SEDUCTION

Cul tureTexts
Arthur andMari l oui se Kroker

General Edi tors
Cul tureTexts i s aseri es of creati ve expl orati ons i ntheory, pol i ti cs and
cul ture at thef i n- de- mi l l eni um. Themati cal l y f ocussed
aroundkey
theoreti cal debates
i nthepostmoderncondi ti on, theCul tureTexts seri es
chal l enges recei veddi scourses i n art, soci al andpol i ti cal
theory,
f emi ni sm, psychoanal ysi s, val ue i nqui ry, sci ence
andtechnol ogy, the
body,
andcri ti cal aestheti cs. Takeni ndi vi dual l y, contri buti ons to
Cul tureTexts represent thef orward
breaki ng- edge
of
postmoderntheory
andpracti ce.
Ti tl es
Seducti on
J eanBaudri l l ard
Pani c
Encycl opedi a
Arthur Kroker, Mari l oui se Kroker andDavi dCook
Li f e
Af ter Postmoderni sm: Essays onVal ue andCul ture
edi tedandi ntroducedby J ohnFekete
Body I nvaders
edi tedandi ntroducedby
Arthur andMari l oui se Kroker
The PostmodernScene:
Excremental Cul ture andHyperAestheti cs
Arthur Kroker/ Davi dCook
SEDUCTION
JEANBAUDRILLARD
t r ansl at ed by Br i an Si nger
NewWor l d Per spect i ves
Cul t ur eText s Ser i es
Mont r eal
COPYRIGHT NOTICE: Published by CTHEORY BOOKS in
partnership with NWP and copyright, 2001, by CTHEORY
BOOKS. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be
reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means
(including photocopying, recording, or information storage and
retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher,
except for reading and browsing via the World Wide Web.
Users are not permitted to mount this file on any network
servers. Readers are encouraged to download this material for
personal use. Commercial use with permission only.
First published as De la seduction by Editions Galilee, 1979.
9, rue Linne, Paris 5e.
Editions Galilee
English language copyright New World Perspectives, 1990 .
ISBN 0-920393-25-X
Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data
Baudrillard, Jean
Seduction
(CultureTexts series)
Translation of: De la seduction.
ISBN 0-920393-25-X
1. Seduction-Psychological aspects.
(Psychology). 3 . Sex (Psychology) 4.
1 . Title. II . Series .
BF637.S36133813 1990
2 . Femininity
Postmodernism.z
V
CONTENTS
I I I . THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NY
OF
SEDUCTI ON
I NTRODUCTI ON
I . THEECLI PTI COFSEX
The Ecl i pt i c of Sex 3
The Et er nal I r ony
of
t he Communi t y 12
St er eo- Por no 28
Seduct i on/ Pr oduct i on 37
I I . SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES
The
Sacr ed
Hor i zon
of
Appear ances
53
Tr ompe l ' oei l
or
Enchant ed Si mul at i on 60
I ' l l Be Your Mi r r or 67
Deat h
i n
Samar kand 72
The Secr et and The Chal l enge 79
The Ef f i gy of t he Seduct r ess 85
The I r oni c St r at egy of t he Seducer
98
The Fear
of Bei ng Seduced
119
ThePassi on f or Rul es 131
TheDual , t he Pol ar and t he Di gi t al 154
The"Ludi c" and Col d Seduct i on 157
Seduct i on as Dest i ny 179
I NTRODUCTI ON
Af i xed
desti nywei ghs onseducti on. For rel i gi onseducti on
wasastrategy of the devi l , whether i n the gui se of wi tchcraf t
or l ove. I t i s al ways the seducti onof evi l - or of theworl d. I t
i s the very arti f i ce
of theworl d. I ts mal edi cti onhas beenun-
changedi n ethi cs andphi l osophy, andtodayi t i s mai ntai ned
i n psychoanal ysi s and the `l i berati on
of desi re. '
Gi ven the
present-daypromoti onof sex, evi l andperversi on, al ongwi th
the cel ebrati onof the of tti mes
programmati c resurrecti on of
al l that wasonceaccursed, i t mi ght seemparadoxi cal that seduc-
ti onhas remai nedi n
theshadows - andevenreturned thereto
permanentl y.
Theei ghteenthcenturysti l l spokeof seducti on. I t was, wi th
val our andhonour, acentral
preoccupati onof the ari stocrati c
spheres. Thebourgeoi sRevol uti onput anendtothi s preoccu-
pati on (andthe others, the l ater revol uti ons endedi t i rrevoca-
bl y - every revol uti on, i n i ts begi nni ngs, seeks toend the
seducti onof appearances) . Thebourgeoi s eradedi catedi tsel f
tonature andproducti on, thi ngs
qui tef orei gnandevenexpress-
l y f atal toseducti on. Andsi ncesexual i tyari ses, asFoucaul t notes,
f romaprocess of producti on(of di scourse, speech
or
desi re),
i t i s not at al l surpri si ngthat seducti onhas beenal l the more
coveredover. Wel i ve todaythepromoti on
of nature, bei t the
good
nature
of
the
soul of yesteryear, or the goodmateri al na-
ture of
thi ngs,
or eventhepsychi cnatureof desi re. Naturepur-
sues i ts real i zati on through al l the metamorphosi s of the
repressed, and throughthe
l i berati on of al l energi es, be they
2 SEDUCTI ON
psychi c, soci al or mat er i al .
Seduct i on, however , never bel ongs t o t he or der of nat ur e,
but
t hat
of
ar t i f i ce
-
never
t o
t he
or der of
ener gy,
but
t hat
of
si gns and r i t ual s . Thi s i s why al l t he gr eat syst ems of pr oduc-
t i on and i nt er pr et at i on have not ceased t o excl ude seduct i on
- t o i t s good f or t une - f r omt hei r concept ual f i el d. For seduc-
t i on cont i nues t o haunt t hem
f r om
wi t hout , and
f r omdeep wi -
t hi n i t s f or saken st at e, t hr eat eni ng t hemwi t h col l apse. i t awai t s
t he dest r uct i on of ever y godl y or der , i ncl udi ng t hose of pr oduc-
t i on anddesi r e. Seduct i on cont i nues t o appear t o al l or t hodoxi es
as mal ef i ce and ar t i f i ce, a bl ack magi c f or t he devi at i on of al l
t r ut hs, an exal t at i on
of
t he mal i ci ous use
of
si gns, a conspi r acy
of si gns. Ever y di scour se i s t hr eat ened wi t h t hi s sudden r ever -
si bi l i t y, absor bed i nt o i t s own si gns wi t hout a t r ace of mean-
i ng. Thi s
i s
why al l di sci pl i nes, whi ch have as an axi omt he
coher ence andf i nal i t y of t hei r di scour se, must t r y t o exor ci ze
i t . Thi s i s wher e seduct i on andf emi ni ni t y ar e
conf ounded, i n-
deed, conf used . Mascul i ni t y has al ways been haunt edby t hi s
sudden
r ever si bi l i t y wi t hi n t he f emi ni ne. Seduct i on andf emi -
ni ni t y ar e i nel uct abl e as t he r ever se si de of sex, : meani ng and
power.
Today t he exor ci smi s mor e vi ol ent and syst emat i c. We ar e
ent er i ng t he er a of f i nal sol ut i ons ;
f or
exampl e, t hat of
t he sex-
ual r evol ut i on, of t he pr oduct i on and management of al l l i mi -
nal and subl i mi nal pl easur es, t he
mi cr o- pr ocessi ng of desi r e,
wi t h t he woman who pr oduces her sel f as woman, andas sex,
bei ng t he l ast avat ar . Endi ng seduct i on.
Or
el se t he t r i umph of a sof t seduct i on, a whi t e, di f f use f emi ni -
zat i on and er ot i ci zat i on of al l r el at i ons i n an ener vat ed soci al
uni ver se.
Or el se none of t he above. For not hi ngcan be gr eat er
t han
seduct i on i t sel f , not even t he or der t hat dest r oys i t .
THEECLI PTI COFSEX
Not hi ng
i s l es s
cer t ai n t oday t han s ex, behi nd t he l i ber at i on
of i t s di s cour s e. And not hi ng t oday i s l es s cer t ai n t han des i r e,
behi nd t he pr ol i f er at i on of i t s i mages .
I n mat t er s of s ex, t he pr ol i f er at i on i s appr oachi ngt ot al l os s .
Her e l i es t he s ecr et of t he ever i ncr eas i ng pr oduct i on of s ex
andi t s s i gns , and t he hyper r eal i s mof s exual pl eas ur e, par t i cu-
l ar l y f emi ni ne pl eas ur e. The pr i nci pl e of uncer t ai nt yhas ext end-
edt o s exual r eas on, as wel l as pol i t i cal and economi c r eas on.
The s t at e of s ex' s l i ber at i on i s al s o t hat of i t s i ndet er mi na-
t i on. No mor e want , nomor e pr ohi bi t i ons , andnomor e l i mi t s :
i t
i s
t he
l os s of
ever y r ef er ent i al pr i nci pl e
.
Economi c r eas on i s
s us t ai ned onl y by penur y; i t i s put i nt o ques t i onwi t ht he r eal i -
zat i on of i t s obj ect i ve, t he abol i t i on of t he s pect r e of penur y.
Des i r e t oo i s s us t ai ned onl y by want . When des i r e i s ent i r el y
on
t he
s i de of demand,
when
i t i s oper at i onal i zed
wi t hout r es -
t r i ct i ons , i t l os es i t s i magi nar y and, t her ef or e, i t s r eal i t y; i t ap-
pear s ever ywher e, but i n gener al i zed s i mul at i on. I t i s t he ghos t
of des i r e t hat haunt s t he def unct r eal i t y of s ex. Sex i s ever y-
wher e, except i n s exual i t y ( Bar t hes ) .
I n s exual myt hol ogy, t he t r ans i t i on t owar ds t he f emi ni ne i s
cont empor aneous wi t h t he pas s age f r omdet er mi nat i on t o
gener al i ndet er mi nat i on. The f emi ni ne i s not s ubs t i t ut ed f or t he
6 SEDUCTI ON
mascul i ne as onesex f or anot her , accor di ng t o somest r uct ur al
i nver si on. I t i s subst i t ut ed as t he end of t he det er mi nat e
r epr esent at i on of sex, as t he f l ot at i on of t he l aw~t hat r egul at es
t he di f f er ence bet ween t he' sexes. The ascent
of
t he f emi ni ne
cor r esponds t o bot h t he
apogee of sexual pl easur e anda cat as-
t r ophe r el at i ve
t o
sex' s r eal i t y pr i nci pl e
.
And so i t i s f emi ni ni t y t hat i s gr i ppi ng, i n t he pr esent and
f at al si t uat i on of sex' s hyper r eal i xy -
as
i t was yest er day, but i n
di r ect cont r ast , i n i r ony and seduct i on.
Fr eudwas r i ght : t her e i s but one sexual i t y, one l i bi do - and
i t i s mascul i ne. Sexual i t y has a st r ong, di scr i mi nat i ve st r uct ur e
cent er ed on t he phal l us, cast r at i on, t he Name- of - t he
Fat her , and
r epr essi on
. Ther e
i s none
ot her . Ther e
i s no use
dr eami ng
of
some non- phal l i c, unl ocked, unmar ked sexual i t y. Ther e i s no
use seeki ng, f r omwi t hi n t hi s st r uct ur e, t o have t he f emi ni ne
pass t hr ought o t he ot her si de, or t o cr oss t er ms. Ei t her t he st r uc-
t ur e r emai ns t he same, wi t h t he f emal e bei ng' ent i r el y absor bed
by t hemal e, or el se i t col l apses, and t her e i s nol onger ei t her
f emal e or mal e - t hedegr ee zer oof t he st r uct ur e. Thi s i s ver y
much what i s happeni ngt oday: er ot i c pol yval ence, t he
i nf i ni t e
pot ent i al i t y
of
desi r e, di f f er ent connect i ons, di f f r act i ons, l i bi di -
nal i nt ensi t i es
-
al l mul t i pl e var i ant s
of
a l i ber at or y al t er nat i ve
comi ng f r omt he f r ont i er s of a psychoanal ysi s f r ee of Fr eud,
or f r omt he f r ont i er s of desi r e f r ee of psychoanal ysi s . Behi nd
t he ef f er vescence of t he par adi gmof sex, ever yt hi ng i s con-
ver gi ng t owar ds t he non- di f f er ent i at i on of t he st r uct ur e andi t s
pot ent i al neut r al i zat i on .
Thedanger of t he sexual r evol ut i on f or t hef emal e i s t hat she
wi l l be encl osedwi t hi n a st r uct ur e t hat condemns
her
t o
ei t her
di scr i mi nat i on when t he st r uct ur e i s st r ong, or a der i sor y t r i -
umph wi t hi n a weakened st r uct ur e.
Thef emi ni ne, however , i s, andhas al ways been, somewher e
el se
. That i s t he secr et
of
i t s st r engt h. J ust as i t i s sai d t hat some-
t hi ng l ast s becausei t s exi st ence i s not adequat e t o i t s essence,
i t must be sai d t hat t he f emi ni ne seduces because i t i s never
wher e i t t hi nks i t i s, or wher e i t t hi nks i t sel f
. The f emi ni ne i s
not f ound i n t he hi st or y of suf f er i ng and oppr essi on i mput ed
THE
ECLI PTI C
OF
SEX 7
t o i t - women' s hi st or i cal t r i bul at i ons
( t hough by gui l e i t con-
ceal s i t sel f t her ei n) . I t suf f er s such ser vi t udeonl y whenassi gned
t o
and r epr essed wi t hi n t hi s st r uct ur e - t o whi ch t he sexual
r evol ut i onassi gnsand r epr esses i t al l t hemor e
dr amat i cal l y. But
by what aber r ant compl i ci t y ( compl i ci t wi t h what ?
i f not , pr e-
ci sel y, t he mal e) woul d onehave us
bel i evet hat t hi s i s t he f e-
mal e' s
hi st or y? Repr essi on i s al r eady her e i n f ul l f or ce, i n t he
nar r at i veof
women' s sexual and pol i t i cal mi ser y, t o t he excl u-
si on of ever y ot her t ype of st r engt h and sover ei gnt y.
Ther e i s anal t er nat i ve t o sex and t o
power , onet hat psy-
choanal ysi s cannot knowbecausei t s axi omat i cs
ar esexual . And
yes, t hi s
al t er nat i ve
i s
undoubt edl y
of
t he or der of t he f emi -
ni ne, under st ood out si det heopposi t i on mascul i ne/ f emi ni ne,
t hat opposi t i onbei ngessent i al l y mascul i ne, sexual i n i nt ent i on,
and i ncapabl e of bei ng over t ur ned wi t hout ceasi ng t o
exi st .
Thi s st r engt h of
t he f emi ni ne i s t hat of seduct i on.
Onemay cat ch a gl i mpse of anot her , par al l el uni ver se ( t he
t wo never meet ) wi t h t he decl i neof psychoanal ysi s and
sexu-
al i t y as st r ong st r uct ur es, and t hei r cl eansi ng wi t hi n a psy and
mol ecul ar uni ver se ( t hat of
t hei r f i nal l i ber at i on) . Auni ver se
t hat can
no
l onger be i nt er pr et ed i n t er ms of psychi c or psy-
chol ogi cal r el at i ons, nor t hose of r epr essi on and t he uncons-
ci ous, but must bei nt er pr et ed i n t he t er ms of pl ay, chal l enges,
duel s,
t he
st r at egy of
appear ances - t hat i s, t het er ms of seduc-
t i on
. Auni ver se t hat can
no
l onger be i nt er pr et ed i n t er ms of
st r uct ur es and di acr i t i cal opposi t i ons, but i mpl i es a seduct i ve
r ever si bi l i t y - a uni ver se wher et he f emi ni ne i s not what op-
poses t he mascul i ne, but what seduces t he mascul i ne.
I n seduct i on t he f emi ni ne
i s
nei t her a mar ked nor an un-
mar ked t er m. I t does not maskt he"aut onomy" of desi r e, pl eas-
ur eor t hebody, or of a speech or wr i t i ng t hat i t has supposedl y
l ost ( ?) . Nor does i t l ay cl ai m
t o
somet r ut h
of
i t s own. I t seduces.
To be sur e, onecal l s t he sover ei gnt y of seduct i on f emi ni ne
by convent i on, t he same convent i on t hat cl ai ms sexual i t y t o
be
f undament al l y mascul i ne. But t hei mpor t ant poi nt i s t hat t hi s
f or mof sover ei gnt y has al ways exi st ed -
del i neat i ng, f r oma
di st ance, t he
f emi ni ne
as
somet hi ng
t hat i s
not hi ng,
t hat i s
never
8 SEDUCTI ON
"produced, " i s never wherei t i s produced(andcert ai nl y can-
not , t heref ore, bef oundi nany "f emi ni s t " demand). Andt hi s
not f rom
t hepers pect i veof aps ychi cor bi ol ogi cal bi - s exual i t y,
but t hat of t het rans - s exual i t y of s educt i onwhi cht heent i re
organi zat i onof s ex t ends t o rej ect - as does ps ychoanal ys i s i n
accordancewi t ht heaxi omt hat t herei s noot her s t ruct uret han
t hat
of
s exual i t y (whi chrenders
i t i ncapabl e, by
def i ni t i on,
of
s peaki ng about anyt hi ng el s e).
What does t hewomen' s
movement oppos et o
t hephal l ocrat i c
s t ruct ure? Aut onomy, di f f erence, as peci f i ci t y of des i reandpl eas -
ure, a di f f erent rel at i ont o t hef emal e body, as peech, awri t i ng
- but never s educt i on
.
Theyareas hamedof s educt i on,
as i m-
pl yi ng anart i f i ci al pres ent at i onof t hebody, or al i f e of vas s al age
and pros t i t ut i on. They do not unders t and t hat s educt i on
repres ent s
mas t ery
over t he s ymbol i c
uni vers e, whi l epower
repres ent s onl y mas t ery of t he real uni vers e. Thes overei gnt y
of s educt i oni s i ncommens urabl ewi t ht hepos s es s i onof
pol i t -
i cal or s exual power.
There i s as t range, f i erce compl i ci t y bet ween' t he f emi ni s t
movement
and
t heorder
of
t rut h. For s educt i oni s res i s t edand
rej ect edas ami s appropri at i onof women' s t rue bei ng, a t rut h
t hat
i nt he
l as t
i ns t ance
i s t obe
f oundi ns cri bedi nt hei r bodi es
anddes i res . I n ones t roke t hei mmens epri vi l egeof t hef emi -
ni nei s ef f aced: t hepri vi l egeof havi ng never accededt o t rut h
or
meani ng, and
of
havi ng remai ned
abs ol ut e
mas t er
of
t hereal m
of
appearances . Thecapaci t y i mmanent t os educt i ont o deny
t hi ngs t hei r t rut handt urni t i nt o agame, t hepurepl ay of ap-
pearances , andt hereby f oi l al l s ys t ems of power andmeani ng
wi t ha meret urnof t hehand. Theabi l i t y t ot urn appearances
i nont hems el ves , t opl ay ont hebody' s appearances ,
rat her t han
wi t ht hedept hs of des i re. Nowal l appearances arerevers i bl e . . .
onl y
at
t hel evel
of
appearances ares ys t ems f ragi l eandvul ner-
abl e . . . meani ngi s vul nerabl eonl y t oenchant ment . Onemus t
bei ncredi bl y bl i ndt o deny t hes ol e f orcet hat i s equal ands u-
peri or
t o
al l ot hers , s i ncewi t has i mpl epl ay of t hes t rat egy of
appearances , i t t urns t hemups i de down.
THEECLI PTI COFSEX
9
Anatomyi s des ti ny, Freud s ai d. One mi ght be s urpri s ed that
the f emi ni s t movement' s
rej ecti onof
thi s def i ni ti on, phal l i c by
def i ni ti on, and s eal ed wi ththe s tamp of anatomy, opens onto
an al ternati ve that remai ns f undamental l y bi ol ogi cal and
ana-
tomi cal :
I ndeed, woman' s pl eas ure does not have to choos e
betweencl i toral acti vi ty andvagi nal pas s i vi ty, f or
exampl e. The pl eas ure of the vagi nal cares s does
not have to be s ubs ti tuted f or that
of
the cl i toral
cares s . They each contri bute, i rrepl aceabl y, to
woman' s
pl eas ure .
Amongother
cares s es . . .
Fon-
dl i ngthe breas ts , touchi ng
the vul va, s preadi ngthe
l i ps , s troki ng
the pos teri or
wal l
of the vagi na,
brus hi ngagai ns t the mouthof the uterus , and s o
on
.
To evoke onl y a f ewof the mos t s peci f i cal l y
f emal e pl eas ures .
Luce I ri garay
Parol e def emme?But i t i s al ways ananatomi cal s peech, al -
ways that of the body. What i s
s peci f i c to
women
l i es
i n
the
di f f racti on of the erogenous zones , i n adecentered eroti ci s m,
the di f f us e pol yval ence of s exual pl eas ure and the trans f i gura-
ti on of the enti re bodyby des i re
:
thi s
i s the theme s ong that
runs through the enti re f emal e, s exual revol uti on, but al s o
throughour enti re cul ture
of
the
body, f romthe Anagrammes
of Bel l mer to Del euze' s mechani zed connecti ons . I t i s al ways
aques ti on
of
the body, i f
not the anatomi cal , thenthe organi c,
erogenous body, the f uncti onal
bodythat, even
i n
f ragmented
and metaphori cal f orm, woul d have pl eas ure as i ts obj ect and
des i re as i ts natural mani f es tati on. But then ei ther the body i s
here
onl y
ametaphor ( and i f thi s i s the cas e, what i s the s exual
revol uti on, and our enti rt
cul ture,
havi ng
become abodycul -
ture, tal ki ngabout?) , or el s e, wi ththi s bodys peech, thi s wom-
ans peech, we
have,
very
def i ni tel y, entered i ntoananatomi cal
des ti ny, i nto anatomyas des ti ny. There i s nothi nghere radi cal -
l y oppos ed to Freud' s maxi m.
Nowhere i s i t a ques ti on of s educti on, the bodyworked by
arti f i ce ( and not by des i re) , the body
s educed,
the
body to be
1
0 SEDUCTI ON
seduced, t he bodyi n i t s passi on separ at ed f r omi t s t r ut h, f r om
t hat et hi cal t r ut h of desi r e whi ch obsesses us - t hat ser i ous,
pr of oundl yr el i gi ous t r ut h t hat t he body t odayi ncar nat es, and
f or whi ch seduct i on i s j ust as evi l anddecei t f ul
as
i t
once
was
f or r el i gi on. Nowher e
i s i t a quest i on of t he bodydel i ver ed t o
appear ances
.
Now, seduct i on al one i s r adi cal l y opposedt o anat -
omyas dest i ny. Seduct i on al one br eaks t he di st i nct i ve sexual i -
zat i on of bodi es andt he i nevi t abl e. phal l i c economyt hat r esul t s .
Anymovement t hat bel i eves i t can subver t a syst embyi t s
i nf r a- st r uct ur e i s nai ve. Seduct i on i s mor e i nt el l i gent , andseem-
i ngl y spont aneousl yso. I mmedi at el yobvi ous - seduct i on need
not be demonst r at ed, nor j ust i f i ed - i t i s t her e
al l
at
once, i n
t he r ever sal
of
al l t he al l eged dept h of t he r eal , of al l psychol o-
gy, anat omy, t r ut h,
or
power. I t knows ( t hi s i s i t s secr et ) t hat
t her e i s noanat omy, nor psychol ogy, t hat al l si gns ar e r ever si -
bl e. Not hi ng bel ongs t o i t , except appear ances - al l power s
el ude
i t , but i t " r ever si bi l i zes"
al l
t hei r si gns
.
Howcan'
one
oppose
seduct i on? Theonl yt hi ng t r ul yat st ake i s mast er yof t he st r at egy
of ' appear ances, agai nst t he f or ce of bei ng and r eal i t y. Ther e i s
noneed t opl ay bei ng agai nst bei ng, or t r ut h agai nst t r ut h
; why
become st uck under mi ni ng f oundat i ons,
when a l i ght mani pu-
l at i on of appear ances
wi l l
do.
Nowwoman i s but appear ance.
Andi t i s t he f emi ni ne as ap-
pear ance
t hat t hwar t s mascul i ne dept h. I nst ead of r i si ng up
agai nst such " i nsul t i ng" counsel , women woul d dowel l t ol et
t hemsel ves be seduced by i t s t r ut h, f or her e l i es t he secr et of
t hei r st r engt h, whi ch t heyar e i n t hepr ocess of l osi ng by
er ect i ng
a cont r ar y, f emi ni ne dept h.

.
I t i s
not qui t e t he f emi ni ne as sur f ace t hat i s opposed t o t he
mascul i ne as dept h, but t he f emi ni ne as i ndi st i nct ness of
sur -
f ace anddept h. Or as i ndi f f er ence t o t he aut hent i c andt he
ar -
t i f i ci al . J oan Ri vi er e,
i n " Femi ni t e sans mascar ade" ( La
Psychoanal yse no. 7) , makes a f undament al cl ai m- one t hat
cont ai ns wi t hi n i t al l seduct i on: " Whet her f emi ni ni t y be aut hen-
t i c or super f i ci al , i t i s f undament al l y t he same
t hi ng. "
Thi s can besai d
onl y
of
t he f emi ni ne. Themascul i ne, bycon-
t r ast , possesses unf ai l i ng power s of
di scr i mi nat i on and abso-
THEECLIPTICOFSEX1 1
l ut e cr i t er i a f or pr onounci ng t he t r ut h. The mascul i ne i s cer -
t ai n, t he f emi ni ne i s i nsol ubl e .
Now, sur pr i si ngl y, t hi s pr oposi t i on, t hat i n t he f emi ni ne t he
ver y di st i nct i on bet weenaut hent i ci t y and
ar t i f i ce i s wi t hout
f oundat i on, al so def i nes t he space
of
si mul at i on. Her e t oo one
cannot di st i ngui sh bet ween r eal i t y and i t s model s,
t her e bei ng
no
ot her r eal i t y t han t hat secr et ed by t he si mul at i ve model s,
j ust as t her e i s no ot her f emi ni ni t y t han t hat of appear ances.
Si mul at i on t oo i s i nsol ubl e.
Thi s st r ange coi nci dence poi nt s t o t he ambi gui t y of t he f emi -
ni ne : i t si mul t aneousl y pr ovi des r adi cal evi dence of si mul at i on,
and t he onl y possi bi l i t y of i t s over comi ng- i n seduct i on,
pr e-
ci sel y.
THEETERNAL
IRONYOF
THECOMMUNITY
Thi s f emi ni ni t y, t he
et ernal i rony
of t he communi t y.
Hegel
Femi ni ni t y as a pri nci pl e
of
uncert ai nt y.
