Anthropoetics 6, no. 2 (Fall 2000 / Winter 2001) Performatism, or the End of Postmodernism Rao l Eshelman !

iedl n" am #o$l %2$ &'(12 Wasser$ r", )erman* Reshelman+t,online.de For the s $-ect, postmodernism presents a mi"ht*, seemin"l* inescapa$le trap.(1) An* attempt it ma.es to find itself thro "h a search for meanin" is $o nd to "o a/r*, for e0er* si"n promisin" some sort of ori"inar* .no/led"e is em$edded in f rther conte1ts /hose e1plication re2 ires the settin" of e0en more si"ns. Attemptin" to find itself thro "h meanin", the s $-ect dro/ns in a flood of e0er e1pandin" cross,references. 3et e0en if the s $-ect clin"s to form it fares no $etter. For postmodernism sees in form not an antidote to meanin", $ t rather a trace leadin" $ac. to alread* e1istin", semanticall* loaded conte1ts. E0er* fi1ation of meanin" is dispersed thro "h cross,connected forms4 e0er* se of form lin.s p /ith alread* e1istin" meanin"s4 e0er* approach to an ori"in leads $ac. to an alien si"n. !earchin" for itself, the s $-ect 2 ic.l* ends /here it $e"an5 in the endlessl* e1pandin" field of the postmodern. 6he /a* o t of postmodernism does therefore not lead thro "h the intensified search for meanin", thro "h the introd ction of ne/, s rprisin" forms or thro "h the ret rn to an a thentic ori"in. 7nstead, it m st ta.e place thro "h a mechanism completel* imper0io s to postmodernism8s modes of dispersal, deconstr ction and proliferation. 6his mechanism, /hich has $een ma.in" itself felt /ith increasin" stren"th in the c lt ral e0ents of the last fe/ *ears, can $e $est nderstood sin" the notion of performance. Performance in itself is, of co rse, not a phenomenon ne/ or n.no/n. 7n A stin8s speech,act theor* it refers to a lan" a"e act that does /hat it promises (97 no/ prono nce *o man and /ife9). 7n the sense of an artistic e0ent in the modernist a0ant,"arde, a performance fore"ro nds or 9ma.es stran"e9 the $order $et/een life and art4 in the happenin"s and performance art of postmodernism it inte"rates the h man $od* or s $-ect into an artistic conte1t. 6he concept of performance 7 am s ""estin" here is, ho/e0er, a different one. 6he ne/ notion of performati0it* ser0es neither to fore"ro nd nor conte1t ali:e the s $-ect, $ t rather to preser0e it5 the s $-ect is presented (or presents itself) as a holistic, irred ci$le nit that ma.es a $indin" impression on a reader or o$ser0er. 6his holistic incarnation of the s $-ect can, ho/e0er, onl* s cceed /hen the s $-ect does not offer a semanticall* differentiated s rface that can $e a$sor$ed and dispersed in the s rro ndin" conte1t. For this reason the ne/ s $-ect al/a*s appears to the o$ser0er as red ced and 9solid,9 as sin"le, or simple,minded and in a certain sense identical /ith the thin"s it stands for. 6his closed, simple /hole ac2 ires a potenc* that can almost onl* $e defined in theolo"ical terms. For /ith it is created a ref "e in /hich all those thin"s are $ro "ht to"ether that postmodernism and poststr ct ralism tho "ht definiti0el* dissol0ed5 the telos, the a thor, $elief, lo0e, do"ma and m ch, m ch more. 6he first models of a red ced, holistic s $-ect seem not to ha0e $een form lated $* /riters or artists, $ t rather $* literar* critics reactin" /ith antitheoretical or minimalist ar" ments to poststr ct ralism. 6h s ;napp and <ichaels, in their "ro nd$rea.in" article 9A"ainst 6heor*9 (<itchell 1=&(, ori". 1=&2), call for the nit* or 9f ndamental insepara$ilit*9 (1=&(, 12) of the three $asic conditions of interpretation5 a thorial intention, te1t, and reader. 6o this nit* the* oppose 9theor*.9 Accordin" to ;napp and <ichaels, theor* pri0ile"es the one or the other part of the /hole interpretation process /hile i"norin" or pla*in" do/n the others (the hermene tical critic pla*s p a thorial intention, the deconstr cti0ist the si"n, the relati0ist the reader, and so on4 compare the disc ssion in <itchell 1=&(, 1',2%). 7n ;napp and <ichaels8 0ie/ 9theor*9 does not refine or impro0e interpretati0e practice, $ t rather represents an naccepta$le attempt to ta.e a position o tside of it5 9>6heor*? is the name for all the /a*s people ha0e tried to stand o tside practice in order to "o0ern practice from /itho t. @ r thesis has $een that no one can reach a position o tside practice, that theorists sho ld stop tr*in", and that the theoretical enterprise

sho ld therefore come to an end9 (1=&(, '0). 6his insistence on the a$sol te nit* of a thor, si"n, and reader has indirect, $ t nonetheless far,reachin" conse2 ences for recreatin" the s $-ect. 7nterpretation no lon"er ta.es place thro "h floatin", proliferatin" semiotic acts contin all* el din" their pro"enitors, $ t rather thro "h the competition $et/een indi0id al, holistic statements made $* discrete s $-ects. 6he s $-ect e1presses itself in holistic performances in /hich it $elie0es4 other, competin" s $-ects 2 estion these acts of $elief (cf. <itchell 1=&(, 2&). Antitheoretical s $-ects are opa2 e (the* ha0e no set 2 alities), $ t the* are al/a*s present4 the reader al/a*s has practical access to them on the $asis of a discrete interpretati0e performance. 7n a similar sense <ichaels, in a later $oo. (1==(), ar" es a"ainst searchin" for c lt ral identit* in the past, in race or in forei"n roots. A lt ral identit* is "i0en in the /a* people li0e their li0es at a "i0en time4 it is nprod cti0e, and in fact impossi$le, to esta$lish identit* o tside of that empirical frame. Both 9theor*9 and the ideolo"* of c lt ral pl ralism /or. $* disartic latin" a part from a /hole (the si"nifier from the interpretati0e act, race from c lt re) and ma.in" that part into a contin all* recedin", nattaina$le other (cf. 1==(, 1(,16 and 12&,12=). 2 Ro "hl* at the same time as ;napp and <ichael concei0ed their antitheor* the American Romanist Eric )ans form lated his 9)enerati0e Anthropolo"*,9 /hich is also $ased on a holistic, performati0el* concei0ed si"n and a red ced s $-ect.(2) )enerati0e Anthropolo"* ma* $e descri$ed $riefl* as a minimalist theor* of lan" a"e ori"in inspired $* the 0ictimi:ation theor* of RenC )irard. Aentral to )enerati0e Anthropolo"* is the ass mption of an ori"inar* sit ation,,a 9mimetic crisis9,,in /hich competin" mem$ers of a small, prelin" istic "ro p for the first time emplo* a lin" istic (9ostensi0e9) si"n to desi"nate an o$-ect of contention directl* $efore them. 6he se of the ostensi0e si"n def ses and defers the conflict5 the pre0io sl* e1istin", animalistic social order is transformed into a specificall* h man one $ased on semiotic representation rather than on ph*sical imitation (9mimesis9). Analo"o s to )irard8s 9fo ndin" m rder9 of an innocent 0ictim, the first se of the si"n ac2 ires a considera$le sacral potenc*5 the collecti0e e1periences the semioticall* mediated act of pacification as somethin" hol*. 6his pacification, ho/e0er, is merel* a deferral of the ori"inar*, o$-ect,related conflict5 altho "h the ostensi0e si"n represents an o$-ect it cannot $e p t to direct se. Representation therefore al/a*s "i0es rise to resentment, /hich contin all* threatens to e1pand into 0iolence4 onl* the rene/ed emplo*ment of the si"n can once more defer this threat. )ans,,2 ite conscio sl*,,ontolo"i:es and sacrali:es #erridian diffCrance. !emiosis is ironic deferral, $ t this deferral ser0es not the pla* of traces and lin" istic parado1es, $ t rather a 9hol*9 "oal, namel* the preser0ation of the s $-ect in the semiotic collecti0e. 6he ostensi0e si"n al/a*s contains an element of parado1, since the si"n pretends to $e somethin" that it cannot $e (a sa$le thin"). 6he si"n $rin"s a$o t reconciliation on one hand and resentment on the other $eca se it represents thin"s /itho t placin" them entirel* at the disposal of the s $-ect. 6his parado1 has direct conse2 ences for the s $-ect8s search for identit*. 7nstead of contin all* failin" to find itself in a tan"le of semiotic traces, the s $-ect constit tes itself thro "h a dialectic of 9lo0e and resentment9 rooted in the holistic, o$-ect,$o nd si"n4 this dialectic contin all* asserts itself ane/ in c lt ral life. With this in mind, )ans has $e" n shiftin" his interest from a criti2 e of theor* to a far,ran"in" description of contemporar* c lt re4 his Ahronicles of Do0e and Resentment (see $i$lio"raph*), /hich appear re" larl* on his internet site, ha0e recentl* $een addressin" /hat )ans calls 9post,millennial,9 that is, post,postmodern, c lt re. All in all, ho/e0er, neither ;napp and <ichaels8 m ch,disc ssed antitheor* nor )enerati0e Anthropolo"* ha0e fo nd a $road $ase of adherents in American academia5 their minimalist, antitheoretical criti2 es are nsettlin" not onl* to poststr ct ralism, $ t to hermene tics and traditional literar* criticism as /ell.(') Dess radical, $ t perhaps more infl ential, 0ersions of performatism can $e fo nd in /hat is "enerall* called Ee/ Fistoricism. A case in point is !tephen )reen$latt8s approach to self, fashionin", /hich ma* $e tho "ht of as a 2 asi,transcendent act aimed at re0i0in" still earlier s $-ect,creatin" performances,,one need onl* thin. of the eni"matic openin" line of his !ha.espearian Ee"otiations 5 97 $e"an /ith the desire to spea. /ith the dead9 ()reen$latt 1=&&, 1). G st ho/ m ch performatist practices ha0e come to inform literar* scholarship and criticism

