Phenomenologies of Sacrifice

Ludger Hagedorn & Christian Sternad

Institute for Human Sciences (IWM), Vienna*
Husserl Archives, KU Leuven**
hagedorn@iwm.at
christian.sternad@kuleuven.be

* Correspondence: Ludger Hagedorn – Institute for Human Sciences (IWM), Spittelauer

Lände 3, A-1090 Wien, Austria.
** Correspondence: Christian Sternad – Husserl-Archives: Centre for Phenomenology and
Continental Philosophy, Higher Institute of Philosophy, Kardinaal Mercierplein 2 - box
3200 3000 Leuven, Belgium.

Metodo Vol. 6, n. 2 (2018)

DOI:10.19079/metodo.6.2.7
 8 Ludger Hagedorn & Christian Sternad

…the most solemn sacrifice may not be bloody.

To sacrifice is not to kill but to relinquish and to give.
Georges Bataille, Theory of Religion

Sacrifice is a key issue of historical, sociological, political, and religious

research debates. It also has a variety of interconnections with the
philosophical tradition of phenomenology. For this issue of the journal
Metodo. International Studies in Phenomenology and Philosophy authors
were invited to explore the manifold dimensions of sacrifice.
Over recent decades, the topic has prominently been addressed in
the works of René Girard. While this strand of research examines
sacrifice predominantly in its constitutive function for the overcoming
of violence and the (re-)installment of peace in a given community,
other approaches stress its role of enacting a radical break with the
economy of exchange. Building on classical theories of solidarity and
the gift (Émile Durkheim, Marcel Mauss), these approaches emphasize
the dimension of freedom and responsibility as being characteristic of
self-sacrifice (as e.g. in Jan Patočka or slightly different in Jacques
Derrida). The most drastic break with the economy of exchange is
probably articulated in the work of Georges Bataille where sacrifice
becomes inseparably linked to expenditure and overspending. While
historically sacrifice often became an issue of philosophical reflection
in the context of decisive political battles and wars (especially during
the First World War with authors such as Max Scheler, Ernst Jünger, et
al.), it is precisely the pure phenomenality of sacrifice itself, i.e. its
capacity to make the givenness of the gift visible, that is strongly
articulated in current debates (most explicitly in the work of Jean-Luc
Marion).
Against this broader philosophical background, the contributions of
this issue also tackle historical questions, such as the role of religious
figurations and religious metaphors for aesthetics, or the mystic of
sacrifice that evolves around its meaning for wars and terrorism.
Finally, as indicated by the German word “Opfer” (that means both,

Metodo Vol. 6, n. 2 (2018)

Phenomenologies of Sacrifice 9

sacrifice and victim) the topic of sacrifice also invites for an extension
into what may be called “cultures of victimization,” i.e. the growing
interest in patterns of victimization, self-victimization and its societal
impacts.

The first section explores the wide field of “Phenomenologies of

Sacrifice.”

James Mensch opens this issue with his article The Economy of Sacrifice
and Embodiment. In his contribution, Mensch discusses two meanings
of sacrifice that lie at the bottom of the very nature of sacrifice. On the
one hand, sacrifice can be understood as a quid pro quo economy, i.e.
the idea that one gets something for what is being sacrificed or
offered. This transactional character can be observed in mundane as
well as in religious areas. On the other hand, however, there is a
meaning of sacrifice which precisely exceeds this economical
structure, i.e. a sacrifice that is given for its own sake. This is especially
the case in situations where there can’t be anything that reimburses
somebody’s expenses. Here, Mensch gives the examples of parents
who sacrifice themselves for their children or even soldiers who
sacrifice themselves for their comrades.
According to Mensch, however, both of these meanings involve us in
irresolvable difficulties. The starting point of his reflections is the
simple question if these two meanings of sacrifice really contradict
each other. Maybe, and this is Mensch’s point of departure, these two
opposing meanings of sacrifice can be reconciled by means of our very
embodied existence. Although it is our embodiment that places us in
this economy of exchange, it is also our very embodiment that exceeds
this economy of exchange. By examining various examples and
authors, Mensch shows that it is precisely our own body that urges us
to participate in this world but which, in turn, cannot be turned into a
“currency” itself: «The point is that, as non-transferrable, the
functioning that makes us uniquely ourselves is inherently incapable of
participating in an economy». Hence, the body that chains us to our

Metodo Vol. 6, n. 2 (2018)

10 Ludger Hagedorn & Christian Sternad

bodily existence of needs, is at the same time the means to transcend

it.