It causes t he sexual pol es t owaver. It i s not t he pol e opposed
t o
mascul i ni t y, but what abol i shes t he di f f erent i al opposi t i on,
andt hus sexual i t y i t sel f , as i ncarnat edhi st ori cal l y i n t he mas-
cul i ne phal l ocracy, as i t
mi ght
be i ncarnat ed
i n t he f ut ure i n
a f emal e phal l ocracy.
If f emi ni ni t y i s a pri nci pl e of uncert ai nt y, i t i s where i t i s i t -
sel f uncert ai n t hat t hi s uncert ai nt y wi l l be great est : i n t he pl ay
of f emi ni ni t y.
Transvest i sm
. Nei t her homosexual s nor t ransexual s, t ransves-
t i t es l i ke t o pl ay wi t h t he i ndi st i nct ness of t he sexes. Thespel l
t hey cast , over t hemsel ves as wel l as ot hers, i s born of sexual
vaci l l at i on andnot , as i s cust omary, t he at t ract i on of one sex
f or
t he ot her.
They do
not real l y l i ke mal e men
or
f emal e wom-
en, nor t hose whodef i ne t hemsel ves, redundant l y, as di st i nct
sexual bei ngs. In order f or sex t o exi st , si gns must redupl i cat e
bi ol ogi cal bei ng. Here t he si gns are separat edf rombi ol ogy, and
consequent l y t he sexes
no
l onger exi st properl y speaki ng. What
THEECLI PTI C
OF
SEX 1
3
t r ansvest i t es l ove
i s
t hi s
game of si gns, what exci t es t hemi s t o
seduce t he si gns t hemsel ves
.
Wi t h
t hemever yt hi ngi s makeup,
t heat er ,
and seduct i on. They appear
obsessed wi t h games of
sex, but t hey
ar e obsessed, f i r st of al l , wi t h pl ay i t sel f ;
and
i f
t hei r l i ves appear mor e
sexual l y endowedt han our own, i t i s
because t hey make sex i nt o a t ot al ,
gest ur al , sensual , andr i t ual
game, an
exal t ed but i r oni c i nvocat i on .
Ni co seemed
so beaut i f ul onl y because her f emi ni ni t y ap-
pear edso compl et el y put on . She
emanat edsomet hi ngmor e
t han beaut y,
somet hi ngmor e subl i me, a di f f er ent
seduct i on.
Andt her e was
decept i on: she was a f al se dr ag
queen, a r eal
woman, i n f act ,
pl ayi ng t he queen. I t i s easi er
f or a non-
f emal e/ f emal e t han f or a r eal
woman, al r eady l egi t i mat ed by
her sex, t o move amongst t he si gns
andt ake seduct i on t o t he
l i mi t . Onl y
t he non- f emal e/ f emal e can
exer ci se an unt ai nt ed
f asci nat i on,
because s/ he i s mor e seduct i ve t han sexual .
The
f asci nat i on i s l ost when
t he r eal sex shows t hr ough;
t o be sur e,
some ot her desi r e may f i nd
somet hi ngher e, but pr eci sel y
no
l onger i n
t hat per f ect i on t hat bel ongs
t o ar t i f i ce al one.
Seduct i on
i s al ways mor e si ngul ar and
subl i me t han sex, and
i t commands t he
hi gher pr i ce.
One must not seek
t o gr oundt r ansvest i smi n bi sexual i t y
. For
t he sexes andsexual
di sposi t i ons, whet her mi xedor ambi va-
l ent , i ndef i ni t e or i nver t ed, ar e st i l l r eal ,
andst i l l bear wi t ness
t o t he psychi c r eal i t y
of sex. Her e, however , i t
i s
t hi s
ver y def i -
ni t i on of t he sexual
t hat i s ecl i psed. Not t hat t hi s
game i s per -
ver se. What i s per ver se
i s what per ver t s t he or der
of
t he
t er ms ;
but her e
t her e ar e no l onger any t er ms
t o per ver t , onl y si gns
t o seduce.
Nor shoul d
one seek t o gr oundt r ansvest i sm
i n t he uncons-
ci ous or i n " l at ent
homosexual i t y. " The ol dcasui st r y of l at en-
cy i s i t sel f a pr oduct of t he
sexual i magi nar y of sur f aces and
dept hs,
andal ways i mpl i es a di agnosi s
of sympt oms andpr og-
nosi s f or t hei r
cor r ect i on . But her e not hi ng
i s l at ent , ever yt hi ng
cal l s i nt o quest i on t he
ver y i dea of a secr et , det er mi nat e
i nst ance
of sex, t he i dea t hat t he deep
pl ay of phant asi es cont r ol s t he
super f i ci al pl ay of si gns
. On t he cont r ar y, ever yt hi ng
i s pl ayed
out i n t he
ver t i go of t hi s i nver si on,
t hi s t r anssubst ant i at i on
of
sex i nt o si gns t hat
i s t he secr et of al l seduct i on.
14 SEDUCTI ON
Per haps t he t r ansvest i t e' s abi l i t y t o seduce comes st r ai ght f r om
par ody - apar ody of sex by i t s over -si gni f i cat i on . Thepr ost i -
t ut i on of t r ansvest i t es woul dt hen have adi f f er ent meani ng f r om
t he mor e common pr ost i t ut i on of women. I t woul dbe cl oser
t o t he sacr ed pr ost i t ut i on pr act i ced by t he Anci ent s ( or t he
sacr ed
st at us
of
t he her maphr odi t e) .
I t
woul d be cont i guous
wi t h t he t heat er , or wi t h makeup, t he r i t ual and bur l esque os-
t ent at i on of a sex whose own pl easur e i s absent .
The seduct i on i t sel f i s coupl ed wi t h a par ody i n whi ch an
i mpl acabl e host i l i t y
t o
t he f emi ni ne shows t hr ough, andwhi ch
mi ght be i nt er pr et ed as a mal e appr opr i at i on of t he panopl y
of f emal e al l ur ement s. The t r ansvest i t e woul d t hen r epr oduce
t he si t uat i on of t he f i r st war r i or -- he al one was seduct i ve -
t he
woman bei ng nul ( consi der f asci sm, andi t s af f i ni t y f or t r ans-
vest i t es) . But r at her t han t he addi t i on of t he sexes i s not t hi s
t hei r i nval i dat i on? Anddoesn' t t he mascul i ne, i n t hi s mocker y
of
f emi ni ni t y, r esci nd i t s st at us and pr er ogr at i ves i n or der t o
become a cont r apunt al el ement i n a r i t ual game?
I n any case, t hi s par ody of f emi ni ni t y i s not qui t e as
acer bi c
as onemi ght t hi nk, si nce i t i s t he par ody of f emi ni ni t y
as men
i magi ne and st age i t , as wel l as phant asi ze i t . Af emi ni ni t y ex-
agger at ed, degr aded, par odi ed ( dr ag queens i n Bar cel ona keep
t hei r moust aches and expose t hei r hai r y chest s) , t he cl ai mi s
t hat i n t hi s soci et y f emi ni ni t y i s naught but t he si gns wi t h
whi ch
men r i g i t up. To over -si mul at e f emi ni ni t y i s t o suggest
t hat wom-
an i s but a mascul i ne model of si mul at i on
.
Her e i s a
chal l enge
t o t he f emal e model by way of a f emal e game,
a, chal l enge t o
t he f emal e/ woman by way of t he f emal e/ si gn. And i t i s possi -
bl e t hat t hi s l i vi ng, f ei gned denunci at i on, whi ch' pl ays on t he
f ur t her most bounds of ar t i f i ce, andsi mul t aneousl y pl ays wi t h
t he mechani sms of
f emi ni ni t y
t o
t he poi nt of per f ect i on, i s mor e
l uci d andr adi cal t han al l t he i dea-pol i t i cal cl ai ms of af emi ni n-
i t y " al i enat ed i n i t s bei ng. " Her e f emi ni ni t y i s sai d t o have no
bei ng ( no nat ur e, wr i t i ng, si ngul ar pl easur es
or , as Fr eud sai d,
par t i cul ar i zed l i bi do) . Cont r ar y t o ever y sear ch f or an
aut hen-
t i c f emi ni ni t y,
f or
a
woman' s speech, et c. , t he cl ai mher e i s t hat
t he f emal e i s not hi ng, and t hat t hi s i s her st r engt h.
Her e i s amor e subt l e r esponse t han f emi ni sm' s out r i ght deni al
of t he l awof cast r at i on
.
For
t he l at t er encount er s symbol i c, not
THEECLI PTI COFSEX 1 5
anat omi cal f at e, one t hat wei ghs on al l possi bl e sexual i t y
. The
over t ur ni ngof t hi s l aw, t her ef or e, can onl y r esul t f r omi t spar od-
i c r esol ut i on, f r omt he ex- cent r i ci t y of t he
si gns
of
f emi ni ni t y,
t he r edupl i cat i on of si gns t hat put s an endt o ever y i nsol ubl e
bi ol ogy, or met aphysi cs of t he sexes. Makeup i s not hi ng el se :
a t r i umphant par ody, a sol ut i on by excess, t he sur f ace hyper -
si mul at i onof t hi s i n- dept h si mul at i on t hat i s i t sel f t he symbol -
i c l awof cast r at i on - a t r anssexual game of seduct i on.
The i r ony
of
ar t i f i ci al
pr act i ces : t he pecul i ar
abi l i t y
of
t he
pai nt edwomanor pr ost i t ut e t o exagger at e her f eat ur es, t o t ur n
t hemi nt o mor e t han a si gn,
andby t hi s usage of , not
t he
f al se
as opposedt o t he t r ue, but t he mor e f al se t han f al se,
t o
i ncar -
nat e t he peaks of sexual i t y whi l e si mul t aneousl y bei ngabsor bed
i n t hei r si mul at i on. The i r ony pr oper t o t he const i t ut i on of wom-
an as i dol or sex obj ect : i n her cl osed per f ect i on, she put s an
endt o sex pl ay andr ef er s man, t he l or dandmast er
of
sexual
r eal i t y, t o hi s t r anspar ency as an i magi nar y subj ect . The i r on-
i c power of t he obj ect , t hen, whi ch she l oses when pr omot ed
t o t he st at us of a subj ect .
Al l mascul i ne power i s a power t o pr oduce. Al l t hat i s
pr oduced, be
i t
t he pr oduct i on of woman as f emal e, f al l s
wi -
t hi n t he r egi st er of mascul i ne power . The onl y, andi r r esi st i bl e,
power of f emi ni ni t y i s t he i nver se power of seduct i on. I n i t sel f
i t i s nul , seduct i on has no power of i t s own, onl y t hat of an-
nul i ng t he power of pr oduct i on. But i t al ways annul s t he l at t er
.
Has t her e, mor eover , ever been a phal l i c power ? Thi s ent i r e
hi st or y
of
pat r i ar chal domi nat i on, of phal l ocr acy, t he i mmemor i -
al mal e pr i vi l ege, i s per haps onl y a st or y. Begi nni ng wi t h t he
exchange of women i n pr i mi t i ve soci et i es, st upi dl y i nt er pr et -
edas t he f i r st st age of woman- as- obj ect . Al l t hat we have been
askedt o bel i eve - t he uni ver sal di scour se on t he i nequal i t y of
t he sexes, t he t heme song of an egal i t ar i an andr evol ut i onar y
moder ni t y
( r ei nf or ced, t hese days, wi t h al l t he ener gi es of
a
f ai l edr evol ut i on) - i s per haps one gi gant i c mi sunder st andi ng.
The opposi t e hypot hesi s i s j ust as pl ausi bl e and, f r oma cer t ai n
per spect i ve, mor e i nt er est i ng - t hat i s, t hat t he f emi ni ne has
never
been domi nat ed, but has al ways been
domi nant . The
f emi -
ni ne consi der ednot as a sex, but as t he f or mt r ansver sal t o ev-
er y sex,
as
wel l as
t o
ever y
power , as t he secr et , vi r ul ent f or m
1 6 SEDUCTI ON
of i n- sexual i t y. The f emi ni ne as a chal l enge whose devast at i on
can be exper i enced
t oday t hr oughout t he
ent i r e expanse
of
sex-
ual i t y And hasn' t t hi s chal l enge, whi chi s
al so
t hat
of
seduc-
t i on, al ways been t r i umphant ?
I n t hi s sense, t he mascul i ne has al ways been but a r esi dual ,
secondar y and f r agi l e f or mat i on, one t hat must be def ended
by r et r enchment s, i nst i t ut i ons, and ar t i f i ces . The phal l i c f or -
t r ess of f er s al l t he si gns of a f or t r ess, t hat i s t o say, of weakness .
I t
can def end i t sel f onl y f r omt he r ampar t s
of
a mani f est sexu-
al i t y, of a f i nal i t y of sex t hat exhaust s i t sel f i n r epr oduct i on, or
i n t he or gasm.
One can hypot hesi ze t hat t he f emi ni ne i s t he onl y sex, and
t hat t he mascul i ne onl y exi st s by a super human ef f or t t o l eave
i t . Amoment ' s di st r act i on, and one f al l s back i nt o t he f emi ni ne .
The f emi ni ne woul d have a deci si ve advant age, t he mascul i ne
a def i ni t e handi cap. One sees
howr i di cul ous i t i s
t o
want t o
" l i ber at e" t he one i n or der t hat i t accede t o
t he f r agi l i t y of t he
ot her ' s " power , "
t o
t he eccent r i c, par adoxi cal , par anoi d and t i r e-
some mascul i ne st at e.
The phal l i c f abl e r ever sed: wher ewoman i s cr eat ed f r omman
by subt r act i on, her e i t i s man cr eat ed f r omwoman by excep-
t i on.
A
f abl e easi l y st r engt hened by
Bet t l ehei m' s anal ysi s i n Sym-
bol i c Wounds, wher e menar e sai d t o have er ect ed t hei r power s
and i nst i t ut i ons i n or der t o t hwar t t he or i gi nal l y f ar super i or
power s of women. The
dr i vi ng f or ce
i s
not peni s, envy, but on
t he cont r ar y, man' s j eal ousy of woman' s power of
f er t i l i zat i on.
Thi s f emal e advant age coul d not be at oned;
a di f f er ent or der
had t o
be bui l t at al l cost s, a mascul i ne soci al , pol i t i cal andeco-
nomi c or der , wher ei n t hi s advant age coul d be r educed. Thus
t he r i t ual pr act i ces wher eby
t he
si gns of
t he
opposi t e
sex ar e
appr opr i at ed ar e l ar gel y mascul i ne: scar i f i cat i ons ; mut i l at i ons,
ar t i f i ci al vagi ni zat i ons, couvades, et c.
Al l t hi s i s as convi nci ng as a
par adoxi cal hypot hesi s can be
( and
i t i s al ways mor e i nt er est i ng; t han t he r ecei ved wi sdom) ,
but i n t he endi t onl y r ever ses t he t er ms, and so t ur ns t he f emi -
ni ne i nt o an or i gi nal subst ance, a sor t of ant hr opol ogi cal
i n-
f r ast r uct ur e . I t r ever ses t he
anat omi cal det er mi nat i on, but l et s
i t subsi st
as
dest i ny - and once agai n t he " i r ony of f emi ni ni t y"
i s l ost .
THEECLI PTI COFSEX 1 7
Thei r ony i s l os t when t hef emi ni nei s i ns t i t ut ed as a s ex, even
and aboveal l when i t i s i n or der t o denouncei t s oppr es s i on.
I t i s t he et er nal i l l us i on of enl i ght enment humani s m, whi ch
as pi r es t o l i ber at et hes er vi l es ex, r aceor cl as s
i n
t he
ver y
t er ms
of i t s s er vi t ude. That t hef emi ni ne becomes a s ex
i n
i t s
own
r i ght ! An abs ur di t y, i f pos ed i n nei t her t het er ms of s ex nor pow-
er .
Thef emi ni neknows nei t her equi val encenor val ue: i t i s , t her e-
f or e, not s ol ubl e i n power
.
I t i s not even s ubver s i ve,
i t
i s
r ever -
s i bl e.
Power ,
on
t heot her hand, i s s ol ubl e i n t her ever s i bi l i t y
of t hef emi ni ne. I f t he " f act s " cannot deci de whet her i t was
t hemas cul i neor f emi ni ne t hat was domi nant t hr oughout t he
ages ( onceagai n, t het hes i s of women' s oppr es s i on i s bas ed on
a car i cat ur al phal l ocr at i c myt h) , by cont r as t , i t r emai ns cl ear
t hat i n mat t er s of s exual i t y, t he r ever s i bl e f or mpr evai l s over
t hel i near f or m. Theexcl uded f or mpr evai l s , s ecr et l y, over t he
domi nant f or m. Thes educt i ve f or mpr evai l s over t hepr oduc-
t i ve f or m.
Femi ni ni t y i n t hi s s ens ei s
on
t hes ames i de as madnes s . I t
i s becaus emadnes s s ecr et l y pr evai l s t hat i t mus t be nor mal i zed
( t hanks t o, amongs t ot her t hi ngs , t hehypot hes i s of t heuncons -
ci ous ) . I t i s becaus ef emi ni ni t y s ecr et l y pr evai l s t hat
i t
mus t
be
r ecycl ed and nor mal i zed ( i n s exual l i ber at i on i n par t i cul ar ) .
And i n t he or gas m.
Thedes poi l ment of t heor gas m, t heabs enceof s exual pl eas -
ur e, i s of t en advanced as char act er i s t i c of women' s oppr es s i on.
A
f l agr ant i nj us t i cewhos ei mmedi at er ect i f i cat i onever yonemus t
pur s ue
i n
accor d
wi t ht hei nj unct i ons
of
a
s or t of
l ong- di s t ance
r ace or s ex r al l y. Sexual pl eas ur e has becomea r equi s i t e and
a f undament al r i ght . Themos t r ecent of t her i ght s of man, i t
has acceded t o t hedi gni t y
of
a cat egor i cal i mper at i ve. I t
i s
i m-
mor al t o act ot her wi s e. But t hi s i mper at i ve does not even have
t heKant i an char mof endl es s f i nal i t i es . As t hemanagement and
s el f - management of des i r e, i t s i mpos i t i on does not , no mor e
t han t hat of t hel aw, al l owi gnor ance as a def ens e.
But t hi s i s t o r emai n unawar et hat s exual pl eas ur et oo i s r ever -
18 SEDUCTI ON
si bl e,
t hat i s t o sayt hat , i n t he
absence or deni al of t he orgasm,
superi or
i nt ensi t y i s possi bl e. I t i s
here, where t he endof sex
becomes al eat oryagai n, t hat
somet hi ngari ses t hat can be
cal l ed
seduct i onor del i ght . Or
agai n, sexual pl easure canbe
j ust apret ext
for anot her, more exci t i ng, more
passi onat e game. Thi s i s
what
occurredi n TheEmpi re of
t he Senses, where t he ai m
was t o push
sexual pl easure
t o i t s l i mi t andbeyond- a chal l enge
t hat prevai l s
over t he worki ngs of
desi re, because i t i s much
more di zzyi ng,
because i t
i nvol ves t he passi ons whi l e t he
ot her i mpl i es onl y a dri ve.
But
t hi s vert i gocanbe equal l y
present i n t he rej ect i onof
sex-
ual pl easure
. Whoknows i f women, far
frombei ng"despoi l ed, "
have
not , fromt i me i mmemori al , been
pl ayi nga game of
t hei r
ownby t ri umphant l y assert i nga
ri ght t o sexual ret i cence?
I f
t hey have not , fromt he dept hs of
t hei r sexual i mpassi bi l i t y, been
t hrowi ngdowna chal l enge,
chal l engi ngmen' s pl easure
t o be
but t he pl easure of
menal one? Noone knows t o
what dest ruc-
t i ve dept hs
such provocat i on can go,
nor what omni pot ence
i t
i mpl i es . Men, reduced t o sol i t ary
pl easures, and enmeshed
wi t hi n t he di rect i ves of
del i ght andconquest ,
never di d fi nd
a wayout .
Who
wont hi s game wi t h i t s di fferent st rat egi es?
Men, ap-
parent l y,
al l downt he l i ne. But i t i s byno
means cert ai nt hat t hey
di dnot l ose t hemsel ves i n t hi s
t errai n andbecome boggeddown
( as i n t hat of t he sei zure of
power) consequent t o a sort of
forward
fl i ght t hat coul d
nei t her assure t hemof safet y,
nor rel i eve t hem
of t hei r secret
despai r at what hadescaped
t hem- what ever
t hei r gai ns or
cal cul at i ons . Thi s hadt o end: i t
was i mperat i ve
t hat
womenhave orgasms. Measures
had
t o
be t aken t o l i ber-
at e t hemandmake t hem
cl i max-- t herebyendi ngt hi s unbeara-
bl e chal l enge t hat
ul t i mat el y nul l i fi es sexual
pl easure i n a
possi bl e
st rat egy of non-pl easure.
For sexual pl easure
knows
no
st rat egy: i t i s onl yenergy
seeki nganout l et . I t i s t herefore
qui t e
i nferi or t o anyst rat egy t hat uses
i t as i t s mat eri al , anduses
desi re
i t sel f as at act i cal
el ement . Thi s i s t he
cent ral t heme of t he l i ber-
t i ne
sexual i t yof t he ei ght eent h cent ury,
fromLacl os t o Casanova
andSade ( i ncl udi ng
Ki erkegaardi n Di aryof t he
Seducer), for
whom
sexual i t yst i l l ret ai ns i t s ceremoni al ,
ri t ual andst rat egi c
charact er, before si nki ng, wi t h
t he Ri ght s of Man; andpsychol -
ogy, i nt o t he reveal ed
t rut h of sex.
THEECLI PTI COF
SEX 1 9
Here t hen i s t he era
of
t he pi l l when s exual pl eas ure i s
decreed. Theendof t heri ght t o s exual ret i cence. Womenmus t
real i ze t hat t hey arebei ng di s pos s es s ed of
s omet hi ng
es s ent i al
f or t hem
t o
put up s o much res i s t ance ( al l t hos e ghos t s of
"mi s s ed" act s ) t o t he "rat i onal " adopt i on
of
t he pi l l . Thes ame
res i s t ance as t hat of ent i re generat i ons t o s chool , medi ci ne, s ecu-
ri t y andwork. Thes ameprof oundi nt ui t i on about t he
ravages
of an unf et t ered l i bert y, s peech or pl eas ure. Def i ance, t heot her' s
def i ance, i s no l onger pos s i bl e: al l s ymbol i c l ogi c has been
el i mi -
nat ed
t o
t headvant age
of
a permanent erect i on and i t s bl ack-
mai l ( wi t hout count i ng t he t endenci ous l oweri ng of t he rat e
of s exual pl eas ure i t s el f ) .
The "t radi t i onal "
woman' s
s exual i t y was
nei t her repres s ed
nor f orbi dden. Wi t hi n her rol e s hewas ent i rel y hers el f ; s hewas
i n
no way
def eat ed, nor pas s i ve, nor di ds he dream
of
her f u-
t ure "l i berat i on. " I t i s t he beaut i f ul s oul s who, ret ros pect i vel y,
s ee
women
as
al i enat ed f rom
t i me
i mmemori al ,
andt hen
l i ber-
at ed. And t here i s a prof ound di s dai n i n t hi s vi s i on, t he s ame
di s dai n as t hat s hownt owards t he"al i enat ed" mas s es s uppos edl y
i ncapabl e of bei ng anyt hi ng but mys t i f i ed s heep.
I t i s eas y t o pai nt a pi ct ure of woman al i enat ed t hrough t he
ages , and t hen open t he doors of des i re
f or
her under
t he
aus pi ces of t he revol ut i on andps ychoanal ys i s
. I t i s
al l
s o
s i m-
pl e, s o obs cenei n i t s s i mpl i ci t y - wors e, i t i mpl i es t hevery es -
s ence of s exi s mand raci s m: commi s erat i on.
Fort unat el y, t he
f emal e has never
f i t
t hi s i mage. She has
al -
ways hadher own s t rat egy, t he unremi t t i ng, wi nni ng s t rat egy
of chal l enge ( one of whos e maj or f orms i s s educt i on) . There
i s no need t o l ament t he wrongs s he s uf f ered, nor t o want t o
rect i f y t hem.
No needt o pl ay t hel over of j us t i ce f or t he weak-
er s ex. No needt o mort gage everyt hi ng f or s omel i berat i on
or
des i re whos es ecret had t o wai t t i l l t he t went i et h cent ury t o
bereveal ed. At each moment of t hes t ory t hegamewas pl ayed
wi t h a f ul l deck, wi t h al l t hecards , i ncl udi ng t he t rumps . And
mendi dnot wi n, not at al l . Ont hecont rary, i t
i s
womenwho
arenowabout t o l os e, preci s el y under t hes i gn of s exual pl eas -
20 SEDUCTION
ur e - but t hi s i s
anot her s t or y.
It i s t he s t or y of t he f emi ni ne
i n t he pr es ent t ens e, i n a cul -
t ur e t hat pr oduces ever yt hi ng,
s nakes ever yt hi ng s peak, ever y-
t hi ng babbl e,
ever yt hi ng cl i max. The pr omot i on' of
t he f emal e
as a s ex
i n i t s ownr i ght ( equal r i ght s , equal pl eas ur es ) ,
of t he
f emal e as val ue - at t he expens e of t he
f emal e as a pr i nci pl e
of
uncer t ai nt y. Al l s exual l i ber at i on l i es
i n t hi s s t r at egy: t he
i m-
pos i t i on of t he r i ght s , s t at us
andpl eas ur e of women
. The over -
expos i ng and s t agi ng of
t he f emal e as s ex, and of t he
or gas m
as t he r epeat ed pr oof of
s ex.
Por nogr aphy s t at es t hi s cl ear l y At r i l ogy of
s pr ead, s ens ual -
i s mand s i gni f i cat i on, por nogr aphy
pr omot es f emal e s exual
pl eas ur e i n s o exagger at ed a
manner , onl y i n or der t o bet t er
bur y t he
uncer t ai nt y t hat hover s over
t he "bl ack cont i nent . "
No mor e of
t hat "et er nal i r ony of t he
communi t y" of whi ch
Hegel s poke. Hencef or t h women
wi l l cl i max, and wi l l
know
why. Al l f emi ni ni t y wi l l be
made vi s i bl e - womanas
embl emat i c
of or gas m, and
or gas mas embl emat i c of s exual i t y. No
mor e un-
cer t ai nt y, no
mor e s ecr et s . Thi s i s t he
r adi cal obs ceni t y t hat i s
begi nni ng.
Pas ol i ni ' s Sal o, or
a 120Days - - a ver i t abl e
t wi l i ght of s educ-
t i on.
Al l r ever s i bi l i t y has been
abol i s hed i n accor dance wi t h
an
i mpl acabl e l ogi c .