since the 1=&0s is a 2 estion that cannot $e treated here in detail. F rther $elo/, ho/e0er, 7 /ill to ch on t/o recent essa*s deepl* mar.ed $* performatism5 Gedediah P rd*8s For Aommon 6hin"s (1===) and Hnter Ierdacht >Hnder s spicion? (2000) $* the R sso,)erman critic Boris )ro*s. 7n literat re and partic larl* in cinema, the performatist si"n and a holistic, red ced s $-ect $e"in to appear in the mid,to,late 1==0s. 7n R ssian literat re the $est e1amples seem to me to $e Ii.tor Pele0in8s short stories as /ell as his no0el Ahapae0 i P stota >B ddha8s Dittle Fin"er? (ori". 1==6, En"lish translation 1===). Fo/e0er, performatism can also $e fo nd in the pop lar, con0entionall* narrated realism of Di dmila Hlits.aia, as, for e1ample, in her no0ella IesJlie po.horon* >A happ* f neral? or the short stor* 9)enele,s mochnitsa9 >)enele the p rse lad*? ($oth in Hlits.aia 1==&).(%) 7n )erman literat re a "ood recent e1ample /o ld $e 7n"o !ch l:e8s m ch,acclaimed no0el !imple !tor*s >!imple stories? (1===). 7n Western mo0ies 7 /o ld sin"le o t !am <endes8s @scar,cro/ned American Bea t* (1===), Gim Garm sch8s )host #o" (2000), the #anish #o"ma film 6he 7diots $* Dars 0on 6rier (1==&), and 6om 6*./er8s R n Dola R n ()erman ori".5 Dola rennt, 1==&)4 as a !la0ist /ith a Bohemian speciali:ation 780e also $een str c. $* the A:ech films EK0rat idiota >Ret rn of the idiot? (1===) and !amotKri >Doners? (2000). 7n spite of 0astl* different c lt ral $ac."ro nds, themes, and "enre traditions all the a$o0e,named /or.s deri0e their stren"th from the a thoriall* " ided apotheosis of red ced, /hole s $-ects and from the performati0e se of o$-ect,$o nd, holistic si"ns. ! $-ecti0it* and semiosis are no lon"er treated as conte1t,dependent, contin all* failin" "est res $ t rather form closed, performati0el* reali:ed /holes that resist dispersal in s rro ndin" conte1ts. Aro nd these s $-ects there de0elop plots often dealin" /ith a character transcendin" the conte1t aro nd him or her. 6he performati0e principle, /hich at first applies onl* to the indi0id al, is carried o0er to the /hole or at least to other s $-ects close to the central character. ' 6he ne/, performatist concept of the s $-ect e1presses itself most clearl* in films li.e American Bea t*, 6he 7diots, Ret rn of the 7diot and Doners, in /hich d m$ or d m$ed,do/n heroes pla* a central role. 7n American Bea t* the hero conscio sl* re0erts to a state of a p $ert*4 in 6he 7diots the comm ne mem$ers intentionall* act li.e mentall* retarded persons4 in Ret rn of the 7diot the simple,minded prota"onist o/es his nai0ete to a lon" sta* in a ps*chiatric instit tion4 in Doners the pothead Ga. $ is contin all* for"ettin" salient details of dail* life (for e1ample, ho/ the A:ech national anthem so nds, that he8s dri0in" thro "h Pra" e and not # $ro0ni., and that he has a "irlfriend "one off on a t/o,/ee. 0isit to her a nt). 6hese s $-ects present themsel0es (or are presented) as self,s fficient /holes imper0io s to the demands or responsi$ilities emanatin" from the social conte1t aro nd them. @ t of these self,presentations arise ne/ freedoms /hich in all fo r cases ser0e to rene/ h man relationships thro "h lo0e. Dester B rnham, the hero of American Bea t*, $ecomes o$sessed /ith a teena"e o$-ect of desire $ t holds $ac. from sed cin" her precisel* /hen he is in a position to do so4 in 6he 7diots the homel* ;aren, /ho professes lo0e for all the comm ne mem$ers, o0ercomes her o/n $o r"eois $ac."ro nd thro "h an ata0istic performance (9spassin"9)4 $eca se he lo0es e0er*one, Frantise. in Ret rn of the 7diot can act amidst an nhapp* fo r,/a* relationship as an ad0isor, confidante, scape"oat and finall* as a lo0ed one /ho $rea.s thro "h the c*cle of false desire. 7n Pele0in8s pro"rammatic short stor* /ith the characteristic title 9@ntolo"iia detst0a9 >@ntolo"* of childhood?, the narrator states5 97n "eneral, the life of a "ro/n person is self,s fficient and,,ho/ sho ld 7 p t it,,doesn8t ha0e empt* spaces that co ld hold e1perience not directl* related to his immediate s rro ndin"s9 (Pele0in 1==&, 222). 6he 9empt* spaces,9 /hich can $e ps*cholo"ical or rit alistic in nat re, create room for a holistic perspecti0e allo/in" characters to transcend their o/n immediate sit ations5 compare, for e1ample, the apotheosis of Dester B rnham in American Bea t*4 Ahapae08s and An.a8s passa"e to Eir0ana in B ddha8s Dittle Fin"er4 ;aren8s $rea. /ith $o r"eois famil* life in 6he 7diots4 the complete assimilation and application of sam rai teachin"s $* the contract .iller in Gim Garm sch8s )host #o".(() E0en in Di dmila Hlits.aia8s realisticall* narrated short stories one can find this leap from almost total red ction to a d*namic, conte1t,transcendin" performance. 7n A Fapp* F neral the ec menical

testament of the paral*:ed artist Ali. is a taped messa"e /hich is pla*ed ne1pectedl* after his death and admonishes his friends to re0el spontaneo sl* in dail* life4 in 9)enele the P rse Dad*9 the 0oca$ lar* of the d*in" Ge/ish heroine is red ced after a stro.e to the /ord 9p rse,9 in /hich a 0al a$le le"ac* ma* or ma* not $e hidden (her /a* of $e2 eathin" 0al e is e0identl* intended as an alle"or* of ho/ sec lar, derit ali:ed G daism contin es to rene/ itself). 6his retro"ade self,fashionin" of the s $-ect has somethin" profo ndl* sacral a$o t it, for e0er* s ccessf l act of esta$lishin" selfhood implies a transcendin", conte1t,disr ptin" act of sacrifice /hich can e1ha st or destro* the s $-ect. 6he nai0e Frantise. in Ret rn of the 7diot s ffers from sti"mata,li.e nose$leeds4 after a partic larl* intensi0e act of 9spassin"9 the na.ed, e1ha sted leader of 6he 7diots lies li.e Ahrist in the PietL4 Dester B rnham is .illed /hen Aolonel Fitts misinterprets his self,emancipator* messa"e4 the contract .iller in )host #o",,in accordance /ith the sam rai code,,allo/s himself to $e .illed $* his master. 6he performati0e s $-ect, /ho delineates a /hole, closed space /ithin a certain conte1t, m st rec.on /ith the entire resentment of the conte1t $ein" directed a"ainst the forei"n $od* in its midst. At the same time the s $-ect8s 9messa"e9 can spread /hen other s $-ects are infected $* its e1ample and create ne/ free spaces of their o/n. 6his messianic moment emanatin" from performati0e si"ns is e1pressl* treated in American Bea t* in con- nction /ith the character of Ric.* Fitts. Ric.* at first seems to $e a 0o*e r /ho films e0er*thin" passin" $* his camera lens. As it t rns o t, ma.in" di"ital mo0ies,, representin" thin"s in media,,is onl* a means for him to temporaril* participate in holistic processes li.e death and $ea t*. When as.ed /hether he .no/s someone /ho had in the meantime died, he sa*s5 9>Eo, $ t? 7 did see this homeless /oman /ho fro:e to death once. G st la*in" there on the side/al.. !he loo.ed reall* sad9 (Bell 1===, (M). And /hen as.ed /h* he filmed her, he sa*s5 9When *o see somethin" li.e that, it8s li.e )od is loo.in" ri"ht at *o , - st for a second. And if *o 8re caref l, *o can loo. ri"ht $ac.9 (1===, (M). 6hro "h his camera, mediated o$ser0ations of thin"s Ric.* participates in the di0ine order as a /hole, he constit tes himself in s ch moments as the performati0e li.eness of )od.(6) 7t is not onl* the si"ht of death that "i0es Ric.* this chance, $ t also the performati0e $ea t* of the thin"s themsel0es. As Ric.* sa*s, the most $ea tif l thin" he e0er sa/ /as a /hite plastic $a" that danced $efore him in the /ind5 9And this $a" /as - st dancin" /ith me. Di.e a little .id, $e""in" me to pla* /ith it. For fifteen min tes. 6hat8s the da* 7 reali:ed that there /as this entire life $ehind thin"s, and this incredi$l* $ene0olent force that /anted me to .no/ there /as no reason to $e afraid. E0er9 (1===, 60). 6his theistic insi"ht is not sha.en $* Dester8s 0iolent death, /hich Ric.* reacts to not /ith horror or 0o*e ristic c rio sit*, $ t rather /ith sacral s*mpath* (the script spea.s of 9a/e,9 1===, =M). 7nert materialit* (incl din" death) is no lon"er a threat. 7nstead, it is part of a holistic, $ene0olent order /hich can $e o$ser0ed and confirmed $* e1periencin" ho/ actions and their desi"nations come to"ether in a performance. G st as postmodernism instit tionali:ed e0il,, contin o s $o ndar* trans"ression,,the ne/ epoch instit tionali:es the "ood,,the one,time, firm dra/in" of $orders. Accordin"l*, there is a stron" tendenc* amon" performati0e /or.s of art to - stif* di0ine creation, to t rn to theodic*. Dester B rnham8s m rderer, Aolonel Fitts, is not e0il4 he is simpl* a re-ected lo0er /ho has deformed himself $* den*in" his o/n 9fit9 or frame of $ein" (his homose1 alit*)4 the res lt is a 9fit9 or sin"le act of 0iolent ra"e. Fe himself possesses onl* a trace of e0il,,a plate /ith a s/asti.a on the $ac. /hich he .eeps nder loc. and .e*. A similar do/npla*in" and limitin" of e0il can also $e fo nd in Pele0in,,this in star. contrast to the $r tal, endless $order trans"ressions t*pical of postmodernists li.e 7 rii <amlee0 and Iladimir !oro.in in R ssia or Brett Easton Ellis in America. 6h s the Ea:i period in 9@r :hie 0o:me:diia9 >Weapon of 0en"eance? is laconicall* descri$ed /ith the /ords 9a certain <ichel(M) had acted p9 (1==&, '0&). 6he red ction of Ea:ism to $anal o$-ects or to $oistero s actions is not a res lt of historical re0isionism $ t rather of the need to phold the 9"ood9 performati0e order. E0il, /hich is reall* mis nderstood or ill,fittin" "oodness, is rele"ated to a small, insi"nificant space /ithin this order. % 6he performati0e dra/in" of $o ndaries e1presses itself most clearl* in terms of plot.