In his article War and Sacrifice: Comparing Jan Patočka and René Girard,
Wolfgang Palaver compares two philosophers and their important
contributions to the discourse on sacrifice: Jan Patočka and René
Girard. These two thinkers have put the usual understanding of
sacrifice into question and situated this rather radical phenomenon at
the very center of meaningful existence – individually and collectively.
In their accounts, sacrifice itself is not a problem that needs to be
countered but rather sacrifice can be a means to deflect or even
dissolve an ever-growing violent potential that would otherwise tear
societies apart in ever more violent and even “apocalyptic” scenarios.
By putting sacrifice at the very center of human existence, Patočka and
Girard try to redefine our understanding of sacrifice under the threat
of an excessive violence.
As Palaver shows, however, there are also important issues in which
their interpretations start to diverge. Patočka’s suggestive
interpretation of the First World War is strongly influenced by his (and
also Martin Heidegger’s) reading of Heraclitus’ pólemos. War as the
father of all things amounts to a metaphysical concept that guides
mankind’s history and expresses itself especially in the violent
outbursts of the 20th century. In Girard’s opinion, Patočka remained
too committed to the Heideggerian framework which also made him
uncritical of Heidegger’s archaic idea of the sacred and its rootedness
in violence. Girard on the other hand, understood Heidegger’s
interpretation of Heraclitus as «a pagan quasi-revelation of an original
or founding murder». Whereas Patočka thinks that the taming of
violence and/or war by peace – what he calls «the forces of the day» –
only amplifies the violent potential in disguise, Girard thinks that this
growing violent potential has been culturally deflected by a scapegoat
mechanism in which the scapegoat absorbs the violent tension that
would otherwise drive mankind in a constant war of all against all.

Metodo Vol. 6, n. 2 (2018)

Phenomenologies of Sacrifice 11

Francesco Tava’s contribution Sacrifice as a Political Problem: Jan

Patočka and Sacred Sociology takes up this thread insofar as he
contextualizes Patočka’s theory of sacrifice with the tradition of the so-
called “sacred sociology.” His point of departure is Patočka’s
differentiation between a proper and an improper form of sacrifice.
Whereas the improper sacrifice addresses a form of economical
exchange, the proper sacrifice is at bottom a destabilizing deed that
shatters people’s knowledge and existence. However, Tava asks, «how
is it possible that two utterly different meanings [of sacrifice] stem
from the same phenomenon?». In his attempt, Tava tries to show that
Patočka’s theory of the sacrifice can be elucidated by reference to
French anthropology and sociology, more precisely to Émile
Durkheim, Henri Hubert, and Marcel Mauss, but also the
representatives of the so-called sacred sociology: Roger Caillois,
Georges Bataille and other members of the Collège de Sociologie.
By focusing on the proper notion of sacrifice, Tava shows that this
destabilizing deed of (self-)sacrifice can by no means abolish the
conflict but can rather render, in a tragic way, this conflict even visible.
In Patočka’s thought, this form of sacrifice is tightly connected to what
he called «the solidarity of the shaken» – the solidarity of those who
are shaken in their belief in life and peace. This solidarity of the
shaken can say “no” to the permanent mobilization and has to become
a “spiritual authority” which renders certain acts and measures
impossible. Here, Tava spots a connection to Roger Caillois’ idea of a
“moral community”, an intellectual project in the interwar period in
France that aimed at warning the public against the emerging
totalitarian ideologies all over Europe. Viewed against this
background, Tava wants to show how this properly understood
sacrifice can be an instrument for political dissent within societies.

The second section of the volume focuses on the interconnections of

sacrifice and war, especially in the context of the First World War, the
often referenced “initial catastrophe” of the 20 th century and its history
of violence and horror.

