ABSTRACT

This article’s chief contention is that the decisive context of Jacques Derrida’s 1988 Critical Inquiry essay on Paul de Man’s past was the oscillation between the collapse of the historicist chronotype (deconstruction) and the emergence of the chronotype of simultaneities (presence). To demonstrate this thesis, this essay (1) examines the ways Derrida’s highlighting of the deconstruction of Western metaphysics, by continually producing world-interpretations, was the definitive instantiation – and subversion – of the historicist chronotype; and (2) establishes that Derrida’s inquiry into and engagement with de Man’s past marked the limits of the historicist chronotype and what Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht identifies as the rise of the chronotype of simultaneities. Evidence of the oscillation between chronotypes includes the several amalgamations of presence and language that shaped Derrida’s readings of de Man’s collaborationist articles as well as his postwar silence. Signs of these interpenetrations between language and presence suggest that Derrida momentarily halted his willingness to unfold endless, conflicting narratives about de Man, and this fleeting arrest in Derrida’s commitment to perspectivism ultimately caused his arguments to lose their persuasiveness; Derrida’s interpretations gave way to presence. This presence rendered in Derrida’s readings not only generated controversy but also offers historians the chance, today, to consider the interpretive space opened by the chronotype of simultaneities.

摘要

本文的主要论点是雅克·德里达（Jacques Derrida）1988年《批判性探究》的决定性内容关于保罗·德曼过去的文章是历史主义的表型的崩溃（解构）与同时性的表型的出现（存在）之间的振荡。为了证明这一论点，本文（1）研究了德里达通过不断产生世界解释来强调西方形而上学解构的方式是历史主义表型的确定性实例化和颠覆性。（2）确立了德里达对德曼过去的探究和参与，标志着历史主义表型的局限性，以及汉斯·乌尔里希·古姆布雷希特（Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht）所认同的同时性表型的上升。表型之间振荡的证据包括对存在和语言的几种融合，这些形成了德里达对德曼的合作主义者文章的阅读以及战后的沉默。语言和存在之间的这种相互渗透的迹象表明，德里达暂时停止了他对德曼展开无休止，相互矛盾的叙述的意愿，而对德里达对透视主义的承诺的短暂流逝最终使他的论点失去了说服力。德里达的解释让位。德里达的阅读中出现的这种存在不仅引起了争议，而且还为历史学家提供了今天考虑由同时性表型打开的解释空间的机会。语言和存在之间的这种相互渗透的迹象表明，德里达暂时停止了他对德曼展开无休止，相互矛盾的叙述的意愿，而对德里达对透视主义的承诺的短暂流逝最终使他的论点失去了说服力。德里达的解释让位。德里达的阅读中出现的这种存在不仅引起了争议，而且还为历史学家提供了今天考虑由同时性表型打开的解释空间的机会。语言和存在之间的这种相互渗透的迹象表明，德里达暂时停止了他对德曼展开无休止，相互矛盾的叙述的意愿，而对德里达对透视主义的承诺的短暂流逝最终使他的论点失去了说服力。德里达的解释让位。德里达的阅读中出现的这种存在不仅引起了争议，而且还为历史学家提供了今天考虑由同时性表型打开的解释空间的机会。