"I define the Neutral as that which outplays the paradigm, or rather I call Neutral everything that baffles paradigm." With these words, Roland Barthes describes a concept that profoundly shaped his work and was the subject of a landmark series of lectures delivered in 1978 at the Collège de France, just two years before his death. Not published in France until 2002, and appearing in English for the first time, these creative and engaging lectures deepen our understanding of Roland Barthes's intellectual itinerary and reveal his distinctive style as thinker and teacher.
The Neutral (le neutre), as Barthes describes it, escapes or undoes the paradigmatic binary oppositions that structure and produce meaning in Western thought and discourse. These binaries are found in all aspects of human society ranging from language to sexuality to politics. For Barthes, the attempt to deconstruct or escape from these binaries has profound ethical, philosophical, and linguistic implications.
The Neutral is comprised of the prewritten texts from which Barthes lectured and centers around 23 "figures," also referred to as "traits" or "twinklings," that are possible embodiments of the Neutral (sleep, silence, tact, etc.) or of the anti-Neutral (anger, arrogance, conflict, etc.). His lectures draw on a diverse set of authors and intellectual traditions, including Lao-tzu, Tolstoy, German mysticism, classical philosophy, Rousseau, Baudelaire, Walter Benjamin, and John Cage. Barthes's idiosyncratic approach to his subjects gives the lectures a playful, personal, and even joyous quality that enhances his rich insights.
In addition to his reflections on a variety of literary and scholarly works, Barthes's personal convictions and the events of his life shaped the course and content of the lectures. Most prominently, as Barthes admits, the recent death of his mother and the idea of mourning shape several of his lectures.
Roland Barthes of France applied semiology, the study of signs and symbols, to literary and social criticism.
Ideas of Roland Gérard Barthes, a theorist, philosopher, and linguist, explored a diverse range of fields. He influenced the development of schools of theory, including design, anthropology, and poststructuralism.
If I had a choice between reading this book again and shoving an ice pick into one of my eyes, I would shove an ice pick into BOTH of my eyes to eliminate the chance of me ever even looking at this book again. I have never loathed something more. This is the sort of hooey that pompous “intellectuals” ram down their throats and go out of their way to “absolutely ADORE” and constantly regurgitate in conversation in an effort to feel superior to those, like me, who just don’t get it. My sincere apologies if you DO like this text and aren’t an exhibitionist, but holy MOLY this was a painful book to read and discuss. Never again.
I define the Neutral as that which outplays the paradigm, or rather I call Neutral everything that baffles paradigm… Whence the idea of a structural creation that would defeat, annul, or contradict the implacable binarism of the paradigm by means of a third term.
...every inflection that, dodging or baffling the paradigmatic, oppositional structure of meaning, aims at the suspension of the conflictual basis of discourse.
Le tout est assez difficile à suivre, le texte reste très brut, sous forme de notes avec abréviations et sigles, ce qui n'est pas toujours accessible surtout pour un.e lecteur.ice (comme moi) qui n'est pas très familier.e de tous les concepts convoqués ici.
Simultaneously illuminating and complexifying, an elegant, necessarily incomplete discussion of the non-paradigmatic in an exceptionally well designed book. Difficult, but not imposing. Worth it for the subtle shrug of French tone.
Man muss dieses Buch nicht von vorne bis hinten lesen (kann aber ruhig), aber was man wirklich lesen sollte, sind B.s Ausführungen zur Frage als Form. Er haelt sie, woertlich, fuer terroristisch. Warum? Weil sie eine Antwort will, und das Nicht-Antworten als Option nicht zulaesst. Die Frage - das haben auch andere erkannt (z.B. Canetti in Masse und Macht; er arbeitet dort die Invasivitaet und Gefaehrlichkeit der Frage unvergesslich heraus) - enthaelt insofern auch eine implizite Drohung, und Barthes haelt sie tatsaechlich fuer "die schlimmste Form von Gewalt". Das kann ueberempflindlich nennen, aber lehrreich ist es trotzdem. Parallel dazu lesen: Warum? Von der Obszoenitaet des Fragens (Aaron Bodenheimer).