Metodo Vol. 6, n. 2 (2018)

12 Ludger Hagedorn & Christian Sternad

The contribution by James Dodd, entitled War and Sacrifice. The

Troubled Legacy of the First World War, tries to come to terms with the
sacrifice of the fallen soldiers in the “Great War”: What are we to make
of this sacrifice of the fallen, and what does it tell us about the relation
between sacrifice and war? Starting with a close reference to the 1919-
movie J’accuse! by Abel Gance, the author demonstrates the difficult
relationship of “the living” and “the dead”, i.e. the complicated moral
indebtedness of the survivors to those who have sacrificed their lives.
Hence the crucial message of the movie which Dodd considers to
advocate a «re-commitment to a life that would honor instead of
desecrate the memory of those who have fallen». However, it is
precisely the main concern of his article to question such unfettered
moral convictions, as articulated in the movie.
Dodd argues for a specificity of the Great War as the first modern
war that is not only quantitatively “bigger” than any other war before,
but different in its essence. An immediate consequence of this
exceptional status of the Great War therefore would be that sacrifice
«proves to be far more ambiguous than […] the moral logic of self-
giving, remembrance, and affirmation would suggest». This leads the
author to a closer philosophical investigation of sacrifice. He holds that
loss is «at the heart of sacrifice», while violence, debt, and the sacred,
have to be identified as three additional elements that crucially define
the logic of sacrifice. Sacrifice is connected to a kind of violence that is
not just suffered passively, but rendered meaningful (it involves an
agency «that forges destruction into significance»). Likewise, the sacred
dimension of sacrifice undermines the mere economic calculation of
debt or, as Dodd puts it, «thanks to the mystery of the sacred […] debt,
itself perfectly transparent and rational, becomes mixed, at least
potentially, with horror and anguish».
The author’s main line of argumentation then evolves around the
philosophy of Georges Bataille, who diagnosed the common root of
war, sacrifice, and orgy – they all manifest an organized violation of a
taboo. Yet, as already seen by Bataille himself, modern war may have

Metodo Vol. 6, n. 2 (2018)

Phenomenologies of Sacrifice 13

lost this sacred dimension, because it has become the pure

organization and instrumental practice of destruction. The author’s
final assumption is therefore that «in modern war the organization of
violence no longer follows the psychological logic of a consciousness
seeking to incorporate the experience of death into the unity of life».

Nicolas de Warren’s contribution also examines the meaning of

sacrifice in the historical context of the First World War. Yet not only
does the author base his study on a totally different type of sources, he
also gives it a diverging spin by examining the mythologization of
sacrifice and its meaning for nationalist ideologies. The article focuses
almost exclusively on one literary source: Walter Flex’s Der Wanderer
zwischen beiden Welten (The Wanderer between the Two Worlds), a
German novel that is fully forgotten today, but had a tremendous
impact on the public debate in the days of its appearance and
throughout much of the 20th century. De Warren’s provocative title
Christ’s Wine Consists of German Blood already indicates one of the main
threads of his article which neatly outlines a fatal closeness of certain
national(-ist) discourses with Christian mysticism and conservative
Romanticism. In addition, the subtitle The Sacrificial Narrative of Walter
Flex bears a nice double twist in that it presents Flex’s novel itself as a
literary sacrifice to the ambitions of his Volk.
In de Warren’s reading, Flex’s novel becomes nicely interwoven with
the philosophical background of its time. There is a longer passage
that explicitly relates the novel to Max Scheler’s notion of Vorbild (the
exemplary individual), thereby enabling a better understanding of the
novel’s insistence on vorleben and vorsterben (exemplary living and
dying). Also, the references to Nietzsche’s Zarathustra help in
understanding Flex’s wandering between the two worlds as a quest
between the world of the Last Human and the Over-Human.
At many instances, de Warren points out the literary richness of
Flex’s novel. Yet it is also most remarkable how the author himself
manages to delve into the novel’s manifold philosophical implications
and elaborates on the exemplary character of Flex’s narrative not only

Metodo Vol. 6, n. 2 (2018)

