Return experience

If anxiety, a rare phenomenon, puts everyone in front of the possibility of being, the anxiety of thinking rather makes him experience the impossible: she makes him sink into the abyss of a requirement which is no longer clean to him. Risk impropriety, self -granting, think about the limit of what you can and until anxiety ; This is the requirement, and that is the guideline of Evelyne Grossman’s work. The irreducibility of the reworked articles which compose it serves the subject: anxiety is communicated by crossing a multiplicity of singular, all abyssal experiences, and that there is no question of overhanging by a thought liberated from anxiety: cruel, marked and striking experiences, Artaud, Battle, Blanchot, Lacan, Levinas, Beckett, Derrida … Writing as we touch the extreme. The greatest interest of Evelyne Grossman’s attempt is then to deliver us above all a reading experience, which we do not know if it is ours, his own, that of the authors in both directions of the genitive, not because it is universal, but because the anxiety of thinking wins by contagion, contagion of rarity.

Destructive passion, passion for literature

Insisting as a battle on the expressive character of anxiety, the author makes it an essential mode of literary subjectivity. The anxiety responds, or has already responded, to the most current subjectivism, accurately defined as an ambiguous trend to “ write as a person », On his blog for example. Because intimacy cannot escape the exteriority of writing, the dislocation of the self in contact from outside. So begins the experience, the “ self -exit “Said the author, it being understood that the idealistic possibility of a return to oneself has become during the XX^e century the very impossibility: the other, we cannot come back, and writing is to expect this dissociation of the intimate that a plurality of others shares. Thus the same negative passion is communicated, leading to a destruction of the subjective foundations of writing. There is a risk of extending this communication too much: certainly, in Deleuze, the individual who thinks is exasperated by the force of his thought ; But this excess is not negative and destructive. As for the simple mention of a “ strength A destructive, she is faithful to Artaud or Battle, but meets in the work itself the resistance of Blanchot, Levinas, Derrida. But precisely, since in these authors the writing is rather the trace of the vulnerability and the empowerment of the subject, the resistance to any sovereign affirmation, the work finds its way as soon as it underlines a differential of forces, a relationship between the force and the form which escapes the mythical affirmation of an original power. And this is why it offers such a relevant study of the formal effects of destructive passion, the first of which is the insistence of the same prefix in deconstruction, idleness, dedication or decreation.

The styles of anxiety

It is thus a stylistic and not a rhetoric of the out-of-me that Évelyne Grossman offers us, very precise in the articulation of writing and voice: style is never inspired by a mysterious voice, but it is rather the expiration of a word, the aerial form (that is to say all the same material) of anxiety. This is why the writing is always punctuated by the pronounced exteriorization of an excess of breath: the cry and the suffocation live the theater of Artaud, the murmur of empty voice, dead or expelled, that of Beckett ; The impossibility of appropriating the object of desire, the thing, becomes haulage (or breastfeeding) in Lacan, the radical otherness of being-responsible is understood as “ Beyond the lung “In Levinas, thanks to a poetics of the interruption which defeats the syntax for the benefit of the terms” exceptional “(One – God). An article recalls that Derrida condemned only the idea of ​​a voice without writing, and thus opens the possibility of studying the orality of his thought: the Algerian accent of the philosopher is the essential spectrum of a corpus which endeavors to defeat, from the inside and the outside, the community belongings ; As for the detailed indecision of his speech, they are all archived traces of a crisis during which Derrida thought they could write everything, that is to say, they could not write anything. The breath of anxiety is not only understood in the privilege of the word on syntax, but also in the syntax of words: when at Beckett, gaps are widening around And In words, when, in Blanchot, the word rat devours the word devouring from the inside, it is that each term must open the abyss which inclines the experience towards the impossible to live, swarming with life to give body to death, or simply rest on the unstable.

Out of project, or ethics

Would there be a way out of the anxiety of thinking ? The work of course takes into account the battle response: the outcome is to fall out of any project, it is the anxiety reversed in ecstasy, laughing – this joyful suffocation before the inanity of being. But the ambiguity in Bataille of a torture which in excess of suffering takes the figure of enjoyment, or a heartbreak leaving, in itself, a sacrificable part, is not accepted here as such. The proof is that enjoyment is here (only) that of writing. It is not a bloody injury that opens, but as in Beckett, a mouth with a smile preferably ; Or more precisely a neutral space, which, in the latter as in Derrida, differs happiness, and makes it end up believing it. We think of a sentence from Derrida, according to which the Want-writing would like to be the only way out of affection, even if there is no way out. Obviously, there is no question of saying that writing supples to sacrifice ! Her experience leads to her well with a danger of annihilation, a loss, a madness that communicates from Artaud to other authors. Only, if madness is not more an outcome, it is good, as the beautiful article on Levinas shows, the glow of an ethics: self-tearing is done for another, and thus bears beyond being that reason or politics reserve.

The anxiety of thinking therefore culminates in this “ other than being crazy », Nice undecidable formula, located at the exact limit between reason and madness. And finally, the ethics of writing consists in delivering without reservation to the other, to the reader ; It is in reading that anxiety becomes joy, that responsibility is lighter without moving away, joy, lightness, that the title conceals and that the work communicates.