{"title":"殖民地的回忆,殖民地的遗迹:本雅明“暴力批判”一百周年的现实论坛,第二部分","authors":"Aggie Hirst, Tom Houseman, Vinícius Armele","doi":"10.1590/s0102-8529.20234501e20200078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Walter Benjamin published his influential essay ‘Critique of Violence’/‘Zur Kritik der Gewalt’ in 1921, and the work has troubled and provoked thinkers across disciplines for over a century now. This Forum gathers a group of scholars in philosophy, political science, international relations and legal studies to reflect on the actuality of Benjamin’s essay for contemporary critical theory. In Part II of the Forum, Aggie Hirst, Tom Houseman, and Vinícius Armele draw on Benjamin to analyse what remains of European colonialism. Hirst and Houseman interrogate the extent to which Walter Benjamin’s notion of divine violence may be useful in the service of decolonial struggle. Insofar as it is antithetical to the colonial order – which is inaugurated and reproduced by the law making and law preserving functions of mythic violence – divine violence appears to open a space for conceptualising a far-reaching challenge to the violence encrypted in that order that is ‘lethal without spilling blood’. Because the exercise of such ‘power over all life’ is exercised ‘for the sake of living,’ Benjamin argues, its accompanying sacrifices are acceptable. Drawing on postcolonial and decolonial theory, Hirst and Houseman offer a critique of the ‘God’s-eye view’ inherent to any claim to divine violence. Benjamin’s text can generate powerful insights into the nature and limits of decolonial struggles, but it ultimately fails in providing an alternative to the mythic violence it criticises, by reproducing – at the heart of the emancipatory concept of divine violence – a problematic impersonation of a divine authorial voice that is already a trope of coloniality. Armele’s reflection seeks to recover ancient tragedy’s role of reluctance toward the previously unquestionable power of the violence of mythical destiny. Resume Benjamin’s contributions on (1) melancholy and Romanticism, which represents the revolt of repressed, channelled and deformed subjectivity and affectivity, and (2) the criticism of the violence that is established in the manifestation of its ethical relations between law [Recht] and justice [Gerechtigkeit], Armele reveals the intertwining of the experience of historical time and the orientation of current political struggles. Inspired by Benjamin, he examines the action of the Black Lives Matters movement in Bristol, UK, which toppled a statue of the slave trader Edward Colston, and threw it in the city’s harbour, reopening a historical wound of colonialism and national memory.","PeriodicalId":30003,"journal":{"name":"Contexto Internacional","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Colonial Reminiscences, Colonial Remains: Forum on the Actuality of Benjamin’s ‘Critique of Violence’ at Its Centenary, Part II\",\"authors\":\"Aggie Hirst, Tom Houseman, Vinícius Armele\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/s0102-8529.20234501e20200078\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Walter Benjamin published his influential essay ‘Critique of Violence’/‘Zur Kritik der Gewalt’ in 1921, and the work has troubled and provoked thinkers across disciplines for over a century now. This Forum gathers a group of scholars in philosophy, political science, international relations and legal studies to reflect on the actuality of Benjamin’s essay for contemporary critical theory. In Part II of the Forum, Aggie Hirst, Tom Houseman, and Vinícius Armele draw on Benjamin to analyse what remains of European colonialism. Hirst and Houseman interrogate the extent to which Walter Benjamin’s notion of divine violence may be useful in the service of decolonial struggle. Insofar as it is antithetical to the colonial order – which is inaugurated and reproduced by the law making and law preserving functions of mythic violence – divine violence appears to open a space for conceptualising a far-reaching challenge to the violence encrypted in that order that is ‘lethal without spilling blood’. Because the exercise of such ‘power over all life’ is exercised ‘for the sake of living,’ Benjamin argues, its accompanying sacrifices are acceptable. Drawing on postcolonial and decolonial theory, Hirst and Houseman offer a critique of the ‘God’s-eye view’ inherent to any claim to divine violence. Benjamin’s text can generate powerful insights into the nature and limits of decolonial struggles, but it ultimately fails in providing an alternative to the mythic violence it criticises, by reproducing – at the heart of the emancipatory concept of divine violence – a problematic impersonation of a divine authorial voice that is already a trope of coloniality. Armele’s