ABSTRACT

Drawing on an unorthodox approach to desire, Belkacem Meghzouchene’s second novel, The overcoat of Virginia (2013), finds that opposition activists are probably more frustrating than the regime they contest. Specifying “a lack-based” desire, the trope of sodomy in the novel articulates the ways in which the Algerian postcolonial ruling elites allegedly embezzle the country’s resources without any sensible logic except “pure grab”, a predatory habit. This article argues that, while building on desire for understanding a postcolony such as Algeria can be insightful, reducing it to sexual assault is indicative of an impoverished intellectuality marked by a paucity of abstraction. Expressions of desire, once inhibited through disciplining the body via a recourse to an alienating temporality such as Islamism (even when not explicit), cannot be counted as insurrectional. Measured against the task of “revamping history”, the one outlined by the opposition activists in the novel, the “perverted-desire-as-sodomy argument” leads to a submissive regime of truth. Still, Meghzouchene’s characters’ conservative outlook encourages readers not to overlook the biopolitical dimension of the postcolonial state, but warns against populist discourse that confuses scandalizing with activism.

摘要

Belkacem Meghzouchene 的第二部小说《弗吉尼亚的大衣》以非正统的方式处理欲望(2013)，发现反对派活动家可能比他们所竞争的政权更令人沮丧。小说中的鸡奸比喻明确了“缺乏”的欲望，阐明了阿尔及利亚后殖民统治精英据称在没有任何合理逻辑的情况下盗用该国资源的方式，除了“纯粹的掠夺”，一种掠夺性习惯。本文认为，虽然建立在理解阿尔及利亚这样的后殖民地的愿望可能是有见地的，但将其简化为性侵犯表明了一种以缺乏抽象为特征的智力贫乏。欲望的表达，一旦通过诉诸伊斯兰教等异化的时间性来约束身体（即使没有明确表达），就不能算作叛乱。以“改造历史”为目标，小说中反对派活动家所概述的“变态欲望作为鸡奸的论点”导致了一个顺从的真理政权。尽管如此，Meghzouchene 笔下人物的保守观点鼓励读者不要忽视后殖民国家的生命政治层面，但警告不要将丑闻与激进主义混为一谈的民粹主义言论。