost - both be i ng equa l l y i mmora l )? Or ' a f i ner parody of every i dea o f cont rac t and exchange than th i s mag i ca l compl i c i ty, th i s "due l " ob l i ga t i on re l at i ve to the ru l es , thi s agon i st i c a t t empt to seduce one ' s opponen t , and to seduce chance i tse l f? Wha t be t ter den i a l of the va l ues of wi l l , respons i b i l i ty , equa l i ty and j ust i ce than thi s exa l ta t i on of (good and bad) l uck , thi s exu l t a t i on i n p l ay i ng w i th fate as an equa l ? Can there be a mor e beaut i fu l pa rody of our i deo l og i es of l i ber ty than thi s pass i on for ru l es? Is there a be t ter pa rody of " soc i a l i ty " i tse l f than that f ound in Borges ' fabl e , " The Lot t ery in Baby l on , " w i th i ts i nescapab l e and fatefu l l og i c and i ts s i mu l a t i on of the soc i a l by the game?

" I come f rom a d i zzy l and whe r e t he l ot tery is the bas i s of rea l i ty. " Thus beg i ns a story abou t a soc i e t y whe r e the l ot tery has swa l l owed up al l the other i nst i tut i ons . In the beg i nn i ng i t was on l y a game of p l ebe i an character , and the mos t one cou l d do was w i n. Bu t " the- l ot ter i es" were bor i ng , s i nce " they we r e no t d i rec t ed at al l of man ' s facul t i es, but on l y at hope . " One then " t r i ed a re form : the i nt erpo l a t i on of a f ew un f avourab l e t i ckets in the l ist of f avourab l e numbe rs " - w i th the r i sk of payi ng a cons i derab l e f i ne . Th i s was a rad i ca l mod i f i ca t i on : i t e l imi na t ed the i l l us i on tha t the game had an econom i c purpose. Hence for th one ent ered a pure game , and the d i zz i ness that se i zed ho l d of Baby l on i an soc i e ty knew no l i mi ts . Any th i ng cou l d happen by draw i ng lots, the l ot tery became "secret , f ree and genera l , " " every f ree man automa t i ca l l y par t i c i pa ted i n the sacred draw i ngs wh i ch took p l ace every s i xty n i ghts and wh i ch de t erm i ned h i s des t i ny unt i l the nex t draw i ng . " A l ucky draw cou l d make h i m a r i ch man or a mag i , or g i ve h i m the women he des i red ; an un l ucky dr aw cou l d br i ng h i m mut i l a t i on or dea th . In shor t , the i nt erpo l a t i on of chance in al l the i nterst i ces of the soc i a l order and " i n the order of the wor l d . " Al l the lot tery ' s er rors we r e good , s i nce they on l y i ntens i f i ed i ts l og i c .

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON

15 1

Impos tures , ruses, and man i pu l a t i on cou l d be per f ec t l y integrat ed i nto the a l ea tory sys t em : who cou l d say i f they we r e " rea l , " that is, whe t he r they we re the resu l t of some na tura l or rat i onal causa l i ty, or resu l ted f rom chance as de t erm i ned by the lot tery? In pr i nc i p l e no one. Predes t i na t i on encompassed everyth i ng , the l ot tery ' s ef fects we re un i versa l . The Lot t ery and the Company cou l d cease to ex i st , the i r s i l ent func t i on i ng wou l d be exerc i sed over a f i e l d of tot a l s i mu l a t i on . A l l " rea l i ty" had ent ered the secre t dec i s i ons of the Company , and there was , in al l l i ke l i hood , no l onger any d i f f erence be t ween the rea l rea l i ty and the cont i ngent rea l i ty. Indeed i t is poss i b l e that the Company never ex i sted, and the wor l d ' s order wou l d rema i n the same . But the assump t i on of i ts ex i st ence changes every th i ng . The assumpt i on a l one is enough to change rea l i ty, as i t is, as i t cannot be otherw i se , i nto one i mmense s i mu l acrum . Rea l i ty is noth i ng other than i ts own s i mu l a t i on . In our " rea l i st " soc i et i es , the Company has ceased to ex i st . Our soc i et i es are ob l i v i ous to and bu i l t on the ru i ns of th i s poss i b l e tota l s i mu l a t i on . We are no l onger consc i ous of the spi ra l of s i mu l a t i on tha t pr eceded rea l i ty. In t ruth, our unconsc i ous is f ound here : in our i ncomprehens i on be fore the ver t i g i nous i nde t erm i na t i on and s i mu l a t i on that ru l es the sacred d i sorder of our l i ves . No t in the repress i on of a f ew af fects or representat i ons - our i ns i p i d concep t i on of the unconsc i ous - but in our b l i ndness be fore the B i g Game , be fore the fact that our " rea l " fate w i th al l i ts " rea l " event s has a l ready passed through , not some anter i or l i fe ( though by i tse l f th i s hypothes i s is super i or to our me t aphys i cs of ob j ec t i ve causes) , but a cyc l e of i nde t erm i na t i on , a game cyc l e that is s i mu l t aneous l y arb i t rary and f i xed. Borges ' Lot t ery is the symbo l i c i ncarna t i on of thi s game , wh i ch has g i ven our fate that ha l l uc i na tory qua l i ty we take for i ts t ruth. The l og i c escapes us , t hough our consc i ousness of the rea l is based on our unconsc i ousness of s i mu l a t i on . Remembe r the Baby l on i an Lot t ery. Whe t he r or not i t ex i sts, the ve i l of i nde t erm i na t i on i t throws over our l i fe is abso l ut e . I ts arb i t rary decrees ru l e the l east deta i l s of our ex i s t ence. We dare no t speak of a h i dden inf rast ructure , for the l at ter wi l l eventua l l y be ca l l ed upon to appear as t ruth - wh i l e here i t is a ma t -

15 2

SEDUCT I ON

ter of fate, that is, of a game that has a l ways a l ready been wor ked out , ye t rema i ns forever i ndec i pherab l e . Borges ' or i g i na l i ty is to have ex t ended thi s game to the ent i re soc i a l st ruc ture. Whe r e we see games as superst ruc ture , as re l at i ve l y we i ght l ess compa r ed to the good , so l i d i nf rast ructure of soc i a l re l at ions , he has turned . the ent i re ed i f i ce ups i de down and made i nde t erm i na t i on i nto the de t erm i nant i nst ance . I t is no l onger econom i c reason , that of l abour and hi story, nor the "sc i ent i f i c " de t erm i n i sm of exchanges wh i ch de t erm i nes the soc i a l st ructure and fate of ind i v idua l s , but a tota l i nde t erm i n i sm, tha t of the Game and of Chance . Predest i na t i on co i nc i des here w i th a tota l mob i l i ty , and an arb i t rary sys t em w i th the mos t radi ca l democ r acy ( the i ns t ant aneous exchange of al l pos i t i ons some t h i ng to sat i sfy the present -day ' s thi rst for po l yva l ence) . Th i s reversa l is ex t reme l y i ron i c re l at i ve to every cont rac t , every rat i ona l founda t i on of the soc i a l . Pac ts concern i ng rul es, and concern i ng the i r arb i t rar i ness ( the Lot tery) ' e l i mi na t e the soc i a l as we unders t and i t , just as r i tua l s put an end to the l aw. I t has never been otherw i se w i th secre t soc i e t i es ; i n the i r ef f l orescence one shou l d see a res i stance to the soc i a l . The nost a l g i a for a pactua l , r i tua l , and cont i ngent soc i a l i ty, the yearn i ng to be f ree of the cont rac t and soc i a l re l at i on, the l ong i ng for a crue l er i f mor e f asc i na t i ng des t i ny for exchange , is deeper than the rat i ona l i mpera t i ves o f the soc i a l w i th wh i ch we have been l u l l ed . Borges ' take is perhaps no t a f i ct ion, but a descr i pt i on tha t comes c l ose to our former dreams , tha t is to say, to our future as we l l . In Byzant i um, soc i a l l i fe, the po l i t i ca l order , i ts h i erarch i es and expend i tures we re regu l a ted. by horse races. Today one st i l l be ts on the horses , but the m i r ror of democ racy produces on l y a fa int re f l ec t i on . The enormous amoun t of money exchanged in be t t i ng is noth i ng compa red to the ext ravagance of the Byzant ines, whe r e al l pub l i c l i fe was t i ed to eques t r i an compe t i t i ons . St i l l i t is symp t oma t i c of the game ' s i mpor t ance i n many soc i a l act i v i t i es and i n the rap i d c i rcu l a t i on of goods and soc i a l pos i t i ons . In Braz i l there is the Jogo de B i cho: bet t i ng, lot ter i es and other games have se i zed ho l d of ent i re sec tors of the popu l a t i on who r i sk the i r l i fe's sav i ngs and status . A d i st rac t i on f rom unde rdeve l opmen t one m i gh t c l a i m, but even i n i ts wre t ched

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 15 3

mode rn vers i on , i t prov i des an echo o f cu l tures whe r e l ud i c and sump tuary pract i ces genera t ed the essent i a l forms and st ructures of exchange - a schema tha t goes very much aga i nst the gra i n o f our own cu l ture , mos t not ab l y i n i ts Marx i s t vers i on. Unde rdeve l oped? On l y the pr i v i l eged , those e l eva t ed by the soc i a l cont rac t , or by the i r soc i a l status - i tse l f on l y a s i mu l acrum, and one w i thout even the va l ue of a des t i ny - can j udge such a l ea tory prac t i ces as wor th l ess when they are qu i te super i or to the i r own . For i t is as much a cha l l enge to the soc i a l as to chance , and i nd i ca t i ve of a yearn i ng for a mor e adventurous wor l d , whe r e one p l ays w i th va l ue mor e reck l ess l y.

