An Ethics of Becoming-Animal in J.M. Coetzee’s Foe
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper explores the animalization of Friday and the becoming-animal of Cruso in J.M. Coetzee’s Foe, developing this discussion through a critical comparison between Giorgio Agamben’s and Gilles Deleuze’s ethical reflections on animality. Both Agamben and Deleuze criticize the animal-human demarcation for exhibiting a prejudiced “anthropocentrism,” one that has long been central to the West’s conception of a human. The conception of a zone of indiscernibility is thereby central to Agamben’s and Deleuze’s ethics of animality. While Agamben’s theories offer potentialities for opening the relationship between human and animal, there are also limitations. Agamben’s ethics is based on an abyssal difference between human and animal, which ultimately plays out within the division between human and animal. In Agamben’s discourse of animality, Friday, with his muteness and his mutilated tongue is presented as a non-human animal by the narrator, Barton. In contrast with Agamben, Deleuze’s notion of becoming-animal implies the exchange between human and animal via affect, a zone in which humans and animals are involved in a continuous interrelational interplay. Deleuze’s approach diverges somewhat from the postcolonial and deconstructive approaches towards Friday taken by G. Scott Bishop, Derek Attridge and Gayatri Spivak, where Friday’s animalization is more associated with Barton’s constitution of herself as a possessor of language or humanness. Barton’s anthropological morality is sharply divergent from Cruso’s interaction with Friday, the latter being an affective relationship where the boundaries between human and animal become blurred. By focusing on this relationship, I will demonstrate how Deleuze’s theory of affect offers new potentialities for reconceptualising the boundaries between human and animal.
Abstract
This paper explores the animalization of Friday and the becoming-animal of Cruso in J.M. Coetzee’s Foe, developing this discussion through a critical comparison between Giorgio Agamben’s and Gilles Deleuze’s ethical reflections on animality. Both Agamben and Deleuze criticize the animal-human demarcation for exhibiting a prejudiced “anthropocentrism,” one that has long been central to the West’s conception of a human. The conception of a zone of indiscernibility is thereby central to Agamben’s and Deleuze’s ethics of animality. While Agamben’s theories offer potentialities for opening the relationship between human and animal, there are also limitations. Agamben’s ethics is based on an abyssal difference between human and animal, which ultimately plays out within the division between human and animal. In Agamben’s discourse of animality, Friday, with his muteness and his mutilated tongue is presented as a non-human animal by the narrator, Barton. In contrast with Agamben, Deleuze’s notion of becoming-animal implies the exchange between human and animal via affect, a zone in which humans and animals are involved in a continuous interrelational interplay. Deleuze’s approach diverges somewhat from the postcolonial and deconstructive approaches towards Friday taken by G. Scott Bishop, Derek Attridge and Gayatri Spivak, where Friday’s animalization is more associated with Barton’s constitution of herself as a possessor of language or humanness. Barton’s anthropological morality is sharply divergent from Cruso’s interaction with Friday, the latter being an affective relationship where the boundaries between human and animal become blurred. By focusing on this relationship, I will demonstrate how Deleuze’s theory of affect offers new potentialities for reconceptualising the boundaries between human and animal.
참고문헌 (36)
- Agamben, Giorgio, "Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life" (1998), Stanford UP
- Agamben, Giorgio, "Potentialities: Collected Essays in Philosophy", pp.177~184 (1999), Stanford UP
- Agamben, Giorgio, "The Open: Man and Animal" (2004), Stanford UP
- Aristotle, "Politics" (1962), Penguin Books
- Ashcroft, Bill, "Post-Colonial Studies: The Key Concepts" (2007), Routledge
- Attridge, Derek, "J.M. Coetzee and The Ethics of Reading: Literature in the Event" (2004), Chicago UP
- Attwell, David, "J.M. Coetzee: South Africa and the Politics of Writing" (1993), California UP
- Bishop, G. Scott, "J.M. Coetzee’s Foe: A Culmination and a Solution to a Problem of White Identity", World Literature Today, 64(1) (1990)
- Bruns, Gerald L., "Becoming-Animal: Some Simple Ways", New Literary History, 38, pp.702~720 (2007)
- Calarco, Matthew, "Giorgio Agamben: Sovereignty & Life" (2007), Stanford UP
- Calarco, Matthew, "Zoographies: The Question of the animal from Heidegger to Derrida" (2008), Columbia UP
- Coetzee, J.M., "Foe" (1986), Penguin Books
- Coetzee, J.M., "The Lives of Animals" (1990), Princeton UP
- Defoe, Daniel, "Robinson Crusoe" (1975), W.W. Norton & Company
- DeLanda, Manuel, "The Force of the Virtual: Deleuze, Science, and Philosophy", pp.325~332 (2010), U of Minnesota P
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Nietzsche and Philosophy" (1983), Columbia UP
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Spinoza: Practical Philosophy" (1988), City Lights Books
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Critical and Clinical" (1997), U of Minnesota P
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Pure Life: Essays on A Life", Zone Books
- Deleuze, Gilles, "What is Philosophy?" (1994), Columbia UP
- Deleuze, Gilles, "A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia" (2005), U of Minnesota P
- Egginton, William, "Affective Disorder", Diacritics, 40(4), pp.25~43 (2012)
- Gilson, Erinn Cunniff Gilson, "Zones of Indiscernibility: The Life of a Concept from Deleuze to Agamben", Philosophy Today, (Spep Supplement), pp.98~106 (2007)
- Goh, Irving, "Becoming-Animal: Transversal Politics", Diacritics, 39(2), pp.216~231 (2009)
- Head, Dominic, "J.M. Coetzee" (1997), Cambridge UP
- LaCapra, Dominick, "History and Its Limits: Human, Animal, Violence" (2009), Cornell UP
- Marais, Mike, "Secretary of the Invisible: The Idea of Hospitality in the Fiction of Coetzee" (2009), Rodopi
- Murray, Alex, "Giorgio Agamben" (2010), Routledge
- Negri, Antonio, "Giorgio Agamben: Sovereignty & Life", pp.109~125 (2007), Stanford UP
- Nietzsche, Friedrich, "Untimely Meditations" (2007), Cambridge UP
- Patton, Paul, "Becoming-Animal and Pure Life in Coetzee’s Disgrace", Areil, 35(1-2), pp.101~119 (2004)
- Patton, Paul, "Deleuzian Concepts: Philosophy, Colonization, Politics" (2010), Stanford UP
- Pearson, Keith Ansell, "Germinal Life: The Difference and Repetition of Deleuze" (1999), Routledge
- Poyner, Jane, "J.M. Coetzee and the Paradox of Postcolonial Authorship" (2009), Ashgate
- Sotirin, Patty, "Gilles Deleuze, Key Concepts", pp.98~109 (2005), McGill-Queen’s UP
- Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty, "Theory in the Margin: Coetzee’s Foe Reading Defoe’s Crusoe", Roxana, 1990, pp.17(2), 1~23