Ever yt hi ng i s i r r ever s i bl y mas cul i ne
and
dead. Event he
compl i ci t y, t he pr omi s cui t y
bet weenexecut i on-
er s and
vi ct i ms has di s appear ed: i nani mat e
t or t ur e, per pet r at -
ed
wi t hout emot i on, a col d
machi nat i on. ( Her e one per cei ves
t hat s exual
gr at i f i cat i on i s t r ul y t he i ndus t r i al
us uf r uct of t he
body,
and t he oppos i t e of al l s educt i on
: i t i s a pr oduct of
ex-
t r act i on,
a t echnol ogi cal pr oduct of
amachi ner y of bodi es ,
a
l ogi s t i cs of pl eas ur e
whi ch goes s t r ai ght t o i t s
obj ect i ve, onl y
t o
f i nd i t s obj ect dead) .
The f i l m
i l l us t r at es t he t r ut h t hat
i n
a
domi nant mas cul i ne
s ys t em, andi n ever y domi nant
s ys t em( whi ch t her eby
becomes
mascul i ne) , i t i s
f emi ni ni t y t hat i ncar nat es r ever si bi l i t y, t he pos-
si bi l i t y of pl ay and
symbol i c i nvol vement . Sal o i s a uni ver se
compl et el y sani t i zed
of t hat mi ni mumof seduct i on t hat pr o-
vi des t he st akes not j ust of sex, but
of ever y r el at i on, i ncl udi ng
deat h andt he exchange of deat h ( t hi s
i s expr essedi n Sal o, as
i n
Sade, by t he pr edomi nance of sodomy) . I t
i s her e t hat i t be-
comes appar ent
t hat t he f emi ni ne i s not a sex ( opposed t o t he
ot her ) , but what count er s
t he sex t hat al one has f ul l r i ght s and
t he f ul l exer ci se of t hese r i ght s,
t he sex t hat hol ds a monopol y
on sex: t he mascul i ne, i t sel f haunt ed
by t he f ear of somet hi ng
ot her , of whi ch sex i s but t he
di senchant edf or m: seduct i on.
The l at t er i s a game, sex i s a
f unct i on. Seduct i on supposes a
r i t ual or der , sex anddesi r e a nat ur al or der . I t
i s t hese t wo f un-
dament al f or ms t hat
conf r ont each ot her i n t he mal e andf e-
mal e, andnot some bi ol ogi cal
di f f er ence or some nai ve r i val r y
of power .
THEECLI PTI COFSEX
2
1
The
f emi ni ne i s not j ust seduct i on; i t al so suggest s
a chal l enge
t o t he mal e
t o be t he sex, t o monopol i ze sex andsexual
pl eas-
ur e, a chal l enge
t o go t o t he l i mi t s of i t s hegemony andexer -
ci se i t unt o deat h. Today phal l ocr acy i s
col l apsi ng under t he
pr essur e of t hi s chal l enge ( pr esent t hr oughout
our cul t ur e' s sex-
ual hi st or y) ,
andi t s i nabi l i t y t o meet i t . Our ent i r e
concept i on
of sexual i t y may
be col l apsi ng because const r uct edar oundt he
phal l i c f unct i on andt he
posi t i ve def i ni t i on of sex . Ever yposi -
t i ve f or mcan accommodat e i t sel f
t o i t s negat i ve f or m, but un-
der st ands t he
chal l enge of t he r ever si bl e f or mas mor t al . Ever y
st r uct ur e can
adapt t o i t s subver si on or i nver si on, but not
t o
t he r ever si on of i t s t er ms
. Seduct i on i s t hi s r ever si bl e f or m.
Not
t he seduct i on t o whi ch women have
been hi st or i cal l y
consi gned: t he
cul t ur e of t he gynaeceum,
of r ouge andl ace,
a seduct i on r ewor kedby t he
mi r r or st age andt he f emal e i m-
agi nar y,
t he t er r ai n of sex games and
r uses ( t hough her e l i es
t he onl y
bodi l y r i t ual of west er n cul t ur e l ef t , al l
t he ot her s havi ng
di sappear ed, i ncl udi ng
pol i t eness) . But seduct i on as an i r oni c,
al t er nat i ve f or m,
one t hat br eaks t he r ef er ent i al i t y
of sex and
pr ovi des a space,
not of desi r e, but of pl ay anddef i ance.
22 SEDUCTI ON
Thi s i s what occur s
i n
the most banal games of seducti on
:
I shy away; i t i s not youwhowi l l gi ve me pl easur e, i t i s I who
wi l l
make you
pl ay,
and ther eby r ob you of your pl easur e.
A
game i n conti nuous movement - - one cannot assume that sex-
ual str ategi es al one
ar e i nvol ved. Ther e i s, above; al l , astr ategy
of di spl acement ( se- ducer e: to take asi de, to di ver t f r omone' s
path) that i mpl i es a di stor ti on of sex' s tr uth. To pl ay i s not to
take pl easur e. Seducti on, as apassi on andas a game at the l ev-
el of the si gn, acqui r es acer tai n sover ei gnty; i t i s seducti on that
pr evai l s i n the l ongter mbecause i t i mpl i es ar ever si bl e, i ndeter -
mi nate or der.
The gl amour of seducti on i s qui te super i or to; the Chr i sti an
consol ati on
of
the pl easur es of the f l esh. Onewants us to con-
,
si der the l atter anatur al f i nal i ty- - -
andmany ar e
dr i ven madf or
f ai l i ng
to
attai n i t . But l ove has nothi ng
to do
wi th sex dr i ves,
i f not i n the l i bi di nal l ook of our contempor ar y cul tur e. Love
i s a chal l enge and a pr i ze: a chal l enge to the other to r etur n
the l ove.
And
to be seduced i s to
chal l enge the other
to
be
seduced i n tur n ( ther e i s no f i ner ar gument than to accuse a
,
woman of bei ngi ncapabl e of bei ngseduced) . Per ver si on, f r om
thi s per specti ve takes on a somewhat di f f er ent meani ng: , i t i s
to pr etend
to
be seducedwi thout bei ngseduced, wi thout be-
i ngcapabl e of bei ngseduced.
Thel awof seducti on takes the f or mof an uni nter r upted r i tual
exchange wher eseducer andseducedconstantl y r ai se
the stakes
i n agame that never ends . And cannot endsi nce the
di vi di ng
l i ne. that def i nes the vi ctor y of the one and the def eat of
the
other , i s i l l egi bl e. Andbecause ther e i s no l i mi t to, the chal l enge
to l ove mor e than one i s l oved, or to be al ways mor e seduced
- i f not death. Sex, on the other hand, has a qui ck, banal
end:
the or gasm,
the i mmedi ate f or m
of
desi r e' s r eal i zati on.
I n anal ysi s, one can see the extr eme danger that
may
be
i ncur r ed
by a
man who begi ns to l i sten
to a woman' s demand f or sexual pl easur e. I f ,
thr ough her desi r e, a woman al ter s the unal ter a-
bi l i ty wi thi n whi ch aman cannot hel p but' encl ose
her , i f she her sel f becomes an i mmedi ate and
l i mi tl ess demand, i f she no l onger r emai ns wi thi n
THEECLI PTI C
OF
SEX 23
t hi s encl os ur e
andi s no l onger hel dbyi t , t he man
f i nds
hi ms el f cas t i nt o as ubs ui ci dal s t at e
.
A
demand
t hat t ol er at es no del ay, no
excus e, t hat i s l i mi t l es s
wi t h r egar d
t o
i nt ens i t y
anddur at i on, s hat t er s t he
abs ol ut e r epr es ent edby woman, by f emi ni ne
s ex-
ual i t y, andeven by f emi ni ne pl eas ur e
. . . . Femi ni ne
s exual pl eas ur e can al ways
be r ender ed di vi ne
agai n, and
t hus cont r ol l ed, r educedt o t he cool -
nes s
of mar bl e br eas t s , wher eas t he demand
f or
enj oyment made by a woman
t o t he manwhoi s
boundt o her wi t hout bei ng
abl e t o f l ee, caus es
hi m
t o l os e hi s bear i ngs andt he f eel i ng
of pur e
cont i ngency. . . Whenal l des i r e i s channel l ed
i nt o
t he
demandf or enj oyment , t he
wor l dt ur ns up-
s i de down andbur s t s as under . Thi s
i s doubt l es s
why our cul t ur e has t aught women
t o demand
not hi ng i n or der
t o i nduce t hemt o des i r e
not hi ng. . . '
And
t hi s " des i r e, al l of whi ch i s channel l ed
i nt o t he demand
f or
enj oyment " ? Does i t s t i l l concer n
woman' s " des i r e" ? I s n' t
t hi s af or mof
madnes s , whi ch has but l i t t l e t o do wi t h " l i ber a-
t i on" ?
What i s t hi s new, f emi ni ne f i gur e
of unl i mi t eds exual de-
mand, an unl i mi t edcl ai m
t o s exual gr at i f i cat i on? Thi s , i n ef f ect ,
i s t he endpoi nt t o whi ch our cul t ur e
i s r us hi ng - andRous t ang
i s r i ght , i t conceal s a f or m
of s ubs ui ci dal col l ect i ve vi ol ence
.
Andnot j us t f or men,
but f or woment oo, andf or s exual i t y i n
gener al .
We s ay no t o t hos e who l ove onl y
women; t hos e
whol ove onl ymen; t hos e who
l ove onl y chi l dr en
( t her e ar e al s o t he el der l y,
s ados , machos , dogs ,
cat s ) . . . The new
mi l i t ant , wi t h hi s r ef i nedegocen-
t r i ci s m, cl ai ms
ar i ght t o hi s s exual r aci s m. But
we
s ay
no t o
al l
s ect ar i ani s m. I f one mus t become
a
mi s ogyni s t t o be apeder as t ,
an andr ophobe t o be
1 . Fr ani ; oi s Rous t ang, Di r e Mas t er y
( Bal t i mor e: J ohns Hopki ns Pr es s ,
1982) ,
pp.
104- 5.
24 SEDUCTI ON
al esbi an, . . . i f one must r ej ect the
pl easur es of
the
ni ght, chance encounter s, andpi ck- ups i n or der
to def end onesel f agai nst r ape, then i n the name
of astr uggl e agai nst cer tai n pr ohi bi ti ons, one has
r etur ned to other taboos, mor al i sms, nor ms,
bl i nker s . . .
Wi thi n
our bodywe exper i ence not one sex, not
two,
but
a
mul ti tude
of sexes . We donot see aman,
or woman, but ahuman bei ng, anthr opomor ph-
i c( ! ) . . . Our bodi es ar e ti r ed of al l the ster eotyped
cul tur al bar r i er s, al l the physi ol ogi cal segr egati on. . .
We ar e mal e andf emal e, adul ts andchi l dr en, f ai r i es,
dykes, andgays, f ucker s andf ucked, bugger s and
bugger ed. We do
not
accept
the r educti on
of
al l
our sexual r i chness
to
asi ngl e sex. Our sapphi sm
i s onl yone f acet of our sexual i ty. We r ef use' tol i mi t
our sel ves to what soci ety demands of us, that i s,
that we
be
ei ther
heter o,
l esbi an,
gay
the whol e
gamut of pr omoti onal pr oducts . We ar e unr easona-
bl e i n al l our desi r es .
J udi th Bel l adonna Bar bar a Penton
Li bd, J ul y 1978
The f r enzy of unl i mi ted sex, an exacer batedventi l ati on of
desi r e onto demandandgr ati f i cati on - doesn' t thi s consti tute
ar ever sal
of
what Roustang descr i bed: i f unti l nowwomen wer e
taught to demand
nothi ng
i n or der that theydesi r ed
nothi ng,
ar e they not
now
bei ng
taught
to demand
ever ythi ng i n or der
to desi r e nothi ng? The enti r e bl ack conti nent decodedbysex-
ual gr ati f i cati on?
Mascul i ni tywoul dbe cl oser to the Law, f emi ni ni tycl oser to
sexual pl easur e . But i s not such pl easur e the axi omati cs of a
decoded sexual uni ver se - the f emi ni ne andl i ber ati ng r ef er -
ence pr oducedbythe gr adual enf eebl ement of
the Law, the Law
becomi ng an i nj uncti on
to
pl easur e af ter havi ng been i ts i nter -
di cti on. kn ef f ect
of
si mul ati on i nver ted: i t i s when pl easur e
seeks openl y to be autonomous, that i t i s tr ul y a pr oduct of
the Law. Or el se the Lawcol l apses, and
wher e the Lawdi sap-
pear s,
pl easur e i s i naugur ated
as
a newcontr act . What does i t
THE
ECLI PTI COFSEX 2 5
mat t er : not hi ng
has changed, and t he i nver si on of si gns i s but
a consequence of st r at egy.
Thi s i s t he si gni f i cance of t he pr esent
t ur nar ound, and of t he t wi n
pr i vi l egi ng of t he f emi ni ne and
pl easur e over t he mascul i ne and pr ohi bi t i on
t hat once domi -
nat edsexual
r eason. The exal t at i on of t he f emi ni ne
i s a per f ect
i nst r ument f or t he
unpr ecedent edgener al i zat i on andcont r ol l ed
ext ensi on of sexual Reason.
An unexpect ed f at e, one t hat
cut s shor t al l t he i l l usi ons of
desi r e and al l t he r at i onal i zat i ons
of l i ber at i on. Mar cuse:
What wi t hi n a pat r i ar chal syst emappear s
as t he
f emi ni ne ant i t hesi s
of mascul i ne val ues woul d t hen
t r ul y const i t ut e a
r epr essed soci al and hi st or i cal
al t er nat i ve - t he soci al i st
al t er nat i ve. . . To doaway
wi t hpat r i ar chal soci et y i s
t o
deny al l
t he par t i cu-
l ar
qual i t i es at t r i but ed t o womenas women,
and
t hus
t o
ext end
t hese qual i t i es t o al l sect or s
of so-
ci al l i f e, t o wor k and
l ei sur e al i ke. Women' s l i ber -
at i onwoul dt hen be, si mul t aneousl y, t he
l i ber at i on
of
men. . .
Act uel s,
Gal i l de, p.
33.
Suppose t he f emi ni ne
l i ber at ed andpl aced at t he ser vi ce
of
a newcol l ect i ve Er os ( t he
same modus oper andi as f or t he deat h
dr i ve - t he same di al ect i c al i gned
wi t h t he newsoci al Er os) .
But what happens i f t hef emi ni ne, f ar f r om
bei ngaset of speci f i c
qual i t i es ( whi ch i t
may have been when r epr essed,
but onl y
t hen) , pr oves, once " l i ber at ed, "
t o be t he expr essi on of an er ot i c
i ndet er mi nat i on, and of t he
l oss of any speci f i c qual i t i es,
as
much i n
t he soci al as t he sexual spher e?
The si t uat i on
of t he f emi ni ne was qui t e i r oni c i n
seduct i on,
andi s j ust as i r oni c
t oday i n i t s i ndet er mi nat i onand
equi voca-
t i on; f or
i t s pr omot i on as subj ect i s
accompani edby i t s r et ur n
as obj ect , t hat
i s t o say, as gener al i zed por nogr aphy. Ast r ange
coi nci dence. Women' s l i ber at i on
woul dver y muchl i ke t o cast
t he deci di ng
vot e agai nst t hi s obj ect i f i cat i on.
But t he cause i s
hopel ess, f or t he si gni f i cance
of t he l i ber at i on of t he f emi ni ne
l i es i n
i t s r adi cal ambi gui t y. Even
Roust ang' s t ext , whi ch t ends
t o suppor t t he
f l ood of f emal e demands, cannot
but have a
26 SEDUCTI ON
pr esent i ment of
t he cat ast r ophe t hat t he channel l i ng of
al l desi r e
i nt o t he demand
f or gr at i f i cat i on const i t ut es. Unl ess one con-
si der s
t he subsui ci dal st at e of men pr ovoked
by t hi s demand
as a deci si ve ar gument , t her e i s
not hi ng t hat l et s one di st i ngui sh
t he monst r osi t y of t hi s
demand f or f emal e gr at i f i cat i on f r om
t he monst r osi t y of
i t s t ot al i nt er di ct i on i n year s past .
Asi mi l ar
ambi gui t y canbe f ound i n t he mal e and
hi s weak-
ness .
Thepani c men f eel when f aced wi t h t he
` , ` l i ber at ed" f e-
mal e subj ect i s equal l ed onl y by
t hei r f r agi l i t y bef or e t he
por nogr aphi c chasmof t he
" al i enat ed" f emal e sex, t he f emal e
sex obj ect . Whet her a woman
demands sexual sat i sf act i on " by
becomi ng consci ous of
t he r at i onal i t y of her desi r e, " or of f er s
her sel f i n a st at e of t ot al pr ost i t ut i on -
whet her t he f emal e be
subj ect or
obj ect , l i ber at ed or pr ost i t ut ed, her sex
i s t o be
devour i ng,
a gapi ng vor aci t y. I t i s no acci dent
t hat al l por nog-
r aphy t ur ns ar ound t he f emal e sex
. Thi s i s because er ect i ons
ar e
never cer t ai n ( no scenes of i mpot ence i n
por nogr aphy, t hey
ar e aver t ed by t he
hal l uci nat i on of unr est r ai ned f emi ni ne sup-
pl y) : I n a sexual i t ymade pr obl emat i c by demands t o
pr ove and
demonst r at e i t sel f wi t hout di scont i nui t y,
t he mar ked posi t i on,
t he mascul i ne posi t i on, wi l l be
f r agi l e. Bycont r ast , t he f emal e
sex r emai ns equal t o
i t sel f i n i t s avai l abi l i t y, i n i t s chasm,
i t s
degr ee zer o. The
cont i nui t y
of
f emal e sexual i t y, as opposed t o
mal e
i nt er mi t t ency, i s enough t o ensur e i t s
super i or i t y at t he
l evel
of
t he or gani c r epr esent at i on of sexual
pl easur e, t he
r epr esent at i on of endl ess sex t hat has come t o
domi nat e our
f ant asi es .
Sexual l i ber at i on, l i ke t hat of
t he pr oduct i ve f or ces, i s pot en-
t i al l y l i mi t l ess . I t demands a pr of usi on
come t r ue, a " sexual l y
af f l uent soci et y. "
I t can no mor e t ol er at e a scar ci t y of
sexual
goods,
t han of mat er i al goods. Now, t hi s
ut opi an cont i nui t y
and avai l abi l i t y canonl y be i ncar nat ed
by t he f emal e sex. Thi s
i s whyi n t hi s soci et y
ever yt hi ng - obj ect s, goods, ser vi ces,
r e-
l at i ons of al l t ypes - wi l l be f er ni ni zed,
sexual i zed i n a f emi -
ni ne f ashi on. I n adver t i si ng i t i s not so much
a mat t er of addi ng
sex t o washi ng
machi nes ( whi ch i s absur d) as conf er r i ng on
ob-
j ect s t he
i magi nar y, f emal e qual i t y of bei ng avai l abl e
at wi l l , of
never bei ng r et r act i l e or al eat or y.
I n por nogr aphysexual i t y i s
l ul l ed byt hi s yawni ng monot o-
THEECLI PTI COFSEX 2 7
ny, wheref l acci d or erect i l e men pl ay onl y
a
nomi nal
rol e. Hard
core has changed not hi ng: t hemal ei s no l onger i nt erest i ng
be-
cause t oo det ermi ned,
t oo marked - t he phal l us as canoni cal
si gni f i er - and t hus t oo f ragi l e. Fasci nat i on moves t owards t he
neut er, t owards
an i ndet ermi nat echasm, a mobi l e, di f f usesex-
ual i t y . Thef emi ni ne' s hi st ori cal revenge af t er
so
many
cent u-
ri es
of
repressi on
and f ri gi di t y? Perhaps, but more l i kel y, t he
exhaust i on of sexual i t y, whet her
i t bet hemascul i ne sexual i t y
t hat
once nouri shed al l t he schemes of erect i l i t y, vert i cal i t y,
ascendancy, growt h, product i on,
et c . , and i s at present l ost i n
t he
obsessi ve si mul at i on of al l t hese t hemes -
or
a f emi ni ne
sexual i t y, as i ncarnat ed f rom
t i mei mmemori al i n seduct i on . To-
day, behi nd t he mechani cal obj ect i f i cat i on of t hesi gns
of
sex,
i t i s t he mascul i ne as f ragi l e,
and t he f emi ni ne as degree zero
whi ch have t he upper hand .
Weare i ndeed i n an ori gi nal si t uat i on as regards
sexual vi o-
l ence- vi ol ence donet o t he "subsui ci dal " mal e by unbri dl ed,
f emal e sensual i sm. But i t i s not
a mat t er of a reversal of t hehi st or-
i cal vi ol ence done t o women by mal e sexual f orce. The vi o-
l ence i nvol ved herei s rel at i ve t o t heneut ral i zat i on, depressi on
and col l apse of t he marked t erm
bef ore t he i rrupt i on of t he
non- marked t erm. I t i s not a real , generi c vi ol ence, but a vi o-
l ence
of di ssuasi on, t hevi ol ence of t heneut er, t hevi ol ence of
t he degree zero.
So t oo i s pornography : t he vi ol ence of sex neut ral i zed .
STEREO-PORNO
Take met o your roomandfuck:
me. There i s
s omet hi ng i ndefi nabl e i n
your vocabul ary; s omet hi ng l eft
; t o be
des i red.
Phi l i p Di ck
The Schi zos ' Bal l
71crni ng
everyt hi ng i nt o real i t y ,
J i mmyCl i ff
Thet rompe l ' oei l removes a
di mens i onfromreal s pace, and
t hi s account s for i t s s educt i on. Pornographyby
cont ras t adds
a di mens i ont o t he s pace of s ex, i t makes
t he l at t er morereal
t hant hereal
- andt hi s account s for i t s abs ence of s educt i on.
There i s no needt o s earchfor t hephant as i es
t hat haunt por-
nography
( fet i s hi s ms , pervers i ons , pri mal s cenes , et c. , ) , for t hey
arebarredbyanexces s of " real i t y. "
Perhaps pornographyi s onl y
anal l egory, t hat i s t o s ay, aforci ng of s i gns , abaroque
ent er-
pri s eof over-s i gni fi cat i on
t ouchi ngont he" grot es que" ( l i t eral -
l y, " grot es que" garden art added t o a rocky nat ure
as
pornographyadds t he vi vi dnes s ; of
anat omi cal det ai l ) .
Theobs ceni t yi t s el f burns andcons umes i t s obj ect
. Ones ees
fromup cl os e
what onehas never s eenbefore; t o one' s good
fort une, onehas never s eenone' s geni t al s
funct i onfroms o cl os e,
nor for t hat mat t er,
from
s o
general apers pect i ve. I t i s al l t oo
THEECLI PTI COFSEX 29
t r ue,
t oo
near
t o be t r ue.
And
i t i s t hi s t hat i s
f as ci nat i ng,
t hi s
exces s
of
r eal i t y, t hi s hyper r eal i t y
of
t hi ngs
. The
onl y
phant as y
i n por nogr aphy, i f t her e i s one, i s t hus not a phant as y of s ex,
but of t he r eal , andi t s abs or pt i on i nt o s omet hi ng ot her t han
t he r eal , t he hyper r eal . Por nogr aphi c voyeur i s mi s not a s exual
voyeur i s m, but a voyeur i s mof r epr es ent at i on andi t s per di t i on,
a
di zzi nes s
bor n of t he l os s of t he s cene andt he i r r upt i on of
t he obs cene.
Cons equent t o t he anat omi cal zoom, t he di mens i on of t he
r eal i s abol i s hed, t he di s t ance i mpl i edby t he gaze gi ves way
t o an i ns t ant aneous , exacer bat edr epr es ent at i on, t hat of s ex i n
i t s pur e s t at e, s t r i ppednot j us t of al l s educt i on, but of i t s i m-
age' s ver y pot ent i al i t y. Sex s o cl os e t hat i t mer ges wi t h i t s own
r epr es ent at i on : t he endof per s pect i val s pace, andt her ef or e, t hat
of
t he i magi nar y
andof phant as y - endof t he s cene, endof
an i l l us i on.
Obs ceni t y, however , i s not por nogr aphy. Tr adi t i onal obs ceni t y
s t i l l cont ai ns an el ement of t r ans gr es s i on, pr ovocat i on, or per -
ver s i on. I t
pl ays on r epr es s i on, wi t h phant as i es of vi ol ence . Wi t h
s exual
l i ber at i on
t hi s obs ceni t y di s appear s : Mar cus e' s " r epr es -
s i ve des ubl i mat i on" goes t hi s
r out e ( andeven
i f
i t has
not
pas s ed
i nt o gener al mor es , t he myt hi cal t r i umph of r el eas e t oday, l i ke
t hat of r epr es s i on yes t er day, i s t ot al ) . The newobs ceni t y, l i ke
t he newphi l os ophy ( l a nouvel l e phi l os ophy) ar i s es on t he bur y-
i ng gr ounds of t he ol d, andhas anot her meani ng. I t does not
pl ay wi t h vi ol ent s ex, s ex wi t h r eal s t akes , but wi t h s ex neu-
t r al i zedby t ol er ance
. Sex her e i s out r ageous l y " r ender ed, " but
i t i s t he r ender i ng of s omet hi ng t hat has been r emoved. Por -
nogr aphy i s i t s ar t i f i ci al s ynt hes i s , i t s cer emony but not i t s
cel ebr at i on. Somet hi ng neo or r et r o, l i ke t hos e gr een s paces
t hat
s ubs t i t ut e
t hei r chl or ophyl
ef f ect s f or a def unct nat ur e, and
f or t hi s r eas on, par t ake of t he s ame obs ceni t y as por nogr aphy.
Moder n unr eal i t y no l onger i mpl i es t he i magi nar y, i t engages
mor e r ef er ence, mor e t r ut h, mor e exact i t ude - i t cons i s t s i n hav-
i ng ever yt hi ng pas s i nt o t he abs ol ut e evi dence
of
t he r eal .
As
i n hyper r eal i s t pai nt i ngs ( t he pai nt i ngs of t he " magi c r eal i s t s " )
wher e one can di s cer n t he gr ai n
of
t he f ace' s s ki n, an unwont -
edmi cr os copi cs t hat l acks
even t he char mof t he uncanny.
Hyper r eal i s mi s not s ur r eal i s m, i t i s a vi s i on t hat hunt s down
30 SEDUCTI ON
seduct i on by means of vi si bi l i t y. One " gi ves you more. " Thi s
i s al ready t rue of col our
i n f i l m
or
t el evi si on. One gi ves you
so much - col our, l ust re, sex, al l i n hi gh f i del i t y; and wi t h al l
t he accent s ( t hat ' s l i f e! ) - t hat you have not hi ng t o add, t hat
i s
t o
say, not hi ng t o gi ve i n exchange. Absol ut e represssi on: by
gi vi ng youal i t t l e t oo muchonet akes awayeveryt hi ng. Beware
of what has been so wel l " rendered, " wheni t i s bei ng ret urned
t o you wi t hout you ever havi ng; gi ven i t !
