Auden's O

Andrew W. Hass

Description

Finalist for the 2014 American Academy of Religion Book Award for Excellence in the Study of Religion, in the Constructive-Reflective category

In this groundbreaking, interdisciplinary history of ideas, Andrew W. Hass explores the ascendency of the concept of nothing into late modernity. He argues that the rise of the reality of nothing in religion, philosophy, and literature has taken place only against the decline of the concept of One: a shift from a sovereign understanding of the One (unity, universality) toward the "figure of the O"—a cipher figure that, as nonentity, is nevertheless determinant of other realities. The figuring of this O culminates in a proliferation of literary expressions of nothingness, void, and absence from 1940 to 1960, but by century's end, this movement has shifted from linear progression to mutation, whereby religion, theology, philosophy, literature, and other critical modes of thought, such as feminism, merge into a shared, circular activity. The writer W. H. Auden lends his name to this O, his long poetic work The Sea and the Mirror an exemplary manifestation of its implications. Hass examines this work, along with that of a host of writers, philosophers, and theologians, to trace the revolutionary hermeneutics and creative space of the O, and to provide the reasoning of why nothing is now such a powerful force in the imagination of the twenty-first century, and of how it might move us through and beyond our turbulent times.
Acknowledgments

Epicycle
"Nothing will come of nothing"
Falsetto
Auden's Circumlocution

0. Introduction

Giotto's O
The Binary
The Binary Code
The Binary Code Cracked
The Paradigm
The Paradigm Shift
The Paradigm Rift
The Modern
The Modern Crisis

Part One: From Religion and Philosophy to Artiface

1.  The Sovereignty of One

One's Punch Line
From the Many, One: The Hebrews
The Nature of One: The Presocratics
The Metaphysics of One: Plato, Aristotle
The Wholly, Plenary One: Plotinus
The Christian One: Paul
The Paradigms of One
One's Retreat
2. The Revolutions of O

The Romeo Effect
Zero and its History
Ground Zero
Mirror/Speculum/Eye
The Artificer's Circle
The Hermeneutical Circle
I The Author's O
Eternal Recurrence

Part Two: Poesis' Figure — The Making of O

3. Shakespeare's Eye of the Storm

Lear's Tragic O
Shakespeare's Specular O
Caliban's Negating O

4. Reflections of Auden

W. H. Auden
The Sea and the Mirror

5. The Empty Middle

Originating O (Blanchot)
Historicizing O
Alternate Os of the Middle
The O of Auden
The Erotics of O
Simone de Beauvoir

Part III: Looking After O

6. The Remaking of Philosophy and Religion

Philosophy and Religion: Inside the Perimeter
Negation's Triumvirate: Hegel, Nietzsche, Heidegger
Before the Postmodern: Sartre
Through the Postmodern: Derrida, Irigaray
Out of the Postmodern: Badiou
gOd—Postmortem Theology

7. The Future of O?

Auden's Brecht
The Parabolic Within
Pontius Pilate in the Creed
The Other Rogue
The Rogue Within

Another Epicycle
The Truest O is the Most Feigning
"Signifying Nothing"

Notes
Bibliography of Cited Works
Index

Sujets

• Philosophie
• Métaphysique
• Épistémologie
• Éthique et morale
• Philosophie moderne
• Philosophie moderne
• Ethique et morale
• Metaphysics
• William Shakespeare
• Theology
• Shakespeare
• Epistémologie
• Epistémologie
• Epistémologie

Informations

• Publié par: State University of New York Press
• Date de parution: 26 septembre 2013
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781438448336
• Langue: English