THE DUAL , THE POLAR AND THE D I G I TAL

A l ot tery is a s i mu l ac rum - there be i ng noth i ng mor e ar t i f i c i a l than to regu l a te the course of event s by the absurd decrees of chance . Bu t l et us no t forge t tha t thi s is wha t ant i qu i ty d i d w i th the ar ts of d i v i na t i on , us i ng the ent ra i l s of ch i ckens and the f l ight of b i rds ; and isn' t i t wha t the mode rn ar t of i nterpreta t i on cont i nues to do , t hough w i th f ewer grounds? I t is a l l a s i mu l ac rum . The d i f f erence is that i n Borges ' F i cc i ones the game ' s ru l es comp l e t e l y rep l ace the l aw and the game dec i des one ' s dest i ny , wh i l e in our soc i e ty games are s i mp l y marg i na l and f r i vo l ous d i vers i ons . Compa r ed to Borges ' f i ct i ona l soc i ety , based on chance decrees and a t ype of predes t i na t i on by the game , re l at i ve to such a crue l order whe r e the r i sks are never -end i ng and the stakes abso l ute , we l i ve i n a soc i e ty of m i n i ma l stakes and r i sks . I f the t erms we r e no t cont rad i c tory , one cou l d say tha t secur i ty has become our des t i ny. I t m i gh t be the case , moreover , tha t thi s ou t come wi l l be fata l for our soc i e ty - the mor ta l i ty of over prot ec t ed spec i es wh i ch , in the i r domes t i ca t i on , are dy i ng of too much secur i ty . Now i f the Baby l on i ans succumbed to the lot tery ' s ver t i go, i t was because there was some t h i ng i n the l ot tery that comp l e t e l y seduced them, tha t enab l ed t hem to cha l l enge everyth i ng wor t h ex i st i ng, i nc l ud i ng the i r own ex i s t ence - and the i r

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 15 5

own dea th . By cont rast , for us the soc i a l is w i thout seduc t i on . Wha t is l ess seduc t i ve than the very i dea of the soc i a l ? The degree zero of seduc t i on . Even God never fel l so l ow. Re l a t i ve to the dangers of seduc t i on that haun t the un i verse of games and r i tua l s, our own soc i a l i ty and the forms of commun i ca t i on and exchange i t inst i tutes, appear in d i rect propor t i on to the i r secu l ar i za t i on unde r the s i gn of the Law, as ex t reme l y i mpover i shed , bana l and abst rac t . But thi s is st i l l on l y an i nt ermed i ary state, for the age of the Law has passed , and w i th i t that of the soc i us and the soc i a l cont rac t . No t on l y are we no l onger l i v i ng in an era of ru l es and r i tua l s, we are no l onger l i v i ng i n an era of l aws and cont racts . We l i ve today accord i ng to Norms and Mode l s , and we do not even have a t erm to des i gna t e that wh i ch is rep l ac i ng soc i a l i ty and the soc i a l . the RULE R i tua l ( i ty) the LAW Soc i a l ( i ty) the NORM ????????

We are present l y l i v i ng w i th a m i n i mum of rea l soc i a l i ty and a max i mum of s i mu l a t i on . S i mu l a t i on neut ra l i zes the po l es that organ i ze the perspec t i va l space of the rea l and the Law, wh i l e dra i n i ng of f the energy potent i a l tha t st i l l dr i ves the space of the Law and the soc i a l . In the era of mode l s , one mus t speak of the de t er rence of the antagon i st i c st rateg i es that gave the Law and the soc i a l the i r stakes - i nc l ud i ng a st ake in the i r t ransgress i on . No mor e t ransgress i on , and no mor e t ranscendence. But for a l l that , we are no l onger in the t rag i c i mmanence of ru l es and r i tua l s, but i n the coo l i mmanence of norms and mode l s . De t er rence , regu l at i on, f eed-back , sequences of tact i ca l e l ement s in a non- re f erent i a l space . . . But above al l , i n thi s age of mode l s , the digi ta l i ty o f the s i gna l as a rep l acement for the po l ar i ty of the s i gn . DUAL I TY POLAR I TY D I G I TAL I TY

These three l og i cs are exc l us i ve of each other : - the dua l re l a t i on dom i na t es the game , the r i tua l and the ent i re sphere of the ru l e.

156

SEDUCT I ON

- the po l a r re l a t i on , or the d i a l ect i ca l or cont rad i c tory re l at ion, organ i zes the un i verse of the Law, the soc i a l , and mean i ng . - the d i g i ta l r e l a t i on (but i t is no l onger a " re l a t i on" - l et us speak i ns t ead of the d ig i ta l connec t i on) a l l ocates the space of Norms and Mode l s . In the cross-p l ay of these three log i cs , the concep t of seduct i on i n i ts rad i ca l sense (as due l , r i tua l ist i c, agon i st i c , w i t h the stakes max i m i zed) mus t be rep l aced by seduc t i on i n i ts " sof t " sense - the seduc t i on of an " amb i ence , " or the p l ayfu l erot i c i za t i on of a un i verse w i thou t stakes .

V THE " LUD I C " AND COLD SEDUCT I ON

For we a re l i v i ng of f seduc t i on bu t w i l l d i e i n f asc i na t i on .

The p l ay of mode l s w i th the i r ever -chang i ng comb i na t i ons , is character i st i c of a l ud i c un i verse , whe r e every th i ng opera t es as poss i b l e s i mu l a t i on , whe r e everyth i ng , in the absence of a God to acknow l edge h i s creat i ons , can ac t as count er -ev i dence . Subvers i ve va l ues have on l y to wa i t the i r turn, and v i o l ence and cr i t i que are themse l ves present ed as mode l s . We are l i v i ng i n a supp l e , curved un i verse , that no l onger has any van i sh i ng po i nt s. Former l y the rea l i ty pr i nc i p l e was de f i ned i n t erms of the cohe rence of ob j ec t s and the i r use , func t i ons and the i r inst i tut ion, th i ngs and the i r ob j ec t i ve de t erm i na t i on - today the p l easure pr i nc i p l e is de f i ned in t erms of the con j unc t i on o f des i res and mode l s (of a demand and i ts ant i c i pa t i on by s i mul a ted responses) . The " l ud i c " is f ormed of the "p l ay " of the mode l w i th the demand . But g i ven that the demand is promp t ed by the mode l , and the mode l ' s precess i on is abso l ute , cha l l enges are i mposs i b l e . Mos t of our exchanges are regu l a t ed by game st rateg i es ; bu t the lat ter , de f i ned as a capac i t y to foresee al l of one ' s opponent ' s moves and check t hem in advance , renders al l stakes i mposs i b l e . Game theory descr i bes the l ud i c charac t er of a wor l d

15 8

SEDUCT I ON

where , paradox i ca l l y , noth i ng is at stake . The " Werbung , " the so l i c i tat ion of adver t i sement s and pol l s, al l the mode l s of the med i a and. pol i t i cs, no l onger c l a i m credence , on l y cred i b i l i ty. They are no l onger ob j ec t s of l ib id ina l i nves tment ; for they are made se l ect i ve l y ava i l ab l e w i th i n a range of cho i ces - w i th l e i sure i tse l f now appear i ng , re l at i ve to work , as just another channe l on the screen of t i me (and wi l l there soon be a th i rd or four th channe l ?) . Ame r i can te l ev i s i on, one m i gh t add , w i th i ts 83 channe l s is the l i v i ng i ncarna t i on of the l ud i c : one can no l onger do any th i ng but p l ay - change channe l s , m i x programs and crea te one ' s own mon t age ( the predom i nance of TV games is mere l y an echo , at the l eve l of cont ent , of thi s l ud i c emp l oymen t of the med i um) . And l i ke every comb i na tor i a l , i t is a source of fasc i nat i on ' . Bu t one can no l onger speak of a sphere of enchan t men t or seduc t i on ; instead, an era of f asc i na t i on is beg i nn i ng . Obv i ous l y , the l ud i c cannot be equa t ed w i th hav i ng fun. W i t h i ts propens i t y for mak i ng connec t i ons , the ludi c , is mor e ak i n to de t ec t i ve wor k . Mor e genera l l y , i t connot es ne tworks and the i r mode of func t i on i ng , the f orms of the i r permea t i on and man i pu l a t i on . The l ud i c encompasses al l the d i f ferent ways one can "p l ay " w i th ne tworks , no t in order to estab l i sh a l ternat i ves , bu t to d i scover the i r state of opt i ma l func t i on i ng. We have a l ready w i tnessed the debasemen t of pl ay to the l eve l of func t i on - i n p l ay therapy , p l ay schoo l , p l ay-as=cathars i s and p l ay-as-creat i v i ty . Throughou t the f i e lds of educa t i on and ch i l d psycho l ogy , p l ay has become a "v i ta l func t i on" 'or necessary phase of deve l opmen t . Or e l se i t has been gra f ted onto the p l easure pr i nc i p l e to become a revo l ut i onary a l ternat i ve , a d i a l ect i ca l ove rcom i ng of the rea l i ty pr i nc i p l e i n Marcuse , an i deo l ogy of p l ay and the fest i va l for others . Bu t even as t ransgress i on , spont ane i ty , or aesthe t i c d i s i nterestedness , p l ay rema i ns on l y a sub l i ma t ed f orm of the o l d, d i rec t i ve pedagogy tha t g i ves i t a mean i ng , ass i gns i t an end , and thereby purges i t of i ts powe r of seduc t i on . P l ay as dream i ng , spor t , work , rest or as a t rans i t i ona l ob j ec t - or as the phys i ca l hyg i ene necessary for psycho l og i ca l equ i l i br i um or for a system' s regu l a t i on or evo l ut i on . The very oppos i t e of tha t pass i on for i l l us i on wh i ch once charac t er i zed i t .

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 15 9

We are st i l l speak i ng , however , of func t i ona l a t t empt s to subj ect p l ay to the l aw of va l ue . Wha t is mor e ser i ous is the cyber ne t i c absorpt i on of p l ay i nto the genera l ca t egory of the l ud i c.

