Politics of the Person as the Politics of Being by David Walsh (review)

Abstract

Review Article Politics of the Person as the Politics of Being, David Walsh (Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 2016). 299 pages. The cover of David Walsh’s latest book carries a reproduction of a detail of a painting by the Irish artist Louis le Brocquy. From an all-white background, a figure emerges. Seen at a distance the image is definitely of a face, looking straight out at the viewer, one side partly in shadow, with penetrating eyes, furrowed brow, nose, lips and chin. But seen close-up the figure disintegrates into blotches of colour, with strokes of the brush leaving a chaotic mishmash of lines and shapes. The painting, dated 1987, is entitled Image of Self. Why not Self-Portrait, the viewer wonders. It is that tension between the two ideas, self-portrait, and image of self, which inspires the reflection on the reality of person at the heart of this book. Self-portrait might lead one to believe that the self can be somehow captured and depicted in a painting. On the other hand, image of self clearly signals that this is just one image of a reality, which might be represented more or less well in other images, but cannot possibly be captured or exhaustively depicted in any one, or indeed in all of them. The self exceeds all attempts to contain it. This too is the message of the le Brocquy painting. Only at a distance does it appear to be a representation of something, of a face, belonging to a person, possibly the artist. But the closer that one comes to the painting, the more the image disintegrates and the depiction is seen to be not of a clear and distinct identity, but of a complexity of signs, each of which amounts to no more than a hint. What is depicted here? Is it confusion? Perhaps torrents of emotion, thoughts or doubts? Suffice it to say that it is mysterious. The painting gives us an image of the self as mystery, always transcending the grasp of the viewer. The self is always more than what we can say of it. In his introduction of the central concept of ‘practice’ in his renowned study, After Virtue, Alasdair MacIntyre uses the example of portraiture to explain what he means.1 The history of portraiture exemplifies an extended conversation, in which the practitioners strive both to take on board what has been achieved by those gone before and to extend the capacity of the genre to communicate what it is that the artist perceives in the person represented. Simon Schama’s book Rembrandt’s Eyes explores this dynamism of discovery and extension in the life work of one great artist, situating it in the Review Article Studies • volume 106 • number 421 103 context of the conversation with other greats such as Peter Paul Rubens.2 But, above all, Rembrandt was continually struggling with his own performance, and his long series of self-portraits shows this fascination with the impossible challenge to capture in the picture the person depicted. David Walsh, a native of Dublin, is Professor of Politics at the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. He is author of many fine books, of which this latest is something of a capstone. A comparison with Alasdair MacIntyre is helpful in situating this work. There are many similarities between the two authors, the Irishman and the Scotsman. As Walsh’s book is a culmination of several previous studies, so also MacIntyre is responsible for a series of books and publications integrated around a central concern. One might expect considerable agreement between their works, since both espouse a Catholic world-view and do not hesitate to own their faith commitment in their philosophical writings. Yet the reader quickly discerns a difference of tone. MacIntyre offers a persuasive analysis of the chaotic state of contemporary moral theory, which he explains in terms of the loss of a vision of the human telos, the purpose of human life. The elements of moral language in the principles, norms, goods and virtues lead to competing theories as exemplified in the standard polarisation of deontological and consequentialist or utilitarian theories. He explains...