Postmodernism, as is /ell .no/n, allo/s no time or space for ca sal ties to de0elop. Ahronotopes arise and disperse almost sim ltaneo sl* (as can $e seen in #erridian modes li.e diffCrance or ndecida$ilit*, /hich cannot $e fi1ed in temporal, spatial or ca sal terms). 7n contrast, in the ne/, performatist epoch there is a tendenc* to create chronotopes allo/in" a choice $et/een possi$ilities or e0en repeated choices $et/een possi$ilities. Aontin"enc* is no/ the prero"ati0e of the s $-ect and not of si"ns5 the point is to preser0e the inte"rit* of the s $-ect e0en nder the most nfa0ora$le conditions. 6he most o$0io s e1ample of this is 6om 6*./er8s R n Dola R n . 6he mo0ie8s heroine "ets the chance to repeat a $otched mone* transfer three times ntil she and the hero finall* "et thin"s ri"ht. Each of the three plot se2 ences appears as a discrete chronotope, each startin" respecti0el* /ith a fe/ split seconds8 difference. Each chronotope correlates formall* /ith e0er* other one, *et $eca se of the sli"ht difference in time each res lts in a completel* different performance. 6ime and space are in other /ords ad- sted ntil a holistic sol tion fa0orin" the s $-ect is fo nd, ntil /ish and /ish,f lfillment coincide. 6he actions of the s $-ect are no lon"er determined $* the aleator*, ltimatel* ncontrolla$le e2 i0alences amon" si"ns, $ t rather thro "h the manip lation of the transcendental frame $* a s $-ect endo/ed /ith a thorial po/ers. 7nstead of nfoldin" as a free/heelin" postmodern "ame, Dola8s actions ser0e a sin"le, self,confirmin" "oal5 the* preser0e a s $-ect r nnin" for her and another8s life. Rather than $ein" - stified in epistemolo"ical or ar" mentati0e terms this manip lation is simpl* performed5 it is presented to the 0ie/er as a narrati0e fact that m st either $e dis$elie0ed or $elie0ed. 7n this /a* fiction $ecomes reli"ion, $elief $ecomes an na0oida$le res lt of an* semiotic or sec lar act. 7t is no accident in this re"ard that )ans especiall* emphasi:es the sacral f nction of the mar.et and cons mption in capitalist societies (see Ahronicle 12%, 6he <ar.et <odel5 6hree Points, '1 Gan ar* 1==&)4 it is no accident that the e1emplar* Ge/ish heroine in Hlits.aia8s 9)enele the P rse,Dad*9 al/a*s "ets the optimal price in her dealin"s /ith the mar.et 0endors (see Hlits.aia 1==&, 162,16%). !ince the positi0el* actin" s $-ect sho ld $e preser0ed at all costs, /e find in performatist /or.s a tendenc* to in0est characters /ith far,ran"in" a thorial prero"ati0es. Accordin"l*, characters are endo/ed /ith the a$ilit* to manip late time, space, and ca salit* for their o/n $enefit. 6he fact that Dola is allo/ed to ta.e off on her r n three times is not - st the decision of an anon*mo s a thorial narrator $ t also of Dola herself. A similar moment can $e fo nd in the narrati0e str ct re of American Bea t*. At the film8s $e"innin" /e see the $ird8s,e*e 0ie/ of a small to/n and hear a detached, almost meditati0e 0oice sa*in"5 9<* name is Dester B rnham. 6his is m* nei"h$orhood. 6his is m* street. 6his . . . is m* life. 78m fort*,t/o *ears old. 7n less than a *ear 78ll $e dead.9 As the first scene of the film appears, Dester8s 0oice adds5 9@f co rse, 7 don8t .no/ that *et9 (Bell 1===, 1). Dester8s tran2 ilit* is made possi$le $* the holism of the narrati0e frame/or., /hich is o$li0io s to the ontolo"ical difference $et/een implicit a thor and character,, and hence to death itself. 7n this /a* e0en the e0ac ation or destr ction of characters ser0es to stren"then the /hole4 after his m rder $* Aolonel Fitts, Dester ret rns to the a thorial frame, from /hich he reintrod ces the stor* from a personal perspecti0e. 6he act of narratin" $ecomes an act of $elief that cannot $e made the o$-ect of a metaph*sical criti2 e or deconstr ction. 6he film is constr cted in s ch a /a* that the 0ie/er has no choice other than to transcend his or her o/n dis$elief and accept the performance represented $* the film. 6his transformation of the 0ie/in" process into an in0ol ntar* act of $elief stands in direct contrast to the postmodern mode of the 0irt al, /here the o$ser0er can8t $elie0e an*thin" $eca se ontolo"ical parameters li.e a thor, narrator and character ha0e $een dissol0ed in an impenetra$le /e$ of parado1ical citations and cross,references (the $est e1ample of this is the nen0ia$le fate of the pri0ate detecti0e in Pa l A ster8s Ee/ 3or. 6rilo"*). E0en Frantise., the hero of the con0entionall* filmed Ret rn of the 7diot has a stri.in" a thorial po/er5 he has the c rio s a$ilit* to "et on or off departin" trains alread* /ell in motion. 6his a$ilit*, /hich departs anno*in"l* from the realistic conte1t of the rest of the film, is decisi0e for the o tcome of the plot. 7n the $e"innin", it ena$les the hero to "et to .no/ the older sister and, at the end, it ena$les him to ret rn to the *o n"er one /ho apparentl* lo0es him. @nce more, this is a case of contin"enc* $ein" fore"ro nded and at the same time s spended in the interest of the s $-ect. 6he temporar* s spension of 9mere9 mimesis is not a thro/a/a* semiotic