The genera l evo l ut i on of games is revea l i ng : f rom compe t i t i ve games - t eam spor ts , o l d- f ash i oned card games , or even tab l e footba l l - to the genera t i on of p i nba l l mach i nes (wh i ch a l ready had screens but we re not ye t " te l ev i sed, " a m i x ture of e l ec t ron i cs and hand movemen t s) , now rendered obso l e t e by e l ec t ron i c t enn i s and other compu t er i zed games , the i r screens st reaked w i th h i gh-speed mo l ecu l es . And the a tomi st i c man i pul at i on requ i red by the l at ter is not to be d i s t i ngu i shed f rom the prac t i ces of i nforma t i on cont ro l i n the " l abour process " or the future emp l oymen t of comput ers i n the domes t i c sphere , wh i ch we re a l so preceded by te l ev i s i on and other aud i ov i sua l a i ds . The l ud i c is everywhere , even i n the " cho i ce " of a brand of l aundry de t ergent i n the supermarke t . W i t hou t too much ef for t one sees s imi l ar i t i es w i th the wor l d of psychot rop i c drugs : for the l at ter too is lud i c , be i ng noth i ng but the man i pu l a t i on of a sensor i a l keyboard or neuron i c i ns t rument pane l . E l ec t ron i c games are a sof t drug - one p l ays t hem w i th the same somnambu l ar absence and tact i l e euphor i a . Even the gene t i c code appears as a command keyboard for the l i v ing, on wh i ch are p l ayed the i nf i n i tes i ma l comb i na t i ons and var i a t i ons that de t erm i ne the i r "dest i ny " - a- " t e l e " -onom i c dest i ny that unfo l ds on the mo l ecu l ar screen of the code. Much can be sa i d abou t the ob j ec t i v i ty of the gene t i c code that serves as a "b i o l og i ca l " protot ype for the ent i re un i verse , thi s comb i natory , a l ea tory and l ud i c un i verse tha t now sur rounds us . Af t er al l , wha t is "b i o l ogy "? Wha t is thi s t ruth i t possesses? Or is i t that i t possesses on l y t ruth . . . des t i ny t rans formed i nto an opera t i ona l i ns t rument pane l . Beh i nd the screen of b i o l og i ca l remo t e cont ro l , there is no l onger any p l ay - no stakes , i l lus ions , or represent a t i ons . I t is s i mp l y a ma t t er of modu l a t i ng the code , p l ay i ng w i th i t as one p l ays w i th the tona l i t i es and t i mbres of a s t ereophon i c sys t em . The l at ter is a good examp l e of the l ud i c . When man i pu l a t -

160 SEDUCT I ON

i ng the stereo' s cont ro l s , one ' s concerns are no l onger mus i ca l but t echno l og i ca l : the opt i ma l rnodu l a t i on of . the system' s range . W i t h the mag i c of the conso l e and i ns t rument pane l , the man i pu l a t i on of the med i um predom i na t es . Cons i der a game of compu t e r chess . Whe r e is the i ntens i ty of the game of chess , or the p l easure proper to comput ers? The one i nvo l ves pl ay, the other the l ud i c . The same app l i es to a soccer ma t ch tha t has been te l ev i sed . Don ' t th i nk tha t they are the same ma t ch: one is hot , the other coo l - one is a game , w i th i ts emot i ona l charge , i ts bravado and choreography , the other is tact i le, modu l a t ed (p l ay-backs , c l ose-ups , sweeps , s l ow mo t i on shots , d i f ferent ang l es of v i s i on , e tc .) . , The te l ev i sed ma t ch is, above al l e l se , a te l ev i sed event , l i ke the Ho l ocaus t or the wa r i n V i e tnam, and is bare l y d i st i ngu i shab l e f rom the l at ter . Thus the i nt roduc t i on of co l our te l ev i s i on in the Un i t ed States, wh i ch had been s l ow and di f f i cul t , on l y took of f when one of the ma j or ne tworks dec i ded to i nt roduce co l our to tel ev i sed j ourna l i sm . I t was the per i od of the wa r in V i e tnam, and stud i es have shown tha t the "p l ay " of co l ours , and the techn i ca l soph i st i ca t i on borne by thi s i nnova t i on , rendered the i mages of wa r mor e bearab l e to the v i ew i ng pub l i c . The " more " t ruth, the grea t er the l ud i c d i stant i a t i on f rom the event .

The Ho l ocaus t , the te l ev i s i on spec i a l . TheJews are no l onger forced to pass through the gas chambers and c rema tor i um ovens , bu t through the sound t rack and p i c ture st r ip, the ca thod i c screen and m i croprocessor . The amnes i a , the ob l i v i on , thereby f ina l l y at ta ins an aesthe t i c d i mens i on - consumma t ed i n re t rospec t i ve and re t rogress i ve fash i on, ra i sed here to mass d i mens i ons . Te l ev i s i on as the event ' s t rue " f ina l so l ut i on . " The d i mens i on of h i story that once rema i ned in the shadows as gui l t , no l onger ex i sts , s i nce now " the who l e wor l d knows , " the who l e wor l d has been shaken - a sure s i gn tha t " i t " wi l l never happen aga i n . In ef fect , wha t is exorc i zed at the cos t of on l y a f ew tears wi l l no t happen aga i n, because it, is now recur r ing, and i n the very f orm of i ts a l l eged denunc i a t i on , the very

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON

16 1

med i um of i ts a l l eged exorc i sm - te l ev i s i on . The same forget fu l ness , the same l i qu i da t i on , ext erm i na t i on , and even ann i h i l at i on of memor y and h i story - the same recess i ve i r rad i at ion, the same echo l ess absorpt i on , the same b l ack ho l e as Auschw i t z . And one wou l d have us be l i eve that te l ev i s i on is go i ng to re l ease us f rom the burden of Auschw i t z by ra i s i ng co l l ect i ve consc i ousness , when te l ev i s i on perpe tua t es i t i n other ways , no l onger unde r the ausp i ces of a p l ace of ann i h i l a t i on , but of a med i um of d i ssuas i on . The Ho l ocaus t is, f i rst of a l l (and exc l us i ve l y) a te l ev i sed event (one mus t no t forge t McLuhan ' s bas i c ru l e) . Tha t is, i t is an at t emp t to rehea t a t rag i c but co l d h i stor i ca l event , the f i rst grea t event of the co l d syst ems , the-coo l i ng syst ems , the sys t ems of d i ssuas i on and ex t erm i na t i on wh i ch wou l d then be dep l oyed in other forms ( i nc l ud i ng the Co l d War , e tc .) - and an event that concerns co l d masses ( the Jews no l onger i mp l i ca t ed , but in the end forced to manage the i r own dea th , the masses no l onger rebe l l i ous - d i ssuaded by dea th , d i ssuaded unto dea th) . A co l d event wa rmed up by a co l d med i um for masses , themse l ves co l d , who are go i ng to exper i ence on l y a pos t humous emot i on , a tact i l e and d i ssuas i ve shudder tha t wi l l enab l e t hem to l et the ca t as t rophe s l ip i nto ob l i v i on w i th a sor t of aesthe t i c good consc i ence. In order to rehea t al l this, the po l i t i ca l and pedagog i ca l or chest ra t i on that fo l l owed the ( te l ev i sed) event in an a t t empt to g i ve i t mean i ng was not excess i ve . The pan i c be fore the program' s poss i b l e consequences on the m i nds of ch i l dren ; al l those soc i a l workers mob i l i zed to f i l ter it, as i f thi s ar t i f icial resur rect i on car r i ed a danger of cont ag i on! In fact , the danger was qu i te the oppos i te : that resu l t i ng f rom the soc i a l i ner t i a of co l d sys t ems - co l d produc i ng co l d . Thus the who l e wor l d had to be mob i l i zed i n order to reconst i tute the soc i a l (warmth) of commun i ca t i on out of the co l d mons t e r of ex t erm i na t i on . The program served to capture the ar t i f i c i a l wa rmt h of a dead event in order to rehea t the dead body of the soc i a l . Hence the supp l emen t ary cont r i but i ons of the other med i a a t t empt i ng to ex t end the program' s ef fects by i ts f eed-back: the concur rent po l l s second i ng the program' s enormous , co l l ect i ve i mpac t - when , need l ess to say, these po l l s on l y ver i f i ed the te l ev i sua l success of the med i um i tse l f .

16 2 SEDUCT I ON

One shou l d speak of te l ev i s ion' s co l d l ight , and why i t is inof f ens i ve to the i mag i na t i on ( i nc l ud i ng the i mag i na t i on of chi l dren) . I t is i nnocuous because i t no l onger conveys an i mag i nary , for the s i mp l e reason tha t i t i s no l onge r an i mage. He re i t cont rasts w i th the c i nema wh i ch ( though i ncreas i ng l y cont am i na t ed by te l ev i s i on) is st i l l endowed w i th an i nt ense i mag i nary - because i t is an i mage. Th i s is not s i mp l y to speak o f f i l m as a me r e screen or v i sua l form, but as a my t h , some t h i ng tha t st i l l resemb l es a doub l e , a mi r ror , a fantasy , a dream, e tc. None of th i s in the TV i mage. I t doesn ' t sugges t any th i ng , i t mesme r i zes . . . I t is on l y a screen or , bet ter , i t is a m i n i a tur i zed t ermi na l that i mmed i a t e l y appears in your head (you are the screen and the te l ev i s i on is wa t ch i ng you) , t rans i stor i zes al l , your neurons and passes for a magne t i c t ape - a tape , not an i mage.

forma t i on systems , the co l d at t ract i on of the termi na l s and med i ums tha t we have become , sur rounded as we are by conso l es , i so l ated and seduced by the i r man i pu l a t i on . The poss i b l i ty of modu l a t i ons w i th i n an und i f f erent i a t ed un i verse and of the "p l ay " of unst ab l e sets of e l ement s , is never w i thou t f asc i na t i on . I t is even h i gh l y poss i b l e that l ud i c and l ib ina l f l i r t w i th each other somewhe r e in the d i rec t i on of random syst ems , by v i r tue of a des i re that no l onger l eads to i nf rac t i ons i n the l ega l sense , but enta i l s d i f f rac t i on i n a l l senses w i th i n a un i verse that no l onger knows the l ega l sphere. Th i s des i re a l so be l ongs to the l ud i c rea l m w i th i ts topo l ogy of shi f t i ng sys t ems , and is an added sour ce o f p l easure (or angu i sh) for each of the par t i c l es mov i ng w i th i n the ne tworks . We are al l accorded thi s l ight , psychede l i c g i dd i ness wh i ch resu l ts f rom mu l t i p l e or success i ve connec t i ons and d i sconnec t i ons . We are al l i nv i ted to become m i n i a tur i zed " game syst ems , " i .e ., m i crosys t ems w i th the pot ent i a l to regu l a te the i r own r andom func t i on i ng .

co l d seduc t i on - the "narc i ss i st i c " spe l l of e l ec t ron i c and in-

