THE OTHER DOES NOT RESPOND

levinas’s answer to blanchot

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Levinas’s idea of substitution promotes what sounds at first sight like a full-blown notion of relationality. This is reflected, for example, in his adoption of Rimbaud’s phrase “I is an other.” But Levinas also insisted that the I is a term that exceeds the relation in the same way that the Other does. Maurice Blanchot questioned these implications in The Writing of the Disaster, but Levinas held fast to his conclusion that this was a “relation without relation,” one of a number of formulations that test our standards of comprehension. In this essay I explore the considerations that led Levinas to adopt these formulations, focusing both on his account of my responsibility, even for the one who persecutes me, and his novel account of “subjectivity.”.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)88-98
Number of pages11
JournalAngelaki - Journal of the Theoretical Humanities
Volume24
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 4 2019

Fingerprint

substitution
subjectivity
disaster
comprehension
responsibility
Emmanuel Levinas
Maurice Blanchot
Substitution
Responsibility
Subjectivity
Disaster
Sound
Relationality

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Cultural Studies
  • Philosophy
  • Literature and Literary Theory

Cite this

@article{ed3633bb98a74fd08a06e28360cf71aa,
title = "THE OTHER DOES NOT RESPOND: levinas’s answer to blanchot",
abstract = "Levinas’s idea of substitution promotes what sounds at first sight like a full-blown notion of relationality. This is reflected, for example, in his adoption of Rimbaud’s phrase “I is an other.” But Levinas also insisted that the I is a term that exceeds the relation in the same way that the Other does. Maurice Blanchot questioned these implications in The Writing of the Disaster, but Levinas held fast to his conclusion that this was a “relation without relation,” one of a number of formulations that test our standards of comprehension. In this essay I explore the considerations that led Levinas to adopt these formulations, focusing both on his account of my responsibility, even for the one who persecutes me, and his novel account of “subjectivity.”.",
author = "Bernasconi, {Robert Lambert}",
year = "2019",
month = "5",
day = "4",
doi = "10.1080/0969725X.2019.1620459",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "88--98",
journal = "Angelaki",
issn = "0969-725X",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "3",

}

THE OTHER DOES NOT RESPOND : levinas’s answer to blanchot. / Bernasconi, Robert Lambert.

In: Angelaki - Journal of the Theoretical Humanities, Vol. 24, No. 3, 04.05.2019, p. 88-98.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - THE OTHER DOES NOT RESPOND

T2 - levinas’s answer to blanchot

AU - Bernasconi, Robert Lambert

PY - 2019/5/4

Y1 - 2019/5/4

N2 - Levinas’s idea of substitution promotes what sounds at first sight like a full-blown notion of relationality. This is reflected, for example, in his adoption of Rimbaud’s phrase “I is an other.” But Levinas also insisted that the I is a term that exceeds the relation in the same way that the Other does. Maurice Blanchot questioned these implications in The Writing of the Disaster, but Levinas held fast to his conclusion that this was a “relation without relation,” one of a number of formulations that test our standards of comprehension. In this essay I explore the considerations that led Levinas to adopt these formulations, focusing both on his account of my responsibility, even for the one who persecutes me, and his novel account of “subjectivity.”.

AB - Levinas’s idea of substitution promotes what sounds at first sight like a full-blown notion of relationality. This is reflected, for example, in his adoption of Rimbaud’s phrase “I is an other.” But Levinas also insisted that the I is a term that exceeds the relation in the same way that the Other does. Maurice Blanchot questioned these implications in The Writing of the Disaster, but Levinas held fast to his conclusion that this was a “relation without relation,” one of a number of formulations that test our standards of comprehension. In this essay I explore the considerations that led Levinas to adopt these formulations, focusing both on his account of my responsibility, even for the one who persecutes me, and his novel account of “subjectivity.”.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067614886&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85067614886&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/0969725X.2019.1620459

DO - 10.1080/0969725X.2019.1620459

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 88

EP - 98

JO - Angelaki

JF - Angelaki

SN - 0969-725X

IS - 3

ER -