effect $ t rather ser0es the /elfare of the s $-ect in its personal " ise. 6his sort of a thoriall* self, empo/ered s $-ect can also $e fo nd in Hlits.aia, /ho adheres consistentl* to 1=th ,cent r* norms of realistic representation. B* allo/in" a 9dialo"ical9 tape to $e pla*ed after his death Ali., in A Fapp* F neral,appears to his friends and relati0es,,literall*,,as a de s e1 machina spea.in" a thoritati0el* from the hereafter. An a thoriall* empo/ered character also pla*s a cr cial role in the #o"ma film 6he 7diots, /hich other/ise (in accordance /ith the 9#o"ma,=(9 oath) fore"oes the se of all e1ternal a thorial manip lations. 6he onl* person na$le to 9spass,o t9 in the comm ne8s "ro p actions pro0es to $e the onl* one /ho dares to do so in the conte1t of her o/n famil* life5 her droolin" and slo$$erin" at her stiff, emotionall* cold famil*8s midtime coffee is not - st a s perficial pro0ocation $ t materiall* e2 ates her /ith her $a$* /ho had died t/o /ee.s $efore. 7n this /a* she alone reali:es the missionar* messa"e of the domineerin", e"ocentrical leader of the 9idiots9 (/ho characteristicall* does not act li.e an idiot /hen dealin" /ith his o/n $o r"eois relati0e). #o"matic a thorialit* m st al/a*s first pro0e itself in a spontaneo s personal " ise (this happens, for e1ample, in B ddha8s Dittle Fin"er /hen the Ee/ R ssian "an"sters in0ol ntaril* e1perience a B ddhist ill mination). 6hat the principle of the personall* empo/ered implicit a thor can $e transferred to the le0el of the real,life a thor can $e seen in the 9#o"ma =(9 code form lated $* Dars 0on 6rier and 6homas Iinter$er". 6he self,imposed a thorial dictate that the director sho ld onl* se nat ral li"ht and so nds and not $rin" in e1tra props esta$lishes a semanticall* nmar.ed frame that frees $* confinin". 6he res lt is not an o$sessi0e adherence to r les, $ t rather the holistic nification of a thorial ri"or and personal spontaneit*5 ( >...? *o can practise the techni2 e,,the #o"ma techni2 e or the idiot techni2 e,,from no/ to .in"dom come /itho t an*thin" comin" o t of it nless *o ha0e a profo nd, passionate desire and need to do so. ;aren disco0ers that she needs the techni2 e and therefore it chan"es her life. 7dioc* is li.e h*pnosis or e-ac lation5 if *o /ant it, *o can8t ha0e it, and if *o don8t /ant it, *o can.(&) A s ccessf l performance depends on the nforced /ill of an a thoriall* framed s $-ect and not on the a thor himself. 6he pro"rammatic, indeed almost @ld 6estamentar* restriction a"ainst creditin" the director in #o"ma mo0ies pa*s tri$ te to this principle5 di0init* e1presses itself neither in an a thorial dictate, nor in personal /ill, nor in p re rit al, $ t rather in the fort ito s con0er"ence of all three. 7n spite of 0er* different reli"io s so rces (theism in American Bea t*, B ddhism in Pele0in, G daism in Hlits.aia, c lt in 6he 7diots) all performatistic a thors share an identical c lt ral,theolo"ical perspecti0e5 namel* that )odliness is e0er*/here /here /holes are created $* indi0id al s $-ects.(=) Fo/ persons can $e a thoriall* empo/ered /ith architectonic means can $e e1perienced, incidentall*, in the ne/l* reno0ated Reichsta" in Berlin.(10) Whereas postmodern architect re disorients the s $-ect $* ca sin" spatial coordinates to appear e2 i0alent and interchan"ea$le, the "lass dome of the Reichsta" presents a transparent, nmar.ed frame /hich allo/s the 0isitor to e1perience his or her o/n apotheosis $* slo/l* ascendin" the spiral,shaped /al./a* c rlin" aro nd the dome4 at the end of the clim$ the 0isitor, no/ completel* s rro nded $* $l e s.*, 9thrones9 o0er the mem$ers of the B ndesta" deli$eratin" directl* $elo/. 7n terms of media, the performati0e red ction and dra/in" of $o ndaries aims neither one, sidedl* at the a thentic reprod ction of the real nor at the effortless, endless reprod ction of si"ns in 0irt al, secondar* realit*. Rather, it performs a parado1ical nification of $oth moments in a cinematic frame /hich, precisel* $eca se it is constr cted $* an a thor and not $* an interpla* of si"ns, is mar.ed $* personal and technical 9mista.es.9 7n 6he 7diots Dars 0on 6rier reali:es this parado1alit* in the most 0aried /a*s. Altho "h 9#o"ma =(9 ri"oro sl* restricts the technical possi$ilities of camera techni2 e, so nd effects, and li"htin" in 6he 7diots, the monta"e emplo*ed is comparati0el* d*namic and professional,,that is, /itho t the n$eara$l* lon", monotono s ta.es s ""estin" the a$sence of a thoriall* scripted dramat r"*. At the same time, 0on 6rier intentionall* allo/ed easil* remo0a$le mista.es to remain, as, for e1ample, $ac.,and,forth,

foc ssin" in poor li"ht and foota"e of a $adl* set, p second cameraman. 6his intentional - 1taposition of professionalism and dilettantism ca ses the medi m of film to appear as a real thin" emplo*ed $* a personall* responsi$le a thorial s $-ect and not as a 0irt al, self, perpet atin" process L la Ba drillard or <cAl han. 6he medi m is the messen"er, and no lon"er the messa"e5 it is the e1tension of a parado1ical a thorial s $-ect pointin" o t his (or her) o/n materialit* and falli$ilit*. Fo/ messa"es are no/ lin.ed to a specificall* h man medi m can $e seen in an especiall* 0i0id /a* on the /alls of the ne/ Reichsta", /here !ir Eorman Foster simpl* allo/ed m ch of the (in part o$scene) "raffiti left $* R ssian soldiers to stand as it /as. Within the frame/or. of the ne/l* reno0ated $ ildin" the $anal messa"es scri$$led on the /alls $* real people no lon"er ha0e a semantic meanin"4 instead, the* represent the 0iolent intr sion of a histor* $orne $* h man s $-ects into the massi0e, static space of )erman state po/er.(11) 6he "raffiti on the Reichsta" /alls are not citations, the* are real4 rather than prod cin" a nostal"ic, sim lator* effect, the* demonstrate the materialit*, s $-ecti0it* and fract redness of histor* /ithin a holistic, intentionall* constr cted frame/or.. Precisel* this perfomati0e, a thorial framin" of historical statements ena$les their rene/al and .eeps them from $ein" de"raded to mere 2 otes. @n the other hand, tho "h, performatism does not ret rn to a thenticit*. 6he force of the ori"inal si"ns asserts itself onl* after the* ha0e $een framed in another medi m /hich is necessaril* al/a*s artificial.(12) 6he parado1ical relationship $et/een the medi m as a con0e*or of 9tr e9 ph*sical facts and an a thoriall* manip lated, 0irt al frame is e1pressed most 0i0idl* in 6he 7diots in the depiction of se1 alit*. 6here, the se1 al act is presented as an ind $ita$le ph*sical performance5 the film sho/s $oth erections as /ell as 0a"inal penetration. 6he depiction of these real ph*sical acts, /hich /o ld normall* 0iolate the intimate sphere of actors, characters and 0ie/ers ali.e, nonetheless does not appear de"radin", deh mani:in" or mechanical in the conte1t of the film. 6his is apparentl* onl* possi$le $eca se the s $-ecti0el* ndifferentiated, faceless se1 alit* of the comm ne mem$ers,,"ro p se1 creates a nified field of action in /hich s $lime, s $-ect, fi1ated narrati0e and primiti0e, o$-ect,fi1ated l st con0er"e in a con"enial /a*. Performed idioc*, /hich at least temporaril* le0els o t the difference $et/een o$-ect and s $-ect, creates a discrete space in /hich nothin" h man appears alien. 6his free space for performin" faceless ph*sical acts is itself ho/e0er not the "oal. Rather, it is a means for creatin" a ne/ indi0id al s $-ecti0it* residin" $e*ond the confines of the free space itself. 7n a scene directl* follo/in" the shots of "ro p se1, /here t/o indi0id als approach one another eroticall*, the camera $eha0es con0entionall* and chastel*5 it t rns a/a* - st $efore the se1 al act ta.es place, th s ret rnin" a sense of pri0ac* to characters, actors and 0ie/ers. Dars 0on 6rier8s messianistic performatism (and Pele0in8s as /ell) ma.es fre2 ent se of s ch dramat r"ical shifts, /hich the 0ie/er is made to percei0e and assimilate in0ol ntaril*. 7n "eneral, performatism enco ra"es self,therap*, it s ""ests /e can transcend the force of rampant, oppressi0e conte1ts $* repeatedl* assertin" o r o/n selfhood (compare in this re"ard R n Dola R n, Pele0in8s search for Eir0ana or <ichaels8 criti2 e of the pl ralist dispersion of selfhood in @ r America). 6 Performatism also has a political dimension. 7n his caref ll* honed essa* For Aommon 6hin"s, Gedediah P rd* (2000, ori". 1===) ar" es a"ainst the postmodern attit de of ironic indifference and for the acceptance of indi0id al political responsi$ilit* in a postideolo"ical a"e. B t ho/ is the indi0id al to /or. to/ards a political "oal in the a$sence of an* clear ideolo"ical " idelinesN P rd* e1emplifies this dilemma sin" t/o seemin"l* disparate e1amples5 that of the r ino s strip minin" in his home state of West Iir"inia and that of the t rn to democrac* in Poland, the A:ech Rep $lic and F n"ar*. #estr cti0e strip minin" in West Iir"inia cannot, to paraphrase P rd* in m* terms, $e a0erted solel* $* imposin" a strict "o0ernmental frame (a 9car$on ta19) or $* performin" acts of indi0id al resistance. Rather, $oth need to coincide in a t*picall* circ lar fashion /hose alpha and ome"a is a non,ironic, 9attenti0e9 s $-ect5