reflection seeks to recover ancient tragedy’s role of reluctance toward the previously unquestionable power of the violence of mythical destiny. Resume Benjamin’s contributions on (1) melancholy and Romanticism, which represents the revolt of repressed, channelled and deformed subjectivity and affectivity, and (2) the criticism of the violence that is established in the manifestation of its ethical relations between law [Recht] and justice [Gerechtigkeit], Armele reveals the intertwining of the experience of historical time and the orientation of current political struggles. Inspired by Benjamin, he examines the action of the Black Lives Matters movement in Bristol, UK, which toppled a statue of the slave trader Edward Colston, and threw it in the city’s harbour, reopening a historical wound of colonialism and national memory.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30003,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contexto Internacional\",\"volume\":\"82 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contexto Internacional\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/s0102-8529.20234501e20200078\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contexto Internacional","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/s0102-8529.20234501e20200078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
沃尔特·本雅明(Walter Benjamin)在1921年发表了他颇具影响力的论文《暴力批判》(Zur Kritik der Gewalt),一个多世纪以来,这部作品一直困扰和激发着各个学科的思想家。本次论坛聚集了一群来自哲学、政治学、国际关系和法律研究领域的学者,对本雅明的当代批判理论的现状进行反思。在《论坛》的第二部分,阿吉·赫斯特、汤姆·豪斯曼和Vinícius Armele利用本雅明分析了欧洲殖民主义的残余。赫斯特和豪斯曼探讨了瓦尔特·本雅明关于神圣暴力的概念在多大程度上有助于非殖民化斗争。就其与殖民秩序的对立而言——殖民秩序是由神话暴力的法律制定和法律保护功能所开创和复制的——神性暴力似乎为概念化一种对该秩序中加密的暴力的深远挑战开辟了一个空间,这种挑战是“致命而不流血”的。本杰明认为,因为行使这种“对所有生命的权力”是“为了生存”,所以伴随而来的牺牲是可以接受的。利用后殖民和非殖民理论,赫斯特和豪斯曼对任何主张神圣暴力的固有的“上帝之眼观点”提出了批评。本雅明的文本可以对非殖民化斗争的本质和局限性产生强有力的见解,但它最终未能提供一种替代它所批评的神话暴力的方法,通过再现——在神圣暴力的解放概念的核心——一种对神圣作者声音的有问题的模仿,这种声音已经是殖民主义的比喻。阿梅尔的反思试图恢复古代悲剧的角色,即对神话命运的暴力的先前毋庸置疑的力量的不情愿。回顾本雅明在以下方面的贡献:(1)忧郁和浪漫主义,它代表了对被压抑、被引导和变形的主体性和情感的反抗;(2)对暴力的批判,它建立在法律(Recht)和正义(Gerechtigkeit)之间的伦理关系的表现上,揭示了历史时间的经验与当前政治斗争的取向之间的交织。受本杰明的启发,他研究了英国布里斯托尔的“黑人的命也重要”运动的行动,该运动推翻了奴隶贩子爱德华·科尔斯顿(Edward Colston)的雕像,并将其扔进了城市的港口,重新揭开了殖民主义和民族记忆的历史伤口。
Colonial Reminiscences, Colonial Remains: Forum on the Actuality of Benjamin’s ‘Critique of Violence’ at Its Centenary, Part II
Abstract Walter Benjamin published his influential essay ‘Critique of Violence’/‘Zur Kritik der Gewalt’ in 1921, and the work has troubled and provoked thinkers across disciplines for over a century now. This Forum gathers a group of scholars in philosophy, political science, international relations and legal studies to reflect on the actuality of Benjamin’s essay for contemporary critical theory. In Part II of the Forum, Aggie Hirst, Tom Houseman, and Vinícius Armele draw on Benjamin to analyse what remains of European colonialism. Hirst and Houseman interrogate the extent to which Walter Benjamin’s notion of divine violence may be useful in the service of decolonial struggle. Insofar as it is antithetical to the colonial order – which is inaugurated and reproduced by the law making and law preserving functions of mythic violence – divine violence appears to open a space for conceptualising a far-reaching challenge to the violence encrypted in that order that is ‘lethal without spilling blood’. Because the exercise of such ‘power over all life’ is exercised ‘for the sake of living,’ Benjamin argues, its accompanying sacrifices are acceptable. Drawing on postcolonial and decolonial theory, Hirst and Houseman offer a critique of the ‘God’s-eye view’ inherent to any claim to divine violence. Benjamin’s text can generate powerful insights into the nature and limits of decolonial struggles, but it ultimately fails in providing an alternative to the mythic violence it criticises, by reproducing – at the heart of the emancipatory concept of divine violence – a problematic impersonation of a divine authorial voice that is already a trope of coloniality. Armele’s reflection seeks to recover ancient tragedy’s role of reluctance toward the previously unquestionable power of the violence of mythical destiny. Resume Benjamin’s contributions on (1) melancholy and Romanticism, which represents the revolt of repressed, channelled and deformed subjectivity and affectivity, and (2) the criticism of the violence that is established in the manifestation of its ethical relations between law [Recht] and justice [Gerechtigkeit], Armele reveals the intertwining of the experience of historical time and the orientation of current political struggles. Inspired by Benjamin, he examines the action of the Black Lives Matters movement in Bristol, UK, which toppled a statue of the slave trader Edward Colston, and threw it in the city’s harbour, reopening a historical wound of colonialism and national memory.