14 Ludger Hagedorn & Christian Sternad

for the immediate circumstances of its time but, more generally, for the
alleged metaphysical grandeur and transcendence that develops
around the notion of sacrifice. Very much in this sense, de Warren also
avoids the pitfall of reading Der Wanderer exclusively as an expression
of German nationalism and its “sacred” mission. The novel’s
metaphysical richness is greatly elaborated in reference to one scene in
which the main characters shed their uniforms and take a bath in the
river. Their nudity represents a temporary dispensation with national
and social identities, while the uniform can be seen as the material
incarnation and visible form «of a body that has been selected to kill
and to be killed». Referencing literary examples like this, the article
shows a great sense for the multi-faceted layers of the use (and misuse)
of sacrifice for what de Warren calls «the secular religious enterprise
of nationalism, and the shaping of political affects».

Alexander Kozin’s article The Sacrifice addresses the eponymous 1986-

movie by Andrey Tarkovsky. It is the last movie shot by the world-
celebrated Russian art filmmaker before his premature death. The
close nexuses between the movie’s plot and the filmmaker’s biography
have often been observed and confer the movie its special aura. As
Kozin holds, Sacrifice is «not only the title of the film and the crux of its
plot, but a reference to Tarkovsky’s personal circumstances and the
culmination of his philosophical vision». It is the cinematic bequest of
a filmmaker whose movies are characterized by mystic elements and a
strong influx from literary existentialism, esp. Dostoevsky. Tarkovsky’s
movies invite for a philosophical exegesis, and Kozin takes up this call
by interpreting Sacrifice very much with the help of Jacques Derrida’s
notable considerations on The Gift of Death. The movie itself overtly
establishes the two crucial notions of “gift” and “sacrifice” – Otto, a
postman in the movie, who is a kind of liminal character, neatly
intertwines both of them by holding: «every gift is a sacrifice if it is a
true gift». Yet, it is only in Derrida’s writing that Kozin finds the third
code for the interpretation of the movie: namely the concept of
“secret” that bridges both others. Alexander, the main character of the

Metodo Vol. 6, n. 2 (2018)

Phenomenologies of Sacrifice 15

movie, will in the end sacrifice himself, but he will also keep «the
reason of the unreasonable act to himself, because sacrifice is
grounded in secrecy».
The author aptly outlines Tarkovsky’s aesthetic position as a
filmmaker – which is described as “narrative imagism” – and the
coincidences of the movie plot with his personal biography. Yet, the
article’s main achievement is how convincingly it highlights the
underlying hypothesis that The Sacrifice is «an example of a new
intellectual turn in the history of cinema as well as a clear-cut
philosophical statement». On many levels it shows the uniqueness of
Tarkovsky’s vision of sacrifice (a sacrifice that is not just to save
oneself, but to save the whole world), the continuous transformations
of the character Alexander towards «something which comes as a
coming», and the intriguing parallels to Derrida’s notions of gift,
sacrifice, and secrecy. The movie’s characters who are the “most moral
and most immoral, the most responsible and the most irresponsible”
serve as striking examples to this, since – as the author says by quoting
Derrida – they «respond absolutely to the absolute duty, keeping it
secret, expecting no reward, answering to God and only before God».
In this sense, Tarkovsky’s Sacrifice is not only the sole exemplification
of the aesthetic dimensions of sacrifice in this volume, but it is also the
only invocation of the religious connotations and the mystic that will
continue to surround our understanding of sacrifice.

The idea for this issue originated in the two-day workshop Pro Patria
Mori. Solidarity and Sacrifice in the First World War in Vienna, Austria
(14./15. April 2016). This workshop was organized in cooperation
between the Institute for Human Sciences (IWM) and the ERC research
project The Great War and Modern Philosophy (GRAPH) that was based
at the Institute of Philosophy at KU Leuven, Belgium from 2014 to
2017. It received additional input from the conference The Critiques of
Violence at KU Leuven, Belgium (12./13. May 2017). We hereby want to
thank all the people and institutions involved for the support that
grew into these events and the finalization of this current issue.

Metodo Vol. 6, n. 2 (2018)