I would like to speak in support of Stuart Elden's reference to the wisdom
of silence, and speak against the call for Derrida to fill a void somehow
left with Foucault's absence. In addition to the wisdom of taking time to
consider before speaking (not to mention waiting for a time when genuine
dialogue, including listening, might be possible... a time at which we might
not yet have arrived), I recall Foucault's reluctance to speak as a "public
intellectual" such that his speaking would be conferred with an
all-encompassing authority. The very call for Derrida to join Chomsky and
Fisk in making public declarations itself seems dangerous in just the way
Foucault resisted. I don't have the document here with me but I am thinking
of the contrast between Foucault and Chomsky's comments in their join
interview...
If Derrida may only speak because it is demanded by an audience that is
ready to give the weight of his seemingly singular "brilliance" then it
seems perhaps wise not to speak at all.
maureen
of silence, and speak against the call for Derrida to fill a void somehow
left with Foucault's absence. In addition to the wisdom of taking time to
consider before speaking (not to mention waiting for a time when genuine
dialogue, including listening, might be possible... a time at which we might
not yet have arrived), I recall Foucault's reluctance to speak as a "public
intellectual" such that his speaking would be conferred with an
all-encompassing authority. The very call for Derrida to join Chomsky and
Fisk in making public declarations itself seems dangerous in just the way
Foucault resisted. I don't have the document here with me but I am thinking
of the contrast between Foucault and Chomsky's comments in their join
interview...
If Derrida may only speak because it is demanded by an audience that is
ready to give the weight of his seemingly singular "brilliance" then it
seems perhaps wise not to speak at all.
maureen