Al l thi s be l ongs to the l ud i c rea l m whe r e one encount ers a

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON

163

Th i s is the mode rn mean i ng of pl ay, the " l ud i c " sense , connot i ng the supp l eness and po l yva l ence of comb i na t i ons . Unders tood in th i s sense , "p l ay , " i ts very poss ibi l i ty, is at the bas i s of the me tastab i l i ty of sys t ems . I t has noth i ng to do w i th p l ay as a dua l or agon i st i c re l a t i on ; i t is the co l d seduc t i on that governs the spheres of i nforma t i on and commun i ca t i on. And i t is in thi s co l d seduc t i on tha t the soc i a l and i ts represent at i ons are now wear i ng themse l ves th i n . We are a l l qu i t e fami l i ar w i th thi s i mmense process of s i mul at i on . Non-d i rec t i ve i nterv i ews , ca l l - in shows , a l l -out par t i c i pa t i on - the extor t i on of speech : " I t concerns you , you are the ma j or i ty , you are wha t ' s happen i ng . " And the prob i ng of op i ni ons , hear ts , m i nds , and the unconsc i ous to show how much " i t " speaks . The news has been i nvaded by thi s phan t om content , thi s homeopha t h i c t ransp l ant , thi s wak i ng dr eam of commun i ca t i on . A c i rcu l ar cons t ruc t i on whe r e one present s the aud i ence w i th wha t i t want s , an i ntegra ted c i rcu i t of perpe tua l so l i c i tat i on . The i mmense energ i es spent in ma i nt a i n i ng thi s s i mu l ac rum at arm' s l ength , to avo i d the bruta l d i s-s i mu l a t i on that wou l d occur shou l d the rea l i ty of a rad i ca l l oss of meani ng become too ev i dent . Seduc t i on / s i mu l acrum: commun i ca t i on as the func t i on i ng of the soc i a l w i th i n a c l osed c i rcui t , whe r e s i gns dup l i ca t e an und i scoverab l e rea l i ty. The soc i a l cont rac t has become a " s i mul at i on pac t " sea l ed by the med i a and the news . And nobody , one m i gh t add , is comp l e t e l y t aken in : the news is exper i enced as an amb i ence , a serv i ce , or ho l ogram of the soc i a l . The masses respond to the s i mu l a t i on of mean i ng w i th a k i nd of reverse s i mu l a t i on ; they respond to d i ssuas i on w i th d i sa f fect i on, and to i l l us i ons w i th an en i gma t i c be l i ef . I t al l moves around , and can g i ve the i mpress i on of an opera t i ve seduc t i on . Bu t such seduc t i on has no mor e mean i ng than any th i ng e l se , seduc t i on here connot es on l y a k i nd of l ud i c adhes i on to s i mu l a t ed p i eces of i nforma t i on , a k i nd of tact i l e at t ract i on ma i nt a i ned by the mode l s .

164

SEDUCT I ON

"Te l e-pha th i cs . " "Rogers here - I am rece i v i ng you f i ve on f i ve . " " Do you hear me? Yes , I hear you . " . "We rece i ve you , come i n . " "Yes , we are speak i ng . " Th i s is the l i tany of the rad i o bands , par t i cu l ar l y the a l terna t i ve or p i rate stat i ons . One p l ays at speak i ng and l i steni ng ; one p l ays at commun i ca t i on us i ng the mos t soph i st i ca t ed t echno l ogy for the l at ter 's m i se en scene . The pha t i c func t i on of l anguage , used to estab l i sh cont ac t and susta i n speech ' s for ma l d i mens i on: thi s func t i on f i rst i so l ated and descr i bed by Ma l i nowsk i w i th re f erence to the Me l anes i ans , then by Jakobson in h i s gr i d of l anguage ' s func t i ons , becomes hyper t roph i ed in the t e l e-d i mens i on of the commun i ca t i ons ne tworks . Contact for contac t ' s sake becomes the emp t y f orm w i th wh i ch l anguage seduces i tse l f when i t no l onger has any th i ng to say. The l at ter concerns our own cu l ture . Wha t Ma l i nowsk i descr i bed was some th i ng qu i te d i f ferent : a symbo l i c a l terca t i on or due l of words . By these r i tua l phrases and pa l avers w i thou t cont ent , the na t i ves we re st i l l throw i ng a cha l l enge and of fer i ng a gi f t , as in a pure ceremon i a l . Language has no need for " cont ac t " : i t is we who need commun i ca t i on to have a spec i f i c " cont ac t " func t i on , prec i se l y because i t is e l ud i ng us . Tha t is why Jakobson was ab l e to i so l ate i t i n h i s ana l ys i s of l anguage , wh i l e both the concep t and the t erms to express i t are absent f rom other cu l tures . Jakobson ' s gr i d and h i s ax i oma t i cs of commun i ca t i on are con t emporaneous w i th a change i n l anguage ' s for tune - i t is beg i nn i ng to no l onger commun i ca t e any th i ng . I t has thus become urgent to ana l yt i ca l l y restore the func t i ona l poss i b i l i ty of commun i ca t i on , and i n par t i cu l ar the "pha t i c " func t i on that , i n l og i ca l t erms , is a s i mp l e t ru i sm : i f i t speaks , then i t speaks . Bu t i n e f fect i t no l onger speaks , ' and the di scovery of the "pha t i c " func t i on is symp t oma t i c of the need to i n j ect contac t , estab l i sh connec t i ons , and speak t i re l ess l y s i mp l y in order to render l anguage poss i b l e . A despera t e s i tua t i on whe r e even s i mp l e cont ac t appears wondrous . I f the pha t i c has become hyper t roph i ed i n a l l our commun i ca t i ons sys t ems (i .e., w i th i n the med i a and i nforma t i on processi ng syst ems) , i t is because te l e-d i stance ensures tha t speech l i tera l l y no l onger has any mean i ng . One says tha t one is speaking, but by speak i ng one is on l y ver i fy i ng the ne t work and the

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 16 5

fact tha t one is l i nked up w i th i t . The re is no t even an "other " at the other end , for i n a s i mp l e rec i proca t i on of s i gna l s of recogn i t i on there is no l onger an i dent i f i ab l e t ransmi t t er or rece i ver , but s i mp l y t wo t ermi na l s . The one termi na l ' s s i gna l to the other is mere l y an i nd i ca t i on tha t some t h i ng is go i ng through and that , there fore , noth i ng is happen i ng. Per f ec t d i ssuas i on . Two t ermi na l s do not t wo i nter l ocutors make . In " te l e " space ( the fo l l ow i ng a l so ho l ds t rue for te l ev i s ion) , there are no l onger any de t e rm i na t e t e rms or pos i t i ons . On l y t erm i na l s in a pos i t i on of ex- t e rm i na t i on . I t is here , morever , that Jakobson ' s ent i re gr i d fa l ls apar t , for i ts va l i d i ty is rest r i cted to the c l ass i c conf i gura t i on of d i scourse and commun i ca t i on . The gr i d l oses i ts mean i ng when app l i ed to ne tworks whe r e pure "d ig i ta l i ty" re i gns. In d i scourse there is st i l l a po l ar i ty of terms , d i st i nc t i ve oppos i t i ons that regu l a te the advent of mean i ng. A st ructure , synt ax and space of d i f ference , st i l l regu l a te d i a l ogue , as i mp l i ed by the s i gn (s igni f i er /s i gn i f i ed) and the message ( t ransmi t ter / rece i ver ) , e tc. Bu t the 0 / 1 of b i nary or d ig i ta l sys t ems is no l onger a d i st i nc t i ve oppos i t i on or est ab l i shed d i f f erence. I t is a "bi t , " the sma l l est un i t of e l ec t ron i c i mpu l se - no l onge r a un i t o f mean i ng , but an i dent i f i ca tory pu l se. I t is no l onger l anguage , but i ts rad i ca l d i ssuas i on . Th i s is wha t the ma t r i x of i nforma t i on and commun i ca t i on is l ike, and how the ne tworks func t i on . The need for " cont ac t " is mos t crue l l y fel t , for not on l y is there no due l re l at i on as w i th the Me l anes i an ' s l ingu i st i c pot l ach , but there is no l onger even the i nter - i nd i v i dua l l og i c of exchange f ound i n c l ass i ca l l anguage ( that of Jakobson) . D i scurs i ve dua l i ty and po l ar i ty have been succeeded by the digi ta l i ty of da ta process i ng . The tota l ascendancy of the med i a and ne tworks . The co l d e l eva t i on of the e l ec t ron i c med i a , and of the mass i tse l f as med i um . TELE : there are no l onger any th i ng but termi na l s . AUTO : each person is h i s or her own t ermi na l . ( `Te l e" and " auto" can t hemse l ves be seen as work i ng p i eces or commu t i ng par t i c l es tha t are connec t ed to words , l i ke a v i deo is connec t ed to a group of peop l e , or te l ev i s i on to those wa t ch i ng i t ) . The group w i th a v i deo came ra is i tse l f i ts own t ermi na l . I t records , ad j usts and manages i tse l f e l ec t ron i ca l l y. I t turns i tse l f on , seduces i tse l f . The group is seduced and even erot i c i zed by the i nstantane-

166 SEDUCT I ON ous repor t i t has of i tse l f . Soon se l f -management wi l l be un i ver sa l , the prov i nce of every person , group and t ermi na l . Se l f seduc t i on wi l l become the norm of al l the charged par t i c l es i n the ne tworks or sys t ems. The body i tsel f , opera t ed by remo t e cont ro l f rom the gene t i c code , is i tse l f no mor e than i ts own t ermi na l ; i t has no other concern than the opt i ma l se l f -management of i ts memor y banks. Pure magne t i za t i on - tha t of the response by the quest i on , the rea l by the mode l , the 0 by the 1, the ne t work by i ts very ex i stence , the speakers by the i r me r e connec t i on , the pure tact i l i ty of the s i gna l , the sheer v i r tue o f " contac t , " the tota l af f ini ty of one t ermi na l for another : thi s is the i mage of seduc t i on , sca t t ered and d i f fused throughou t al l our cur rent sys t ems. A se l f -seduc t i on / se l f -management tha t s i mp l y ref l ects the ne t works " c i rcul ar i ty, and the shor tc i rcu i t i ng of each of the i r a t oms or par t i c l es . (Some m i gh t speak. here of narc i ss i sm, and why not? I f on l y because one shou l d not t ranspose t erms l i ke nar c i ss i sm and seduc t i on to a reg i ster that does no t concern them, tha t of s i mu l a t i on) . Thus accord i ng to Jean Quer zo l a i n " Le s i l i c i um f l eur de peau " (Traverses , no . 14/15) : psychob i o l og i ca l t echno l ogy - al l the compu t e r prosthes i s and se l f -ad j ust i ng e l ect ron i c ' ne tworks we possess - prov i des us w i th a k i nd of s t range b i oe l ec t ron i c mi r ror , i n wh i ch each person , l i ke some digi ta l narc i ssus , is go i ng to s l i de a l ong the t ra j ec tory of a dea th dr i ve and s i nk i n h i s or her own i mage. Narc i ssus = narcos i s (McLuhan had a l ready made the connec t i on) : E l ec t ron i c narcos i s : i t is the u l t i ma t e r i sk of d ig i tal s i mu l a t i on . . . We wou l d s l ip f rom Oed i pus to Narc i ssus. . . At the end of the se l f -management of our bod i es and p l easures there wou l d be a s l ow narc i ss i st i c narcos i s . In a word , w i th s i l i con, wha t happens to the rea l i ty pr i nc i p l e? I am not say i ng that the wor l d ' s d ig i ta l i zat ion wi l l soon put an end to Oed i pus . I am not i ng tha t the deve l opmen t o f b i o l ogy and i nforma t i on t echno l ogy is accompa n i ed by the d i sso l ut i on of the persona l i t y st ructure we ca l l Oed i pa l . The d i sso l ut i on of these