Extrait

AUDEN’S O
The Loss of One’s Sovereignty in the Making of Nothing
A NDREW W. H ASS
S TATE U NIVESITY OF N EW Y ORK P RESS
Published by S TATE U NIVERSITY OF N EW Y ORK P RESS , A LBANY
© 2013 State University of New York
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission. No part of this book may be stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means including electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission in writing of the publisher.
For information, contact State University of New York Press, Albany, NY www.sunypress.edu
Production, Laurie Searl Marketing, Anne M. Valentine
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Hass, Andrew. Auden’s O : the loss of one’s sovereignty in the making of nothing / Andrew W. Hass. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-4384-4831-2 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Nothing (Philosophy) in literature. 2. Hermeneutics—Philosophy. 3. Postmodernism. 4. Nothing (Philosophy) I. Title.
PN56.N69H37 2013 809 .9338—dc23
2012045469
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
EPICYCLE
“Nothing will come of nothing”
Falsetto
Auden’s Circumlocution
CHAPTER 0 INTRODUCTION
Giotto’s O
The Binary
The Binary Code
The Binary Code Cracked
The Paradigm
The Paradigm Shift
The Paradigm Rift
The Modern
The Modern Crisis
PART ONE FROM RELIGION AND PHILOSOPHY TO ARTIFICE
CHAPTER ONE THE SOVEREIGNTY OF ONE
One’s Punch Line
From the Many, One: The Hebrews
The Nature of One: The Presocratics
The Metaphysics of One: Plato, Aristotle
The Wholly, Plenary One: Plotinus
The Christian One: Paul
The Paradigms of One
One’s Retreat
CHAPTER TWO THE REVOLUTIONS OF O
The Romeo Effect
Zero and its History
Ground Zero
Mirror/Speculum/Eye
The Artificer’s Circle
The Hermeneutical Circle
I The Author’s O
Eternal Recurrence
PART TWO POESIS’ FIGURE—THE MAKING OF O
CHAPTER THREE SHAKESPEARE’S EYE OF THE STORM
Lear’s Tragic O
Shakespeare’s Specular O
Caliban’s Negating O
CHAPTER FOUR REFLECTIONS OF AUDEN
W. H. Auden
The Sea and the Mirror
CHAPTER FIVE THE EMPTY MIDDLE
Originating O (Blanchot)
Historicizing O
Alternate Os of the Middle
The O of Auden
The Erotics of O
Simone de Beauvoir
PART III LOOKING AFTER O
CHAPTER SIX THE REMAKING OF PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION
Philosophy and Religion: Inside the Perimeter
Negation’s Triumvirate: Hegel, Nietzsche, Heidegger
Before the Postmodern: Sartre
Through the Postmodern: Derrida, Irigaray
Out of the Postmodern: Badiou
gOd—Postmortem Theology
CHAPTER SEVEN THE FUTURE OF O?
Auden’s Brecht
The Parabolic Within
Pontius Pilate in the Creed
The Other Rogue
The Rogue Within
ANOTHER EPICYCLE
The Truest O is the Most Feigning
“Signifying Nothing”
NOTES
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF CITED WORKS
INDEX
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

A book of this ambition and breadth does not come together—if it comes together at all—without the thoughts, input, and support of a great number of people. Many names are now lost to the process of thinking on so many different levels and over such a length of time. But some continue to stand out, with feedback that had direct impact on the content of the text: Tom Altizer, Pamela Sue Anderson, Andrew Cutrofello, Bettina Bergo, Ward Blanton, Val Cunningham, David Jasper, Werner Jeanrond, David Klemm, Ben Morgan, Dan Price, Robert Sherwood, and Heather Walton. Of course the more formative influence of these and others could never be captured, though my gratitude for such influence is as great if not greater. I am also deeply indebted to the anonymous reviewers of this manuscript, who drew my attention to the pockmarks and seams still present in the argument of the final draft. I also owe much thanks to the tremendous support of my colleagues at the University of Stirling, especially those in Critical Religion—Tim Fitzgerald, Alison Jasper, Michael Marten, Richard Roberts—who keep the inspiration for such interdisciplinary interrogations, amid the intensities of daily academic life, very much alive. But I owe my greatest gratitude to the love and support of my partner, Jennifer Davidson, whose indefatigable belief, even during the most arduous of times, and when our own children entered our lives, sustained me beyond my own belief, and in ways I cannot say. Thank you.
Finally, I am grateful for the permission granted to use the following previously published material:
“The Sea and the Mirror,” copyright 1944 and renewed 1972 by W.H. Auden, “One Circumlocution,” copyright © 1976 by Edward Mendelson, William Meredith and Monroe K. Spears, Executors of the Estate of W.H. Auden., from COLLECTED POEMS OF W. H. AUDEN by W.H. Auden. Used by permission of Random House, Inc. Any third party use of this material, outside of this publication, is prohibited. Interested parties must apply directly to Random House, Inc. for permission.
“On circumlocution” and “The Sea and the Mirror.” Copyright © 1947 and 1951 by W.H. Auden, renewed. Reprinted by permission of Curtis Brown, Ltd.
Excerpts from Endgame , English translation copyright © 1957 by the Estate of Samuel Beckett. Used by permission of Grove/Atlantic, Inc. and of Faber and Faber Ltd.
Excerpts from “Texts for Nothing”, copyright © 1995 by the Estate of Samuel Beckett. Used by permission of Grove/Atlantic, Inc. and of Faber and Faber Ltd.
Excerpts from The Unnamable , English translation copyright © 1958 by the Estate of Samuel Beckett. Used by permission of Grove/Atlantic, Inc. and of Faber and Faber Ltd.
EPICYCLE