Abewi l deri ng, cl aust rophobi c and obscene i mage, t hat of
J apanese quadrophoni cs: an
i deal l y
condi t i oned
' room, f ant as-
t i c t echni que, musi c i n f our di mensi ons, not j ust t he
t hree
of
t he envi roni ng space, but af ourt h, vi sceral
di mensi on
of
i nt er-
nal
space.
The t echni cal del i ri umof _ t he perf ect rest i t ut i on of
musi c ( Bach,
Mont everdi , Mozart ! ) t hat has never exi st ed , t hat
no
onehas ever heard, andt hat was not meant t o be heardl i ke
t hi s . Moreover, onedoes not " hear" i t , f or t he di st ance t hat al -
l ows one t o hear musi c, at a concert or somewhere el se, i s
abol i shed.
I nst ead i t permeat es one f romal l si de' s ; t here i s no
l onger anymusi cal space; i t i s t he si mul at i on of at ot al envi ron-
ment t hat di spossesses one of even t he mi ni mal anal yt i c per-
cept i on const i t ut i ve of musi c' s charm. The J apanese have
si mpl e- mi ndedl y, andi n compl et e goodf ai t h, conf used
t he real
wi t h t he great est number of di mensi ons possi bl e
. ' I f t hey coul d
const ruct
hexaphoni cs, t hey woul ddo i t . Now, i t i s by t hi s f ourt h
di mensi on. whi ch t hey have addedt o musi c, t hat t hey cast rat e
you of al l musi cal pl easure. Somet hi ng el se f asci nat es ( but no
l onger seduces) you: t echni cal perf ect i on, " hi gh f i del i t y, "
whi ch
i s j ust as obsessi ve andpuri t ani cal as t he
ot her, conj ugal f i del i -
t y Thi s t i me, however, one no l onger even
knows what obj ect
i t i s
f ai t hf ul
t o,
f or
no
oneknows wheret he real begi ns or ends,
nor underst ands, t heref ore, t he f ever of perf ect i bi l i t y t hat per-
si st s i n t he real ' s reproduct i on
.
Techni que i n t hi s sense di gs i t s owngrave. For at t he same
t i me t hat i t perf ect s t he means of synt hesi s, i t deepens t he
cri t er-
i a of anal ysi s and def i ni t i on t o such
an ext ent t hat t ot al f ai t h-
f ul ness,
exhaust i veness as regards t he real becomes f orever
i mpossi bl e. The real becomes avert i gi nous phant asy of
exact i -
t ude l ost i n t he i nf i ni t i smal
.
I n compari son wi t h, f or exampl e, t he t rompe- l bei l , whi ch
THEECLI PTI COFSEX
3
1
saves on one di mensi on, "normal " t hree- di mensi onal space i s
al ready debasedandi mpoveri shed by vi rt ue of anexcess of me-
ans ( al l t hat i s real ,
or
want s
t o be
real , const i t ut es a debase-
ment of t hi s t ype) . Quadrophoni cs, hyperst ereo, or hi f i
const i t ut e a concl usi ve debasement .
Pornography i s t he quadrophoni cs of sex. I t adds a t hi rd and
f ourt h t rack t o t he sexual act . I t i s t he hal l uci nat i on of det ai l
t hat rul es . Sci ence has al ready habi t uat ed us t o t hi s mi croscopi cs,
t hi s excess of t he real i n i t s mi croscopi c det ai l , t hi s voyeuri sm
of exact i t ude - a cl ose- up of t he i nvi si bl e st ruct ures of t he cel l
- t o t hi s not i on of an i nexorabl e t rut h t hat canno l onger be
measured
wi t h
ref erence t o t he pl ay of appearances, and t hat
canonl y be reveal ed by a sophi st i cat ed t echni cal apparat us . End
of t he secret .
What el se does pornography do, i ni t s shamvi si on, t han reveal
t he i nexorabl e, mi croscopi c t rut h of sex? I t i s di rect l y descended
f romamet aphysi cs t hat
supposes t he phant asy of ahi dden
t rut h
andi t s revel at i on, t he phant asy
of
"repressed" energy andi t s
product i on - on t he obscene scene of t he real . Thus t he i m-
passe of enl i ght enedt hought whenasked, shoul d one censure
pornography andchoose a wel l - t empered repressi on? There can
be no def i ni t i ve response i n t he af f i rmat i ve, f or pornography
has reason on i t s si de; i t i s part of t he devast at i on of t he
real ,
of
t he i nsane i l l usi on
of
t he real and i t s obj ect i ve "l i berat i on. "
One cannot l i berat e t he product i ve f orces wi t hout want i ngt o
"l i berat e" sex i n i t s brut e f unct i on; t hey are bot h equal l y ob-
scene.
The
real i st corrupt i on of sex, t he product i vi st corrup-
t i on
of l abour
- same
sympt oms, same combat
.
The equi val ent of t he conveyor bel t here, i s t heJ apanese vagi -
nal cycl orama - i t out does any st ri p- t ease. Prost i t ut es, t hei r t hi ghs
open,
si t t i ng
on t he edge of a pl at f orm, J apanese workers i n
t hei r shi rt - sl eeves ( i t i s a popul ar spect acl e) , permi t t ed t o shove
t hei r noses up t o t hei r eyebal l s wi t hi n t he woman' s vagi na i n
order t o see, t o see bet t er - but what ? They cl amber over each
ot her i n order t o gai n access, and al l t he whi l e t he prost i t ut es
speak t o t hemgent l y, or rebuke t hemsharpl y f or t he sake of
f orm. The rest
of
t he spect acl e, t he f l agel l at i ons, t he reci procal
mast urbat i on andt radi t i onal st ri p- t ease, pal es bef ore t hi s mo-
ment
of absol ut e obsceni t y,
t hi s
moment of vi sual
voraci t y t hat
3
2 SEDUCTI ON
goes
f ar beyondsexual possessi on. Asubl i me por nogr aphy: i f
t hey coul ddo i t , t hese guys woul dbe swal l owedup
whol ewi -
t hi n t he pr ost i t ut e. Anexal t at i on wi t h deat h? Per haps, but at
t he same t i me t hey ar e compar i ng and comment i ng on t he
r espect i ve vagi nas i n mor t al ser i ousness, wi t hout ever smi l i ng
or br eaki ng out i n l aught er , andwi t hout ever t r yi ng t o t ouch
- except whenpl ayi ng by t he r ul es. No l ewdness, but an
ex-
t r emel yser i ous, i nf ant i l e act bor ne of anundi vi dedf asci nat i on
wi t ht he mi r r or of t he f emal e or gan, l i ke Nar ci ssus' f asci nat i on
wi t h hi s owni mage
.
Beyondt he convent i onal i deal i smof t he
st r i p- t ease ( per haps t her e mi ght evenbe some seduct i on her e) ,
por nogr aphyat i t s most subl i me r ever ses i t sel f i nt o a pur i f i ed
obsceni t y, an obsceni t yt hat i s pur er , deeper , mor e vi scer al . But
why
st op
wi t h nudi t y,
or
t he geni t al i a? I f t he obscene i s a mat -
t er of r epr esent at i on andnot of sex, i t must expl or e t he ver y
i nt er i or of t he bodyandt he vi scer a . Whoknows what pr of ound
pl easur e i s t o
be f oundi n t he vi sual di smember ment of mu-
cous membr anes andsmoot hmuscl es? Our por nogr aphyst i l l
r et ai ns a r est r i ct ed def i ni t i on. Obsceni t yhas anunl i mi t edf ut ur e
.
But t ake heed, i t i s not a mat t er of t he deepeni ngof a
dr i ve;
what i s
i nvol ved
i s an
or gy
of
r eal i sm, anor gy of pr oduct i on.
Ar age ( per haps al so a dr i ve, but one t hat subst i t ut es i t sel f f or
al l t he ot her s) t o summonever yt hi ng bef or e t he j ur i sdi ct i on
of si gns. Let ever yt hi ng be r ender ed i n t he l i ght of t he si gn,
i nt he l i ght of a vi si bl e
ener gy.
Let
al l
speech
be l i ber at ed and
pr ocl ai m
desi r e. We ar e r evel i ng,
i n t hi s l i ber al i zat i on, whi ch,
i nf act ,
si mpl y mar ks t he gr owi ng;
pr ogr ess of
obsceni t y. Al l t hat
i s hi ddenandst i l l enj oys a f or bi ddenst at us, wi l l be unear t hed,
r ender edt o speechandmade t o bowbef or e t he f act s. Ther eal
i s gr owi ng ever l ar ger , some dayt he ent i r e uni ver se wi l l be
r eal ,
andwhen t he r eal i s uni ver sal , t her e
wi l l
be
deat h.
Por nogr aphi c si mul at i on: nudi t y i s never anyt hi ng but anex-
t r a si gn. Nudi t y vei l ed by cl ot hi ng f unct i ons as a secr et , am-
bi val ent r ef er ent . Unvei l ed, i t sur f aces as a
si gn
and
r et ur ns
t o
t he ci r cul at i onof si gns: nudi t y de- si gn. Thesame occur s wi t h
har d cor e andbl ue por n: t he sexual or gan, whet her er ect or
THEECLI PTI COFSEX 33
open wi de i s j us t anot her s i gn
i n t he hypers exual panopl y.
Phal l us - des i gn. Themoreoneadvances
wi l l y- ni l l y i ns ex' s ver-
aci t y, i nt heexpos ureof
i t s worki ngs , t hemorei mmers edone
becomes
i nt heaccumul at i onof s i gns , andt hemoreencl os ed
onebecomes i n t heendl es s over- s i gni f i cat i on of a real t hat no
l onger exi s t s , andof a body t hat never exi s t ed. Our ent i re body
cul t ure,
wi t h i t s concern f or t he "expres s i on" of t he body' s
"des i res , "
f or t he s t ereophoni cs
of
des i re, i s a cul t ure of i rre-
deemabl emons t ros i t y andobs ceni t y.
Hegel : "J us t as whens peaki ng of t he ext eri ori t y of t he hu-
manbody, wes ai d t hat i t s ent i re s urf ace, i n cont ras t t ot hat of
t he ani mal worl d, reveal s t he pres ence andpul s at i on of
t he
heart , wes ay of art t hat i t has as i t s t as k t o creat ei n s uch a way
t hat at al l poi nt s of i t s s urf acet hephenomenal , t heappearance
becomes
an eye, t he s eat
of
t he s oul , renderi ng i t s el f vi s i bl e
t o t he s pi ri t . " Therei s , t heref ore, never any nudi t y, never any
nude body t hat i s s i mpl y nude; t here i s never j us t a body. I t
i s l i ke t he I ndi an s ai dwhent hewhi t emanas ked hi mwhyhe
ranaround naked: "For me, i t i s al l f ace. " I n a non- f et i s hi s t i c
cul t ure ( one t hat does not f et i s hi ze nudi t y as obj ect i ve t rut h)
t hebody i s not , as i nour own, oppos edt o t hef ace,
concei ved
as al oneri ch i n expres s i on andendowedwi t h "eyes " : i t i s i t -
s el f a f ace, andl ooks at you. I t i s t heref ore not obs cene, t hat
i s t o s ay, made t o bes eennude. I t cannot be s een nude, no
more t han t hef ace can f or us , f or t he body i s - andi s onl y
- as ymbol i c vei l ; andi t i s by way of t hi s pl ay of vei l s , whi ch,
l i t eral l y,
abol i s hes t he body "as s uch, " t hat s educt i on
occurs .
Thi s i s wheres educt i oni s at pl ay andnot i n t he t eari ng away
of t hevei l i nt henameof s omemani f es t at i onof t rut h or des i re.
Thei ndi s t i nct i onof f ace andbody i na t ot al cul t ure of
ap-
pearances - t he di s t i nct i on bet weenf ace andbody i n a cul -
t ure of meani ng ( t hebody here becomes mons t rous l y vi s i bl e,
i t becomes t hes i gnof amons t er cal l ed des i re) - t hent he t ot al
t ri umph i n pornography
of
t he obs cene body, t o t he poi nt
wheret he f ace i s ef f aced. Theerot i c model s are f acel es s , t he
act ors arenei t her beaut i f ul , ugl y, or expres s i ve; f unct i onal nu-
di t y ef f aces everyt hi ng i n t he "s pect acul ari t y" of s ex. Cert ai n
f i l ms arenomoret hanvi s ceral
s ound- ef f ect s of a coi t al
cl os e-
up; event hebody di s appears , di s pers edamongs t overs i ze, par-
3
4 SEDUCTI ON
t i al obj ect s. What ever t he f ace, i t remai ns i nappropri at e, f or i t
breaks t he obsceni t y
andrei nt roduces meani ngwhereevery-
t hi ngaspi res
t o
abol i shi t i n
sexual excess anda
ni hi l i st i c vert i go
.
At t heendof t hi s t errori st debasement , wheret hebody(and
i t s "desi re") aremadet o
yi el dt ot he evi dence, appearances no
l onger have anysecret . Acul t ure of t he desubl i mat i onof ap-
pearances: everyt hi ngi s mat eri al i zedi naccordwi t ht he most
obj ect i vecat egori es. Apornographi c cul t ureparexcel l ence; one
t hat pursues t heworki ngs of t he real at al l t i mes andi nal l pl aces.
A
pornographi c cul t ure
wi t h
i t s i deol ogy of
t he concret e,
of
f act i ci t yanduse, andi t s concernwi t ht hepreemi nenceof use
val ue, t he mat eri al
i nf rast ruct ure of
t hi ngs,
andt hebody
as t he
mat eri al i nf rast ruct ure of desi re. Aone- di mensi onal cul t uret hat
exal t s everyt hi ngi nt he "concret eness of product i on" or of
pl easure - unl i mi t edmechani cal l abour or copul at i on. What
i s obsceneabout
t hi s worl d
i s t hat
not hi ng
i s
l ef t
t o
appear-
ances, or t ochance. Everyt hi ngi s a vi si bl e, necessarysi gn. Li ke
t hosedol l s, adornedwi t hgeni t al i a, t hat t al k, pee; andwi l l one
daymakel ove. Andt hel i t t l e gi rl ' s react i on: "Myl i t t l e si st er, she
knows howt o do t hat t oo. Can' t yougi ve mea real one?"
Fromt he di scourse of l abour t o t hedi scourse of sex, f rom
t he di scourseof product i vef orces t o t hat of dri ves, onef i nds
t hesameul t i mat um, t hat
of
pro- duct i oni nt he l i t eral senseof
t het erm. I t s ori gi nal meani ng, i n.
f act , wasnot t of abri cat e, but
t o render vi si bl e or make appear. Sex i s producedl i ke one
produces a document , or as onesays of anact or t hat he per-
f orms (seprodui t )
onst age.
Toproducei s t omat eri al i zebyf orcewhat bel ongs t o anot her
order, t hat of t hesecret andof seduct i on. Seduct i oni s, at
al l
t i mes andi n al l pl aces,
opposedt o product i on
. Seduct i onre-
movessomet hi ngf romt heorder of t hevi si bl e, whi l eproduc-
t i onconst ruct s everyt hi ngi nf ul l vi ew, bei t anobj ect , a
number
or concept .
Everyt hi ngi s t o be produced, everyt hi ngi s t o be l egi bl e,
everyt hi ngi s
t o
becomereal , vi si bl e, account abl e; everyt hi ng
i s t obe t ranscri bedi n rel at i ons of f orce, syst ems
of
concept s
or measur abl e
ener gy;
ever yt hi ng i s t o be sai d, accumul at ed,
i ndexed
and r ecor ded . Thi s i s sex as i t exi st s i n por nogr aphy,
but mor e gener al l y, t hi s i s t he ent er pr i se of our ent i r e cul t ur e,
whosenat ur al condi t i on i s obscene: a cul t ur e of monst r at i on,
of demonst r at i on, of pr oduct i ve monst r osi t y.
No seduct i on her e, nor i n por nogr aphy, gi ven t he abr upt
pr oduct i on of sexual act s, and t he f er oci t y of pl easur e i n i t s
i mmedi acy
.
Ther e
i s not hi ngseduct i ve about bodi es t r aver sed
by a gaze l i t er al l y sucked i n by a vacuum
of t r anspar ency
; nor
can t her e be even a hi nt of seduct i on wi t hi n t he uni ver se of
pr oduct i on, wher e a pr i nci pl e of t r anspar ency gover ns t he
f or ces
bel ongi ng
t o t he wor l d of vi si bl e, cal cul abl e phenome-
na - obj ect s, machi nes, sexual act s, or t he gr oss nat i onal
pr oduct .
THEECLI PTI COFSEX
3
5
Thei nsol ubl e equi vocal ness
of
por nogr aphy:
i t put s an end t o
al l seduct i on vi a sex, but at t he same t i me i t put s an end t o
sexvi a t he accumul at i on of t he si gns of sex. Bot h t r i umphant
par ody and si mul at ed agony - t her el i es i t s ambi gui t y. I n a sense,
por nogr aphy i s t r ue: i t owes i t s t r ut h t o asyst emof sexual di s-
suasi on by hal l uci nat i on,
di ssuasi on of t he r eal by t he hyper -
r eal ,
and
of
t he body by i t s f or ced mat er i al i zat i on.
Por nogr aphy i s usual l y f aul t ed f or t wo r easons - f or
mani pul at i ng sex i n or der t o def use t he cl ass st r uggl e ( al ways
t he ol d "myst i f i ed consci ousness") and f or cor r upt i ng sex ( t he
good, t r ue sex, t he sex t o bel i ber at ed, t he sex t o be consi der ed
amongst our nat ur al r i ght s) by i t s
commodi f i cat i on
.
Por nogr a-
phy, t hen, i s sai d t o mask ei t her t he t r ut h
of capi t al and
t he i n-
f r ast r uct ur e, or t hat of sex and desi r e. But i n f act por nogr aphy
does not mask anyt hi ng ( yes, t hat
i s i ndeed
t he
case) .
I t
i s not
an i deol ogy, i . e. , i t does not hi de some t r ut h; i t
i s
a si mul acr um,
i . e. , i t i s a t r ut h ef f ect t hat hi des t he t r ut h' s non- exi st ence.
Por nogr aphy says
:
t her e
must be good sex somewher e, f or
I ami t s car i cat ur e. I n i t s gr ot esque obsceni t y, i t at t empt s
t o save
sex' s t r ut h and pr ovi de t he f al t er i ng sexual model wi t h some
cr edi bi l i t y. Now, t he whol equest i on i s whet her good sex ex-
i st s, or whet her , qui t e si mpl y, sex exi st s, somewher e - sex as
36 SEDUCTI ON
t he body' s i deal use val ue, sex
as
possi bl e pl easur es whi ch can
andmust be " l i ber at ed. " I t i s t he same quest i on demanded of
pol i t i cal economy
:
i s
t her e
" good" val ue,
ani deal use val ue be-
yond exchange val ue under st ood as t he i nhumanabst r act i on
of capi t al - an i deal val ue of goods or soci al r el at i ons whi ch
can and must be " l i ber at ed" ?
SEDUCTION/PRODUCTION
In r eal i t y, por nogr aphy i s but t he par adoxi cal l i mi t of t he s ex-
ual . A" r eal i s t i c" exacer bat i on, a mani acal obs es s i on wi t h t he
r eal : t hi s i s t he obs cene, i n t he et ymol ogi cal and ever y ot her
s ens e . But i s not t he s exual i t s el f al r eady a f or ced mat er i al i za-
t i on? Is not t he advent of s exual i t y al r eady par t of occi dent al
r eal i s t i cs , t he compul s i on pr oper t o our cul t ur e t o i ns t ant i at e
and i ns t r ument al i ze ever yt hi ng?
It i s abs ur d, when s peaki ng of ot her cul t ur es , t o di s s oci at e
r el i gi on, economi cs , pol i t i cs , and t he l egal s ys t em( i . e . , t he s o-
ci al and ot her cl as s i f i cat or y phant as magor i as ) . f or t he r eas on t hat
s ucha di s s oci at i on has not occur r ed, t hes e concept s
bei ngl i ke
s o
many di s eas es wi t hwhi chwe i nf ect t hes e cul t ur es i n or der
t o bet t er " under s t and" t hem. In t he s ame manner , i t i s abs ur d
t o aut onomi ze t he s exual as a s epar at e i ns t ance, an i r r educi bl e
gi ven, as s omet hi ngt o whi chot her i ns t ances or gi vens can be
r educed. We need a cr i t i que of s exual Reas on, or r at her , a
geneol ogy of s exual Reas on s i mi l ar t o Ni et zche' s geneol ogy of
good and evi l , f or i t i s our newmor al i t y . One mi ght s ay of s ex-
ual i t y, as of deat h: " i t i s a newwr i nkl e
t o
whi chcons ci ous nes s
became accus t omed not s o l ong ago. "
We r emai n per pl exed and vaguel y compas s i onat e when con-
f r ont ed wi t h cul t ur es f or whi cht he s exual act i s not a f i nal i t y
38
SEDUCTI ON
i n i t s el f , f or whi chs exual i t y does not have t he mor t al s er i ous -
nes s
of
an ener gy
t o
be l i ber at ed,
of an ej acul at i on t o be
f or ced,
a pr oduct i on at any pr i ce, or hygi eni c audi t i ng of t he body. Cul -
t ur es t hat pr es er ve l engt hy pr ocedur es of ent i cement and s en-
s ual i t y, l ong s er i es of gi f t s andcount er - gi f t s , wi t hs ex bei ngbut
one s er vi ce amongs t ot her s , and t he act of l ove one pos s i bl e
end- t er mt o apr es cr i bed, r i t ual i s t i c i nt er change . Suchpr oceed-
i ngs no l onger make s ens e t o us ; ; s ex has become, s t r i ct l y s peak-
i ng,
t he act ual i zat i on of des i r e i n pl eas ur e - al l el s e i s l i t er at ur e .
An ext r aor di nar y cr ys t al i zat i on
ar ound
t he or gas mi c, andmor e
gener al l y, t he ener gi zi ng f unct i on.
Our s i s a cul t ur e of pr emat ur e ej acul at i on. I ncr eas i ngl y
al l
s educt i on,
al l manner
of
ent i cement - whi ch
i s
al ways a hi gh-
l y r i t ual i zed
pr oces s
-
i s ef f aced behi nda nat ur al i zeds exual
i mper at i ve, behi nd t he i mmedi at e andi mper at i ve ; r eal i zat i on of
des i r e . Our cent er of gr avi t y has been di s pl aced t owar ds a l i bi di -
nal economy concer nedwi t honl y t he nat ur al i zat i on of des i r e,
a des i r e dedi cat ed
t o
dr i ves ,
or t o a
machi ne- l i ke f unct i oni ng,
but above al l , t o t he i magi nar y of r epr es s i on and l i ber at i on.
Hencef or t hone no l onger s ays : "You have a s oul andi t mus t
be s aved, " but :

'
"You have a s ex, and you mus t put i t t o good
us e. "
"You have an uncons ci ous , andyou mus t . l et t he
i d s peak. "
"You have a body, and you mus t der i ve pl eas -
ur e f r omi t . "
"You have a l i bi do, andyou mus t expendi t , " et c.
Thi s pr es s ur e t owar ds l i qui di t y, f l ux and t he accel er at ed ar -
t i cul at i on
of
t he s exual , ps ychi c andphys i cal body i s an exact
r epl i ca of t hat whi chr egul at es exchange val ue : capi t al mus t ci r -
cul at e, t her e mus t no l onger be any f i xed poi nt , i nves t ment s
mus t be ceas el es s l y r enewed, val ue mus t
r adi at e wi t hout r es pi t e
- t hi s i s t he f or mof val ue' s pr es ent r eal i zat i on, ands exual i t y,
t he s exual model , i s s i mpl y i t s mode of appear ance at t he l evel
of t he body.
As a model s ex t akes t he f or mof an i ndi vi dual ent er pr i s e
bas ed on nat ur al ener gy: t o each hi s des i r e and may t he bes t
man, pr evai l ( i n mat t er s
of
pl eas ur e) . I t i s t he s el f s ame f or mas
THEECLI PTI COFSEX
39
capi t al , and t hi s i s whysexual i t y, desi r e and pl easur e ar e
subal t er n val ues . Whent heyf i r st appear ed, not so l ong ago,
as a syst em
of
r ef er ence
ont he hor i zonof west er ncul t ur e, i t
was as f al l en, r esi dual val ues - t he i deal of i nf er i or cl asses, t he
bour geoi si e, t hen t he pet t y- bour geoi si e
-
r el at i ve
t o
t he
ar i st ocr at i c val ues of bi r t h andbl ood, val our and seduct i on,
or t he col l ect i ve val ues of r el i gi on andsacr i f i ce .
Mor eover , t he body- t hi s sel f same bodyt o whi chwe cease-
l essl yr ef er -
has no ot her r eal i t yt han t hat i mpl i edbyt he sex-
ual and pr oduct i ve, model . I t i s capi t al t hat , i n a si ngl e
movement , gi ves r i se t o bot h t he ener gi zi ng bodyof l abour
power , andt he bodyof our dr eams, a sanct uar yof desi r es and
dr i ves, of psychi c ener gyandt he unconsci ous, t he i mpul si ve
bodyt hat , haunt s t he pr i mar y
pr ocesses - t he bodyi t sel f hav-
i ng become a pr i mar y
pr ocess, andt her ebyan ant i - body, an
ul t i mat e r evol ut i onar yr ef er ent . The t wobodi es ar e si mul t ane-
ousl yengender edi nr epr essi on, andt hei r appar ent ant agoni sm
i s but a consequence of t hei r r edupl i cat i on. When
one
uncover s
i nt he body' s secr et pl aces an"unbound" l i bi di nal ener gyop-
posedt o t he "bound" ener gyof t he pr oduct i ve body, when
one uncover s i ndesi r e t he t r ut h of t he body' s phant asms and
dr i ves, one i s st i l l onl y di si nt er i ng t he psychi c met aphor . of
capi t al .
Her e i s your desi r e, your unconsci ous : a psychi c met aphor
of
capi t al i n t he r ubbi sh
heap of
pol i t i cal
economy
. And
t he
sexual j ur i sdi ct i oni s but a
f ant ast i c ext ensi onof t he
common-
pl ace i deal of pr i vat e- pr oper t y, wher e ever yone i s assi gned a
cer t ai namount of capi t al t o manage: a psychi c capi t al , a l i bi di -
nal ,
sexual or unconsci ous capi t al , f or whi ch each per sonwi l l
have t o answer i ndi vi dual l y, under t he si gn of hi s or her own
l i ber at i on.
A
f ant ast i c r educt i onof seduct i on. Thi s sexual i t yt r ansf or med
byt he r evol ut i onof desi r e, t hi s mode of bodi l ypr oduct i onand
ci r cul at i on has acqui r ed i t s pr esent char act er , has come t o be
spokenof i n t er ms of "sexual r el at i ons, " onl ybyf or get t i ng al l
f or ms of seduct i on- j ust as one canspeak
of
t he
soci al
i nt er ms
of "r el at i ons" or "soci al r el at i ons, " onl yaf t er i t has l ost al l sym-
bol i c subst ance.