Reform thro "h la/ is onl* effecti0e if it -oins /ith li0es that reali:e some of the principles that la/ declares and tries to enforce. 7f /e do not $ecome the sort of people,,more reflecti0e in o r demands, more modest in o r needs, more attenti0e in o r actions,,/ho co ld inha$it a responsi$le econom*, s ch an econom* /ill not come to s $* la/ or "o0ernment. Beca se it /ill not come /itho t la/ and "o0ernment, chan"in" o rsel0es is all the more important. We are the $e"innin" as /ell as the end of a decent econom*8s possi$ilit*, $eca se /e are the sole site of responsi$ilit*. Responsi$ilit* $e"ins in attenti0eness, $eca se onl* that can help s to discern the conditions of hope. (2000, 1(=,160) B* contrast, Eastern E rope8s t rn to democrac* is for P rd* a s ccessf l act of political transcendenc* and a 0ictor* of democratic, re0ol tionar* ideals5 pri"ht, co ra"eo s dissidents li.e Adam <ichni. or IKcla0 Fa0el not onl* prom l"ated these ideals p $licl* $ t also li0ed $* them personall* (see 2000, 11' ff.). As P rd* points o t, tho "h, the s ccessf l political performances in Eastern E rope ha0e led to a parado1ical res lt. 6he heroic 0ictor* of democratic ideals has once more allo/ed the creation of a free pri0ate realm4 this pri0ate realm is at the same time concerned mainl* /ith $anal, personal matters and contin all* threatens to fall $ac. into political lethar"* and social indifference. For P rd*, heroic, self,sacrificin" political performances of the t*pe cited a$o0e ne0er deli0er a$sol te ideolo"ical le"itimac*. Rather, the* create a frame in /hich /e ma* acti0el* o0ercome o r o/n indifference and de0elop an interest in 9common thin"s9,,that is, thin"s /hich are in man* respects $anal $ t /hich are also o$-ects of p $licall* shared concern (2000, 12M,12&). Attenti0e indi0id als m st act in the pri0ate, $anal sphere in order to transcend it temporaril* and reach shared ($ t ne0er ideolo"icall* $indin") "oals. 6his corresponds in practical political terms to the fictionall* mediated creation of a frame and the transcendin" of that frame $* a nai0e or simple,minded indi0id al s $-ect. 9Realist9 performatism (P rd*, )ans, Hlits.aia etc.) confirms this mechanism $ t allo/s for contin al relapses into iron* or parado14 9fantastic9 performatism (Pele0in) holds forth the possi$ilit* of total transcendence. Finall*, the nif*in" intention of performatism is closel* tied to the ret rn of the phall s as a positi0e ena$lin" force in c lt re.(1') Aontrar* to the poststr ct ralist ass mption that the phall s f nctions onl* $* m ::lin", s ppressin", or penetratin" the female, the performati0e phall s creates a positi0e, "ender,transcendin" nit* thro "h a process of more,or,less 0ol ntar* self, sacrifice. 6he centrif*in", attention,"ra$$in" f sion of corporalit* and semioticit* /hich the act of self,sacrifice entails lea0es $ehind an empt* space /hich is not seldom filled o t $* female characters. 6he phallic order th s annihilates itself (Far Eastern tradition,,B ddha8s Dittle Fin"er and )host #o"), practices continence (Ahristian tradition,,Dester in American Bea t*) or lea0es $ehind a code1 or testament (Ge/ish tradition,, Ali.8s tape in A Fapp* F neral). 6o this can $e added an element of c lt5 in 6he 7diots the erect penis of a faceless 9idiot9 in a mi1ed p $lic sho/er acts as a c lt o$-ect en"enderin" ner0o s, 9 nderstandin"9 "i""les rather than a se1 al threat. 7n 0ie/ of this acti0e presentation and retraction of the phall s (not castrationO) the female characters themsel0es recei0e the opport nit* to act in a phallic,,/hich is to sa* acti0e and nif*in",,/a*. 6he res ltin" "ender mi1es cannot, ho/e0er, $e red ced to an* sin"le pattern4 often the* are treated ironicall*. 7n American Bea t* and )host #o" /omen pic. p phallic /eapons /ith mi1ed res lts. 7n the case of Aarol*n in American Bea t* the o tcome is l dicro s4 in the case of the little "irl in )host #o", /ho shoots an nloaded " n at )host #o"8s .iller and master, the s spension of 0iolence emanatin" from )host #o" is s ""ested ($ t also the fail re of the annihilatin" performance $* the child, /ho has in the meantime has $ecome the $earer of )host #o"8s sam rai teachin"s). 7n 6he 7diots it is ltimatel* not the se1 all* char"ed c lt leader /ho transcends his life sit ation $* 9spassin" o t9 $ t the sh* and mee. ;aren. Finall*, <ichel Fo elle$ec28s anti,postmodern no0el 6he Elementar* Particles (ori". 1==&, En"l. 2000) and the A:ech comed* Doners attempt to create entirel* ne/ "enders5 the hero in 6he Elementar* Particles en"ineers a ne/, rational, non,a"ressi0e and sens al "ender (possessin", incidentall*, mainl* female traits)4 in Doners the character Iesna $elie0es that there is a race of aliens /ho need se0en different se1es in order to cons mmate interco rse (a n m$er correspondin" directl* to the n m$er of comicall* intert/ined heroes in the mo0ie). 7n "eneral, the a$o0e,named /or.s tend to enco ra"e reconciliator* performances ena$lin" $oth se1es to frame or complement one another4 in performatist theor* ()ans and his adherents) one finds re" lar criticism of Dacanian ps*choanal*sis, /hich from the point of 0ie/ of )enerati0e Anthropolo"* o0erloads the $asic

interh man dialectic of lo0e and resentment /ith con0ol ted s*m$olic e1planations. 7ndeed, in the /orld of performatism the s*m$olic order of lan" a"e and the chain of si"nifiers /ith its distractin" p ns pla* little or no role. 6he si"n and/or lan" a"e acts as a massi0e instr ment in the ser0ice of the s $-ect4 decisi0e for for the performatist /or. is the holistic, o$-ect,oriented force of the tterance and not the "lissement of si"nifiers. As ;napp and <ichaels 0i0idl* demonstrate /ith their poem ma"icall* appearin" in the sand, hi"hl* comple1 com$inations of si"nifiers cannot $e considered a lan" a"e at all /hen there is no s $-ect $ehind them (<itchell 1=&(, 1(,16)4 con0ersel*, the inartic late "r ntin" of the 9idiots9 in the epon*mo s mo0ie and )ans8s theor* of the ostensi0e sho/ that e0en the simplest com$inations of so nds can $e a hi"hl* effecti0e lan" a"e in themsel0es. As the R ssian "raffiti in the Reichsta" and the harmonio s comm nication $et/een the En"lish,spea.in" )host #o" and the French,spea.in" ice cream 0endor in )host #o" sho/, performati0e lan" a"e is not dependent on semantics or a e0en on a common code to f nction5 decisi0e is the frame /hich has $een placed aro nd addressant and addressee (or to /hich adressant and addressee ha0e s $mitted) and /hich ser0es to $rid"e their differences. M PPP Performatism8s $rea. /ith postmodernism did not ta.e place cleanl* and in one stro.e. Performatism,,as /ith e0er* other ne/ epoch,,$orro/s in man* instances from the old epoch /hile $rea.in" /ith it sharpl* in other, decisi0e re"ards. 6he main difference 0is,L,0is postmodernism asserts itself in this case in the se of a holistic, discrete s $-ect and si"n. 6his is lo"icall* and practicall* incompati$le /ith postmodernism8s notion of s $-ect and si"n as nsta$le side effects of a constantl* shiftin" te1t al conte1t. At present, ho/e0er, the se of classical de0ices of postmodernism to create closed si"ns and s $-ects is almost na0oida$le5 the ne/ epoch is still dependent on the instr ments of the old. Aritics of performatism /ill no do $t $e 2 ic. to claim that /or.s li.e B ddha8s Dittle Fin"er or R n Dola R n are postmodern $eca se the* operate /ith 0irt al realities. 7t is important not to for"et, tho "h, that the f nction of 0irt al realit* in s ch cases is completel* different5 it ser0es "oals,,the a$sol te reconciliation of the s $-ect /ith its conte1t in Pele0in, the nconditional preser0ation of the lo0in" s $-ect in R n Dola R n,,/hich postmodernism dismisses as $anal, metaph*sical e1pressions of $elief. 7f one choses to i"nore the anno*in" pretension of these /or.s to achie0in" fictional transcendence, then there is no reason not to "o on endlessl* misreadin" them as postmodern. An essa*istic e1ample of the "rad al transition $et/een postmodernism and performatism is Boris )ro*s8s recent Hnter Ierdacht. Eine PhQnomenolo"ie der <edien >Hnder s spicion. A phenomenolo"* of the media? ()ro*s 2000).(1%) )ro*s, one co ld sa*, 9redisco0ers9 the holistic si"n, ontolo"* and performance $ t, in .eepin" /ith the pessimistic metaph*sics of the postmodern, still contin es to concei0e of them as e0il and threatenin". 6he main "oal of )ro*s8s essa* is to e1plain the /a* aesthetic 0al e is created in (post,)modern media c lt re. )ro*s ass mes that aesthetic 0al e arises /hen a thin" is enshrined in a c lt ral archi0e, that is, in an a thoritati0e space " aranteein" (at least for a time) the aesthetic o$-ect8s effecti0eness. )ro*s ar" es that the conditions for admission to the archi0e can $e defined neither in terms of content nor material, other/ise s ch conditions co ld $e predicted and reprod ced at /ill ("ettin" a rinal placed in a m se m does not, for e1ample, depend on the archi0e8s secret preference for toilet fi1t res or porcelain). For )ro*s, the specific conditions for admission to the archi0e can also not $e p rel* semiotic, for the* cannot $e determined,,as poststr ct ralism ass mes,,$* the interpla* of freel* flo/in", s $-ect, and o$-ectless si"ns. Rather, the .e* to the archi0e lies for )ro*s in the hidden, direct, npredicta$le relation $et/een the si"n and its material s $strate. 6his relation, in t rn, can onl* come a$o t /hen a s $-ect ca ses a si"n and its s $strate to enter into a nified, $indin" relation 0is,L,0is an o$ser0er. Aonse2 entl*, the aesthetic effecti0eness of the artistic artifact is for )ro*s an ontolo"ical and not a semiotic or semantic pro$lem. )ro*s, ho/e0er, chooses to address this pro$lem in phenomenolo"ical rather than ontolo"ical terms. 6he definin"