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 167

st ruc tures uncovers another reg i on , whe r e the father is absent : i t has to do w i th the ma t erna l , the ocean i c fee l i ng and the dea th dr i ve. I t is not a neuros i s that threatens , but some th i ng of the order of a psychos i s . A pa tho l og i ca l narc i ss i sm . . . We be l i eve that we unders t and the forms of the soc i a l bond bu i l t on Oed i pus. Bu t when the l at ter no l onger func t i ons , wha t wi l l powe r do? Af ter author i ty , seduc t i on? The f i nest examp l e of thi s "b i on i c m i r ror " and "narc i ss i st i c necros i s " is c l on i ng , the ex t reme f orm of se l f -seduc t i on : f rom the Same to the Same w i thout go i ng through the Other . In the Un i t ed States a ch i l d m i gh t be born in the same way as a geran i um, by tak i ng cut t i ngs . The f i rst ch i l d-c l one - genea l ogy by vege ta t i ve mu l t i p l i ca t i on . The f i rst ch i l d born f rom the s ing l e ce l l of an i nd i v i dua l , h i s " father , " the so l e parent , of wh i ch he wi l l be the exac t copy , the per f ec t tw i n , the doub l e (D . Ror v i k , `A son i mage : la cop i e d ' un homme " ) . Inf ini te human propaga t i on by cut t i ngs , w i th each ce l l of an i nd i v i dua t ed organ i sm capab l e of becom i ng the ma t r i x for an i dent i ca l i nd i v i dua l . My gene t i c i nher i t ance was f i xed once and for al l when a cer ta i n sperma tozo i d me t a cer t a i n ovary. Th i s i nher i t ance bears the formu l a for al l the b i ochem i ca l processes tha t have crea t ed me and ensure my func t i on i ng. A copy of thi s formu l a is inscr i bed in each of the tens of b i l l ions of ce l l s tha t const i tute me. Each of t hem knows my makeup ; be fore be i ng a ce l l o f my l i ver or b l ood , i t is a ce l l of me . I t is there fore theore t i ca l l y poss i b l e to const ruct an i nd i v i dua l i dent i ca l to myse l f f rom any one of t hem . (Pr. A . Jacquard) Pro j ec t i on and i nt ernment i n the m i r ror of the gene t i c code. The re is no be t ter prosthes i s than D .N .A . , no f i ner narc i ss i st i c ex t ens i on than that new i mage bes t owed on mode rn be i ngs in p l ace of the i r specu l ar i mage: the i r mo l ecu l ar formu l a . He re is whe r e one wi l l f i nd one ' s " t ruth" - i n the i nde f i n i te repet i -

16 8 SEDUCT I ON

t i on of one ' s " rea l , " b i o l og i ca l be i ng. Th i s narc i ss i sm, whose source is no l onger a m i r ror but a formu l a , is a mons t rous parody o f the my t h of Narc i ssus . A co l d narc i ss i sm, a co l d se l f seduc t i on , w i thout even tha t m i n i ma l d i st ance necessary for the exper i ence of onese l f as an i l l us i on . The ma ter i a l i za t i on of the rea l , b i o l og i ca l doub l e i n the c l one cut s shor t the poss i b i l i ty of p l ay i ng w i th one ' s own i mage and , thereby , p l ay i ng w i th one ' s own dea th. ' The doub l e is an i mag i nary f i gure that , l i ke the , sou l or one ' s shadow , or one ' s i mage i n a mi r ror , haunt s the sub j ec t w i th a fa int dea th that has to be cons t ant l y wa rded of f. I f i t ma ter i a l i zes, dea th is i mm i nen t . Th i s fantast i c propos i t i on is now l i ter a l l y rea l i zed in c l on i ng. The c l one is the very i mage of dea th , but w i thou t the symbo l i c i l l us i on that once gave i t i ts cha rm. Some t h i ng of the sub j ect ' s i nt i macy w i th h i mse l f rests on the i mma t er i a l i ty of h i s doub l e , on the fact that i t is and rema i ns a phant asy. One can and mus t dr eam throughou t one ' s l i fe of the per f ec t dup l i ca t i on or mu l t i p l i ca t i on of one ' s be i ng , but i t rema i ns a dream, and is des t royed when one t r i es to make i t rea l . The same ho l ds for the pr i ma l scene or tha t o f seduc t i on : they too on l y wor k when reca l l ed and phant as i zed , never when rea l . I t was up to our per i od to t ry and ma ter i a l i ze thi s phant asy - l i ke so many others - and by way of tota l confus i on , change the p l ay w i th one ' s doub l e f rom a subt l e exchange w i th dea th and the other i nto an e tern i ty of the same . The dr eam of eterna l tw i ns as a subst i tute for sexua l reproduct i on . A ce l l u l ar dr eam of sch i zogenes i s - the surest f orm of parenthood , s i nce i t f i na l l y a l l ows one to bypass the other , and go f rom the same to the same (one wi l l st i l l requ i re a woman ' s uterus , and a ho l l owed out ovum , but these a i ds are shor t - l i ved and anonymous - any f ema l e prosthes i s wi l l do) . A monoce l l u l ar utop i a that , by way of genet i cs , wi l l enab l e comp l ex be i ngs to at ta in the des t i ny of protozoa . Is there a dea th dr i ve that pushes sexed be i ngs towards a form of reproduc t i on anter i or to the i r acqu i s i t i on of sexua l i dent i t i es - (moreover , doesn ' t thi s f i ss i parous form, thi s pro l i ferat i on by cont i gu i t y con j ure up dea th i n the deepes t recesses of our i mag i nary - as some t h i ng tha t den i es sexua l i ty and seeks to ann i h i l a te i t , the l at ter be i ng the bearer o f l i fe and there fore

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 169

a cr i t i ca l and mor t a l f orm o f reproduc t i on?) - and that s i mu l t aneous l y pushes t hem to deny al l a l ter i ty so that they need no l onger st r i ve for any th i ng but the perpe tua t i on of an i dent i ty, the t ransparency of a gene t i c code a l l the mor e ded i ca t ed to procrea t i on? Le t us l eave the dea th dr i ve. Perhaps we are dea l i ng w i th a f antasy of se l f -engender i ng? But no , for the sub j ec t m i gh t dream of e l i mi na t i ng the parenta l f i gures and even subst i tut i ng h i mse l f for them, but he cannot e l i mi na t e the symbo l i c st ruc ture of procrea t i on : when one becomes one ' s own ch i ld, one is st i l l the ch i l d of someone . C l on i ng by cont rast , abo l i shes no t j ust the Mother , but the Father , the cross i ng of the i r genes , the i mm i x ture of the i r d i f ferences , and above al l the due l ac t tha t engender i ng supposes . The person c l oned does no t engende r h i mse l f : he comes to bud f rom a segmen t . One m i gh t specul ate on the wea l th of these p l ant - l i ke branch i ngs that d i sso l ve Oed i pa l sexua l i ty in f avour of an " non-human " sex - but the fact rema i ns that both the Fa ther and Mo t he r have d i sappeared , and in f avour of a ma t r i x / code [ the word "ma t r i ce " means both "ma t r i x " and " womb " ] . No mor e mother , just a ma t r i x . And hence for th i t is the ma t r i x of the gene t i c code that wi l l "g i ve b i r th" w i thou t end i n an opera t i ve manne r purged of al l cont i ngent sexua l i ty. Nor can one speak any l onger of a sub j ect , s i nce the i dent i tar i an redup l i ca t i on put s an end to i ts d i v i s i on . The m i r ror stage is abo l i shed , or ra ther parod i ed in mons t rous f ash i on , ma rk i ng the end of the age-o l d dr eam of the sub j ect ' s narc i ssist i c pro j ec t i on . For the l at ter st i l l supposes a mi r ror , the mi r ror i n wh i ch the sub j ec t a l i enates h i mse l f i n order to f i nd h i mse l f , or stares at h i mse l f on l y to see h i s own dea th. But here there is no m i r ror : an i ndust r i a l ob j ec t w i th i n a ser i es does no t "m i r ror " the i dent i ca l ob j ec t that succeeds i t . The one is never a mi rage , an i dea l or danger for the other. At mos t such ob j ec ts can be added up , for they have no t been engende red sexua l l y and are no t aware of dea th. A segmen t does no t requ i re the med i a t i on of the i mag i nary for i ts reproduc t i on - no mor e than an ea r t hworm. Each segmen t of a worm is reproduced d i rect l y as the comp l e t e worm - each ce l l of an Ame r i can i ndust r i a l i st can g i ve r i se to a new

170 SEDUCT I ON

i ndust r i a l i st . Just as each f ragment of a ho l ogram can become a ma t r i x of the comp l e t e ho l ogram ; a l l the i nforma t i on be i ng cont a i ned i n each of the sca t t ered f ragment s . The same l og i c ma r ks the end of the concep t of tota l i ty. I f al l the i nforma t i on can be f ound i n each of the par ts, the who l e l oses i ts mean i ng. I t a l so ma rks the end of the body , o f thi s s ingu l ar be i ng we ca l l the body , thi s s i ngu l ar conf i gura t i on tha t cannot be segmen t ed i nto add i t i ona l ce l ls, as w i tnessed by the fact of sexua l i ty. Paradox i ca l l y , c l on i ng wi l l f abr i ca te sexed bei ngs i n perpe tu i ty , s i nce they wi l l resemb l e the i r mode l s , even as the sex organs l ose the i r func t i on . But then sex ' is not a funct ion, for i t exceeds al l the body ' s par ts and func t i ons . Indeed , i t exceeds al l the da t a tha t can be obt a i ned abou t the body , wh i ch the gene t i c code c l a i ms to co l l ec t . Th i s is why the l at ter can on l y c l ear the way to a t ype of au t onomous reproduc t i on , i ndependen t of sex and dea th . ;