Wher ever sex has beener ect ed i nt o a f unct i on, anaut ono-
4
0
SEDUCTI ON
mousi nst ance,
i t
has
l i qui dat ed seduct i on . Sex t odaygener al l y
occur s onl y i n t he pl ace, and
i n
pl ace of a
mi ssi ng seduct i on,
or as t he r esi due and st agi ng of a f ai l ed seduct i on. I t i s t hen
t he absent f or mof seduct i on t hat i s hal l uci nat ed sexual l y -
i n t he f or mof desi r e. The moder n t heor y of desi r e dr aws i t s
f or ce f r omseduct i on' s l i qui dat i on .
Hencef or t h,
i n
pl ace of a seduct i ve
f or m, t her e; i s a pr oduc-
t i ve
f or m,
an "economy" of sex
: t he r et r ospect i ve of a dr i ve,
t he
hal l uci nat i on
of
a st ock
of
sexual ener gy, of an unconsci ous
i n whi ch t he r epr essi on of desi r e and i t s cl ear ance ar e i nscr i bed.
Al l t hi s ( and t he psychi c i n gener al ) r esul t s f r omt he aut onomi -
zat i on of sex - as nat ur e and t he economywer e once t he
pr eci pi -
t at e of t he aut onomi zat i on of
pr oduct i on. Nat ur e and desi r e,
bot h of t hemi deal i zed, succeed each ot her
i n
t he
pr ogr essi ve
desi gns f or l i ber at i on, yest er day t he
l i ber at i on of t he pr oduc-
t i ve f or ces, t oday
t hat
of
t he body and sex.
One can speak of t he bi r t h of t he sexual and of sex speech
- j ust as one speaks of t he bi r t h of t he
cl i ni c andt cl i ni cal gaze
-
wher e once t her e wasnot hi ng, i f not uncor i t r ol l ' ed, unst abl e,
i nsensat e, or el se hi ghl y r i t ual i zed f or ms. Wher e t oo, i t f ol l ows,
t her e wasnor epr essi on, t hi s t hemat i c wi t h whi chwe have bur -
dened al l pr evi ous soci et i es even
mor e t han our own. We con-
demn t hemas pr i mi t i ve f r oma t echnol ogi cal per spect i ve,
but
al so
f r oma. sexual
or
psychi c per spect i ve, f or t hey concei ved
of nei t her t he sexual nor t he unconsci ous. For t unat el y, psy-
choanal ysi s has come al ong t ol i f t t he bur den and r eveal what
was
hi dden. The i ncr edi bl e r aci smof t he t r ut h, t he evangel i -
cal r aci smof t he Wor d and i t s accessi on.
Wher e t he sexual does not appear of and f or i t sel f , we
act
as t hough i t wer e r epr essed; i t i s our way of
savi ng i t . And yet
t ospeak of r epr essed or
subl i mat ed sexual i t y i n pr i mi t i ve, f eu-
dal or ot her soci et i es, or si mpl y t o speak of "sexual i t y" and
t he unconsci ous i n such cases, i s a si gn of pr of ound
st upi di t y.
I t i s
not even cer t ai n t hat such t al k hol ds t he best key t o un-
l ocki ng our soci et y. On t hi s basi s, t hat i s, by cal l i ng i nt oques-
t i on t he ver y hypot hesi s of
sexual i t y,
by
quest i oni ng sex and
desi r e asaut onomous
i nst ances, i t i s possi bl e t oagr ee wi t h Fou-
caul t and say ( t hough not f or t he same r easons) t hat i n our cul -
t ur e t oot her e i s noand never has been
any r epr essi on ei t her.
Sexual i t y as a di s cour s e i s , l i ke pol i t i cal economy ( and ever y
ot her di s cur s i ve s ys t em) , onl y amont age or s i mul acr umwhi ch
has al ways
beent r aver s ed, t hwar t ed and exceeded by act ual
pr act i ce. The coher ence andt r ans par ency
of homo
s exual i s
has
no mor e exi s t ence t han t he coher ence
and t r ans par ency of
homo economi cus .
I t i s a l ong pr oces s t hat s i mul t aneous l y es t abl i s hes t he ps y-
chi c andt he s exual , t hat es t abl i s hes t he "ot her s cene, " t hat of
t he phant as y and t he uncons ci ous , at t he s ame t i me as t he ener -
gy pr oduced t her ei n-
a ps ychi c ener gy t hat i s mer el y a di r ect
cons equence of t he s t aged hal l uci nat i on
of r epr es s i on, anener gy
hal l uci nat ed as s exual s ubs t ance, whi ch i s t henmet aphor i zed
and met onymi zedaccor di ng t o t he var i ous i ns t ances ( t opi cal ,
economi c, et c. ) , andaccor di ng
t o al l t he modal i t i es of s econ-
dar y andt er t i ar y r epr es s i on. Ps ychoanal ys i s , t hi s
mos t admi r a-
bl e edi f i ce, t he mos t beaut i f ul hal l uci nat i onof t he back- wor l d,
as Ni et zs che woul ds ay. The ext r aor di nar y ef f ect i venes s of t hi s
model f or t he s i mul at i on of s cenes and ener gi es - anext r aor -
di nar y t heor et i cal ps ychodr ama, t hi s s t agi ng
of
t he
ps yche,
t hi s
s cenar i o of s ex as a s epar at e i ns t ance andi ns ur mount abl e r eal -
i t y ( aki nt o t he hypos t at i zat i on of pr oduct i on) . What does i t
mat t er i f t he economi c, t he bi ol ogi cal or t he ps ychi c bear t he
cos t s of t hi s s t agi ng
-
of what concer ni s t he "s cene" or "t he
ot her
s cene" : i t i s t he ent i r e s cenar i o of s exual i t y ( and ps y-
choanal ys i s ) as amodel of s i mul at i ont hat s houl d be ques t i oned.
THEECLI PTI C
OF
SEX 41
I t i s t r ue t hat i n our cul t ur e t he s exual has t r i umphed over
s educt i on, andannexed i t as as ubal t er nf or m. Our i ns t r umen-
t al vi s i on has i nver t ed ever yt hi ng. For i n t he s ymbol i c or der
s educt i oni s pr i mar y, and s ex appear s onl y
as anaddendum
.
Sex i n t hi s l at t er or der i s l i ke t he r ecover y i nananal yt i c cur e,
or a bi r t h i nas t or y of Levi - St r aus s ; i t comes as anext r a, wi t hout
a r el at i on of caus e t o ef f ect . Thi s i s t he s ecr et
of
"s ymbol i c ef -
f i caci t y" : t he wor l d' s wor ki ngs ar e t her es ul t of ament al s educ-
t i on . Thus t he but cher Tchouang
Ts eu whos e under s t andi ng
enabl ed hi m
t o des cr i be t he cow' s i nt er s t i t i al s t r uct ur e wi t hout
ever havi ngus ed t he bl ade
of
a kni f e
: a s or t of s ymbol i c r es o-
42 SEDUCTI ON
i
l ut i on t hat , as an addendum, has a pr act i cal r esul t .
Seduct i on t oo wor ks on t hemodeof symbol i c, ,
ar t i cul at i on,
of a duel *
af f i ni t y wi t h t he st r uct ur e of t he ot her - sex may
r esul t , as an addendum, but
not necessar i l y. Mor egener al l y,
seduct i on i s a chal l enge t o t hever y exi st enceof t hesexual or der .
Andi f our " l i ber at i on" seems t o have r ever sed t he t er ms
and
successf ul l y chal l engedt he
or der
of
seduct i on, i t i s by no me-
ans cer t ai n t hat i t s vi ct or y i s not hol l ow. Thequest i on of t he
ul t i mat esuper i or i t y of t her i t ual l . ogi cs of
chal l engeandseduc-
t i on over t he economi c l ogi cs of sex andpr oduct i on st i l l r e-
mai ns unr esol ved.
For r evol ut i ons andl i ber at i ons ar e
f r agi l e, whi l eseduct i on
i s
i nescapabl e. I t i s seduct i on t hat l i es i n wai t f or t hem- seduced
as t hey ar e, despi t e ever yt hi ng, by t he i mmenseset backs
t hat
t ur n t hemf r omt hei r t r ut h - andagai n i t i s seduct i on t hat awai t s
t hemeven i n t hei r t r i umph. Thesexual
di scour sei t sel f i s con-
t i nual l y t hr eat ened wi t h sayi ng somet hi ng ot her ; t han what i t
says .
I n an Amer i can f i l ma guy pur sues a st r eet -wal ker ,
pr udent -
l y, accor di ng t o
f or m. Thewomanr esponds, aggr essi vel y : " What
do you-want ? Do you want t o j ump me? Then, change your
appr oach! Say, I want t o j ump you! "
andt heguy, ; t r oubl ed, r e-
pl i es
: " yes,
I want
t o
j ump you. " " Thengo f uck your sel f ! " And
l at er , when hei s dr i vi ng. her i n hi s car : " I ' l l makecof f ee, and
t hen you can
j ump
me. "
I n f act , t hi s cyni cal conver sat i on, whi ch
appear s obj ect i ve, f unct i onal , anat omi cal , andwi t hout nuance,
i s onl y a game. Pl ay, chal l enge, andpr ovocat i on ar ej ust beneat h
t he sur f ace. I t s ver y br ut al i t y i s r i ch wi t h t hei nf l ect i ons of l ove
andcompl i ci t y. I t i s a newmanner of seduct i on
.
Or t hi s conver sat i on t aken f r omTheSchi zophr eni cs' Bal l by
Phi l i p Di ck:
" Take met o your r oomand f uck me. "
" Ther ei s somet hi ng i ndef i nabl ei n your vocabu-
l ar y somet hi ng l ef t t o be desi r ed. " i
Onecan under st and t hi s as : Your pr oposi t i on i s
unaccept a-
bl e, i t l acks t hepoet r y of desi r e, i t i s t oo di r ect . But ~i n a senset he
t ext says t he exact opposi t e: t hat t he
pr oposi t i on has some-
*Tr ans. not e: I n Fr ench, t hewor dduel means bot h duel / dual
. Baudr i l l ar di s cl ear -
l y pl ayi ng on t hedoubl e meani ng of t hewor d- agonal r el at i ons and
r eci pr ocal
chal l enges . I t r ansl at e t het er m`duel ' , even i n i t s adj ect i val f or m.
THE
ECLI PTI C
OFSEX 4
3
t hi ng "i ndef i nabl e" about i t , whi ch t her eby openst he pat h t o
desi r e. Adi r ect sexual i nvi t at i on i s t oo di r ect
t o be
t r ue, and
i mmedi at el y r ef er s t o somet hi ng el se.
The f i r st ver si on depl or es t he obsceni t y of t he conver sat i on
.
The second i s mor e subt l e; i t i s capabl e of di scl osi ng a t wi st
t o obsceni t y - obsceni t y as an ent i cement , and t husas an
"i n-
def i nabl e" al l usi on
t o
desi r e. An obsceni t y
t oo
br ut al t o be t r ue,
and
t oo
i mpol i t e
t o be di shonest - obsceni t y as a chal l enge
and
t her ef or e, agai n, as seduct i on.
I n t he l ast i nst ance, a pur el y sexual st at ement , apur e demand
f or sex, i s i mpossi bl e. One cannot be f r ee of seduct i on, and
t he di scour se of ant i - seduct i on i s but i t s l ast met amor phosi s.
I t i s
not j ust t hat a
pur e di scour se of
sexual demand i s ab-
sur d gi ven t he compl exi t y of af f ect i ve r el at i ons; i t qui t e si m-
pl ydoesnot exi st . To bel i eve i n sex' sr eal i t y and i n t hepossi bi l i t y
of speaki ng sex wi t hout medi at i on i s a del usi on
-
t he del usi on
of ever y di scour se t hat bel i eves
i n
t r anspar ency; i t i s al so
t hat
of f unct i onal , sci ent i f i c, and al l ot her di scour ses wi t h cl ai ms
t o t he t r ut h. For t unat el y, t he l at t er i s cont i nual l y under mi ned,
di ssi pat ed, dest r oyed,
or
r at her , ci r cumvent ed, di ver t ed, and
seduced. Sur r ept i t i ousl y t hey ar e t ur ned agai nst t hemsel ves; sur -
r ept i t i ousl y t hey di ssol ve i nt o a di f f er ent game, a di f f er ent set
of st akes.
To be sur e, nei t her por nogr aphy nor sexual t r ansact i ons
ex-
er ci se
any
seduct i on
.
Li ke
nudi t y, and l i ke t he t r ut h, t hey ar e
abj ect . They ar e t he
body' s
di senchant ed f or m, j ust as sex i s
t he suppr essed and di senchant ed f or mof seduct i on, j ust as use
val ue i s t he di senchant ed f or mof t he obj ect , and j ust as, mor e
gener al l y, t he r eal i s t he suppr essed and di senchant ed f or mof
t he
wor l d.
Nudi t y wi l l never abol i sh seduct i on, f or i t i mmedi at el y be-
comessomet hi ng el se, t he hyst er i cal ent i cement s of a
di f f er -
ent game, one t hat goes beyond i t . Ther e i s nodegr ee zer o, no
obj ect i ve r ef er ence, nopoi nt of neut r al i t y, but al ways and agai n,
st akes. Today
al l
our si gns appear t o be conver gi ng - l i ke
t he
body i n nudi t y and meani ngi n t r ut h - t owar ds some concl u-
si ve obj ect i vi t y, an ent r opi c and met ast abl e f or mof
t he neu-
t r al . (What el se i s t hei deal - t ypi cal , vacat i oni ng nude body, gi ven
over t o t he sun, i t sel f hygeni c and neut r al i zed, wi t h i t s l uci f er i -
44 SEDUCTI ON
an parody of
burni ng) . But i s t here ever a
ces s at i on of s i gns
at s ome zero
poi nt
of
t he real or t he neut ral ?
I s n' t t here al ways
arevers i on
of t he neut ral i t s el f i nt o anews pi ral of
. s t akes , s educ-
t i on and deat h.
What s educt i onus edt o l i e conceal ed
i ns ex? What news educ-
t i on, what newchal l enge l i es
conceal edi n t he abol i t i on of
what ,
wi t hi ns ex, was once at
s t ake? ( The s ame ques t i onon
anot her
pl ane: What chal l enge, what s ource of
f as ci nat i on, l i es conceal ed
i n t he mas s es , i n t he abol i t i onof
what was once at s t ake
wi t h
t he s oci al ?)
Al l des cri pt i ons of
di s enchant eds ys t ems ,
al l hypot hes es about
t he
di s enchant ment of s ys t ems - t he
f l ood of s i mul at i on and
di s s uas i on, t he abol i t i on of
s ymbol i c proces s es , t he deat h
of
ref erent i al s - are perhaps f al s e.
The neut ral i s never neut ral
; i t
becomes anobj ect of f as ci nat i on
. But does i t t hen become
an
obj ect of s educt i on?
Agoni s t i c l ogi cs ,
l ogi cs of ri t ual ands educt i on
. , are s t ronger
t hans ex
. Li kepower, s ex never has t he l as t word
. I n The Em-
pi reof
The Sens es , af i l mt hat f romendt o
endi s occupi edwi t h
t he s ex act , t he l at t er, byi t s
very pers i s t ence, comes t o be pos -
s es s ed by t he l ogi c of anot her
order . The f i l mi s , uni nt el l i gi bl e
i n t erms of s ex,
f or s exual pl eas ure, by i t s el f , l eads t o
every-
t hi ng but
deat h. But t he madnes s t hat s ei zes
hol d of t he cou-
pl e ( a madnes s
onl y f or us , i n real i t y i t i s a
ri gourous l ogi c)
pus hes
t hemt o ext remes , where: meani ngno
l onger has s ens e
andt he exerci s e of t he s ens es
i s not i n t he l eas t s ens ual .
Nor
i s i t i nt el l i gi bl e i n t erms of
mys t i ci s mor met aphys i cs . I t s
l ogi c
i s one of
chal l enge, i mpel l edby t he t wo part ners
out bi ddi ng
each ot her. Or more preci s el y, t he key
event i s t hepas s age f rom
a l ogi c of pl eas ure at
t he begi nni ng, where t he manl eads
t he
game, t o a l ogi c of chal l enge anddeat h,
t hat occurs under t he
i mpet us of t he woman- who
t herebybecomes t he game' s mi s -
t res s , even
i f
at
f i rs t s he was onl y a. s exual obj ect
. I t i s t he f emi -
ni ne
pri nci pl e t hat bri ngs about. t he revers al of
s ex/ val ue i nt o
an agoni s t i c l ogi c of s educt i on
.
There i s here no
pervers i on or morbi ddri ve, no
i nt erpret a-
THEECLI PTI COFSEX 45
t i on drawn f romour psycho- sexual f ront i ers,
no " af f i ni t y" of
Eros f or Thanat os nor anyambi val ence of desi re. I t
i s not amat -
t er
of sex, nor of t he unconsci ous. The sexual act
i s vi ewed
as a ri t ual act , ceremoni al
or warl i ke, f or whi ch ( as . i n anci ent
t ragedi es
on
t he t heme
of i ncest ) deat hi s t he mandat ory denoue-
ment , t he embl emat i c f orm
of t he chal l enge' s f ul f i l l ment .
Thus t he obscenecan
seduce, as can sex andpl easure. Even
t he most ant i - seduct i ve f i gures
can become f i gures of seduc-
t i on. ( I t has been sai d of t he f emi ni st
di scourse t hat , beyond
i t s t ot al absence of seduct i on, t here l i es a cert ai n
homosexual
al l ure) . These f i gures
needonl y move beyondt hei r t rut h i nt o
areversi bl e conf i gurat i on,
a conf i gurat i on t hat i s al so t hat of
t hei r deat h. Thesame hol ds t rue f or t hat f i gure
of ant i - seduct i on
par excel l ence,
power.
Power seduces. But
not
i n
t he vul gar sense of t he masses'
desi re f or compl i ci t y ( a t aut ol ogy t hat ul t i mat el y
seeks t o ground
seduct i on i n t he desi reof ot hers) . No, power
seduces by vi rt ue
of
t he
reversi bi l i t y t hat haunt s i t , andon whi ch a mi nor
cycl e
i s i nst i t ut ed.
No more domi nant anddomi nat ed, no more. vi c-
t i ms andexecut i oners
( but " expl oi t ers" and" expl oi t ed, " t hey
cert ai nl y exi st , t hough qui t e separat el y, f or
t here i s no reversi -
bi l i t y i n product i on - but t hen not hi ng essent i al
happens at
t hi s l evel ) . No more separat e posi t i ons : power
i s real i zed ac-
cordi ng
t o aduel rel at i on, whereby i t t hrows achal l enge
t o so-
ci et y, andi t s exi st ence i s chal l engedi n
ret urn. I f power cannot
be " exchanged" i n accordwi t h t hi s mi nor
cycl e of seduct i on,
chal l enge andruse, t hen i t qui t e si mpl y di sappears
.
At bot t om,
power does not exi st . Theuni l at eral charact er of
of t he rel at i on of f orces on whi ch
t he " st ruct ure" and" real i -
t y"
of
power
andi t s perpet ual movement are supposedl y i n-
st i t ut ed, does not exi st . Thi s i s t he dream
of power i mposed
by reason, not i t s real i t y. Everyt hi ng seeks i t s own
deat h, i n-
cl udi ng power.
Or
rat her,
everyt hi ng demands t o be exchanged,
reversed, and abol i shed wi t hi n a
cycl e ( t hi s i s why nei t her
repressi on nor t he
unconsci ous exi st , f or reversi bi l i t y
i s al ways
al ready t here) . Thi s al one
i s prof oundl y seduct i ve. Power
46 SEDUCTI ON
seduces onl y wheni t becomes a chal l enge t o
i t sel f ; ot her wi se
i t i s j ust anexer ci se, andsat i sf i es
onl y t he hegemoni c l ogi c of
r eason.
Seduct i oni s
st r onger t hanpower becausei t i s r ever si bl e
and
mor t al ,
whi l e power , l i ke val ue, seeks t o be i r r ever si bl e,
cumul a-
t i ve andi mmor t al
. Power par t akes of al l t he i l l usi ons of pr oduc-
t i on, andof t he r eal ; i t want s t o be r eal , andso t ends t o
become
i t s owni magi nar y, i t s ownsuper st i t i on ( wi t ht he
hel p of t he-
or i es t hat anal yze i t , be t hey t o
cont est i t ) . Seduct i on, on t he
ot her hand, i s
not of t he or der of t he r eal - andi s
never
of
t he
or der of
f or ce, nor r el at i ons of f or ce. But pr eci sel yf or t hi s
r ea-
son,
i t enmeshes al l power ' s r eal act i ons, as wel l as
t he ent i r e
r eal i t y
of
pr oduct i on, i n t hi s unr emi t t i ng
r ever si bi l i t y and di s-
accumul at i on - wi t hout whi ch t her e
woul d be nei t her power
nor accumul at i on.
I t i s t he
empt i ness behi nd, or at t he ver y hear t of power
and
pr oduct i on; i t i s t hi s empt i ness t hat t oday gi ves t hem
t hei r l ast
gl i mmer of r eal i t y. Wi t hout t hat
whi chr ever ses, annul s, and
seduces t hem, t hey woul d
never have had t he aut hor i t y of
r eal i t y.
Ther eal , mor eover , has never i nt er est ed
anyone. I t i s a pl ace
of di senchant ment , asi mul acr umof
accumul at i onagai nst deat h
.
Andt her e i s not hi ng mor e t i r esome.
What somet i mes r ender s
t he r eal
f asci nat i ng - and t he t r ut has wel l - i s t he
i magi nar y
cat ast r ophe whi chl i es behi nd
i t . .
Do
you t hi nk t hat power , sex,
economi cs - al l t hese r eal , r eal l y
bi g t hi ngs
-
woul dhave hel d
upf or a si ngl e moment unl ess
sust ai nedby f asci nat i on, a f asci -
nat i on t hat comes pr eci sel y
f r omt he mi r r or i mage i n whi ch
t hey ar e r ef l ect ed, f r omt hei r
cont i nuous r ever si on, t he pal pa-
bl e pl easur e
bor ne of t hei r i mmi nent cat ast r ophe?
The r eal , par t i cul ar l y i n t he pr esent , i s
not hi ng mor e t han
t he st ockpi l i ngof dead
mat t er , deadbodi es anddeadl anguage
- a r esi dual
sedi ment at i on. St i l l wef eel mor e secur e when
t he
st ock of
r eal i t y i s assessed ( t he; ecol ogi cal
l ament speaks of
mat er i al ener gi es, but i t conceal s
t hat what i s di sappear i ng i s
t he r eal ' s
ener gy, t he r eal ' s r eal i t y, t he possi bi l i t y' of
i t s manage-
ment , whet her capi t al i st or
r evol ut i onar y) . I f t he hor i zon of
pr oduct i on i s begi nni ng t o vani sh, t hat of
speech, sex or desi r e
can st i l l t ake upt he sl ack
.
To
l i ber at e, t o gi ve pl easur e, t o
gi ve
THE
ECLI PTI COFSEX 47
aspeech,
to gi vespeechto others: thi s i s real ,
i t i s somethi ng
substanti al , wi th
aprospect of stocks. And, therefore,
i t i s power.
Unfortunatel y
not . That i s to say, not for l ong. Thi s
"real i ty"
i s sl owl ydi ssi pati ng. Onewants
sex, l i ke power, to becomean
i rreversi bl e i nstance, anddesi re
ani rreversi bl e energy( astock
of
energy -
desi re, needi t besai d, i s never far
fromcapi tal ) .
For wegrant meani ngonl y
to what i s i rreversi bl e: accumul a-
ti on, progress, growth,
producti on. Val ue, energy and
desi re
i mpl yi rreversi bl eprocesses-
that i s theverymeani ngof thei r
l i berati on. ( I nj ect thesmal l est dose
of reversi bi l i tyi nto our eco-
nomi c,
pol i ti cal , sexual or i nsti tuti onal
mechani sms, andevery-
thi ng
col l apses) . Thi s i s what today
assures sexual i ty of i ts
mythi cal authori ty
over hearts andbodi es. But i t i s al so what
l i es behi nd the fragi l i ty of sex,
and of the enti re edi fi ce of
producti on.
Seducti oni s
stronger thanproducti on. I t i s stronger
thansex-
ual i ty, wi thwhi ch
i t must never beconfused
. I t i s not some-
thi ngi nternal to
sexual i ty, though thi s i s what i t
i s
general l y
reducedto. I t i s aci rcul ar, reversi bl e
process of chal l enges,
oneupmanshi panddeath. I t i s,
onthecontrary, sex that i s the
debasedform,
ci rcumscri bedas i t i s bytheterms
of energyand
desi re.
Seducti on' s entangl ement
wi thproducti onandpower, the
i rrupti onof ami ni mal
reversi bi l i ty wi thi nevery i rreversi bl e
process, such that the l atter are
secretl y undermi ned, whi l e
si mul taneousl y
ensuredof that mi ni mal
conti nuumof pl eas-
urewi thout whi ch
theywoul dbenothi ng-
thi s i s what must
be anal yzed. At thesame
ti me knowi ngthat producti oncon-
stantl yseeks to el i mi nate
seducti oni n order to establ i sh i tsel f
onan
economyof rel ati ons of forceal one
; andthat sex, the
producti onof sex, seeks
to el i mi nateseducti oni n
order to es-
tabl i sh i tsel f onan
economyof rel ati ons
of desi re al one.
Thi s i s whyonemust
compl etel yturnroundwhat Foucaul t
has to say i n
TheHi story of Sexual i tyI , whi l esti l l
accepti ng
i ts central
hypothesi s. Foucaul t sees onl ythe
producti onof sex
as di scourse. Hei s
fasci natedby thei rreversi bl e
depl oyment
48 SEDUCTI ON
andi nt er s t i t i al s at ur at i on of af i el dof
s peech, whi ch i s at t he
s ame t i me t he i ns t i t ut i on of a f i el d of
power , cul mi nat i ng i n
a f i el d of knowl edge t hat r ef l ect s ( or
i nvent s ) i t . But f r om
whence does power
der i ve i t s s omnambul i s t i c f unct i onal i t y,
t hi s
i r r es i s t i bl e vocat i on
t o s at ur at e s pace? I f nei t her
; s oci al i t y nor
s exual i t y exi s t unl es s
r ecl ai medands t agedby power ,
per haps
power t oo does not exi s t unl es s
r ecl ai med and s t aged by
knowl edge ( t heor y) . I nwhi chcas e,
t he ent i r e ens embl e s houl d
be pl aced i ns i mul at i on, and
t hi s t oo per f ect mi r r or
i nver t ed,
even i f t he "t r ut h
ef f ect s " i t pr oduces ar e
mar vel ous l y
deci pher abl e .