feat re of artistic s ccess is hence not an* specific, as *et nre0ealed essence, $ t rather o r s spicion that 9someone or other9 $ehind the scenes is manip latin" thin"s to "et them into the archi0e. 6his 9ontolo"ical s spicion,9 /hich is necessaril* directed a"ainst an alien, manip latin" s $-ect, is not, in )ro*s8s 0ie/, ade2 atel* acco nted for in deconstr cti0ism8s criti2 e of metaph*sics, /hich sees c lt re as an endless sea of si"ns /hich the o$ser0er can $as. in safel* and comforta$l* (see 2000, 'M). < ch more con0incin" for )ro*s is /a* the s $-ect is represented in pop lar c lt re (as, for e1ample, in films li.e 6erminator, Alien or 7ndependence #a*)5 there the alien s $-ect appears as a merciless .iller destro*in" e0er*one /ho crosses his path (2000, M(). 6his s spicion of the alien s $-ect8s intrinsicall* e0il nat re can, ho/e0er, $e sed to help "ain entrance to the archi0e, namel* $* emplo*in" /hat )ro*s calls the 9sincerit* effect9 >Effe.t der A frichti".eit?. Basicall*, this amo nts to /hat ps*cholo"ists call parado1ical inter0ention5 *o achie0e $est res lts $* ad0ocatin" the opposite of /hat is normall* e1pected of *o . Fence the li$eral politician appears most sincere /hen he fa0ors conser0ati0e positions, the conser0ati0e politician sincere /hen he propo nds li$eral ones (2000, M2). Also, accordin" to )ro*s, /hoe0er p $licl* re0eals his or her o/n $adness is s all* re"arded as sincere. 6his /or.s not $eca se s ch $eha0ior is re0elator* per se , $ t $eca se it confirms o r s spicion that, $eneath the s rface, the alien s $-ect is al/a*s someho/ e0il (2000, M&,M=). 7n )ro*s8s 0ie/, the onl* protection a"ainst the alien, malicio s s $-ect is to $e malicio s oneself, that is, to appear 9sincere9 $efore others in the parado1ical /a* descri$ed a$o0e (2000, M=). )ro*s8s thin.in", tho "h ironic and c*nical in P rd*8s sense, is ndo $tedl* alread* performatist. 6he s $-ect m*sterio sl* en"ineerin" the admission of a /or. of media art into the archi0e carries o t a holistic performance in /hich a s $-ect, a thin",$ased si"n, and a comm nicati0e partner are s ccessf ll* nited. )ro*s, ho/e0er, remains o$li"ated to the ne"ati0e concept of s $-ect pre0ailin" in postmodernism, /hich insin ates that the s $-ect stri0in" for /hole .no/led"e is either narcissistic (Dacan), reactionar* (Fo ca lt) or "enerall* e0il (Ba drillard), and he remains o$li"ated to postmodern epistemolo"*, /hich sees metaph*sical fra d in e0er* attempt to lin. si"ns /ith thin"s (#errida). 7n contrast to )ro*s, 7 $elie0e that in the ne/ epoch it is not the 9e0il9 principle of contin ed, random $order trans"ression that is dominant, $ t rather the $ene0olent principle of dra/in" $orders to create a 2 asi,sacral space in /hich an e1istin" state can nder certain circ mstances $e transcended. )ro*s "rasps this sit ation correctl* /hen he notes that 9the phenomenon of sincerit* arises . . . in a com$ination of conte1t all* defined inno0ation and red ction9 (2000, M'). 6his red ction and inno0ation, ho/e0er, ta.es place in performatism in a /a* that is m ch more radical and positi0e than )ro*s ima"ines. Hnder optimal conditions, the performati0e s $-ect is red ced so m ch thro "h its massi0e denseness that it no lon"er poses a threat to others.(1() !imilarl*, the performatist s $-ect8s tter simplicit* tends to def se an* s spicion that it is sim latin" or insincere (e0en in the case of sim lated idioc* in 6he 7diots none of the 90ictims9 " esses its fra d lent nat re4 the " idin" criterion is not a thenticit*, $ t rather the de"ree to /hich the performance is assimilated $* the o$ser0er to form a /or.in" /hole). 7n contrast to )ro*s 7 /o ld also s ""est that it is not e0il /hich determines the post,postmodern condition (e0en if e0il is still acti0e and present as a resid al phenomenon), $ t rather lo0e, for lo0e, as the optimal condition of inno0ation, ena$les an* s $-ect to $e lo0ed,,that is, to enter /ith another, alien s $-ect into a /hole, sal0ational space or frame. 6his perspecti0e, /hich is that of a sacrali:in" metaph*sical optimism, means the end of postmodernism and not its contin ation $* other means. & Another e1ample of mi1ed performatism and postmodernism can $e fo nd in Des partic les ClCmentaires (1==&), <ichel Fo elle$ec28s acid no0el of postmodern manners. 6here, Fo elle$ec2 e1poses the increasin"l* 0ir lent d alism of postmodern c lt re $* creatin" t/o characters completel* incapa$le of lo0e5 one is " ided entirel* $* the mind, the other $* se1. @0er the co rse of nearl* '%0 pa"es Fo elle$ec2 nfolds scenes of ps*cholo"ical indifference and coarseness, mechanical cop lation and incredi$le $r talit* that are meant to doc ment the tter emptiness of his heroes. 7t is onl* in the last ten or so pa"es that he $e"ins to de0elop the topian notion of a "eneticall* en"ineered, peacef l, and selfless ne/ "ender. Fo elle$ec28s

no0el is performatistic inasm ch as it fictionall* transcends the postmodern ima"e of h man.ind. At the same time, he remains for the most part o$li"ated to pessimistic postmodern metaph*sics, /hose onl* point of orientation is death and its nsa0or* pro1ies (at one point a mo thpiece for Fo elle$ec2 states5 9in the end, life $rea.s *o r heart after all. . . . And then no$od* la "hs. . . . All that8s left is loneliness, cold and silence. All that8s left is death9(16)). Fo elle$ec2 is a postmodern re0olted $* his o/n postmodernit* so m ch that he see.s sal0ation thro "h the "enetic transformation of the old, e0il, masc line s $-ect4 the a thor himself ho/e0er e0identl* has pro$lems de0elopin" an a tonomo s stor* line o t of the ne/, cloned "ender. 6he pro$lem of separatin" performatism from postmodernism,,in this case from R ssian concept alism,,is e1pressl* treated $* Ii.tor Pele0in in his short stor* 9Istroenn*i napominatel89 >6he $ ilt,in /arnin" si"nal? (1==&, '&1,'&%). 6he stor* concerns a ficti0e artistic mo0ement called 0i$rationalism /hich ass mes that 9/e li0e in an oscillatin" /orld and o rsel0es represent a collection of oscillations9 (1==&, '&1). 6he concept alist, accordin" to Pele0in8 s 90i$rationalist,9 ma.es the mista.e of tr*in" to fi1ate the concept5 9the p re fi1ation of ideas leads s $ac. onto the /ell,tread path of concept alism9 (1==&, '&1). Ii$rationalism, $* contrast, /hich intensifies the oscillations /ith artistic means and directs them $ac. at itself, ca ses 9its o/n $o ndaries to appear f ::* and so to spea. non,e1istent. For that reason the tas. of the 0i$rationalist artist is to leap $et/een the !c*lla of concept alism and the Ahar*$dis of e1,post,facto theoreti:in"9 (1==&, '&1). Pele0in8s criti2 e of concept alism is patentl* nfair. Aoncept alism isn8t static4 it oscillates $et/een conte1ts, or $et/een s $-ect and conte1t, - st as 90i$rationalism9 does. B t is 90i$rationalism9 identical /ith concept alism $eca se of thatN Ar cial to 90i$rationalism9 as /ell as to Pele0in8s /or. in "eneral is that si"n and s $-ect o0ercome the d alism of s $-ect and o$-ect, of thin" and si"n in a red ctionistic performance. 6he s ccessf l s spension of this d alism can $e achie0ed in 0ario s /a*s. 7t can $e e1perienced in a m*stical performance4 it can $e descri$ed sin" parado1ical B ddhist -ar"on4 or it can $e performed in a fictional frame that is accessi$le to e0er*one and that can al/a*s $e in0ested /ith a certain de"ree of self,iron* (in this case 0i$rationalism doesn8t /or. $eca se the artist doesn8t heed his o/n instr ctions).(1M) Beca se precisel* this sort of ironic fail re pla*s a ma-or role in Pele0in8s plot lines these are often conf sed /ith the ironic de0ices of postmodernism, /hose o/n d*sf nctionalit* and fail re is a fore"one concl sion. While a formal identit* is ndenia$le, postmodernism differs from Pele0in $* not reco"ni:in" that a nified, transcendent perspecti0e can $e temporaril* instit ted or performed /ithin a fictional frame. 7n performatism the set is al/a*s to/ard transcendin" iron*4 in postmodernism it is to/ard "eneratin" iron* ad infinit m . 6he cro/nin" achie0ement of postmodernism is in an* case hardl* "oin" to consist in enthronin" precisel* those thin"s,,the s $-ect, $elief, transcendence, presence...,,/hich it has p to no/ relentlessl* scattered to the /inds. PPP 7 can ma.e o t fi0e $asic feat res of performatism5 1. Eo more endless citin" and no a thenticit*, $ t rather the framin" of thin"s alread* e1istin" in order to transcend or radicall* rene/ them4 se of rit al, do"ma or similarl* inhi$itin" frames in order to transform or transcend e1istin" states of $ein"4 ret rn of histor* in the " ise of an empiricall* framed s $-ect (for e1ample, )reen$latt8s histor* of self,fashionin", <ichaels8 neopra"matism). 7n narrati0e, ret rn of a thorialit*, of a $indin" a thorial frame, mar.ed $* different /a*s of st*li:in" transcendence5 0erticall* (passa"e to a hi"her le0el)4 hori:ontall* (sidesteppin" to a different frame)4 holisticall* ("ettin" the ri"ht fit $et/een s $-ect and frame). 2. 7nstead of an order of floatin", nsta$le relations $et/een parts of si"ns the holistic s $-ect,si"n,thin",relation $ecomes the $asis of all comm nication and all social interaction4 the se of a si"n is an (in0ol ntar*) act of $elief instead of a semiotic or semantic $l nder. 6he s $-ect appears to solid or opa2 e4 it can $e d m$, nai0e, da:ed, simple,minded, simple, earnest and heroic $ t not endlessl* c*nical or ironic.