The b i o-phys i o-ana tom i ca l sc i ences had a l ready begun the ana l yt i ca l decompos i t i on of the body w i th i ts d i ssec t i on i nto organs and func t i ons. M i cro-mo l ecu l ar gene t i cs is i ts l og i ca l consequence at a much h i gher l eve l of abst rac t i on and s i mu l a t i on : the nuc l ear l eve l of the command ce l l , the d i rect i ve l eve l of the gene t i c code a round wh i ch thi s ent i re phant asmagor i a is organ i zed . In the mechan i s t i c v i s i on we can st i l l speak of " t rad i t i ona l " s i mu l a t i on , each organ be i ng on l y a par t i a l and d i f ferent i a ted prosthes i s . In the b i o-cyberne t i c v i s i on, the sma l l est und i f f erent i ated e l ement , the ce l l becomes an embryon i c prosthes i s of the ent i re body. The formu l a i nscr i bed i n each ce l l becomes the t rue mode rn prosthes i s of al l bod i es . For i f a prosthes i s is genera l l y an ar t i fact tha t rep l aces a fa i l ing organ , or an ins t rument a l pro l onga t i on of the body , then the DNA mo l ecu l e that cont a i ns al l the da ta re l at i ve to a l i v ing be i ng , is the prosthes i s pa r exce l l ence , s i nce i t wi l l a l l ow that be i ng to pro l ong i t se l f i nde f i n i te l y. In t ruth, i t wi l l become noth i ng mor e than the i nde f i n i te ser i es o f i ts cyberne t i c avatars . We are speak i ng of a prosthes i s even mor e ar t i f i c i a l than any

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON

171

mechan i ca l prosthes i s . For the gene t i c code is not "na tura l . " Wheneve r a par t is abst rac t ed f rom the who l e and rendered au tonomous , i t a l ters the who l e by subst i tut i ng i tse l f for i t (prothes i s - thi s is i ts e t ymo l og i ca l mean i ng) . In thi s sense one can say that the gene t i c code , wh i ch c l a i ms to condense an ent i re l i v i ng be i ng because i t cont a i ns a l l the l at ter 's "da t a " (gene t i c s i mu l a t i on is i ncred i b l y v i o l ent ) is an ar t i fact , an ar t i f ic ia l ma t r i x , a s i mu l a t i on ma t r i x , f rom wh i ch wi l l proceed , no l onger by reproduc t i on , bu t by pure and s i mp l e repe t i t i on , i dent i ca l bei ngs ass i gned to the same commands .

C l on i ng is, there fore , the u l t i ma t e state of the body ' s s i mu l at ion, whe r e the i nd i v i dua l , reduced to an abst rac t gene t i c for mu l a , is des t i ned to ser i a l mu l t i p l i ca t i on . Wa l t er Ben j am i n sa i d that i n the age of mechan i ca l reproduc t i on the wor k of ar t l oses i ts " aura , " the un i que qua l i ty of i ts here and now , i ts aesthe t i c f orm : i t is no l onger des t i ned for seduc t i on but reproduc t i on , and in i ts new dest i ny , takes on apo l i t i ca l f orm . The or i g i na l is lost , and on l y nosta l g i a can restore i ts " authent i c i ty. " The ext reme f orm of th i s process is to be f ound in our con t empora ry mass med i a , whe r e there never was an or ig ina l , th i ngs be i ng conce i ved f rom the star t i n t erms of the i r un l i m i t ed reproduc i bi l i ty. Th i s is exac t l y wha t happens to human be i ngs w i th c l on i ng . Th i s is wha t happens to the body when conce i ved on l y as informa t i ona l stock , or as da ta to be processed . No th i ng then prevent s i ts ser i a l reproduc t i on i n the same t erms Ben j am i n used when speak i ng of i ndust r i a l ob j ec t s or i mages . The gene t i c mode l has precedence over al l poss i b l e bod i es . Beh i nd thi s reversa l l ies the i ncurs i on of a t echno l ogy that Ben j am i n had a l ready descr i bed as a tota l med i um - an enor mous prosthes i s for the genera t i on of i dent i ca l and i nd i st i ngu i shab l e ob j ec ts and i mages - but w i thou t ye t conce i v i ng of the cur rent deepen i ng of thi s t echno l ogy , wh i ch makes poss i b l e the genera t i on of i dent i ca l be i ngs , w i thout any poss i b l e re turn to an or i g i na l be i ng. The prosthes i s of the i ndust r i a l age we re st i l l externa l , exot ecbn i ca l - wh i l e those that we are com i ng

172

SEDUCT I ON

to know have branched out and been i nter i or i zed : esot echn i ca l . We l i ve in an age of sof t t echno l og i es , of gene t i c and ment a l sof tware. The prosthes i s of the i ndust r i a l age , i ts mach i nes , st i l l pa i d heed to the body i n order to mod i f y i ts i mage - and we r e themse l ves me t abo l i zed in an i mag i nary , thi s me t abo l i sm becom i ng par t of the body ' s i mage: . Bu t when s i mu l a t i on reaches the po i nt of no re turn , when the prosthes i s inf i l t rate the body ' s anonymous , m i cro-mo l ecu l ar core , when they force themse l ves on the body as i ts ma t r i x , and burn out al l the succeed i ng symbo l i c c i rcu i ts such that al l future bod i es wi l l be on l y i ts i mmu t a b l e repe t i t i on - then the body and i ts h i s tory have come to an end , the i nd i v i dua l be i ng no mor e than the cance rous me t as t as i s
o f h i s bas i c f ormu l a .

Is not the c l on i ng of i nd i v i dua l s f rom an i nd i v i dua l X s i mi l ar to the pro l i ferat i on of a s i ng l e ce l l one ident i f i es w i th cancer? The re is a c l ose re l a t i on be t ween the concep t of the gene t i c code and the pa tho l ogy of cancer . The code des i gna t es the m i n i ma l formu l a to wh i ch one can reduce an i nd i v i dua l such tha t he can (and can on l y) be repea t ed , wh i l e w i th cancer the same t ype of ce l l pro l i ferates w i thou t conce rn for the organ i c l aws of the who l e. Thus w i th c l on i ng one w i tnesses the repet i t i on of the Same , the pro l i f era t i on of a s i ng l e ma t r i x . Former l y sexua l reproduc t i on prevent ed this, bu t today one can f i na l l y i so l ate the gene t i c ma t r i x of ident i ty , and e l i mi na t e al l the d i f ferent i a l v i c i ss i tudes tha t gave i nd i v i dua l s the i r a l ea tory cha rm . Or the i r seduc t i veness. The me tastas i s that began w i th i ndust r i a l ob j ec t s ends i n ce l l u l ar organ i za t i on . Cance r is the d i sease tha t dom i na t es cont emporary pa tho l ogy , because i t is the ve ry f o rm o f the code ' s v i ru l ence : the aggrava t ed redundancy of the same ce l ls, or the same s i gna l s .

C l on i ng is very much i n keep i ng w i th the i r revers i b l e tendency to " ex t end and deepen the syst em' s i nterna l t ransparency by i ncreas i ng i ts poss ib i l i t i es of se l f - regu l at i on and mod i f y i ng i ts i nforma t i ona l economy " (Quer zo l a) . Al l dr i ves w i l l be expe l l ed . Every th i ng i nter i or (ne tworks ,

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 17 3

func t i ons , organs , consc i ous or unconsc i ous c i rcu i ts) wi l l be exter i or i zed i n the form of prosthes i s that wi l l const i tute an i dea l corpus orb i t i ng a round the body , but w i th the l at ter as i ts own sate l l i te . Every nuc l eus wi l l be enuc l ea t ed and pro j ec t ed i nto spat i a l orb i t . The c l one is the ma ter i a l i za t i on of the gene t i c formu l a in human f orm. Bu t i t wi l l not s top there. Al l the body ' s secre ts sex , angu i sh , even the subt l e p l easures der i ved f rom me r e exi stence - every th i ng that you do not , and do not wan t to know abou t yourse l f , wi l l be turned i nto b i o- f eed-back , and re turned to you in the f orm of "bu i l t - i n" d ig i ta l i nforma t i on . I t is the bi on i c mi r ror stage (Quer zo l a) . A d ig i ta l Narc i ssus i nst ead of a t r i angu l ar Oed i pus. The hypost as i s of the ar t i f i c i a l doub l e , the c l one wi l l be your guar d i an ange l , the v i s i b l e f orm of your unconsc i ous and the f l esh of your f l esh, not me taphor i ca l l y but l i tera l ly. Your " f e l l ow creature " wi l l hence for th be the c l one w i th i ts ha l l uc i na tory resemb l ance , such that you wi l l never be a l one , and wi l l never have any secre ts . " Love your ne i ghbour as yourse l f " - the d i f f i cu l t i es of l i v i ng the Gospe l wi l l be reso l ved . Your ne i ghbour is yourse l f . Love is there fore tota l . Tota l se l f -seduc t i on .

The masses themse l ves f orm a c l one- l i ke appara tus that func t i ons w i thou t the med i a t i on of the other. In the l ast ana l ys i s , the masses are s i mp l y the sum of al l the syst ems ' t ermi na l s a ne t work t rave l l ed by digi ta l i mpu l ses ( thi s is wha t forms a mass) . Ob l i v i ous to ext erna l i n j unc t i ons , they const i tute t hemse l ves i nto i nt egra t ed c i rcu i ts g i ven over to man i pu l a t i on (se l f man i pu l a t i on) and " seduc t i on " (se l f -seduct i on) . In t ruth, nobody any l onger knows how a represent a t i ona l appara tus works , or even i f i t st i l l ex i sts . St i l l , i t is becom i ng i ncreas i ng l y urgent to rat i ona l i ze poss i b l e occur rences i n the un i verse of s i mu l a t i on . Wha t happens be t ween an absent , hypothe t i ca l po l e of powe r and the neut ra l , e l us i ve po l e f ormed by the masses? The answer : seduc t i on . Th i ngs wor k by seduc t i on . Bu t such seduc t i on sugges t s the work i ngs of a soc i a l wor l d

174 SEDUCT I ON

that we no l onger compr ehend , and a pol i t i ca l ' wor l d whose st ruc tures have f aded . In p l ace of the lat ter , seduc t i on g i ves r i se to an i mmense b l ank area t raversed by t ep i d cur rent s of speech , or a ma l l eab l e ne t work l ubr i ca t ed by magne t i c i mpu l ses . The wor l d is no l onger dr i ven by power , but fasc i na t i on , no l onger by produc t i on , bu t seduc t i on . Th i s seduc t i on is, however , no mor e than an emp t y dec l ara t i on f ormed of s i mu l a t ed concept s . The d i scourses he l d by bo t h the "st rateg i sts" of mass des i re ( the po l i t i c i ans , adver t i sers , organ i zers , eng i neers o f the sou l , and of the m i nd , e tc.) and the " ana l ysts" of the i r st rategi es, these d i scourses that descr i be the func t i on i ng of the soc i a l or the pol i t ical , or wha t rema i ns o f there , i n t erms of seduc t i on , they are as vacuous as the po l i t i ca l space i tse l f . They , s i mp l y re f ract the empt i ness of that abou t wh i ch they speak . " The med i a seduce the masses , " " the masses seduce themse l ves " - the use of the word seduc t i on here is i ncred i b l y sha l l ow and hackneyed . Cor rupt ed of i ts l i tera l mean i ng , wh i ch i mp l i es cha rm and mor t a l enchan tmen t , the t erm comes to s i gn i fy the soc i a l and techn i ca l l ubr i ca t i on requ i red for smoo t h re l at i ons - a smoo t h sem i urgy , a sof t t echno l ogy. The t erm then has an " eco l og i ca l " connot a t i on , and ma r ks the passage f rom hard to sof t energ i es . Sof t energy , sof t seduc t i on . The soc i a l made scarce .