Fur t her mor e, t he equat i on
of power wi t h knowl edge,
t hi s
conver gence of
mechani s ms over af i el dof r ul e t hey
have s eem-
i ngl y s wept cl ean, t hi s conj unct i ondes cr i bed by
Foucaul t as
compl et e andoper at i onal , i s
per haps onl y t he concur r ence of
t wo deads t ar s whos e l as t
gl i mmer i ngs s t i l l i l l umi nat e each
ot her ,
t hough
t hey have l os t t hei r ownr adi ance?
I n t hei r or i gi nal ,
aut hent i c phas e, knowl edge andpower
wer e oppos edt o each
ot her , s omet i mes vi ol ent l y
( as wer e, mor eover , s ex and
pow-
er ) . But i f t oday t hey ar e
mer gi ng, i s t hi s not due t o t he
pr ogr es -
s i ve ext enuat i on of
t hei r r eal i t y pr i nci pl e, of t hei r
di s t i nct i ve
char act er i s t i cs , t hei r s peci f i c
ener gi es ? Thei r conj unct i ont hen
woul dher al dnot ar ei nf or cedpos i t i vi t y,
but at wi ni ndi f f er en-
t i at i on, at t he endof
whi chonl y t hei r phant oms woul d,
r emai n,
mi ngl i ng amongs t
t hems el ves , l ef t t o haunt us .
I nt he l as t i ns t ance, behi nd
t he appar ent s t as i s of
knowl edge
andpower whi ch
appear s t o ar i s e f r omal l s i des ,
t her e woul d
l i e onl y t he
met as t as i s of power , t he cancer ous
pr ol i f er at i on
of a
di s t ur bed, di s or gani zeds t r uct ur e . I f
power t oday i s gener -
al , andcanbe det ect ed at al l l evel s
( "mol ecul ar " power ) , i f i t
has become cancer ous ,
wi t h i t s cel l s pr ol i f er at i ng
uncont r ol l a-
bl y, wi t hout r egar dt o
t he goodol d "genet i c code" of
pol i t i cs ,
t hi s i s
becaus e i t i s i t s el f af f l i ct ed and
i n a s t at e of advanced
decompos i t i on. Or per haps
i t i s af f l i ct ed. wi t h hyper r eal i t y
and
i nanacut e cr i s i s of s i mul at i on
( t he cancer ous pr ol i f er at i on
of
onl y t he
s i gns
of
power ) and, accor di ngl y,
has r eacheda s t at e
of
gener al di f f us i onands at ur at i on
. I t s s omnambul i s t i c
oper a-
t i onal i t y.
One mus t
t her ef or e al ways wager on
s i mul at i onandt ake t he
THE
ECLI PTI COFSEX 49
si gns f rombehi nd - si gns t hat , when t aken
at f ace val ue and
i n goodf ai t h,
al ways l ead t o t hereal i t y andevi dence of power.
J ust as t hey l ead t o t hereal i t y and
evi dence of sexandproduc-
t i on. I t i s t hi s
posi t i vi smt hat must not be t aken at f ace val ue;
and
i t
i s t o t hi s reversi on of power i n si mul at i on
one must de-
vot e one' s ef f ort s . Power wi l l
never doi t by i t sel f , andFoucaul t ' s
t ext shoul d be cri t i ci zed f or f ai l i ng
t o do i t and, t heref ore, f or
revi vi ng t he i l l usi on
of power.
Thewhol e, obsessedas i t
i s
wi t h
maxi mi zi ng power andsex,
must bequest i oned
as t o i t s empt i ness . Gi veni t s obsessi on wi t h
power as cont i nuous
expansi on andi nvest ment , onemust ask
i t t he quest i on of t he reversi on
of
t he
space of power, andof
t he reversi on of t hespace
of sex andi t s speech. Gi ven i t s f asci -
nat i on wi t h product i on, one must
ask
i t
t he quest i on of
seduct i on .
I I
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES
V
THESACREDHORIZON
OFAPPEARANCES
Seduct i on t akes f rom
di scourse i t s sense and t urns i t f rom
i t s t rut h.
It i s, t heref ore, cont rary t o t he
psychoanal yt i c di st i nc-
t i on bet weenmani f est and
l at ent di scourses . For t he l at ent di s-
course t urns t he mani f est di scourse not
f romi t s t rut h, but
t owards i t s t rut h . It
makes t he mani f est di scourse say what i t
does not want t o say; i t causes det ermi nat i ons
and prof ound
i ndet ermi nat i ons
t o showt hrough i n t he mani f est
di scourse.
Dept h al ways peeks t hrough
f rombehi nd t he break, andmean-
i ng peeks f rom
behi nd t he l i ne. Themani f est di scourse has
t he
st at us of an appearance,
a l aboured appearance, t raversed by
t he
emergence of meani ng. Int erpret at i on i s what
breaks t he
appearance andpl ay of t he mani f est
di scourse and, by t aki ng
up wi t h t he
l at ent di scourse, del i vers t he real meani ng.
In seduct i on, by cont rast , i t i s
t he mani f est di scourse - di s-
course at i t s
most superf i ci al - t hat t urns back
on
t he
deeper
order ( whet her consci ous or
unconsci ous) i n order t o i nval i -
dat e i t , subst i t ut i ng t he
charmandi l l usi on of appearances. These
appearances
are not i n t he l east f ri vol ous,
but occasi ons f or a
game andi t s st akes, and
a passi on f or devi at i on - t he
seduc-
t i on
of t he si gns t hemsel ves bei ng
more i mport ant t han t he
emergenceof any t rut h - whi ch i nt erpret at i on
negl ect s anddes-
t roys i n i t s search f or hi dden
meani ngs . Thi s i s whyi nt erpret a-
t i on i s what , par
excel l ence, i s opposedt o seduct i on,
andwhy
5
4 SEDUCTI ON
i t i s t he l eas t s educt i ve of di s cour s es
. Not onl y does i t s ubj ect
t he domai n of appear ances t o
i ncal cul abl e damage, but t hi s
pr i vi l eged s ear ch f or hi dden
meani ngs maywel l be pr of ound-
l y i n er r or. For i t i s not
s omewher e el s e, i n a hi nt er wel t or
an
uncons ci ous , t hat one wi l l f i nd
what l eads di s cour s e as t r ay.
What
t r ul y di s pl aces
di s cour s e, "s educes " i t i n t he l i t er al
s ens e, and
r ender s i t s educt i ve,
i s i t s ver y appear ance, i t s
i nf l ect i ons , i t s
nuances , t he ci r cul at i on( whet her al eat or y and
s ens el es s , or r i t u-
al i zed andmet i cul ous ) of s i gns at i t s
s ur f ace. I t i s t hi s t hat ef -
f aces meani ngandi s s educt i ve,
whi l e a di s cour s e' s
meani nghas
never s educed anyone. Al l
meani ngf ul di s cour s e s eeks t o
end
appear ances : t hi s i s i t s
at t r act i on, and i t s i mpos t ur e. I t i s
al s o
an i mpos s i bl e
under t aki ng. I nexor abl y, di s cour s e i s
l ef t t o i t s
appear ances , andt hus t o
t he s t akes of . s educt i on, t hus t o
i t s own
f ai l ur e as di s cour s e
. But per haps di s cour s e i s s ecr et l y
t empt -
ed by t hi s
f ai l ur e, by t he br acket i ng of i t s
obj ect i ves , of i t s t r ut h
ef f ect s whi ch become abs or bed
wi t hi n a s ur f ace t hat s wal l ows
meani ng. Thi s i s what
happens at f i r s t , whendi s cour s e
s educes
i t s el f ; i t i s t he
or i gi nal f or mby whi ch di s cour s e
becomes ab-
s or bed
wi t hi n i t s el f andempt i ed of i t s t r ut h i n
or der t o bet t er
f as ci nat e
ot her s : t he pr i mi t i ve s educt i on of
l anguage.
Ever y di s cour s e i s compl i ci t
i n t hi s r apt ur e, i n t hi s devi at i on,
andi f i t does
not do i t i t s el f , t hen ot her s wi l l do: i t i n
i t s pl ace.
Al l
appear ances cons pi r e t o combat and r oot
: out meani ng
( whet her i nt ent i onal or ot her wi s e) ,
andt ur n i t i nt o a game,
i nt o
anot her of t he game' s
r ul es , a mor e ar bi t r ar y r ul e - or
i nt o
anot her el us i ve r i t ual , one
t hat i s mor e advent ur ous and
s educ-
t i ve t han t he
di r ect i ve l i ne of meani ng. What
di s cour s e mus t
f i ght
agai ns t i s not s o much t he uncons ci ous
s ecr et as t he s u-
per f i ci al abys s of i t s ownappear ance
; andi f di s cour s e mus t
t r i -
umph over
s omet hi ng, i t i s not over
phant as i es and
hal l uci nat i ons heavywi t h meani ng and
mi s i nt er pr et at i on, but
t he s hi ny s ur f ace of non- s ens e and
al l t he games , t hat t he
l at t er
r ender s pos s i bl e. I t
was onl y a s hor t whi l e ago
t hat one s uc-
ceeeded
i n el i mi nat i ng t hi s s t ake of s educt i on
( whi ch has as
i t s concer nt he s acr ed hor i zonof
appear ances ) i n or der t o
s ub-
s t i t ut e a s t ake "i n
dept h, " a s t ake i n t he uncons ci ous ,
or i n i n-
t er pr et at i on
. But t hi s s ubs t i t ut i on i s f r agi l e
andephemer al . No
one knows i f t he r ei gni ng obs es s i on
wi t h l at ent di s cour s e one
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 55
f i nds i n psychoanal ysi s ( whi ch i n ef f ect ,
gener al i zes t he vi o-
l ence of i nt er pr et at i on t o
al l
l evel s) ,
i f t hi s mechani smwi t h
whi ch one has el i mi nat ed ( or sought t o el i mi nat e) al l seduct i on
i s not i t sel f a model of si mul at i on - a r at her f r agi l e one t hat
gi ves i t sel f t he sembl ance of bei ng i nsur mount abl e i n or der t o
bet t er conceal al l par al l el ef f ect s, and most not abl y, t he
ef f ect s
of seduct i on
t hat
ar e
begi nni ng
t o
wor kt hei r damage. For what
i s most
damagi ng
t o
psychoanal ysi s
i s
t he r eal i zat i on t hat t he
unconsci ous seduces : i t seduces by i t s dr eams and by i t s con-
cept ; i t seduces as soon as t he i d speaks and even as t he i d wi shes
t o speak. Adoubl e st r uct ur e emer ges, a par al l el st r uct ur e of
t he
conni vance of t he si gns of t he unconsci ous and t hei r
exchange,
whi ch eat s away at
t he ot her
st r uct ur e,
t he har d, pur e st r uc-
t ur e of unconsci ous "l abour " and t r ansf er ence and count er -
t r ansf er ence. The ent i r e psychoanal yt i c edi f i ce per i shes of i t s
own seduct i on, and wi t h i t al l t he ot her s .
Let
us be
anal yst s
f or one bl azi ng i nst ant , and say t hat i t i s t he r evenge of t he
r epr essed, t he r epr essi on of seduct i on, t hat i s at t he or i gi n of
psychoanal ysi s as a "sci ence, " wi t hi n t he i nt el l ect ur al
t r aj ect o-
r y of
Fr eud hi msel f .
The Fr eudi an oeuvr e unf ol ds bet ween t wo pol es_ t hat r adi -
cal l y put i nt o quest i on t he i nt er medi ar y const r uct i on,
t hese
pol es bei ng seduct i on and t he deat h dr i ve. We have al r eady
spoken
i n L' Ecbange symbol i que et l a mor t of t he l at t er , consi -
der ed as an i nver si on of t he ear l i er psychoanal yt i c appar at us
( t opi cal , economi c) . Regar di ng t he f or mer , whi chaf t er
numer -
ous t ur ns l i nks up wi t h t he deat h dr i ve bysome secr et
af f i ni t y,
one has t o say t hat i t appear s
as
psychoanal ysi s' l ost obj ect .
I t i s cl assi c t o consi der Fr eud' s abandonment of
t he t heor y of
seduct i on ( 1907)
as
a deci si ve st ep
i n t he emer gence of psychoanal yt i c t heor y and i n
movi ng t o t he f or egr ound t he not i ons of uncons-
ci ous phant asy, psychi c r eal i t y, i nf ant i l e sexual i t y,
et c.
Lapl anche and Pont al i s
Vocabul ai r e de l a psychanal yse
56 SEDUCTI ON
Seduct i on, as an or i gi nal f or m, i s cons i der ed r el at ed t o t he
s t at e
of
t he
"pr i mal phant as y"and t hus t r eat ed, accor di ng t o a
l ogi c t hat i s not l onger i t s own, as a r es i due, a ves t i ge, or
s cr een/ f or mat i on i n t he hencef or t h t r i umphant l ogi c ands t r uc-
t ur e of ps ychi c and s exual r eal i t y. But i ns t ead of cons i der i ng
s educt i on' s downgr adi ng as neces s ar y t o ps ychoanal ys i s '
gr owt h, one s houd
t hi nk
of i t as a cr uci al event ,
heavy wi t h
cons equences .
As
we
know,
s educt i on
wi l l
di s appear
f r omps y-
choanal yt i c di s cour s e, or wi l l r eappear onl y t o be bur r i ed and
f or got t en, i n accor d wi t ha l ogi cal r epet i t i on of t hef oundat i onal
act of deni al by t he mas t er hi ms el f . I t i s not s i mpl y s et as i de
as s omet hi ngs econdar y r el at i ve t o t he mor e deci s i ve el ement s
l i ke i nf ant i l e s exual i t y, r epr es s i on,
Oedi pus ,
et c. ; i t
i s deni ed as
a
danger ous f or m
t hat coul d
wel l t hr eat en t he devel opment and
coher ence
of
t he ul t er i or edi f i ce.
Exact l y t he s ame t hi ng occur s i n Saus s ur e as i n Fr eud. Saus -
s ur e al s o began, i n t he Anagr ammes , wi t h a des cr i pt i on of a
f or m
of
l anguage,
or
mor e pr eci s el y,
of
i t s
s ubver s i on
- a r i t u-
al i zed, met i cul ous f or mof t he decons t r uct i on of meani ng and
val ue. But t hen he t ook i t al l back and moved on t o t he con-
s t r uct i on of l i ngui s t i cs . Was t hi s t ur n due t o t he mani f es t f ai l ur e
of hi s at t empt ed pr oof s , or di d i t i nvol ve a r enunci at i on of
t he
anagr ammat i cal chal l enge i n or der t o under t ake t he mor e con-
s t r uct i ve, dur abl e and s ci ent i f i c devel opment of t he mode of
pr oduct i on of meani ng, t o t he excl us i on of i t s pos s i bl e s ub-
ver s i on? But what does i t mat t er , t he f act i s t hat l i ngui s t i cs was
bor n f r omt hi s i r r evocabl e r edepl oyment , andi t cons t i t ut es
t he
f undament al axi omandr ul e f or al l t hos e who cont i nue Saus -
s ur e' s wor k
.
Onedoes not r et ur n t o t he s cene of ,
t he
cr i me,
and
t he f or get t i ng of t he or i gi nal mur der i s par t of t he l ogi cal and
t r i umphant unf ol di ng of s ci ence. Al l t he ener gyof t he deadob-
j ect and i t s l as t r i t es pas s es i nt o t he s i mul at ed
r es ur r ect i on
of
t he l i vi ng. St i l l i t mus t be s ai d t hat Saus s ur e, at l eas t , had t he
i nt ut i t i on t owar ds t he endt hat hi s l i ngui s t i c ent er pr i s e
hadf ai l ed,
l eavi ng a
hover i ng
uncer t ai nt y, t he gl i mps e of a weaknes s ,
of
t he pos s i bl y i l l us or y char act er of s o beaut i f ul a mechani s mof
s ubs t i t ut i on. But s uch s cr upl es , wi t hi n whi ch one can per cei ve
s omet hi ng of t he pr emat ur e and vi ol ent bur i al of
t he
Anagr ammes , woul d
be t ot al l y f or ei gn
t o
hi s hei r s , whor emai n
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES
57
cont ent t o manage t he di sci pl i ne
wi t hout ever t ouchi ngont he
i dea of an abyss of l anguage, an
abyss of l i ngui st i c seduct i on,
a
r adi cal l y di f f er ent oper at i on t hat absor bs r at her
t han pr oduces
meani ng. The
sar cophagus of l i ngui st i cs was t i ght l y seal ed,
and
f el l upon t he shr oud
of t he si gni f i er .
Thus t he
shr oud of psychoanal ysi s has f al l en
over seduct i on,
t he shr oud of
hi ddenmeani ngs and of ahi ddenexcess of mean-
i ng, at t he expense of t hesur f ace
of absor pt i on, t he super f i ci al
abyss of appear ances, t he
i nst ant aneous and pani cky sur f ace
of t he exchange and r i val r y of si gns
const i t ut ed by seduct i on
( hyst er i a bei ngbut
a"sympt omat i c" mani f est at i on of t he l at -
t er , onet hat has
al r eady been cont ami nat ed by t he l at ent
st r uc-
t ur e of t he sympt om,
and i s t hus pr e- psychoanal yt i c, t hus
degr aded
- whi ch i s why i t was abl e
t o, , ser ve as a "conver si on
mat r i x" f or
psychoanal ysi s) . Fr eud abol i shed seduct i oni n
or der
t o put i nt o pl ace a machi ner y
of i nt er pr et at i on, and of sexual
r epr essi on, t hat of f er al l t he
char act er i st i cs of obj ect i vi t y and
coher ence. Assumi ngt hat
one di sr egar ds al l t he i nt er nal con-
vul si ons
of psychoanal ysi s, be t hey
per sonal or t heor et i cal , t hat
under mi nei t s
beaut i f ul coher ence - l est al l t he
chal l enges and
seduct i ons
bur i ed under t he di scour se' s
r i gour r eemer ge l i ke
t he l i vi ng dead.
( But doesn' t t hi s suggest , so t he beaut i f ul soul s
wi l l ar gue, t hat , at bot t om, psychoanal ysi s
i s st i l l al i ve?) . Fr eud
mayhave
br oken wi t h seduct i onand t aken
t he si de of i nt er pr e-
t at i on ( at
l east unt i l t he l ast met apsychol ogy
whi ch, ver y
def i ni t el y, moves i n a di f f er ent
di r ect i on) , but al l t hat was
r epr essed by t hi s admi r abl e
r eal i gnment has r eemer ged wi t hi n
t he conf l i ct s andvi ci ssi t udes
of psychoanal ysi s' hi st or y, and wi -
t hi nt he cour se of
al most ever y cur e( one i s never f i ni shed wi t h
hyst er i a! ) . And i t
i s not an i nconsi der abl e sour ce of ent er t ai n-
ment t o see seduct i on sweep acr oss
psychoanal ysi s wi t hLa-
can, i n t he wi l d- eyed
f or mof apl ay of si gni f i er s f r om
whi ch
psychoanal ysi s - i n t he
r i gour of i t s demands and i n i t s f or m,
i n t he
f or mFr eud want ed - i s dyi ngj ust
as cer t ai nl y, nay even
mor e cer t ai nl y, as f r omi t s
i nst i t ut i onal banal i zat i on.
The
seduct i on of Lacani ani sm
i s, no doubt , an i mpost ur e;
5
8 SEDUCTI ON
but i n i t s own wayi t
cor r ect s , r ect i f i es andat ones
f or t he or i gi -
nal i mpos t ur e of
Fr eudhi ms el f , t hat of t he f or cl os ur e
of t he
f or m/ s educt i on t ot he advant age
of awoul d- be s ci ence. The
Lacani an di s cour s e,
whi ch gener al i zes t he s educt i ve
pr act i ces
of ps ychoanal ys i s ,
avenges t hi s f or ecl os eds educt i on,
but i n a
manner t hat
i s ' i t s el f cont ami nat ed by
ps ychoanal ys i s . That i s
a
t os ay, t he
vengeance al ways occur s wi t hi n
t he t er ms of t he Law
( of t he s ymbol i c) ,
r es ul t i ng i n an i ns i di ous s educt i on
exer ci s ed
i n t er ms of
t he l awand ( of t he ef f i gy) of a
Mas t er whor ul es
by t he Wor d over hys t er i cal
mas s es unf i t f or pl eas ur e. . .
Nonet hel es s , wi t h Lacan i t i s
s t i l l amat t er of t he deat h of
ps y-
choanal ys i s , of adeat h due t o
t he t r i umphant but
pos t humous
r eemer gence of
what at t he begi nni ng was
deni ed. I s n' t t hi s
t he f ul f i l l ment of a
des t i ny? At l eas t ps ychoanal ys i s
wi l l have
hadt he
oppor t uni t yt oendwi t h aGr eat
I mpos t or af t er havi ng
begun . wi t h a Gr eat Deni al .
That t he mos t beaut i f ul
cons t r uct i on of meani ng andi nt er pr e-
t at i on ever er ect ed
t hus col l aps es under t he
wei ght of i t s own
s i gns ,
whi ch wer e once t er ms '. heavy wi t h
meani ng, but have
t
once
agai n become devi ces i n an
unr es t r ai neds educt i on, t er ms
i n an unt r ammel edexchange
t hat i s bot h compl i ci t wi t h
and
empt yof meani ng
( i ncl udi ng i n t he cur e) - t hi s
s houl d exal t
andcomf or t us . I t i s a
s i gn t hat t he t r ut h at l eas t ( t hat
f or whi ch
i mpos t or s
r ei gn) wi l l be s par ed- us . Andt hat
what mi ght appear
as ps ychoanal ys i s ' f ai l ur e i s
but t he t empt at i on common t o
ev-
er y: gr eat s ys t emof meani ng, t o
s i nk i nt oi t s own i mage
and
l os e i t s s ens e - whi ch i ndeed
s ugges t s t he r et ur n of
pr i mi t i ve
s educt i on' s - f l ame
and t he r evenge of appear ances
. But t hen
wher e i s t he i mpos t ur e?
Havi ng r ej ect ed t he
f or m/ s educt i on
f r omt he
s t ar t , ps ychoanal ys i s - was
per haps onl yan i l l us i on
-
an
i l l us i on of t r ut handi nt er pr et at i on
- t hat woul dbe cont r adi ct -
edandcount er bal anced
byt he Lacani an i l l us i on of s educt i on
.
Thus acycl e i s
compl et ed, f r omwhi ch per haps
ot her i nt er r oga-
t i ve and
s educt i ve f or ms wi l l
ar i s e.
I t was t he s ame wi t h God
andt he Revol ut i on . To
di s pel al l
appear ances s o
t hat God' s t r ut h coul d
s hi ne f or t h was t he i l l u-
s i on of
t he I conocl as t s . An i l l us i on
becaus e God' s t r ut hdi d
not
exi s t , andper haps , s ecr et l y
t heyknewi t , t hi s bei ng
whyt hei r
f ai l ur e pr oceeded
f r omt he s ame i nt ui t i on as
t hat of t he ador er s
i
SUPERFI CI AL
ABYSSES 59
of i mages : one canl i ve onl y t he i dea of al t ered t rut h. I t i s t he
onl y
way t o l i ve i n conf ormi t y wi t h t he t rut h. Ot herwi se l i f e
becomes unbearabl e ( preci sel y because t he t rut h does not ex-
i st ) . One need not want t o di spel appearances ( t he seduct i on
of i mages) . But i f one does, i t i s i mperat i ve t hat one not suc-
ceedl est t he absence of t he t rut h become mani f est . Or t he ab-
sence of God, or t he Revol ut i on. The Revol ut i on, and i n
part i cul ar i t s ape- l i ke
t ravest y, St al i ni sm, l i ves onl y by t he i dea
t hat everyt hi ng i s opposedt o i t . St al i ni smi s i ndest ruct i bl e be-
cause i t exi st s
onl y
i n order t o conceal t he non- exi st ence of
t he Revol ut i onandi t s t rut h, andt hereby
t o
rest ore
hope.
"The
peopl e" Ri varol sai d, "di dnot want aRevol ut i on, t hey want ed
onl y i t s spect acl e" - because t hi s i s t he onl y way
t o
preserve
t he Revol ut i on' s appeal , i nst ead of abol i shi ng i t i n i t s t rut h.
"Wedo not bel i eve t hat t he t rut h remai ns t rue once t he vei l
has been l i f t ed" ( Ni et zsche) .
TROMPEL' OEI L
OR
ENCHANTEDSI MULATI ON
Di senchant ed si mul at i on: pornography - t ruer t han t rue -
t he hei ght of t he si mul acrum.
Enchant edsi mul at i on: t he t rompe- l ' oei l - f al ser t han f al se -
t he secret of appearances.
Nei t her f abl e, st ory or composi t i on, nor t heat er, scene or ac-
t i on. The t rompe l bei l f orget s al l t hi s andbypasses
i t
by
t he
l ow- l evel represent at i on
of
second- rat e obj ect s. The l at t er f i gure
i n t he great composi t i ons of t he t i me, but here t hey appear
al one, as t hough
t he
di scourse on
pai nt i ng hadbeenel i mi nat -
ed. Suddenl y t hey no l onger " represent , " t hey are no l onger
obj ect s, no l onger anyt hi ng. Theyare bl ank, , empt y si gns t hat
bespeak a soci al ,
rel i gi ous
or
art i st i c ant i - ceremony or ant i -
represent at i on. Scraps of soci al l i f e, t hey t urn agai nst t he l at t er
andparody i t s t heat ri cal i t y; t hi s i s
why
t hey are
scat t ered, j ux-
t aposedat random. The i mpl i cat i onbei ngt hat t heseobj ect s are
not obj ect s
. They do
not
descri be a
f ami l i ar real i t y, as does a
st i l l l i f e. Theydescri be avoi d, an absence, t he absence of
ev-
ery represent at i onal hi erarchy t hat organi zes t he el ement s of
a t abl eau, or f or t hat mat t er, t he pol i t i cal order. . .
These are not mere ext ras di spl aced
f romt he mai n scene,
but ghost s t hat haunt t he empt i ness of t he st age. Thei rs i s not
t he aest het i c appeal of
pai nt i ng
and
resembl ance, but t he acut e,
met aphysi cal appeal of t he real ' s abol i t i on. Haunt ed obj ect s,
met aphysi cal obj ect s, i n t hei r unr eal r ever si on t hey ar eopposed
t o t he ent i r e r epr esent at i ve space of t he Renai ssance.