'. 6he s/itch from a mode of endless temporal deferral (diffCrance , process) to the one, time or finite -oinin" of opposites in the present (parado1ical performance, )ans8s ostensi0it*). %. 6ransition from metaph*sical pessimism to metaph*sical optimism4 the metaph*sical point of orientation is no lon"er death and its pro1ies (emptiness, .enosis, a$sence, d*sf nctionalit*) $ t rather ps*cholo"icall* e1perienced or fictionall* framed states of transcendence (res rrection, passa"e to Eir0ana, lo0e, catharsis, f lfillment or plerosis, deification etc.). = (. Ret rn and reha$ilitation of the phall s as an acti0e, nif*in" a"ent of performati0it*4 sim ltaneo s ironi:ation or retraction of its desire and pretensions to po/er for the $enefit of the feminine4 the phall s as positi0e frame for the 0a"ina and 0ice 0ersa (male characters act empt* or 0a"inal4 female ones act phallic, that is, acti0e and "oal,oriented). 7n "eneral, a tendenc* to/ards dese1 ali:ation4 lo0e, or the nif*in" 2 alit* of desire, /hether masc line, feminine, hetero, or homose1 al, is more important than endlessl* pla*in" o t one8s otherness. Finall*, an e1cerpt from 7n"o !ch l:e8s !imple !tor*s (1==&, En"l. trans. 2000), in /hich the massi0e opacit* of his 9simple9 characters asserts itself /ith e1emplar* force5 9!omethin" happened to me once at the mo0ies,9 said Ed"ar. 9We came late, the onl* place to sit /as in the front ro/. 6he mo0ie started off /ith a $ird8s,e*e 0ie/, a fli"ht o0er a - n"le. 7 closed m* e*es so 7 /o ldn8t "et di::*. 6hen off to m* ri"ht 7 heard a deep ch c.lin" so nd, a /onderf l la "h. . . . And someho/ it /as al/a*s in places /here no$od* else /as la "hin". !he had her le"s crossed and /as -i""lin" her ri"ht foot p and do/n, it /as li.e an in0itation. 7 to ched her el$o/ /ith mine, she didn8t e0en notice. 7 tho "ht 78d onl* ha0e to p t m* arm aro nd her and she8d lean a"ainst me li.e it /as completel* nat ral, li.e it - st had to $e. And at the same time 7 /anted to stro.e her calf. 7 had to reall* hold m*self $ac., reall*, /e /ere sittin" so close to"ether. . . <* )od, is she $ea tif l, 7 .ept thin.in" all the time. After each ch c.le 7 /anted to .iss her.9 9And,,did *o N9 97 co ldn8t tell /ho /as sittin" ne1t to her. A man,,*eah, $ t 7 co ldn8t tell /hether or not he /as /ith her.9 9!he /asn8t aloneN9 as.ed Genn*. 9Eo,9 said Ed"ar. 9!he /asn8t alone. !he /as there /ith a /hole "ro p.9 Fe pa sed. 9What thenN9 Ed"ar shoo. his head. 97 co ldn8t ha0e seen it. !he /as retarded, the /hole "ro p /as retarded.9 9@h shit,9 said Genn*. 978d fallen in lo0e /ith an idiot.9 9Hn$elie0a$le.9 93eah,9 he said. 96he /orst thin" /as, 7 /anted her an*/a*.9 9F hN9 978d fallen in lo0e, it /as too late.9

!ch l:e 1==&, 2(M,2(&4 m* translation 7n a /a*, /e are in the same sit ation as Ed"ar5 /e feel the presence of an epoch /hose conto rs are - st $arel* 0isi$le and in /hich /e can percei0e onl* simplicit* or simple, mindedness. 6he main thin", tho "h, is to alread* $e in lo0e /ith it. 10 Diterat re Aited Bateson, )re"or*. 1=M2. !teps to an Ecolo"* of <ind. Ee/ 3or.. Bell, Alan. 1===. American Bea t*. 6he !hootin" !cript. Ee/ 3or.. B tler, G dith. 1==0. )ender 6ro $les. Feminism and the ! $0ersion of 7dentit*. Ee/ 3or./Dondon. Foster, Eorman and Gen.ins, #a0id. 2000. Re$ ildin" the Reichsta". Ee/ 3or.. )ans, Eric. Ahronicles of Do0e and Resentment http5/////.anthropoetics. cla.ed /0ie/s )ans, Eric. 1==M. !i"ns of Parado1. 7ron*, Resentment, and @ther <imetic !tr ct res, !tanford. )offman, Er0in". 1=M%. Frame Anal*sis. An Essa* on the @r"ani:ation of E1perience. Ee/ 3or.. )reen$latt, !tephen. 1=&&. !ha.espearean Ee"otiations5 6he Airc lation of !ocial Ener"* in Renaissance En"land. Ber.ele*. )ro*s, Boris. 2000. Hnter Ierdacht. Eine PhQnomenolo"ie der <edien. < nich. Fo elle$ec2, <ichel. 1==&. Des partic les ClCmentaires. Paris. Fo elle$ec2, <ichel 1===. Elementarteilchen. ;Rln. ;arrer, Deo et al. (eds.). 2000. )e/alti"e @pfer. Film"esprQche mit RenC )irard nd Dars 0on 6rier. ;Rln. <ichaels, Walter Benn. 1==(. @ r America5 Eati0ism, <odernism and Pl ralism. Ahapel Fill. <itchell, W.G.6. 1=&2. A"ainst 6heor*. Diterar* !t dies and the Ee/ Pra"matism. Ahica"o. Pele0in, Ii.tor. 1==&. Sheltaia strela. <osco/. P rd*, Gedediah. 2000. For Aommon 6hin"s. 7ron*, 6r st, and Aommitment in America 6oda*. Ee/ 3or.. !ch l:e, 7n"o. 1==&. !imple !tor*s. Berlin. Hlits.aia, Di dmila. 1==&. IesJl*e po.horon*. <osco/. Ion 6rier, Dars 96he <an Who Wo ld )i0e Hp Aontrol9. 7nternet inter0ie/ /ith Peter @0i"

