Writing History Intimately: The House of Jacob, the Quest for Home, and the Other Language

M. Margaroni
{"title":"Writing History Intimately: The House of Jacob, the Quest for Home, and the Other Language","authors":"M. Margaroni","doi":"10.1353/SLI.2014.0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION If one were to attempt an initial definition of the ontology of our age, one might do worse than to characterize it in terms of a war against inhabitancy. --Robert P. Marzec 314 The focus of this essay is Sylvie Courtine-Denamy's The House of Jacob which received the Alberto Benveniste Prize for Sephardi Literature in 2002. This is an autobiographical journey into the turbulent history of Sephardic Jewry from fourteenth-century Spain to the death camps. As Julia Kristeva suggests in her foreword to the book, what is at stake in Courtine-Denamy's herstory of an alternative Jewish tradition (a tradition that can be interpreted as critical to the one currently promoted in Israel) is \"an intimacy that reinvigorates\" (x). The force of this intimacy, according to Kristeva, lies not so much in the autobiographical sources of Courtine-Denamy's account but in her use of a language which (in contrast to \"Hebrew, the sacred language\") draws on sensory experience and \"the universe of kinship\" (xv, xiii). More importantly for my intervention here, this is the language of a landless people whose distinct fate and history exemplify what Robert Marzec has aptly called \"the war against inhabitancy\" (314). Inhabitancy, as Marzec defines it, refers to \"an obligation between humankind and the land, between human subjects as born in and through a relation to an ecosystem\" (315). According to Marzec, what we are currently experiencing in the face of \"the 'abject' of dislocated inhabitants\" is the latest stage of the erasure of inhabitancy as a distinct form of human subjectivity (310). Marzec traces this erasure back to the enclosure movement in England and imperial territorializing politics, arguing that the \"specter\" of this systematic severing of the bonds between the human animal and its habitat still \"haunts all neoimperial orders of the late twentieth and early twenty-first century world\" (314, 315). What I find valuable in Marzec's reclamation of the real of an interconnected land is that it opens up a space within which to rethink the human possibility of dwelling and dwelling-with against the \"blood-and-soil\" politics that has historically enframed this possibility and beyond the uncritical celebrations of \"a free-floating human subjectivity,\" a figure much cathected by certain forms of postmodern cosmopolitanism (Marzec 321). As I will go on to demonstrate, Courtine-Denamy's The House of Jacob makes an important contribution to the cultivation of a contagious, hospitable and guilt-free imaginary that does justice to the human need to connect through and across a shared (home)land. What is more, I will suggest, this imaginary functions as a form of resistance in the face of the distinct spatial pathologies that are part of the legacy of the war on inhabitancy: namely, territorial occupation, land dispossession, exile, displacement, migration, the nationalist politics of \"blood-and-soil,\" but also the systematic abjection of the national \"thing.\" In what follows, I intend to trace this imaginary as it unfolds in Courtine-Denamy's sensory and affect-based language. Kristeva's foreword to the book (significantly written in the form of a letter addressed to the author) will serve as the main intertext in light of which I will explore the intimate national and language politics of The House of Jacob. Given my concern with what for Kristeva is a central idea in the book (that is, \"language as one's only homeland\" [\"Foreword\" xi]), my intention here is to attend closely to the possibilities opened up by this idea in Courtine-Denamy's narrative. At the same time, I want to reflect on Kristeva's cosmopolitan reinvestment of this idea, in other words, her (subtly yet clearly) corrective reiteration of Courtine-Denamy's suggestion; to wit, \"Languages as One's Only Homeland,\" which she uses as the subtitle of her foreword (ix, emphasis added). Finally, I propose to approach this reinvestment as the site of a productive (though by no means nonconflictual) dialogue between Kristeva and Jacques Derrida, especially his Monolingualism of the Other Or the Prosthesis of Origin. …","PeriodicalId":390916,"journal":{"name":"Studies in the Literary Imagination","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in the Literary Imagination","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/SLI.2014.0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