Thei r
ver y i nsi gni f i cance i s of f ensi ve. Obj ect s wi t hout r ef er -
ent s, st r i pped of t hei r decor -
ol dnewspaper s, books, nai l s,
boar ds, andscr aps
of f ood- i sol at ed, decayed, spect r al obj ect s,
di si ncar nat edf r omal l nar r at i ve, t hey al one wer e abl e t o t r ace
an obsessi on wi t h a l ost r eal i t y, somet hi ng aki n t o l i f e bef or e
t he subj ect andhi s acqui si t i on of consci ousness. "For t he t r ans-
par ent , al l usi ve i mage
t hat t he ar t l over expect s, t he t r ompe Z bei l
t ends t o subst i t ut e t he i nt r act abl e opaci t y
of Pr esence"
( Pi er r e
Char pent r at ) . Si mul acr a wi t hout per spect i ve, t he f i gur es i n
t r ompe l ' oei l appear suddenl y, wi t h
l ust r ous exact i t ude, as
t hough denudedof t he aur a of meani ng andbat hed i n et her .
Pur e
appear ances, t hey have t he i r ony of t oo much r eal i t y.
SUPERFI CI AL ABYSSES 61
Ther e i s no nat ur e i n t he t r ompe l bei l , nor l andscapes, ski es,
vani shi ng poi nt s or nat ur al l i ght . Nor f aces, psychol ogy or
hi st or i ci t y. Ever yt hi ng
i s ar t i f act .
A
ver t i cal backdr op r ai ses ob-
j ect s i sol at ed f r omt hei r r ef er ent i al
cont ext t o t he st at us of pur e
si gns.
Tr ansl ucency, suspense, f r agi l i t y, obsol escence - hence t he
i nsi st ence on paper ( f r ayedat t he edges) , t he l et t er , t he mi r r or
or wat ch, t he f aded, unt i mel y si gns of a t r anscendence t hat has
vani shed i nt o t he
quot i di an
.
The mi r r or of wor n- out boar ds
whose knot s andr i ngs mar k
t he t i me, l i ke a cl ock wi t hout hands
t hat l eaves one t o guess t he hour : t hese ar e t hi ngs t hat have
l ast ed,
i n
a t i me t hat has al r eady passed. Anachr ony al one st ands
out , t he i nvol ut ed r epr esent at i on of t i me and space.
Ther ear e
no
f r ui t s,
meat s or f l ower s, no basket s or bouquet s,
nor any of t he del i ght f ul t hi ngs f oundi n ( a st i l l ) l i f e. Nat ur e
i s
car nal , anda st i l l l i f e i s a car nal ar r angement on a hor i zont al
pl ane, t hat pr ovi ded by t he gr oundor a t abl e. Al t hough a st i l l
l i f e may somet i mes pl ay wi t h
di sor der , wi t h t he r agged edge
of t hi ngs andt he f r agi l i t y of t hei r use, i t al ways r et ai ns t hegr avi t y
of r eal t hi ngs, as under scor ed by t he
hor i zont al ness . Wher eas
t he t r ompe l bei l f unct i ons i n
wei ght l essness, as i ndi cat edby
t he ver t i cal backdr op, ever yt hi ng bei ng
suspended, t he obj ect s,
62 SEDUCTI ON
t i me, evenl i ght andper spect i ve. Whi l e t he st i l l l i f e uses cl assi c
shapes andshades, t he shadows bor ne by t he t r ompe l bei l l ack
t he dept h t hat comes f r omar eal l umi nous sour ce. Li ke t he ob-
sol escence of obj ect s, t hey ar e t he si gn of asl i ght ver t i go,
t he
ver t i go of a pr evi ous l i f e, of an appear ance
pr i or
t o
r eal i t y.
Thi s
myst er i ous
l i ght wi t hout or i gi n, whose obl i que r ays ar e
nol onger r eal , i s l i ke st agnant wat er , wat er wi t hout dept h, sof t
t o
t he
t ouch
l i ke anat ur al deat h . Her e t hi ngs have l ong si nce
l ost t hei r shadows ( t hei r subst ance) . Somet hi ng ot her t hant he
sunshi nes ont hem, abr i ght er st ar , wi t hout anat mospher e, or
wi t h an et her t hat doesn' t r ef r act . Per haps deat h i l l umi nat es
t hese t hi ngs di r ect l y, and t hat i s t hei r sol e
meani ng? These
shadows do
not move wi t h t he sun; t hey donot gr owwi t h t he
eveni ng; wi t hout movement , t hey appear as ani nevi t abl e edg-
i ng. Not
t he r esul t of
chi ar oscur o, nor aski l f ul di al ect i c of l i ght
andshadow( f or t hese ar e st i l l pai nt er l y ef f ect s) , t hey suggest
t he t r anspar ency of obj ect s t o abl ack sun.
One senses t hat t hese obj ect s ar e appr oachi ng
t he bl ack hol e
f r omwhi ch, f or us, r eal i t y, t he r eal wor l d, and nor mal t i me
emer ge. Wi t h t hi s f or war d decent er i ng ef f ect , t hi s advance
t owar ds t he subj ect of ami r r or obj ect , i t i s t he appear ance of
t he doubl e,
i n
t he gui se of
t r i vi al obj ect s, t hat cr eat es t he ef -
f ect of
seduct i on, t he st ar t l i ng i mpr essi on char act er i st i c of t he
t r ompe l bei l : at act i l e ver t i got hat r ecount s t he subj ect ' s i nsane
desi r e t o obl i t er at e hi s owni mage, andt her eby vani sh
. For r eal i t y
gr i ps us onl y whenwe l ose our sel ves i n i t , or when i t r eap-
pear s as our own, hal l uci nat ed deat h .
A. vague physi cal
wi sh
t o gr asp
t hi ngs, but whi ch havi ng been
suspended, becomes
met aphysi cal : t he obj ect s of t he t r ompe
l oei l have somet hi ng of t he same: f ant ast i c vi vaci t yas t he chi l d' s
di scover y of hi s owni mage, anunmedi at edhal l uci nat i on
an-
t er i or t o t he per cept ual or der
.
I f t her e i s a mi r acl e of t r ompe l bei l , i t does not l i e i n t he
r eal i smof i t s execut i on, l i ke t he gr apes of Zeuxi s
whi ch ap-
pear edso r eal t hat bi r ds came t o peck at t hem. Thi s i s absur d.
Mi r acl es never r esul t f r omasur pl us of r eal i t y but , on t he con-
t r ar y, f r omasudden br eak i n r eal i t y andt he gi ddi ness of f eel -
i ng onesel f f al l . I t i s t hi s l oss of r eal i t yt hat
t he sur r eal f ami l i ar i t y
of obj ect s
t r ansl at es . Wi t h t he di si nt egr at i on of t hi s hi er ar chi -
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 6
3
cal or gani zat i on of space t hat pr i vi l eges t he eye andvi si on, of
t hi s per spect i val si mul at i on - f or i t i s mer el y a si mul acr um-
somet hi ng emer ges t hat , f or want of somet hi ng bet t er , weex-
pr ess i n t er ms of t ouch, a t act i l e hyper pr esence of t hi ngs, " as
t hough one coul dhol dt hem: " But t hi s t act i l e f ant asy has not h-
i ng t o do wi t h our sense of t ouch; i t i s a met aphor f or t he " sei -
zur e"
r esul t i ng
f r omt he anni hi l at i on of t he scene andspace
of r epr esent at i on . Suddenl y t hi s sei zur e r ebounds
ont o
t he
so-
cal l ed " r eal " wor l d, t o r eveal t hat t hi s " r eal i t y" i s naught but
a st agedwor l d, obj ect i f i edi n accor dwi t h t he r ul es of per spec-
t i ve. " Real i t y" appear s as apr i nci pl e, one t hat def i nes t he pai nt -
i ng, scul pt ur e andar chi t ect ur e of t he per i od, but a pr i nci pl e
nonet hel ess - t hat i s, a si mul acr umwhi ch t he exper i ment al
hyper si mul at i on
of t he t r ompe l bei l ) under mi nes.
The t r ompe l oei l does not seek t o conf use i t sel f wi t h t he
r eal
.
Consci ousl y pr oducedby means of pl ay andar t i f i ce,
i t
pr esent s i t sel f as asi mul acr um. Bymi mi cki ng t he t hi r ddi men-
si on, i t quest i ons t he r eal i t y of t hi s di mensi on, andbymi mi cki ng
andexceedi ng t he ef f ect s of t he r eal , i t r adi cal l y quest i ons t he
r eal i t y pr i nci pl e
.
Ther eal i s r el i nqui shedby t hever yexcess of i t s appear ances.
Theobj ect s r esembl e t hemsel ves
t oo
much, t hi s r esembl ance
bei ng l i ke a secondst at e; andby vi r t ue of t hi s al l egor i cal r esem-
bl ance, andof t he di agonal l i ght i ng, t hey poi nt t o t he i r ony of
t oo much r eal i t y.
Dept h appear s t o have been t ur ned i nsi de out . Whi l e t he
Renai ssance or gani zedal l space i n accor dwi t h a di st ant vani sh-
i ngpoi nt , per spect i ve i n t he t r ompe l bei l i s, i n asense, pr oj ect ed
f or war d. I nst eadof f l eei ng bef or e t he panor ami c sweepof t he
eye ( t he pr i vi l ege of panopt i c vi si on) , t he obj ect s " f ool " t he
eye ( " t r ompent Z bei l ) by a sor t of i nt er nal dept h - not by caus-
i ng onet o bel i eve i n a wor l dt hat
does
not exi st , but by under -
mi ni ng t he pr i vi l egedposi t i on of t he gaze. The eye, i nst ead of
gener at i ng
a space t hat spr eads out , i s but t he
i nt er nal vani sh-
i ng poi nt f or a conver gence of obj ect s. Adi f f er ent uni ver se oc-
cupi es t he f or egr ound, a uni ver se wi t hout hor i zon
or
64 SEDUCTI ON
hor i zont al i t y, l i ke an opaque mi r r or pl acedbef or e t he eye, wi t h
not hi ngbehi nd i t . Thi s i s, pr oper l y speaki ng, t he r eal mof ap-
pear ances, wher e t her e i s not hi ngt o see, wher e t hi ngs see you
.
They do not f l ee bef or e your
gaze, but posi t i on t hemsel ves i n
f r ont of you,
wi t h
a
l i ght
t hat seems t o come
f r omanot her
wor l d, wi t h shadows t hat never qui t e gi ve t hema t r ue t hi r d
di mensi on. For t hi s di mensi on, t hat of per spect i ve, al ways
i n-
di cat es t he badconsci ence of t he si gn r el at i ve t o r eal i t y - a bad
consci ence t hat has eat en away at al l pai nt i ng
si nce t he
Renai ssance.
Whence i ndependent of t he
aest het i c pl easur e, comes t he
uncanni ness of t he t r ompe
l ' oei l - t he st r ange l i ght i t cast s on
t hi s ent i r el y new, west er n r eal i t y whi ch emer ged t r i umphant
wi t h t he Renai ssance . The t r ompe Z bei l i s t he i r oni c si mul acr um
of t hat r eal i t y. I t i s what sur r eal i smwas t o t he f unct i onal i st r evo-
l ut i on of t he ear l y t went i et h cent ur y
-
sur r eal i sm
bei ngbut an
i r oni c r ever i e on t he pr i nci pl e of f unct i onal i t y. Andl i ke
t r ompe
l
oei l
sur r eal i smi s not qui t e par t of ar t or ar t hi st or y, f or t hei r
concer n i s wi t h a met aphysi cal di mensi on, and not
wi t h mat -
t er s of st yl e . They at t ack our sense of r eal i t y or f unct i onal i t y
and,
t her ef or e, our sense
of
consci ousness . They seek out t he
wr ongor r ever se si de of t hi ngs, andunder mi ne t he wor l d' s ap-
par ent f act ual i t y. Thi s i s why t he pl easur e t hat t hey gi ve us, t hei r
seduct i veness, however smal l , i s r adi cal ; f or i t comes
f r oma
r adi cal sur pr i se bor ne of appear ances,
f r oma l i f e pr i or t o t he
mode of pr oduct i on of t he r eal wor l d.
The t r ompe l oei l i s no l onger conf i ned t o pai nt i ng.
Li ke st uc-
co, i t s
cont empor ar y,
i t can do
anyt hi ng, mi mi c
or
par ody any-
t hi ng. I t has become t he pr ot ot ype f or t he mal evol ent use of
appear ances. What began as a game t ook on f ant ast i c
di men-
si ons i n t he XVI t h cent ur y, andendedupel i mi nat i ngt he bound-
ar i es bet ween pai nt i ng, scul pt ur e andar chi t ect ur e. I n t he mur al s
andcei l i ngpai nt i ngs of t he Renai ssance andBar oque,
pai nt i ng
andscul pt ur e conver ge . I n t he t r ompe Z' oei l mur al s andst r eet s
of Los Angel es, ar chi t ect ur e i s decei ved and def aced
by i l l u-
si on
. The seduct i on of space by t he si gns of space. Havi ngsai d
so muchabout t he product i on of space, i s i t not t i me t o speak
about i t s seduct i on?
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 65
And
about
t he
seduct i on of pol i t i cal space. For exampl e. t he
st udi ol os of t he Duke
of
Urbi no
andFederi go da
Mont ef el t re
i n t he ducal pal ace of Urbi no andGubbi o: t i ny sanct uari es en-
t i rel y i n t rompe Z' oei l at t he heart of t he i mmensespace of t he
pal ace. The l at t er exempl i f i es t he t ri umphof an archi t ect ural
perspect i ve, of a space depl oyed accordi ng t o t he rul es, whi l e
t he st udi ol o appears as an i nvert ed mi crocosm. Cut of f f rom
t he rest
of
t he st ruct ure, wi t hout
wi ndows,
l i t eral l y wi t hout
space - here space i s, act ual i zed by si mul at i on. I f t he pal ace
as a
whol e
const i t ut es t he archi t ect ural act par excel l ence, t he
mani f est di scourse
of
art ( andpower) , t hen what
i s
one
t o
make
of t he mi ni scul est udi ol o t hat adj oi ns t he chapel l i ke yet anot her
sacred pl ace, but wi t h an ai r of bewi t chment ? I t i s not cl ear
what i s happeni ng wi t hregard t o space, andconsequent l y, t o
t he ent i re syst em
of
represent at i ons t hat gi ves order t o t he pal ace
and republ i c.
I t i s apri vat i ssi me space, t he prerogat i ve of t he Pri nce, l i ke
i ncest andt ransgressi onwere once ki ngl y prerogat i ves .
A
com-
pl et e reversal of t he rul es of t he game i s i n ef f ect here, al l ow-
i ng us
t o
surmi se i roni cal l y, by t heal l egory
of
t he t rompeZ' oei l ,
t hat t he ext ernal space, t hat of t he pal ace, and beyond i t , t he
ci t y, t hat i s, t he pol i t i cal space, t he l ocus of power, i s i t sel f
perhaps onl y anef f ect of perspect i ve. Suchadangerous secret ,
sucharadi cal hypot hesi s, t he Pri nce must keep t o
hi msel f i n
t he st ri ct est secrecy
: f or
i t
i s t he very secret of hi s
power.
Si nce Machi avel l i pol i t i ci ans have perhaps al ways knownt hat
t he mast ery of a si mul at ed space i s at t he source of
t hei r pow-
er,
t hat pol i t i cs i s not a real act i vi t y, but a si mul at i on model ,
whose mani f est act s are but act ual i zed i mpressi ons . I t i s t hi s
bl i nd spot wi t hi nt he pal ace, cut of f f romarchi t ect ure andpubl i c
l i f e, whi chi n asense rei gns supreme, not by di rect det ermi na-
t i on,
but by a sort of
i nt ernal reversi on,
by an abrogat i on of
t he rul es enact edi n secret , as i npri mi t i ve ri t ual s . Ahol e i n real -
i t y, an
i roni c t ransf i gurat i on,
an exact si mul acrumhi dden
at t he
66
SEDUCTI ON
hear t of r eal i t y, andonwhi ch t he l at t er depends f or i t s f unc-
t i oni ng. Thi s i s t he secr et of appear ances.
Thus t hePope, t he Gr andI nqui si t or , t he gr eat J esui t s andt he-
ol ogi ans al l knewt hat Goddi dnot exi st ; t hi s was t hei r secr et ,
andt he secr et of t hei r st r engt h. Si mi l ar l y Mont ef el t r e' s st udi o-
l o i n t r ompe l ' oei l secr et l y suggest s t hat , i n t he l ast i nst ance,
r eal i t y does not exi st , t hat " r eal " i n- dept h space,
i ncl udi ng
po-
l i t i cal
space,
i s al ways pot ent i al l y r ever si bl e - t he secr et t hat
once commandedpol i t i cs, but whi ch have si nce beenl ost i n
t he i l l usi on of t he masses' " r eal i t y. "
I ' LL BEYOURMI RROR
I n t he t rompe Zoeil, whet hera mirrororpaint ing, we
are
bewit ched by t he spell of t he
missing dimension. I t is t he lat -
t er
t hat est ablishes t hespace of seduct ion andbecomes asource
of vert igo. Forif t he divine mission of all
t hings
is t o
f ind t heir
meaning, ort of ind a st ruct ure on which t obase t heirmean-
ing, t hey alsoseek, by
virt ue
of
a diabolical nost algia, t olose
t hemselves in appearances, in t he seduct ion of t heirimage.
That
it t osay, t hey seek t ounit e what should be
separat ed int oa sin-
gle ef f ect of
deat h and seduct ion . Narcissus .
Seduct ion cannot possibly be represent ed,
because in seduc-
t ion
t he dist ance bet ween t he real andit s double, and t he dis-
t ort ion bet ween t he Same andt he
Ot her, is abolished. Bending
overa pool of wat er, Narcissus quenches his t hirst . His image
is nolonger"ot her; " it is a surf ace
t hat absorbs and seduces
him, which he canapproach but neverpass beyond.
Fort here
is nobeyond, j ust as t here is noref lexive dist ance
bet ween him
and his image. The mirrorof wat eris not a surf ace of ref lec-
t ion, but of absorpt ion
.
This
is
whyof all t he great f igures of seduct ion in myt holo-
gyandart - whoseduce by a look, a
song,
an
absence, byrouge,
beaut y ormonst rosit y, by masks ormadness, by
t heirf ame, but
also
t heirf ailure anddeat h - Narcissus st ands out wit h singu-
larf orce.
68 SEDUCTI ON
Not a mi r r or - r ef l ecti on, i n whi ch the
subj ect
f i nds hi msel f
tr ansf or med - not a mi r r or phase, i n whi chthe
subj ect estab-
l i shes hi msel f wi thi n the i magi nar y. Al l . thi s bel ongs to the psy-
chol ogi cal
domai n of al ter i ty and i denti ty, not seducti on.
Al l r ef l ecti on theor y i s
i mpover i shed, par ti cul ar l y the i dea
that seducti on i s r ooted i n the attr acti on of l i ke
to
l i ke, i n ami -
meti c exal tati on of one' s own i mage, or an i deal mi r age of r esem-
bl ance. Thus Vi ncent Descombes, i n L' I nconsci ent mal gr e l ui ,
wr i tes :
What seduces i s not some f emi ni ne
wi l e, but the
f act that i t i s di r ected at you. I t i s seducti ve to be
seduced, and
consequentl y, i t i s bei ngseducedthat
i s seducti ve. I n other
wor ds, the bei ng seduced
f i nds hi msel f i n the per son seduci ng. What the per -
sonseduced sees i n the one whoseduces hi m, the
uni que obj ect of hi s f asci nati on, i s hi s ownseduc-
ti ve, char mi ng sel f , hi s
l ovabl e sel f - i mage. . .
I t i s al ways amatter of sel f - seducti on and i ts psychol ogi cal
vi ci ssi tudes .
I n
the nar ci ssi sti c myth, however , the mi r r or does
not exi st so that Nar ci ssus
can
f i nd
wi thi n hi msel f some l i vi ng
i deal . I t i s a matter of the mi r r or as an
absence of depth, as a
super f i ci al abyss, whi chother s f i nd seducti ve and ver ti gi nous
onl y
because they ar e each the f i r st to be swal l owed up i n i t .
Al l
seducti on i n thi s sense i s nar ci ssi sti c, and i ts secr et l i es
wi ththi s mor tal
absor pti on. Thus women, bei ngcl oser to thi s
other , hi dden mi r r or ( wi thwhi chthey
shr oud
thei r
i mage and
body) ar e al so cl oser to the ef f ects of seducti on. Men, by con-
tr ast,
have depth, but nosecr ets ; hence thei r power and f r agi l i ty.
I f seducti on does not pr oceedf r om
some i deal mi r age of the
subj ect, nor does i t r esul t f r omthe mi r r or
i deal of death. I n
Pausani as' ver si on :
Nar ki ssos had a twi n
si ster , they wer e exactl y the
same to l ook at wi th j ust the same hai r styl e and
the same
cl othes, and they even used to go hunt-
i ngtogether . Nar ki ssos
was
i n
l ove wi thhi s si ster ,
and when she di ed he used
to
vi si t the spr i ng;
he
knewt hat what hesawwashi s ownr ef l ect i on, but
evensohef oundsomer el i ef i n t el l i ng hi msel f i t
was hi s si st er ' s i mage.
Gui det o Gr eece. Vol . I , p. 376
Accor di ng
t o
H. - P
J eudy, whoaccept s t hi s ver si on, Nar ci s-
sus seduces hi msel f , andconquer shi s power of seduct i on,
onl y
by embr aci ng mi met i cal l y t hel ost
i mage, r est or edby hi s own
f ace, of hi s deceased t wi n si st er
.
But i s a mi met i c
r el at i onwi t h t hei mageof t hedeceasedr eal l y
necessar y t o
i nvest i gat enar ci ssi st i c ver t i go? I n t r ut h,
t hel at t er
has noneedof
a t wi nr ef r act i on. I t s owni l l usi onwi l l do-
whi ch
i s per haps
t he i l l usi on of i t s owndeat h . Per haps deat h
i s al -
ways i ncest uous - a f act t hat woul d
onl y addt o i t s spel l . The
"soul si st er " i s
i t s spi r i t ual i zedver si on. Thegr eat st or i es of seduc-
t i on, t hat of Phaedr a or I sol de, ar est or i es of
i ncest , andal ways
endi n deat h. What ar ewet o
concl ude, i f not t hat deat h i t sel f
awai t s us i nt heage- ol d
t empt at i onof i ncest , i ncl udi ng i n t he
i ncest uous
r el at i onwemai nt ai nwi t h our owni mage?
Wear e
seduced
by t hel at t er becausei t consol es us wi t h
t hei mmi nent
deat h of
our sacr i l egous exi st ence. Our mor t al
sel f - absor pt i on
wi t h our i mageconsol es us f or t hei r r ever si bi l i t y
of our havi ng
beenbor n and
havi ng
t o
r epr oduce. I t i s by t hi s sensual , i n-
cest uous t r ansact i onwi t h our
i mage, our doubl e, andour deat h,
t hat wegai n our power of seduct i on
.
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 69
"I ' l l beyour
mi r r or " does not si gni f y "' I ' l l be your r ef l ec-
t i on" but
"I ' l l
be
your decept i on. "
To
seducei s t o di eas r eal i t y andr econst i t ut e
onesel f as i l -
l usi on. I t i s t obe t aken
i n by one' s owni l l usi on andmove
i n
anenchant ed
wor l d
.
I t i s t hepower of t heseduct i vewoman
whot akes her sel f f or her owndesi r e, and
del i ght s i n t hesel f -
decept i oni n whi ch ot her s,
i n t hei r t ur n, wi l l becaught . Nar -
ci ssus t ool oses
hi msel f i n hi s owni l l usor y i mage; t hat i s why
he t ur ns f r omhi s t r ut h, andby hi s
exampl et ur ns ot her s f r om
t hei r t r ut h - andso becomes a model of l ove.
Thest r at egy of seduct i oni s oneof decept i on
. I t l i es i nwai t
70 SEDUCTI ON
f or a l l t ha t t ends t o conf use i t sel f wi t h i t s r ea l i t y. Andi t
i s pot en-
t i a l l y
a sour ce of f a bul ous st r engt h. For i f pr oduct i on ca n onl y
pr oduce obj ect s
or r ea l si gns, a ndt her eby obt a i n some power ;
seduct i on, by pr oduci ng onl y
i l l usi ons, obt a i ns a l l power s, i n-
cl udi ng t he power t o r et ur n
pr oduct i on a nd r ea l i t y t o t hei r f un-
da ment a l i l l usi on.
I t even l i es i n wa i t f or t he unconsci ous a nddesi r e, by t ur n-
i ng
t hemi nt o a mi r r or of t he unconsci ous a nddesi r e. For t he
l a t t er concer ns onl y dr i ves
a nd t hei r gr a t i f i ca t i on; whi l e t he en-
cha nt ment begi ns onl y a f t er
one ha s been t a ken i n by one' s
desi r e. I t i s t he i l l usi on
t ha t , ha ppi l y, sa ves us f r om"psychi c
r ea l i t y. " Andi t i s t he i l l usi on of psychoa na l ysi s, whi ch
conf uses
i t sel f wi t h i t s owndesi r e f or psychoa na l ysi s a nd t her eby ent er s
i nt o seduct i on, i nt o a ut o- seduct i on, r ef r a ct i ng t he
l a t t er ' s power
f or
i t s own ends .
Thus a l l sci ence,
r ea l i t y, a ndpr oduct i on onl y' post pone t he
due da t e of seduct i on, whi ch shi nes
a s non- sense, a s t he sen-
sua l a nd i nt el l i gi bl e f or mof non- sense, i n t hesky
of
t hei r
desi r e.
The
decept i on' s r a i son det r e. Li ke t he ha wk t ha t
r et ur ns t o a pi ece
of r ed l ea t her i n t he f or mof a
bi r d, i s i t not t he sa me i l l usi on t ha t , wi t hi n r epe-
t i t i on, conf er s a n a bsol ut e r ea l i t y ont o t he,
obj ect
t ha t wi ns?
Beyond a l l quest i on of bel i ef , Wa r r a nt -
ed or unwa r r a nt ed,
t he decept i on i s, i n a sense,
r ecogni t i on
of
t he
endl ess power of seduct i on. Na r -
ci ssus, ha vi ng
l ost hi s t wi nsi st er , mour ns her l oss,
by const i t ut i ng hi s own
f a ce i nt o a n i l l usor y a t -
t r a ct i on. Nei t her consci ous nor
unconsci ous, t he
duper y i s f ul l y pl a yed out a ndsuf f i ci ent unt o i t sel f .
H. I ? J eudy
The decept i on ca nbe i nscr i bedi n
t he sky ; i t s power wi l l not
be di mi ni shed
.
Ever y
si gn of t he Zodi a c ha s i t s f or mof seduc-
t i on. For we a l l seek t he f a vour
of
a mea ni ngl ess
f a t e, a ndpl a ce
our hopes i n t he spel l t ha t mi ght r esul t f r om
some a bsol ut el y
i r r a t i ona l
conj unct ur e - her e l i es t he st r engt h of . of t he hor o-
scope a nd zodi a ca l si gns
.