W i t h th i s d i f fuse , tens i l e f orm of seduc t i on , or i e is no l onger speak i ng of the ar i stocrat i c seduc t i on of due l re l at i ons . One is speak i ng of a seduc t i on rev i ewed and rev i sed by the i deo l ogy of des i re. A psycho l og i zed seduc t i on that resu l ts f rom i ts vu l gar i zat i on w i th the r i se i n the Wes t of the i mag i nary f i gure of des i re . Th i s f i gure does not be l ong to the masters , but was h i stor i ca l l y produced by the oppressed unde r the s i gn o f the i r l i berat i on, and has been deepened by the fa i lure of success i ve revo l ut i ons . As a form, des i re ma r ks the passage f rom the i r status as ob j ec t s to tha t of sub j ects , but thi s passage is i tse l f on l y a mor e re f i ned, i nter i or i zed perpe tua t i on of the i r serv i tude. The f i rst g l i mmer i ngs of mass sub j ec t i v i ty at the dawn of mode rn and revo l ut i onary t i mes - the f i rst g l i mmer i ngs of the fact tha t the masses we r e sub j ec ts and cou l d manage the i r own serv i -

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON 17 5

tude unde r the s i gn of the i r own des i res! Large-sca l e seduc t i on now beg i ns. For i f an ob j ec t can s i mp l y be dom i na t ed , the subj ect of des i re , by cont rast , has to be seduced. Th i s sof t st ra tegy wi l l spread , soc i a l l y and h i stor i ca l l y. The masses wi l l be psycho l og i zed in order to be seduced , they wi l l be r i gged up w i th des i res in order to be d i st rac ted . Yes t erday they had a (myst i f i ed! ) consc i ousness and we re a l i ena t ed - today they have an unconsc i ous and ( repressed and cor rupt ed) des i res and are seduced . Yes t erday they we re d i ver t ed f rom the ( revo l ut i onary) t ruth of h i s tory - today they are d i ver t ed f rom the t ruth of the i r own des i res . The poor , seduced and man i pul a ted masses! Whe r e once they had to endure dom i na t i on under the threat of v i o l ence , now they mus t accept i t by d i nt of seduc t i on .

Speak i ng mor e genera l l y , the theore t i ca l ha l l uc i na t i on of des i re , w i th i ts d i f fuse l ib id ina l psycho l ogy , serves as a back drop to that s i mu l ac rum o f seduc t i on wh i ch one now f i nds everywhere. Hav i ng rep l aced the wor l d of surve i l l ance , i t character i zes the vu l nerab i l i ty of both i nd i v i dua l s and masses to sof t i n j unc t i ons . D i st i l l ed i n homeopha t i c doses throughout al l per sona l and soc i a l re l at ions, the seduc t i ve shadow of thi s d i scourse hovers today over the deser t of soc i a l re l at ions , and of powe r i tse l f . In thi s sense , we t ru l y l i ve i n an era of seduc t i on . Bu t we can no l onger speak of that f orm of absorpt i on or pot ent i a l engu l f men t , that fatefu l d i st rac t i on f rom wh i ch no one or no " rea l i t y " can ever be comp l e t e l y sa fe (perhaps there is no l onger enough rea l i ty to de f l ect , nor t ruth to subver t ) . Nor even of the cor rupt i on of i nnocence or v i r tue ( there is no l onger suf f i c i ent mora l i t y - or pervers i on - for that ) . Al l that rema i ns is to seduce i n order to seduce? " Seduce me . " "Le t me seduce you . " I t is the seduc t i on tha t rema i ns when al l the stakes have been w i thdr awn. We are no l onger speak i ng abou t a v i o l ence comm i t t ed aga i nst mean i ng or about i ts s i l ent ext ermi na t i on , but abou t wha t is l ef t to l anguage when i t no l onger has any th i ng to say. No l onger a ver t i g i nous loss, but the m i n i ma l i s t f orm of mu t u-

17 6

SEDUCT I ON

al grat i f i cat i on t wo l i ngu i st i c be i ngs can g i ve each other i n an enerva t ed soc i a l re l a t i on. " Seduce me . " "Le t me seduce you . " In thi s sense , seduc t i on is everywhere , sur rept i t i ous l y or openly, b l end i ng in w i th the amb i ance , the cons t ant so l i c i tat ions , w i th exchange pure and s i mp l e. I t is the seduc t i on of s tudent and t eacher (I am seduc i ng you and you are seduc i ng me , there be i ng no th i ng e l se to do) , of the po l i t i c i an and h i s pub l i c , of powe r (ah, the seduc t i on of powe r and the powe r of seduct ion! ) , o f the ana l yst and the ana l ysand , e tc . The Jesu i ts we re a l ready f amous for hav i ng used seduc t i on i n a re l i g i ous gu i se , for hav i ng re turned the throngs to the bosom of the Ca tho l i c church by the wor l d l y and aesthe t i c seduct i on o f the baroque , and hav i ng : recaptured the consc i ences of the power fu l by the exped i ent of f ancy goods and f ancy women . In ef fect , the Jesu i ts prov i de: the f i rst mode rn examp l e of the e l abora t i on of a st rategy of mass des i re and a soc i e ty of mass seduc t i on . And they we re re l at i ve l y successfu l . I t is ent i re l y poss i b l e that , once the aust ere cha rms of po l i t i ca l economy and producer cap i t a l i sm - cap i ta l i sm' s pur i t an cyc l e - have been swep t away , a ca tho l i c and Jesu i t i ca l era wi l l beg i n , w i th a sof t t echno l ogy of seduc t i on and a sof t , rosy sem i urgy. I t is no l onger a ma t t er of seduc t i on as pass i on , but o f a demand f or seduc t i on . O f an i nvoca t i on of des i re and i ts rea l i zat i on in p l ace of the fa l ter ing re l at i ons of powe r and know l edge that i nhere in l ove and t ransf erence . Wha t happens ' to the mast er s l ave d i a l ect i c when the mas t er has been seduced by the s l ave , and the s l ave by the mas t er? Seduc t i on becomes no mor e than an e f fus i on of d i f ferences or a d i scurs i ve l ib id ina l st r iptease. W i t h a vague co l l us i on be t ween supp l y and demand , seduc t i on becomes no t h i ng mor e t han an exchange va l ue , serv i ng the ci r cu l a t i on of exchanges and the l ubr i ca t i on of soc i a l re l a t i ons. Wha t rema i ns of the enchant r r i ent of that l abyr i nth i ne st ructure w i th i n wh i ch one cou l d l ose onese l f? Wha t is l ef t of seduct ion' s i mpos ture? " There is another t ype of v i o l ence , wh i ch has ne i ther i ts name nor ou t wa rd appearance , but wh i ch is no l ess dangerous . I am speak i ng o f seduc t i on " (Ro l l in) . Trad i t i ona l l y , the seducer was an i mpos tor who emp l oyed subt er fuge and vi l l a i ny to ach i eve h i s ends - or at l east who be l i eved he was emp l oy i ng t hem . For the other , by a l l ow i ng herse l f to be seduced ,

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON

177

by succumb i ng to the i mpos ture , of t en vo i ded i t , s t r i pped the seducer of h i s cont ro l . In ef fect , he fa l ls i nto h i s own t rap for hav i ng fa i l ed to cons i der seduc t i on ' s revers i b l e powe r . The fo l l ow i ng a l ways ho l ds : the one who seeks to p l ease the other has a l ready succumbed to the other ' s cha rms . On thi s bas i s, an ent i re re l i g i on or cu l ture can be organ i zed a round rel a t i ons of seduc t i on (as opposed to re l a t i ons of produc t i on) . Thus the Gr eek gods - seducers / i mpos tors - used the i r powe r to seduce men , but were seduced i n turn, and i ndeed we re of ten reduced to seduc i ng men , th i s be i ng the i r ma i n task . Thus they prov i ded the i mage of a wor l d order ru l ed not by l aws , as in the Chr i st i an un i verse or po l i t i ca l economy , but by a mu tua l seduc t i on that ensured the symbo l i c equ i l i br i um be t ween gods and men . Wha t rema i ns o f thi s v i o l ence t rapped by i ts own ar t i f i ce? Tha t un i verse whe r e gods and men sought to p l ease each other - even by the v i o l ent seduc t i on of sacr i f i ce - has ended . As has the secret unders t and i ng of s i gns and ana l og i es that prov i ded mag i c w i th i ts powe r of enchan t men t . And w i th i t , the assumpt i on tha t the ent i re wor l d is suscept i b l e to seduc t i on and rever s i b l e in s i gns - not just the gods , but i nan i ma t e be i ngs , th i ngs , and the dead themse l ves who have a l ways had to be seduced , bew i t ched and cast out w i th the a i d of nume rous s i gns and r i tuals, l est they do any ha rm . Today one has to wor k through one ' s own mourn i ng , an i nd i v i dua l and eer i e task of reor i ent a t i on and redep l oymen t . We now l i ve in a un i verse of forces and rel a t i ons of force , a un i verse tha t has ma t er i a l i zed as i n a vo i d , an ob j ec t of mas t ery and no t seduc t i on . A un i verse of produc t ion, i nves tment s , count er - i nves tment s and the l i bera t i on o f energ i es , a un i verse of the Law and ob j ec t i ve l aws , a un i verse of the mast er -s l ave d i a l ect i c . Sexua l i ty i tse l f arose w i th i n thi s un i verse as one of i ts ob j ect i ve func t i ons , and now t ends to overde t erm i ne al l the others , subst i tut i ng i tse l f as an a l ternat i ve f ina l i ty for those tha t are di sappear i ng or a l ready de func t . Every th i ng is sexua l i zed and thereby acqu i res some th i ng of a ter ra i n for adventure and p l ay. Eve rywhe re the i d speaks . Eve ry d i scourse appear as an eter na l commen t a ry on sex and des i re. In thi s sense , one m i gh t say tha t they have al l become d i scourses of seduc t i on , d i scourses

