On Revolutionary Suicide

IF 0.2 4区 文学 0 LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM
David Marriott
{"title":"On Revolutionary Suicide","authors":"David Marriott","doi":"10.1353/dia.2021.0036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This essay takes up Huey Newton’s notion of revolutionary suicide. Against the objection that black suicide is merely reactive, Newton proposes that revolutionary suicide follows other principles and demonstrations. Revolutionary suicide is resistant but in ways that does not make it always possible to distinguish between resistance and reaction—in fact, Newton argues that black revolutionary suicide should be considered a life-affirmation, and that this affirmation reveals a will to power in a decidedly Nietzschean sense. This means—if we read suicide as resistant in its reactions—that black affirmation cannot be read on the order of a sovereign decision (as a sacrificial relation to life and death); nor as will, representation, or as a refusal which always relates to an end (the end of oppression, or injustice). This is why, strictly speaking, Newton’s reading of revolutionary suicide is not to be confused with a classical notion of sovereignty (whether that of Bataille or Mbembe), nor with the political definition of self-murder as resistance (by Spivak, or Puar). At the end of this essay, the notion of revolutionary suicide is shown to be something else altogether. That is to say, revolutionary suicide serves not only to realize the form of the one and the multiple (according to a non-messianic and non-sacrificial economy), but also puts into question the presumed inescapable relation between blackness and state murder (due to the relentless nature of necropower and anti-blackness).","PeriodicalId":46840,"journal":{"name":"DIACRITICS-A REVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY CRITICISM","volume":"49 1","pages":"101 - 133"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DIACRITICS-A REVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY CRITICISM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/dia.2021.0036","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract:This essay takes up Huey Newton’s notion of revolutionary suicide. Against the objection that black suicide is merely reactive, Newton proposes that revolutionary suicide follows other principles and demonstrations. Revolutionary suicide is resistant but in ways that does not make it always possible to distinguish between resistance and reaction—in fact, Newton argues that black revolutionary suicide should be considered a life-affirmation, and that this affirmation reveals a will to power in a decidedly Nietzschean sense. This means—if we read suicide as resistant in its reactions—that black affirmation cannot be read on the order of a sovereign decision (as a sacrificial relation to life and death); nor as will, representation, or as a refusal which always relates to an end (the end of oppression, or injustice). This is why, strictly speaking, Newton’s reading of revolutionary suicide is not to be confused with a classical notion of sovereignty (whether that of Bataille or Mbembe), nor with the political definition of self-murder as resistance (by Spivak, or Puar). At the end of this essay, the notion of revolutionary suicide is shown to be something else altogether. That is to say, revolutionary suicide serves not only to realize the form of the one and the multiple (according to a non-messianic and non-sacrificial economy), but also puts into question the presumed inescapable relation between blackness and state murder (due to the relentless nature of necropower and anti-blackness).
论革命自杀
摘要:本文论述了休伊·牛顿的革命自杀观。反对黑人自杀仅仅是反应性的反对意见,牛顿提出革命自杀遵循其他原则和论证。革命自杀是有抵抗力的,但并不总是能够区分抵抗和反应——事实上,牛顿认为黑人革命自杀应该被视为对生命的肯定,这种肯定揭示了尼采意义上的权力意志。这意味着——如果我们把自杀解读为其反应具有抵抗力——黑人的肯定不能按照主权决定的顺序解读(作为与生和死的牺牲关系);也不是意志、代表或拒绝,这总是与目的有关(压迫或不公正的结束)。这就是为什么,严格来说,牛顿对革命自杀的解读不应与经典的主权概念(无论是巴塔耶还是姆本贝的主权概念)相混淆,也不应与将自我谋杀定义为抵抗的政治定义(斯皮瓦克或普阿的)相混淆。在这篇文章的最后,革命自杀的概念被证明是另一回事。也就是说,革命自杀不仅有助于实现一和多的形式(根据非救世主和非牺牲的经济),而且也使黑人和国家谋杀之间假定的不可避免的关系受到质疑(由于尸权和反黑人的无情性质)。
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
DIACRITICS-A REVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY CRITICISM
DIACRITICS-A REVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY CRITICISM LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: For over thirty years, diacritics has been an exceptional and influential forum for scholars writing on the problems of literary criticism. Each issue features articles in which contributors compare and analyze books on particular theoretical works and develop their own positions on the theses, methods, and theoretical implications of those works.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信