‘Our only real pleasure is to squander our resources to no purpose, just as if a wound were bleeding away inside us; we always want to be sure of the uselessness or the ruinousness of our extravagance. We want to feel as remote from the world as we can. As remote as we can: that is hardly strong enough; we want a world turned upside down and inside out. The truth of eroticism is treason.’
‘It is the desire to live while ceasing to live, or to die without ceasing to live’
Bataille’s eroticism is ‘the assenting to life prior to death’. The conceptual identity of eroticism is historically diffuse & contingent, from primitive man to modern / postmodern consumer society, it is a phantom hand guiding every imaginable facet of life. For Bataille this arises from any terrain where a taboo is set. The abstraction of sexuality from the carnal act itself has to do with the complex interplay of prohibitions and desire which shift with historico-cultural paradigms. Taboos are a litigal-religious necessity for policing the boundaries of violence, ugliness, decay, excrement and (crucially) death. All of which induce fear, revulsion and rapturous desire; and for a society to survive, the fear must be gridlocked into law and the desire forbidden. But banishing something from civilized life inevitably and necessarily strengthens its fascination. The experience of continuity between the monotony of life and the abyssal beauty & terror of death can be bridged via onanism, worship, sacrifice and degradation; heightened to heaving summits by the cold iron bars of taboo.
Bataille wasn’t advocating a cessation of social boundaries. Stuff like free love and libertinism appalled him; full sexual licentiousness would eradicate the very thing it sought to liberate. Continuity comes at the expense of scarcity & degradation which incite violence and horror. To this end, The Catholic Church, like the bloodthirsty Aztec Gods, safeguards the integrity of eroticism’s entrancing otherworldliness.
The book is duly anthropological. Cave art and study of contemporary hunter-gatherer societies like the San People or the horticulturalist tribes across the ‘Hunter Gatherer Spectrum’ in Papua New Guinea give us important anthropological insights into non-state forms of social organization and culture. This is a window into sexual practice less ossified by bloated (post)industrial cultures. The bureaucracy of civilization after a certain stage advances our sense of futurity to the point of stymying an authentic continuity with delirious thanatropic underpinning of erotic experience. The expenditures of ritual hedonism are incompatible with a society revolving around work, where labour is the sum total of ontology, so the erotic becomes a sepulchral ambiguity; the examples Bataille employs to this point are far reaching & very convincing. Categories from structural anthropology like taboo and transgression are important here but Bataille carries them further than most cod-structuralists would dare & he extracts its logic for deployment into his own historical age. As we can easily do to ours; and the basic principles remain sturdy.
That said, the anthropological research Bataille uses was the best available at the time, mostly stuff from Durkheim, Hubert and Mauss. Claude Le vi-Strauss’ dubious theory of incest has an entire chapter devoted to it. This stuff is mostly out of date. It doesn’t really matter. Although Bataille's conclusions rest on some obsolete info they are still convincing. Good philosophy may draw from supplanted regimes of knowledge and still make persuasive claims which endure long after the research itself has been falsified. And I think contemporary developments in sociology & anthropology actually advance many of Bataille’s claims.
Less-ink-than-you-would-think has been spilled on the involvement of Bataille with Lacan. Despite their personal intimacy (they were friends--and Lacan would go on to impregnate and marry Bataille’s estranged wife Sylvia) there are few explicit references to one another in their work. But Lacan is here, if you know where to look. The vanishing objects of desire are located in the enigma of the other, experienced as a sharp pang of lack unlocatable in the maps & grids of the symbolic; Bataille’s thermodynamic solar expenditures, the profane furnace of being, of wanting and of burning our sacred possessions to escape the martyrdom of time. Surplus and plenty, the ill-omened repositories of wealth which characterize industrial age economic privilege are the harbinger of a barren and anhedonic life. There is no doubt that Lacan read Bataille but whether or not he approved of this, um, unorthodox arrangement of his ideas is unknown to me.
I find Bataille’s reading of Sade much more interesting than Sade’s own books, which have always slightly bored me. The manichaean inversion of good and evil, the profusion of sex and violence, always seemed slightly...obvious. Not shocking at all. But Bataille extracts a more complex reading, digging under the soiled flesh of Sade’s unpleasant books and reasoning that most torture, tyranny and bloodshed is not the work of sadistic libertines but rather is sanctioned by the state and wreathed in its antiseptic language; ‘foreign intervention’, ‘austerity’, ‘correctional facility’ all refer to organized death and slavery, comfortably within our purview of acceptable violence. Sade’s characters don’t greasepaint over their horrific cruelties; they are described in loving detail. The act of violence, in which we are all complicit (particularly us first worlders), is animated by Bataille’s logic of expenditure, of squandering & ruining as an act of purification unvarnished by officiated sterility.
There are blemishes on this book. Written from the bourgeois-male perspective, many of the references to the working classes come across as condescending or thoughtless. And Bataille makes the all too familiar tin-eared claim about women enjoying fantasies of rape. While Bataille’s consideration of women as the locus of male sexual desire, and thus violence, is mostly cogent and always interesting, there is never a serious attempt to implant the point of view in...literally anyone else. Eroticism is infinitely variable but it is only considered from the world-historical-default of the male perspective.
That said, in only several months time Bataille has become enormously important to me. And I’m not even close to done, I still have so many books to read from him.