;n dsen (http5/////.do"me=(.d./theTidiots/inter0ie//inter0ie/.htm) Filmo"raph* American Bea t*. America/En"land 1===. #irected $* !am <endes4 screenpla* $* Alan Ball4 director of photo"raph*, Aonrad D. Fall4 edited $* 6ari2 An/ar and Ahris )reen$ r*4 m sic $* 6homas Ee/man. With5 ;e0in !pace*, Annette Benin", 6hora Birch, Wes Bentle*, <ena ! 0ari, Peter )alla"her, Allison Ganne*, !cott Ba. la, !am Ro$ards, Ahris Aooper. 7dioterne >6he 7diots?. #enmar. 1==&. Written and directed $* Dars 0on 6rier4 so nd $* #esi"n Per !treit4 edited $* <oll* <alene !ten"aard. With5 Bodil Gor"ensen, Gens Al$in s, Anne Do ise Fassin", 6roels D*$*, Ei.ola- Die ;aas and others. Dola rennt. >Released in America as R n Dola R n? )erman* 1===. Written and directed $* 6om 6*./er4 camera, Fran. Frie$e4 edited $* <atthilde Bonnefo*4 m sic $* 6om 6*./er, Gohnn* ;lime. and Reinhold Feil. With5 Fran.a Potente, <orit: Blei$tre , Fer$ert ;na p, Eina Petri, Armin Rohde and others. EK0rat idiota >Ret rn of the idiot?, A:ech Rep $lic 1===. Written and directed $* !asa )edeon4 camera, !tepan ; cera4 edited $* Petr 6 r*na4 m sic $* IladimUr )odKr. With5 Pa0el Dis.a, Anna )eislero0K, 6atiana Iilhelmo0K, GirU Dan"meier and others. )host #o". America 2000. Written and directed $* Gim Garm sch4 director of photo"raph*, Ro$$* < ller4 edited $* Ga* Ra$ino/it:4 m sic $* the RSA4 prod ced $* Richard ) a*4 released $* Artisan Entertainment. With5 Forest Whita.er ()host #o"), Gohn 6orme* (Do ie), Aamille Win$ sh (Pearline), Aliff )orman (!onn* Ialerio), Fran. <in cci (Bi" An"ie), 7saach de Ban.ole (Ra*mond), Iictor Ar"o (Iinn*) and #amon Whita.er (3o n" )host #o"). !amotKri >Doners?, A:ech Rep $lic 2000. #irected $* #a0id @ndrUce.4 /ritten $* Petr Selen.a4 camera, Richard Rericha4 m sic $* Gan P. < cho/. With5 Git.a !chneidero0K, !asa Raasilo0, Da$ina <ite0s.K, 70an 6ro-an and others. 11 Eotes 1. 6he follo/in" article /as ori"inall* /ritten in )erman and /ill pro$a$l* appear in that lan" a"e sometime in the *ear 2001. 6he translation is m* o/n. ($ac.) 2. )ans8s concept of lan" a"e /as first set forth in 6he @ri"in of Dan" a"e, Ber.ele* 1=&1. After that follo/5 6he End of A lt re, Ber.ele* 1=&(4 !cience and Faith, !a0a"e, <d. 1==04 @ri"inar* 6hin.in", !tanford 1=='4 !i"ns of Parado1.7ron*, Resentment, and @ther <imetic !tr ct res, !tanford 1==M. <* res me follo/s !i"ns of Parado1, especiall* Ahapter @ne, 9<imetic Parado1 and the E0ent of F man @ri"in,9 1','(.($ac.) '. For more on this see )ans8s h moro s lament in Ahronicle 1&&, 9Adorers of Diterat re !cared of Ariticism,9 20 Eo0em$er 1=== as /ell as ;napp and <ichaels8 criti2 e of E.#. Firsch in <itchell 1=&(, 1=,20.($ac.) %. For the references to Hlits.aia8s stories 7 am inde$ted to Anita Bec.er of Weimar, )erman*.($ac.) (. 6he fi" re of the simpleton transcendin" his o/n life/orld can incidentall* also $e fo nd in the mass media. An e1ample of this is Slat.o, a pop lar participant in the )erman 0ersion of the 9Bi",Brother9 sho/, /hich itself can $e nderstood in performatist terms as a closed, holistic frame propa"atin" the "ro/th of s $-ecti0it* nder conditions of total representation. 6he sho/ is,

of co rse, c*nical and 0o*e ristic, since it ass mes that the artificiall* ind ced sociali:ation of the participants /ill "o a/r*. Slat.o, /ho /as e-ected fairl* 2 ic.l* from the comm nal container d/ellin", sho/ed himself to $e the real /inner of the "ame. As a tr e simpleton (amon" other thin"s, he didn8t .no/ /ho !ha.espeare /asO) he remained at least for a time inaccessi$le to the "reed*, 0o*e ristic "a:e of the 0ie/ers. ($ac.) 6. 6his ma* $e contrasted to #errida8s /ell,.no/n distr st of representation and 0is al e0idence and Dacan8s attempt in Fo r F ndamental Aoncepts of Ps*choanal*sis to separate the merel* mechanical e*e of the s $-ect from the omnipotent "a:e of the @ther. Dacan8s and #errida8s attit de to/ard 0ision and representation are "nostic5 the* prefer tracin" a m ltit de of arcane, fleetin" si"ns emanatin" from a d al ori"in to Ahristian /itnessin", /hich is $ased on the a$ilit* of a 0ie/er to reprod ce a sin"le, e1emplar* act of self,sacrifice. Ric.*8s theolo"*, /hich is onl* latentl* christolo"ical, seems to s ""est that all death is a form of self,sacrifice and that an*one or an*thin" can act as a di0ine mediator. 6he incarnation of this theolo"* is, of co rse, Dester5 he /inds p sacrificin" himself for the others and $ecomin" di0ine /itho t reall* /antin" to do so. 7n "eneral, one co ld sa* that the performatism in American Bea t* "i0es the aleator* /orld of postmodernism a chance at redemption $* introd cin" into it a sacral, sacrificial, 0esti"iall* christolo"ical moment.($ac.) M. <ichel, a $eni"n fi" re in ni"ht"o/n and sleepin" cap, is the )erman 0ersion of Hncle !am.($ac.) &. From an 7nternet inter0ie/ 96he <an Who Wo ld )i0e Hp Aontrol9 /ith Peter @0i" ;n dsen (see $i$lio"raph*).($ac.) =. For theolo"ical, )irardian treatments of 0on 6rier8s #o"ma films, 6ar.o0s.i-8s @ffret and other recent mo0ies see ;arrer 2000.($ac.) 10. Readers nfamiliar /ith the $ ildin" in sit sho ld refer to the doc mentation in Foster and Gen.ins 2000. ($ac.) 11. 6hese are incidentall* /hat )ans calls ostensi0e si"ns, i.e., simple si"ns referrin" to an o$-ect or sit ation that is directl* present (FireO <an o0er$oardO). 7n the case of the Reichsta" man* of the scri$$lin"s are e1amples of ostensi0e self,namin", /hich in this case acts as a .ind of self,referential historical performance5 9<* name is 1 and 78m here (as a R ssian soldier at Fitler8s seat of po/er)O9($ac.) 12. 6his 9framin"9 m st not $e conf sed /ith #errida8s frame or parer"on. Performatist framin" ser0es to relate a lo/er state to a hi"her one, to st*li:e the possi$ilit* of transcendence. B* contrast, the parer"on is a spatiall* indeterminate line hi"hli"htin" the endless pro$lem of conditionalit* and not res ltin" in an* sort of performati0e chan"e (e1cept, perhaps, f rther, temporall* and spatiall* deferred refle1ion on the nat re of conditionalit* itself). <ore rele0ant than the parer"on in this re"ard seems to me to $e )re"or* Bateson8s concept of framin" (Bateson 1=M2), /hich emphasi:es not - st the parado1ical nat re of the frame $ t also its relation to ps*cholo"ical mechanisms prior to the lin" istic si"n4 pertinent is also the sociolo"ical frame theor* de0eloped $* Er0in" )offman (1=M%), /hich offers, amon" other thin"s, a t*polo"* of of frames as the* appear in social realit*. ($ac.) 12 1'. 6he feminist, poststr ct ralist notion of "ender as s $-ectless (prefera$l* non, heterose1 al, non,phallic) performance is e1pressed pro"rammaticall* in G dith B tler8s )ender 6ro $le (1==0, 2(), /here she states that 9"ender is al/a*s a doin", tho "h not a doin" $* a s $-ect /ho mi"ht $e said to pree1ist the deed.9 B* contrast, performatism implies that /hat is important is findin" a 9fit9 $et/een fi1ed $iolo"ical "i0ens li.e male and female "enitalia and the smor"as$ord of ps*chosocial attri$ tes comprisin" "ender. Altho "h s $-ecti0it* in performatism

is not preset,,there is al/a*s an interpla* $et/een s $-ect and conte1t,,the "oal of this interpla* is to set an identit* frame /ithin the conte1t rather than to flo/ alon" /ith it.($ac.) 1%. 6he R ssian,$orn )ro*s ($. 1=%M) is an art critic, philosopher and essa*ist4 ntil his emi"ration to )erman* in 1=&1 he /as a leadin" mem$er of the <osco/ concept alist circle. Fis 6otal Art of !talinism (Princeton 1==2, )erman ori". )esamt. nst/er. !talin, 1=&&) is a seminal anal*sis of R ssian c lt re from the concept alist point of 0ie/. ($ac.) 1(. 6his aspect of performatism,,as /ith all others,,can $e presented ironicall*. For e1ample, in 6he 7diots the comm ne8s c r0aceo s $londe entices se0eral men in a p $lic pool to ma.e a pass at her so that the* can $e dri0en a/a* $* a "r ntin", /addlin" cohort pretendin" to $e her h s$and. 6he men are dri0en a/a* not $* a ph*sical threat, $ t rather, as it /o ld appear, $* the shoc. of competin" /ith an idiot for an erotic o$-ect of desire. ($ac.) 16. <* translation from the )erman (Fo elle$ec2 1===, '2&). ($ac.) 1M. 7t /o ld $e a serio s mista.e to claim that performatism is postmodernism simpl* $eca se it contains iron*. 7n performatism, iron* res lts /hen transcendent ideals are reali:ed imperfectl*4 in practical terms it is an na0oida$le fact of life (the pres ma$l* steadfast anti, ironicist P rd* notes this e1pressl* in the After/ord of For Aommon 6hin"s, 2000, 212,21%). 6he intrinsic iron* of all h man c lt ral acti0it* is also confirmed $* )ans, /ho sees parado1 and iron* as an na0oida$le and necessar* res lt of ha0in" a si"n $ t not complete control o0er the thin" it desi"nates (cf. 1==M, Ahapter ', 96he Eecessit* of Parado1,9 'Mff.). ($ac.) Anthropoetics s $scri$ers ma* cop* or do/nload this te1t from the net/or., $ t its distri$ tion or p $lication shall constit te an infrin"ement of the A thor8s cop*ri"ht. Anthropoetics , 6he Electronic Go rnal of )enerati0e Anthropolo"* Iol me I7, n m$er 2 (Fall 2000/Winter 2001) 7!!E 10&',M26% HRD5 http5/////.anthropoetics. cla.ed / Email5 anthro+h mnet. cla.ed