“NOTHING WILL COME OF NOTHING”
Parmenides, the Eleatic philosopher predating Socrates, handed this famous circularity to the West. From nothing comes nothing. Or as Parmenides said more tautologically, nothing is not. This seems patently clear, at least in terms of basic logic. But the idea keeps returning, keeps haunting us, as if there remains something unresolved in it, something more than pure tautology. Philosophers and theologians, ever since Parmenides, have continued to grapple with it, whether Aristotle in his Physics , or the Scholastics in its Latin form ( nihil ex nihil fit ), or Leibniz’s altered version, “Nothing is without reason”( nihil est sine ratione ). Most people today, however, know the saying from a source other than philosophy: from the injudicious Lear, who says to his youngest and favored daughter Cordelia in the opening scene of Shakespeare’s tragedy: “Nothing will come of nothing. Speak again.” In response to her father’s solicitations, Cordelia has said nothing. Literally, “Nothing.” “Nothing?,” Lear asks dumbfoundedly. “Nothing.” But nothing can possibly come from nothing, says Lear, summoning the many great minds before him. Or, might Lear be overlooking something?
Aristotle himself wondered this, and agreed with the statement only after some qualification. Few remember the philosopher’s qualifications. But many remember the plight of Lear. For Lear is himself reduced to nothing. And only then does he see that Cordelia’s “nothing” was in fact the fullest, the most meaningful response of all the daughters. According to the playwright, then, something might indeed come of nothing. Or nothing is a place where things of a deep nature might come to be known.
By tending to concepts, the philosopher and theologian focus on the substantive nature of the subject and its predicate, in this case “nothing.” By attending to drama, the playwright focuses on the action of the verb, “will come.” Substantively, nothing is … nothing. Actively, something will come , even if it is nothing. Parmenides says nothing is not possible, so let us not speak about it. Shakespeare says nothing will come, even from nothing, so let us speak again. And so the “nothing” of Cordelia speaks again and again throughout the play, until it ripens in its nothing as “something.” This coming to ripeness is what the following pages will explore.
The primary question in this movement, this ripening, is about sovereignty. Who has the better claim, the higher authority, on nothing? Conceptually, and traditionally, it has been the philosopher/theologian. And he—it has almost exclusively been a he —has exercised that claim and authority by trying to rid us of nothing. The poet, on the other hand, has always seen the profound irony in that gesture: if nothing is truly nothing, there is nothing to rid. So let it be, and make nothing of it. But how, puzzles the philosopher, can you make nothing be ? By making nothing of nothing, responds the poet. But how, asks the theologian, can you make nothing, and make it from nothing, without encroaching upon the divine office ( creatio ex nihilo )? By letting go of sovereignty, says the poet. And both philosopher and theologian here have the poet banished.
Let us tell a story of a banished king. This king makes a poor initial choice in dividing up his kingdom between two ingratiating children. His blatant folly lies in inviting the ingratiation as a measure and pageantry of his reward. A third child says nothing. The first two, over the course of time, strip their father of his sovereignty. The third maintains her love and loyalty, but the king cannot see this until he is stripped down to the barest of beings, in a nakedness that is at once physical, mental, psychological, existential, spiritual. By then it is too late—events have overtaken the possibility of regaining any of his loss, and he dies with nothing, neither his beloved third child, nor his other two children, nor his restored kingdom and sovereignty. But something arises from this nothing: the recognition, the tragic recognition, that his third child said volumes in her nothing. That her nothing bore love, bore devotion, bore the honor due a sovereign. The paradox is