“Wait a Minute”: Reflections on [the] Pause Bernd Herzogenrath (bio) In this short essay, I would like to situate Jane Bennett’s take on the virtue of enacting a deliberate ‘pause’ in an assemblage of and encounter with other ideas and concepts, and use it as a cue for addressing the question of how this may relate to recent literary debates about critique and its possible alternatives. In 2004, Bruno Latour published a now-canonical essay on the state of criticism, in which he poses the rhetorical question of whether criticism has “run out of steam” (“Why Has Critique” 225). Latour paints a bleak picture of a practice of criticism couched in military terms (with “war,” “generals,” “projectiles,” “smart bombs,” “young recruits, young cadets”). This situation forces participants to take sides: between those who know and those who are fooled, between appearance and reality, between surface and depth, with the critic seeing himself or herself occupying the default position on the ‘right side’ of the trenches.1 If critique, as Latour suggests, is all about ‘letting off steam,’ then this will come to a natural, entropic end—steam machines don’t run forever, not without external energy. Or, to couch it in Jane Bennett’s terms—no efflux without influx, and, more important: not without the and in-between. “The ‘and’ of influx-and-efflux is immensely important: it marks the hover-time of transformation” (x). In the (often) either/or of critique, the and is conspicuously missing—and it is in the pause, I argue, where the and has a chance to enter. [End Page 1031] Bennett’s book is, on the face of it, (also) a book about Whitman, and in Whitman, the and sometimes seems to be an end in itself: both ‘literally’ and ‘conceptually’ (in his many enumerations), “and” is the building block of Whitman’s lists, the ‘ground-word’ of his paratactic discourse and politics. Here, the ‘I’ connects and is connected to everything in the universe: to the spread of one’s own body, and to the drift of conversation, and to the conduit of water and electricity, and to other people, and to the contents of a book, and to dung beetles, and to the stars and nebulae. The Whitmanian ‘I contain multitudes’ might thus be more than just a metaphorical figure of speech, referring to discursive contradictions—see Ed Yong’s book of the same name, on the life of microbes. The “and” is also the building block of what Gilles Deleuze has called an “assemblage” (in French: agencement), a rhizomatic and fragmentary multiplicity that never adds up to ‘One.’ It is by no means clear how the term “agencement” can be translated most accurately into English. Deleuze and Guattari coined this term in the late 1970s as an alternative to their often misunderstood concept of the machine. While linguistically oriented translations rendered it as “concatenation of enunciations,” it gradually became clear that it was actually about the complex linkages between sign and matter, technology and body, human and animal, etc. In his Dialogues with Claire Parnet, Deleuze gives us a shorthand of this idea: “Substitute the AND for IS” (Deleuze and Parnet 57)—a short motto which you could print on a T-shirt. In French, “est” (3rd person singular of “être,” “to be”) and “et” (in English “and”) are homophones. But this pun encapsulates what is at stake: to undermine or even substitute a transcendental logic of being with a processual logic of becoming: and … and … and … Relations have to be produced, forged—identity, of the subject and of a collectivity, is thus always only a fragmentary effect of the perpetual flux of the given. For Deleuze, the assemblage (as a result of the and … and …) is the basic ‘unit’ of the social, the “minimum real” (Deleuze and Parnet 51). Collective assemblages of enunciation are connected to a “machinic assemblage of bodies, of actions and passions; an intermingling of bodies reacting to one another” (Deleuze and Guattari, Thousand Plateaus 88). It is the complex interplay of these two segments, the dynamic conjunctions of discourse and physics, that makes up the social field, that in fact ‘produces’ semi-stable subjects...
Read full abstract