178 SEDUCT I ON

that reg i ster an exp l i c i t demand for seduc t i on , but a sof t seduct ion, whose weakened cond i t i on has become synonymous w i th so much e l se in th i s soc i e t y - the amb i ence , the man i pu l a t i on , the persuas i on , the grat i f i cat ion, the st rateg i es of des i re , the myst i que of persona l re l at i ons , the l i b i d i na l economy and i ts smoo t hed over re l at i ons of t rans f erence wh i ch re l ays the compet i t i ve economy and i ts re l at i ons of force. Th i s seduc t i on , wh i ch permea t es the ent i re expanse of l anguage , has no mor e subs t ance or sense than the powe r tha t pervades al l the inter st i ces of the soc i a l ne t work . Th i s is why they are ab l e to comb i ne the i r d i scourses so eas i l y . The degenera t ed me t a l anguage of seduc t i on comb i ned w i th the degenera t ed me t a l anguage of po l i t i cs is eve rywhe re opera t i ve (or i f one wi l l , , is abso l ut e l y non-opera t i ve) . I t is enough that there be a consensus concerni ng the mode l o f seduc t i on ' s s i mu l a t i on , the d i f fuse s t ream of speech and des i re - just as the mur ky me t a l anguage o f par t i c i pa t i on suf f i ces to sa f eguard an : appearance of soc i a l i ty.

The d i scourse of s i mu l a t i on is no t an i mpos ture. I t has on l y to have seduc t i on ac t as a s i mu l acrum of af fect , des i re , or l ibidi na l i nves tment , i n a wor l d whe r e the need for these is crue l l y fel t . However , j ust as the " re l a t i ons of force " we re never ab l e to exp l a i n the v i c i ss i tudes of powe r in the panopt i c age - except in Ma rx i an i dea l i sm - s i mi l ar l y seduc t i on , or the re l at i ons of seduc t i on , cannot account for con t emporary po l i t i ca l events . I f every th i ng is dr i ven by seduc t i on , i t wou l d not be by thi s sof t seduc t i on , as rev i sed by the i deo l ogy of des i re , bu t by a de f i ant seduc t i on , a dua l , antagon i st i c seduc t i on w i th the stakes max i m i zed , i nc l ud i ng those that are secret . I t wou l d not be by a game st rategy , bu t by a my th i ca l seduc t i on , not a psycho l og i ca l and opera t i ve seduc t i on , not a co l d , m i n i ma l i s t seduc t i on .

V SEDUCT I ON AS DEST I NY
Are we to th i nk that thi s d i f fuse seduc t i on , wh i ch is ne i ther at t ract i ve nor dangerous , thi s spec t er of seduc t i on that haunt s our c i rcu i ts w i thout secrets , our phant as i es w i thou t af fect , and our cont ac t ne tworks w i thout contacts , that thi s is i ts pure form? As i f the mode rn happen i ng w i th i ts par t i c i pa t i on and express i veness , whe r e the stage and i ts mag i c have d i sappeared , wou l d be the theater ' s pure form? Or as i f the hypothe t i ca l and hyper rea l mode of i nt ervent i on i n rea l i ty - in ac t i ng p i ctures , l andar t and body ar t - whe r e the ob j ect , f rame and st ag i ng of i l lus i ons have d i sappeared , wou l d be the pure form of pa i nt i ng and ar t? We are l i v ing, in ef fect , amongs t pure forms , i n a rad i ca l obscen i ty , tha t is to say, in the v i s ibl e , und i f f erent i a t ed obscen i t y o f f i gures tha t we re once secret and d i screte . The same is t rue o f the soc i a l , wh i ch today ru l es i n i ts pure - i .e ., emp t y and obscene - f orm. The same for seduc t i on , wh i ch in i ts present form, hav i ng lost i ts e l ement s of r isk, suspense and sorcery , takes the f orm of a fa int , und i f f erent i a t ed obscen i t y. Sha l l we re fer to Wa l t er Ben j am i n ' s geneo l ogy of the wor k o f ar t and i ts dest i ny? At f i rst , the wor k of ar t has the status of a r i tua l ob j ec t , re l a ted to an ancest ra l f orm of cu l t . Nex t i t takes on a cu l tura l or aesthet i c f orm i n a sys t em w i th f ewer obl i gat i ons ; i t st i l l reta i ns a s i ngu l ar character , t hough the l at ter

180 SEDUCT I ON

is no l onger i mmanen t to the r i tua l ob j ec t , but t ranscendent a l and i nd i v i dua l i zed . Last l y, the aesthe t i c f orm g i ves way to apol i t i ca l f orm i n wh i ch the wor k of ar t as such d i sappears be fore the i nev i tab l e progress of mechan i ca l reproduc t i on . I f i n the r i tua l f orm there are no or i g i na l s ( the aesthe t i c or i g i na l i ty of cu l t ob j ec t s is of l i t t le concern in the sacred) , the or i g i na l is aga i n lost in the po l i t i ca l f orm. The re is on l y the mu l t i p l i cat i on of ob j ec t s ; the po l i t i ca l f orm cor respond i ng to the ob j ect ' s max i mum c i rcu l a t i on and m i n i mum i ntens i ty. Seduc t i on too wou l d have had i ts r i tua l phase (due l , mag i ca l , agon i st i c) ; i ts aesthe t i c phase (as re f l ec ted i n the " aesthe t i c st ra tegy " of the seducer , whose doma i n approaches that of the f em i n i ne and sexua l i ty , the i ron i c and the d i abo l i c - i t is then that seduc t i on t akes on the mean i ng i t has for us : the poss i b l y accursed d i st rac t i on of appearances , the i r st rategi es, the i r p l ay) ; and f ina l l y i ts "po l i t i ca l " phase ( tak i ng up Ben j am i n ' s t erm, here somewha t amb i guous) . In thi s l ast phase the or i g i na l of seduct i on, i ts r i tua l and aesthe t i c form, d i sappears i n f avour of an a l l -out vent i l a t i on whe r eby seduc t i on becomes ' the i n f orma l f orm o f po l i t i cs , the sca l ed-down f ramework for an e l us i ve pol i t ics devo t ed to the end l ess reproduc t i on of a f orm w i thou t cont ent . (Th i s i nforma l f orm is i nseparab l e f rom i ts t echn i ca l na ture , wh i ch is that of ne tworks - just as the po l i t i ca l f orm of the ob j ec t is i nseparab l e f rom the t echn i ques of ser i a l reproduc t i on) . As w i th the ob j ec t , thi s "po l i t i ca l " f orm cor responds to seduc t i on ' s max i mum d i f fus i on and m i n i mum intens i ty. Is thi s to be seduc t i on ' s dest i ny? Or can we oppose thi s i nvo l ut i ona l fate, and l ay a wage r on seduc t i on as des t i ny? Produc t i on as dest i ny , or seduc t i on as dest i ny? Aga i ns t the deep st ruc tures and the i r t ruth, appearances and the i r dest i ny? Be that as i t may , we are l i v i ng today in non-sense , and i f s i mu l at i on is i ts d i senchant ed form, seduc t i on is i ts enchan t ed f orm . Ana t omy is not dest i ny , nor is po l i t i cs : seduc t i on is des t i ny. I t is wha t rema i ns of a mag i ca l , fatefu l wor l d , a r i sky, ver t i g i nous and predes t i ned wor l d; i t is wha t is qu i e t l y e f f ec t i ve i n a visi b l y e f f i c i ent and sto l i d wor l d .

THE POL I T I CAL DEST I NY OF SEDUCT I ON

181

The wor l d is naked , the k i ng is naked , and th i ngs are c l ear . Al l of produc t i on , and t ruth i tsel f , are d i rec t ed towards di sc l osure , the unbearab l e " t ruth" of sex be i ng but the mos t recent consequence . Luck i l y , at bot tom, there is noth i ng to i t . And seduc t i on_ st i l l ho l ds , in the f ace of t ruth, a mos t s i by l l i ne response , wh i ch is tha t " perhaps we w i sh to uncove r the t ruth because i t is so d i f f i cu l t to i mag i ne i t naked . "

CultureTexts General Editors

Arthur andMarilouise Kroker

SIEIDUC .TUGII~ Jean Baudrillard

translated by Brian Singer NOTHINGAN GREATER C BE THAN SEDUCTION EVEN THEORDER THAT ITSELF, NOT DESTROYS IT which resembles nothing which has preceded it . It turns many contemporary discourses inside out, even the most radical, and could very well challenge all moderntheory, even, indeed, the rules of theoretical production itself ." Liberation
. . . probably the most influential theorist ." New Statesman ". . . for Baudrillard, "Seduction is a theory-fiction

contemporary media analyst and social

is not seduction a newfigure of our freedom?" L'Express

Seduction is Jean Baudrillard's most provocative book. Here, under the sign of seduction all of moderntheory is put into question, feminism andpsychoanalysis in the order of things most of all . Seduction speaks of the sudden reversibility where discourse is absorbed into its ownsigns without a trace of meaning In . the sudden triumph of seduction in apocalyptic culture there is also signalled the end of history . his Jean Baudrillard is lecturer in Sociology, University of Nanterre . Among works translated into English are America, Simulations andSimulacra, Forget Foucault, In the Shadow the Silent Majorities, andFor a Critique of the Political Economy of of the Sign . Brian Singer teaches at GlendonCollege, York University, and is the author of Society, Theory andthe French Revolution (Macmillan/St . Martin's Press, 1986).

Cover : ManRay Femmeux longs cbeveux, 1929 VIS ART a Book and Cover Design : Marilouise Kroker
ISBN

Printed in Canada