INTRODUCTION If one were to attempt an initial definition of the ontology of our age, one might do worse than to characterize it in terms of a war against inhabitancy. --Robert P. Marzec 314 The focus of this essay is Sylvie Courtine-Denamy's The House of Jacob which received the Alberto Benveniste Prize for Sephardi Literature in 2002. This is an autobiographical journey into the turbulent history of Sephardic Jewry from fourteenth-century Spain to the death camps. As Julia Kristeva suggests in her foreword to the book, what is at stake in Courtine-Denamy's herstory of an alternative Jewish tradition (a tradition that can be interpreted as critical to the one currently promoted in Israel) is "an intimacy that reinvigorates" (x). The force of this intimacy, according to Kristeva, lies not so much in the autobiographical sources of Courtine-Denamy's account but in her use of a language which (in contrast to "Hebrew, the sacred language") draws on sensory experience and "the universe of kinship" (xv, xiii). More importantly for my intervention here, this is the language of a landless people whose distinct fate and history exemplify what Robert Marzec has aptly called "the war against inhabitancy" (314). Inhabitancy, as Marzec defines it, refers to "an obligation between humankind and the land, between human subjects as born in and through a relation to an ecosystem" (315). According to Marzec, what we are currently experiencing in the face of "the 'abject' of dislocated inhabitants" is the latest stage of the erasure of inhabitancy as a distinct form of human subjectivity (310). Marzec traces this erasure back to the enclosure movement in England and imperial territorializing politics, arguing that the "specter" of this systematic severing of the bonds between the human animal and its habitat still "haunts all neoimperial orders of the late twentieth and early twenty-first century world" (314, 315). What I find valuable in Marzec's reclamation of the real of an interconnected land is that it opens up a space within which to rethink the human possibility of dwelling and dwelling-with against the "blood-and-soil" politics that has historically enframed this possibility and beyond the uncritical celebrations of "a free-floating human subjectivity," a figure much cathected by certain forms of postmodern cosmopolitanism (Marzec 321). As I will go on to demonstrate, Courtine-Denamy's The House of Jacob makes an important contribution to the cultivation of a contagious, hospitable and guilt-free imaginary that does justice to the human need to connect through and across a shared (home)land. What is more, I will suggest, this imaginary functions as a form of resistance in the face of the distinct spatial pathologies that are part of the legacy of the war on inhabitancy: namely, territorial occupation, land dispossession, exile, displacement, migration, the nationalist politics of "blood-and-soil," but also the systematic abjection of the national "thing." In what follows, I intend to trace this imaginary as it unfolds in Courtine-Denamy's sensory and affect-based language. Kristeva's foreword to the book (significantly written in the form of a letter addressed to the author) will serve as the main intertext in light of which I will explore the intimate national and language politics of The House of Jacob. Given my concern with what for Kristeva is a central idea in the book (that is, "language as one's only homeland" ["Foreword" xi]), my intention here is to attend closely to the possibilities opened up by this idea in Courtine-Denamy's narrative. At the same time, I want to reflect on Kristeva's cosmopolitan reinvestment of this idea, in other words, her (subtly yet clearly) corrective reiteration of Courtine-Denamy's suggestion; to wit, "Languages as One's Only Homeland," which she uses as the subtitle of her foreword (ix, emphasis added). Finally, I propose to approach this reinvestment as the site of a productive (though by no means nonconflictual) dialogue between Kristeva and Jacques Derrida, especially his Monolingualism of the Other Or the Prosthesis of Origin. …
亲密地书写历史:雅各之家,对家园的追求,以及其他语言
如果一个人试图对我们这个时代的本体论进行一个初步的定义,他可能会比用一场反对居住的战争来描述它更糟糕。这篇文章的重点是西尔维·库尔蒂纳-德纳米的《雅各之家》,这本书在2002年获得了阿尔贝托·本文尼斯特西班牙文学奖。这是一段进入西班牙系犹太人动荡历史的自传式旅程,从14世纪的西班牙到死亡集中营。茱莉亚Kristeva表明在书的前言中,什么是利害攸关的Courtine-Denamy历史的另一种犹太传统(一个传统,可以解释为关键的目前在以色列提升)是一个表扬校友的“亲密”(x)。这亲密的力量,根据Kristeva,与其说在于自传Courtine-Denamy来源的账户但她使用的语言(与“希伯来语,神圣的语言”)借鉴了感官经验和“亲属关系的宇宙”(xv, xiii)。更重要的是,对于我在这里的干预,这是一个无地人民的语言,其独特的命运和历史例证了罗伯特·马泽克(Robert Marzec)恰如其分地称之为“反对居住的战争”(314)。正如马泽克所定义的那样,居住是指“人类与土地之间的一种义务,是人类主体之间的一种义务,这种义务是通过与生态系统的关系而产生的”(315)。根据Marzec的说法,我们目前在面对“流离失所的居民的‘卑贱’”时所经历的是作为人类主体性的一种独特形式的居住权被抹去的最新阶段(310)。Marzec将这种抹除追溯到英国的圈地运动和帝国的领土化政治,认为这种系统地切断人类动物与其栖息地之间联系的“幽灵”仍然“困扰着20世纪末和21世纪初世界的所有新帝国主义秩序”(314,315)。我发现,在马泽克对相互联系的土地的真实的复垦中,有价值的是,它开辟了一个空间,在这个空间里,我们重新思考人类居住和居住的可能性——反对历史上框定这种可能性的“血与土”政治,超越对“自由漂浮的人类主体性”的不加批判的庆祝,这是一个被某些形式的后现代世界主义所吸收的形象(马泽克321)。正如我将继续证明的那样,Courtine-Denamy的《雅各之家》对培养一种具有传染性、热情好客和无罪恶感的想象做出了重要贡献,这种想象公正地满足了人类通过共享(家园)土地相互联系的需求。更重要的是,我认为,这种想象的功能是作为一种抵抗形式,面对不同的空间病态,这些病态是居住战争遗产的一部分:即领土占领,土地剥夺,流亡,流离失所,移民,“血与土”的民族主义政治,以及对国家“事物”的系统鄙视。在接下来的内容中,我打算在Courtine-Denamy的感官和情感语言中追踪这种想象。Kristeva的前言(很明显是以写给作者的一封信的形式写的)将作为主要的互文,在此基础上,我将探讨《雅各之家》中亲密的民族和语言政治。鉴于我对Kristeva这本书的中心思想(即“语言是一个人唯一的家园”)的关注,我在这里的目的是密切关注courtina - denamy的叙述中这一思想所带来的可能性。与此同时,我想反思Kristeva对这个想法的世界性再投资,换句话说,她(微妙而清晰地)纠正了Courtine-Denamy的建议;也就是,“语言是一个人唯一的家园”,她用它作为前言的副标题(九,强调)。最后,我建议将这种再投资作为克里斯蒂娃和雅克·德里达之间富有成效的(尽管绝不是无冲突的)对话的场所,特别是他的“他者的单语主义”或“起源的假体”。...
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信