No one
shoul dl a ugh a t : a st r ol ogy, f or
he who no l onger seeks t o seduce t he st a r s
i s
t he
sa dder f or
i
SUPERFI CI AL
ABYSSES 7
1
i t . I n ef f ect , manyaper son' s mi sf or t une comes f r omt hei r not
havi ng
apl ace i n t he sky, wi t hi n af i el d of si gns t hat woul d agr ee
wi t h t hem- t hat i s t o say, i n t he l ast i nst ance, f r omt hei r not
havi ng been
seduced by
t hei r
bi r t h and i t s const el l at i on
.
They
wi l l bear t hi s f at e f or l i f e, and t hei r ver y
deat h
wi l l
come at
t he
wr ong
t i me . To f ai l t o be seduced byone' s si gn i s f ar mor e ser i -
ous t han t he f ai l ur e t o have one' s mer i t s r ewar ded or one' s desi r e
gr at i f i ed. Symbol i c di scr edi t i s al ways much mor e ser i ous t han
ar eal def ect or mi sf or t une.
Thus t he char i t abl e i deaof f oundi ng an I nst i t ut e of Zodi acal
Semi ur gywher e, j ust as one' s physi cal appear ance can be cor -
r ect ed bypl ast i c sur ger y, t he i nj ust i ces of t he Si gn coul d be r i ght -
ed and t he hor oscope' s or phans f i nal l yr ecei ve t he Si gn of t hei r
choi ce i n or der t hat t heymi ght be r econci l ed wi t h t hemsel ves .
I t woul d be agr eat success, at l east t he equal of t hat of t he sui -
ci de mot el s wher e peopl e wi l l come t o di e i n t he manner of
t hei r choosi ng.
DEATHI NSAMARKAND
Anel l i ps i s of t he s i gn, anecl i ps e
of
meani ng:
an,
i l l us i on. The
mor t al di s t r act i ont hat as i ngl e s i gncancaus e i ns t ant aneous l y.
Cons i der
t he s t or y
of t he s ol di er whomeet s Deat h at acr os s -
i ng i n
t he mar ket pl ace, and bel i eves he s awhi mmake amenac-
i ng ges t ur e i nhi s di r ect i on. He r us hes
t o
t he ki ng' s
pal ace
and
as ks t he ki ng f or hi s bes t hor s e i nor der t hat he mi ght f l ee dur -
i ng
t he
ni ght
f ar f r omDeat h, as f ar as Samar kand. Uponwhi ch
t he ki ng s ummons Deat h
t o t he pal ace and r epr oaches
hi mf or
havi ng f r i ght ened one of hi s bes t s er vant s . ; But Deat h,
as t oni s hed, r epl i es : " I di dn' t mean
t o
f r i ght en hi m.
I t was j us t
t hat I was s ur pr i s ed t o s ee t hi s s ol di er her e, whenwe had a
r endez- vous t omor r owi n Samar kand. "
Yes , one r uns t owar ds
one' s f at e al l t he mor e s ur el y by s eek-
i ng t o es cape i t . Yes , ever yone s eeks hi s owndeat h, and t he
f ai l ed act s ar e t he mos t s ucces s f ul . Yes , s i gns f ol l owanuncons -
ci ous cour s e. But al l t hi s concer ns t he t r ut h of t he r endez- vous
i nSamar kand; i t does not account f or t he s educt i on
of
t he s t o-
r y, whi ch i s i n no way an apol ogue of t r ut h.
What i s as t oundi ng about t he s t or y i s t hat t hi s s eemi ngl y i n-
evi t abl e r endez- vous need not have t akenpl ace. Ther e i s not h-
i ng
t o s ugges t t hat t he s ol di er woul d have been
i n
Samar kand
wi t hout t hi s chance encount er , and wi t hout t he i l l - l uck of
SUPERFI CI AL ABYSSES 73
Deat h' s nai ve gest ur e, whi ch act ed i nspi t e of i t sel f as
a gest ur e
of seduct i on. HadDeat h beencont ent t o cal l t he sol di er back
t o or der ,
t he st or y
woul d l ose
i t s char m. Ever yt hi ng her e i s
hi nged ona si ngl e, i nvol unt ar y si gn. The gest ur e does not ap-
pear t o be par t of a st r at egy, nor evenanunconsci ous r use; yet
i t t akes ont he unexpect ed dept h of seduct i on, t hat i s,
i t
ap-
pear s as
somet hi ng t hat moves l at er al l y, as a si gn t hat , un-
beknownst
t o
t he pr ot agoni st s ( i ncl udi ng Deat h, as wel l as t he
sol di er ) , advances a deadl y command, anal eat or y si gnbehi nd
whi ch anot her conj unct i on, mar vel ous or di sast r ous, i s bei ng
enact ed. Aconj unct i on t hat gi ves t he si gn' s t r aj ect or y al l t he
char act er i st i cs
of
a wi t t i ci sm.
No
one i n t he st or y has anyt hi ng t o r epr oach hi msel f wi t h
- or el se t heki ng whol ent hi s hor se, i s as gui l t y as anyone el se.
No. Behi nd t he appar ent l i ber t y of t he t wo cent r al char act er s
( Deat h was f r ee t o make hi s gest ur e, t he sol di er t o
f l ee) , t hey
wer e bot h f ol l owi ng a r ul e of whi ch nei t her wer e awar e. The
r ul e of t hi s game, whi ch, l i ke ever y f undament al r ul e, must r e-
mai nsecr et , i s t hat deat h i s not a br ut e event , but onl y occur s
t hr ough seduct i on, t hat i s, by way of an i nst ant aneous, i n-
deci pher abl e compl i ci t y, by a si gn or si gns t hat wi l l not be
deci pher ed i n t i me.
Deat h i s a r endez- vous, not anobj ect i ve dest i ny. Deat h can-
not f ai l t o go si nce he i s t hi s r endez- vous, t hat i s, t he al l usi ve
conj unct i onof
si gns
andr ul es
whi ch make up t he- game. At t he
same t i me, Deat hi s ani nnocent pl ayer i n t he game. Thi s i s what
gi ves t he st or y i t s secr et i r ony, whose r esol ut i on appear s as a
st r oke of wi t [ t r ai t despr i t ] , and pr ovi des us
wi t h
such
sub-
l i me pl easur e - anddi st i ngui shes i t f r omamor al f abl e or a vul -
gar t al e about t he deat h i nst i nct . The spi r i t ual char act er [ t r ai t
spi r i t uel ] of t he st or y ext ends t he spi r i t ed char act er [ t r ai t
despr i t gest uel ] of Deat h' s gest ur e, andt he t woseduct i ons, t hat
of Deat h and of
t he
st or y, f use t oget her
.
Deat h' s ast oni shment i s del i ght f ul , anast oni shment at t he f r i -
vol i t y of anar r angement wher e t hi ngs pr oceedby chance: "But
t hi s sol di er shoul d have knownt hat he was expect edi nSamar -
kand t omor r ow, andt aken hi s t i me t o get t her e. . . " However
Deat h shows onl y sur pr i se, as i f hi s exi st ence di dnot depend
as much as t he sol di er ' s ont he f act t hat t hey wer e t o meet i n
74 SEDUCTI ON
Samarkand. Deathl ets thi ngs
happen, andi t i s
hi s
cas ual nes s
that makes hi mappeal i ng - thi s
i s
why
the s ol di er has tens to
j oi n hi m.
Noneof thi s i nvol ves theuncons ci ous , metaphys i cs or ps y-
chol ogy. Or evens trategy. Deathhas no pl an. Heres tores chance
wi thachanceges ture; thi s i s hove he works , yet everythi ng s ti l l
gets done. There i s nothi ng that cannot not bedone, yet every-
thi ng s ti l l pres erves thel i ghtnes s of chance, of af urti veges ture,
anacci dental encounter or ani l l egi bl e s i gn. That' s howi t i s wi th
s educti on. . .
Moreover, the s ol di er went to meet death becaus e he gave
meani ng
to ameani ngl es s ges ture whi chdi dnot evenconcern
hi m. He took pers onal l ys omethi ng
that was
notj
addres s edto
hi m, as onemi ght mi s takef or ones el f
a
s mi l e
meant
f or
s ome-
one el s e. Thehei ght of s educti on i s to be wi thout s educti on.
Themans educedi s caught i ns pi te of hi ms el f i nawebof s tray
s i gns
.
Andi t i s becaus e thes i gnhas been turnedf romi ts meani ng
or "s educed, " that thes toryi ts el f i s s educti ve. I t i s whens i gns
are s educedthat they become s educti ve.
Onl ys i gns , wi thout ref erents , empty, s ens el es s , abs urdand
el l i pti cal s i gns , abs orb us .
Al i ttl e
boyas ks a
f ai ry
to grant hi mhi s wi s hes . Thef ai ry
agrees onone condi ti on,
that he never thi nk of thecol our red
i n the f ox' s tai l . "I s that al l ?"
he repl i es
of f handedl y. Andof f
he goes to f i ndhappi nes s . But what happens ? He i s unabl e to
ri dhi ms el f of thi s f ox' s tai l , whi ch hebel i eved. he hadal ready
f orgotten. He s ees i t everywhere, wi th i ts redcol our, i n hi s
thoughts , andi nhi s dreams . Des pi teal l hi s ef f orts , he cannot
make i t di s appear. He becomes obs es s edwi th thi s abs urd, i n-
s i gni f i cant, but tenaci ous
i mage, augmentedbyal l thes pi te that .
comes f romnot havi ng beenabl e to ri dhi ms el f of i t . Not onl y
do the f ai ry' s promi s es not cometrue, but hel os es hi s tas te f or
l i f e
. Perhaps he di es wi thout ever havi ng gotten cl ear of i t .
Anabs urds tory, but abs ol utel ypl aus i bl e, f or i t demons trates
thepower of the i ns i gni f i cant s i gni f i er, thepower of ameani ng-
SUPERFI CI AL ABYSSES 75
l es s s i gni f i er .
The f ai r y was mi s chi evous ( s he was n' t a goodf ai r y) . She knew
t hat t he mi ndi s i r r es i s t i bl y at t r act edt o a pl ace devoi dof mean-
i ng. Her e t he empt i nes s
was
s eemi ngl y
pr ovoked by t he
i ns i g-
ni f i cance ( t hi s i s why t he chi l dwas not
on
hi s
guar d) of
t he
col our r edof a f ox' s t ai l . El s ewher e wor ds andges t ur es ar e emp-
t i ed of t hei r meani ng by unf l aggi ng r epet i t i on ands cans i on .
To wear
meani ng
out , t o t i r e i t out i n or der t o l i ber at e t he pur e
s educt i on of t he nul l s i gni f i er or empt y t er m- s uch i s t he
s t r engt h of r i t ual magi c andi ncant at i on.
But i t can j us t as wel l be a di r ect f as ci nat i on wi t ht he voi d,
as i n t he phys i cal ver t i go of a chas m, or t he met aphor i cal ver -
t i go
of
a
door
t hat opens
ont o
t he voi d. I f youwer e t o s ee wr i t -
t en on a door panel : "Thi s opens ont o t he voi d. " - woul dn' t
you s t i l l want t o open i t ?
That whi ch
l ooks ont o
not hi ng has ever y r eas on
t o
be
opened. That whi chdoes n' t s ay anyt hi ng has ever y r eas on t o
never be f or got t en. That whi chi s ar bi t r ar y i s s i mul t aneous l y
endowedwi t ha t ot al neces s i t y. The pr edes t i nat i on of t he empt y
s i gn, t he pr eces s i on
of
t he voi d, t he ver t i go
of
an obl i gat i on
devoi d
of
s ens e, a pas s i on f or neces s i t y.
Her e l i es s omet hi ng of t he s ecr et of magi c ( t he f ai r y was a
magi ci an) . The power of wor ds , t hei r "s ymbol i c ef f i cacy" i s
gr eat er when ut t er ed i n a voi d. When t hey have nei t her con-
t ext nor r ef er ent , t hey can t ake on t he power of a s el f - f ul f i l l i ng
( or s el f - def eat i ng) pr ophecy. Li ke t he col our r edof a f ox' s t ai l .
Unr eal andi ns ubs t ant i al , i t pr oves
compel l i ng becaus e
of
i t s
nul l i t y. I f t he f ai r y hadf or bi dden t he chi l d f r omdoi ng s ome-
t hi ng s er i ous or s i gni f i cant , he woul dhave pul l edt hr ougheas -
i l y, i ns t eadof bei ng s educedagai ns t hi s wi l l . For i t i s not t he
pr ohi bi t i on,
but i t s non- s ens e t hat s educes
hi m.
Thus ,
agai ns t
al l l ogi c, i t i s t he i mpr obabl e pr opheci es t hat come t r ue ; al l t hat
i s r equi r ed i s t hat t hey not make t oo muchs ens e . Ot her wi s e
t hey woul dnot be pr opheci es . Suchi s t he bewi t chment of
mag-
i cal s peech, s uch i s t he s or cer y of s educt i on.
Thi s i s why nei t her magi c nor s educt i on concer ns bel i ef or
make- bel i eve, f or t hey empl oy s i gns wi t hout cr edi bi l i t y and
ges t ur es wi t hout r ef er ent s ; t hei r l ogi c i s not one of medi at i on,
but of i mmedi acy, what ever t he
s i gn.
76
SEDUCTI ON
Pr oof
i s unneces s ar y
.
Ever ybody
knows t hat t hei r s pel l i s car -
r i ed by t he unmedi at edr es onance of t he s i gns . Ther e i s no of f i -
ci al , i nt er medi ar y t i me f or t he s i gn andi t s deci pher ment ; i t i s
not a mat t er of bel i evi ng, doi ng, want i ng, or
knowi ng. Thei r
at t r act i on i s f or ei gn t o t he f or ms of di s cour s e, as wel l as t he
di s t i nct i ve l ogi c of t he ut t er ance: ands t at ement . Thei r s pel l be-
l ongs t o t he or der of decl amat i on andpr ophecy, a di s cour s e
whos e s ymbol i c ef f ect i venes s r equi r es nei t her deci pher ment
nor bel i ef .
The i mmedi at e at t r act i on of a s ong, a voi ce or s cent . The
at t r act i on of t he pant her ' s s cent ( Ddt i enne: Di onys os mi s a
mor t ) . Accor di ng t o t he anci ent s , t hepant her i s t he
onl y ani mal
t o emi t a f r agr ant odour , whi ch. i t us es t o capt ur e i t s vi ct i ms .
The pant her
has
onl y
t o hi de ( hi s appear ance
s t r i kes t er r or ),
andhi s vi ct i ms ar e bewi t ched by hi s s cent - an i nvi s i bl e t r ap
t o whi ch t hey comet o be caught .
But
t hi s power of s educt i on
can be t ur ned agai ns t t he pant her : one hunt s hi mby
us i ng
s pi ces , her bs andper f umes as bai t .
But what does i t mean t o s ay t hat t he pant her s educes by
i t s s cent ? Why i s i t s s cent s educt i ve? ( And whyi s t hi s l egend
i t s el f s educt i ve? What s or t of f r agr ance does i t emi t ?) What ac-
count s
f or
t he s educt i on of t he s ong of t he Si r ens ,
t he
beaut y
of
a f ace, t he dept hs
of a chas m, or t he i mmi nenceof acat as -
t r ophe - as wel l as t he s cent
of
t hepant her
or
a
door
t hat opens
ont o t he voi d? I s i t s ome hi dden f or ce of at t r act i on? or a power -
f ul des i r e? No, t hes e ar e empt y t er ms
. Seduct i on
l i es wi t h t he
annul ment of t he s i gns , of t hei r meani ng, wi t h t hei r pur e ap-
pear ance. Eyes t hat s educe have no meani ng, t hei r meani ng be-
i ng
exhaus t ed
i n
t he gaze, as a f ace wi t h makeup i s exhaus t ed
i n i t s appear ance, i n t he f or mal . r i gour
of
a s ens el es s l abour .
Above al l , s educt i on s uppos es not a s i gni f i ed des i r e, but t he
beaut y
of
an ar t i f i ce .
Thepant her ' s s cent i s al s o a s ens el es s mes s age - andbehi nd
t hi s mes s aget he pant her i s i nvi s i bl e, l i ke a womanbeneat h
her
makeup.
The
Si r ens t oo
r emai ned
uns een. Sor cer y i s f or med
by what l i es hi dden.
Theseduct i on of eyes. Themost i mmedi at e, pur est f or mof
seduct i on, onet hat bypasses wor ds. Wher el ooks al onej oi n
i n
a sor t of
duel , an i mmedi at ei nt er t wi ni ng, unbeknownst t o
ot her s and t hei r di scour ses : t hedi scr et echar mof a si l ent and
i mmobi l eor gasm. Oncet hedel i ght f ul t ensi on of t hegazes gi ves
way t o wor ds or l ovi ng gest ur es, t hei nt ensi t y decl i nes.
At ac-
t i l i t y of
gazes t hat sums up t hebody' s f ul l pot ent i al ( and t hat
of i t s desi r es?) i n a si ngl e, subt l e i nst ant , as i n a st r oke of wi t .
Aduel t hat i s si mul t aneoul y sensual , even vol upt uous, but di s-
i ncar nat ed - a per f ect f or et ast e of seduct i on' s ver t i go, whi ch
t hemor ecar nal pl easur es t hat f ol l owwi l l not equal . That t hese
eyes meet i s acci dent al , but i t i s as t hought hey hadbeen f i xed
on eachot her f or ever . Devoi d of
meani ng, what i s exchanged
ar enot t hegazes. Ther ei s no desi r eher e,
f or
desi r ei s
not cap-
t i vat i ng,
whi l eeyes, l i ke f or t ui t ous appear ances, cast aspel l com-
posedof pur e, duel si gns, wi t hnei t her dept hnor t empor al i t y.
SUPERFI CI AL ABYSSES 77
Any syst emt hat i s t ot al l y compl i ci t i n i t s ownabsor pt i on,
sucht hat
si gns
no
l onger makesense, wi l l exer ci se a r emar ka-
bl epower of
f asci nat i on. Syst ems f asci nat eby t hei r esot er i ci sm,
whi chpr eser ves t hemf r omext er nal l ogi cs . Theabsor pt i on of
anyt hi ng r eal by somet hi ng sel f - suf f i ci ent , andsel f - dest r uct i ve,
pr oves f asci nat i ng. Whet her a syst emof
t hought , an aut omat i c
mechani sm, a per f ect and per f ect l y usel ess obj ect or a deser t
of
st ones, a woman or st r i p- t ease ar t i st ( who must car ess her -
sel f i n or der t o "enchant " andexer ci se her power )
- or ,
t o
be
sur e, Godt hat most beaut i f ul
pi ece
of
esot er i c machi ner y.
Or t he
womanwi t hmakeup, whoi s absent t o her sel f , an ab-
sence
of
a f ocussed l ook, t heabsenceof a f ace - howcan one
not be swal l owed up i n i t ? Abeaut y i s onewhoabol i shes
her -
sel f , t her eby const i t ut i ng a
chal l enget hat
we
canonl y t akeup
by t hedazzl i ng l oss of what ? Of what i s not beaut i f ul . Thebeau-
t i f ul womanabsor bed by t he car es t hat
her
beaut y
demands
i s i mmedi at el y i nf ect i ous because,
i n her nar ci ssi st i c excess, she
i s r emovedf r omher sel f , andbecauseal l t hat i s r emoved
f r om
t he
sel f
i s
pl ungedi nt o secr ecy andabsor bs i t s sur r oundi ngs .
Theat t r act i on of t hevoi d l i es at t hebasi s of seduct i on: not
78 SEDUCTI ON
t he accumul at i on of si gns, nor t he messages of desi re, but an
esot eri c compl i ci t y wi t h
t he absorpt i on of si gns . ; Seduct i on be-
gi ns i n secrecy, i n t he sl ow, brut al exhaust i on of meani ng whi ch
est abl i shes acompl i ci t y amongst t he si gns
;
i t
i s here, more t han
i n a' physi cal bei ng or t he, qual i t y of adesi re, t hat seduct i on i s
concoct ed
.
And
i t i s what account s f or t he enchant ment of t he
games' s rul es .
THESECRET
ANDTHECHALLENGE
Thesecr et .
Theseduct i ve,
i ni t i at or y qual i t y of t hat whi chcannot besai d
becausei t makes
no sense, and of t hat whi chi s not sai d even
t houghi t get s
ar ound. Thus
I
knowanot her ' s secr et but do not
r eveal i t andheknows t hat I know, but does not
acknowl edge
i t : t hei nt ensi t y bet ween us i s si mpl y t hi s secr et about t hesecr et .
Thecompl i ci t y has not hi ng t o do wi t hsomehi dden pi ece
of
i nf or mat i on.
Besi des, even i f wewant ed t o r eveal t hesecr et we
coul d not , si ncet her ei s not hi ng
t o say . .
Ever yt hi ng
t hat can
ber eveal ed l i es out si det hesecr et . For t he
l at t er i s not a hi d-
den si gni f i ed, nor t hekey t o somet hi ng, but ci r cul at es t hr ough
and t r aver ses ever yt hi ng
t hat can besai d, j ust as seduct i on f l ows
beneat ht heobsceni t y of speech.
I t i s t heopposi t eof commu-
ni cat i on, andyet i t can beshar ed. Thesecr et mai nt ai ns i t s power
onl y at t hepr i ce
of r emai ni ngunspoken, j ust as seduct i on oper -
at es onl y because never
spoken nor i nt ended.
Thehi dden or t her epr essed has a t endency
t o mani f est
i t -
sel f , wher eas t hesecr et does not . I t i s an i ni t i at or y and i mpl o-
si vef or m:
oneent er s i nt o a secr et , but cannot exi t . Thesecr et
i s never r eveal ed, never communi cat ed, never
even "secr et ed"
( Zempl eny, Nouvel l e
RevuedePsychanal yse, no. 14) . Whence
i t s st r engt h, t he power of an al l usi ve, r i t ual exchange
.
80 SEDUCTI ON
Thus i n Ki er kegaar d' s Di ar ycf
t he Seducer , seduct i on t akes
t he for mof an eni gma t o be
sol ved. The gi r l i s an eni gma, and
i n or der t o seduce her , one must become an eni gma
for her .
I t i s
an eni gmat i c duel , one t hat t he seduct i on
sol ves, but
wi t hout di scl osi ng t he secr et . I f t he secr et wer e di scl osed,
sex-
ual i t y woul d st and r eveal ed. The st or y' s
t r ue meani ng, i f i t had
one, woul d be about sex - but
i n fact i t doesn' t have one. I n
t hat pl ace wher e
meani ng
shoul d
be, wher e sex shoul d occur ,
wher e wor ds
poi nt
t o
i t , andwher e ot her s t hi nk i ' t t o be - t her e
i s
not hi ng. And t hi s not hi ng/ secr et , t hi s, t he
seduct i on' s un-
si gni fi ed moves beneat h t he wor ds and t hei r
meani ng, and
moves fast er t han t hei r meani ng. I t i s what t ouches
youfi r st ,
befor e t he
sent ences ar r i ve, i n t he t i me i t t akes for t hemt o fade
away. Aseduct i on beneat hdi scour se,
an i nvi si bl e seduct i on,
movi ng fr om
si gn
t o
si gn - a secr et ci r cul at i on;
I t i s t he
exact opposi t e of t he psychol ogi cal r el at i on
:
t o
shar e
someone' s secr et s i s not t o shar e hi s or
her phant asi es or desi r es,
nor i t i s t oshar e somet hi ngas yet
unspoken. When' t hei d speaks,
i t i s not seduct i ve.
Al l
t hat
i nvol ves r epr essi on, expr essi ve ener -
gi es or
t he unconsci ous, ever yt hi ng t hat wi shes t o speak, ever y-
wher e t he ego has t o appear - al l t hi s bel ongs t o an
exot er i c
or der t hat cont r adi ct s t he esot er i c
for m
of :
secr ecy and
seduct i on.
Yet t he unconsci ous, t he
"advent ur e"
of
t heunconsci ous, ap-
pear s as t he
l ast , l ar ge- scal e at t empt t o r eest abl i sh secr ecy
i n
asoci et y
wi t hout secr et s. The unconsci ous appear sas our secr et ,
our
per sonal myst er yi n a confessi onal andt r anspar ent soci e-
t y. But i t i sn' t r eal l y a secr et , for i t i s
mer el y psychol ogi cal . I t
does not have an exi st ence of
i t s own, si nce t he unconsci ous
was
cr eat ed at t he same t i me as psychoanal ysi s, ; t hat i s t o
say,
at t he same t i me as t he pr ocedur es for i t s
assi mi l at i on, andt he
t echni ques for t he r et r act i on of t he secr et s
l odged i n i t s deep
st r uct ur es.
r
But per haps somet hi ng i s t aki ng i t s r evenge on
al l t he i nt er pr e-
t at i ons, andi n a subt l e waydi sr upt i ng
t hei r devel opment ? Some-
t hi ng t hat ,
most deci dedl y, does not want t o be sai d andt hat ,
bei ng an eni gma, eni gmat i cal l y possesses i t s
own r esol ut i on,
and so aspi r es t o r emai n
i n
secr et
and i n t hej oys of secr ecy.
Language
r et ur ns
t o
i t s secr et seduct i on despi t e al l t he effor t s
t o uncover andbet ray i t i n order t o make i t s i gni f y, whi l ewe
ret urn t o our own i ns ol ubl e pl eas ures .
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 81
There i s nei t her
a t i me of s educt i on, nor at i me f or s educ-
t i on, but s t i l l i t has i t s own
i ndi s pens abl e rhyt hm. Unl i ke i n-
s t rument al s t rat egi es , whi ch
proceedby i nt ermedi ary s t ages ,
s educt i onoperat es i ns t ant aneous l y,
i n as i ngl e movement , and
i s al ways i t s ownend.
The
cycl e of s educt i oncannot bes t opped. Onecan. s educe
s omeone i n order t o s educe s omeone el s e, but
al s o s educe
s omeone
el s e t o pl eas e ones el f . Thei l l us i on t hat l eads f romt he
onet o t he ot her i s s ubt l e. I s i t t o s educe,
or t o bes educed, t hat
i s s educt i ve? But t o be s educed
i s
t he
bes t way t o s educe. I t
i s an endl es s ref rai n. Therei s no act i veor
pas s i vemodei ns educ-
t i on,
no s ubj ect or obj ect , no i nt eri or or ext eri or : s educt i on
pl ays on bot h s i des , andt here
i s no f ront i er s eparat i ng t hem.
Onecannot s educe ot hers , i f onehas not ones el f
beens educed.
Becaus es educt i on
never s t ops at t he t rut h of s i gns , but oper-
at es by decept i on
ands ecrecy, i t i naugurat es a modeof ci rcu-
l at i on t hat i s i t s el f s ecret i ve and
ri t ual i s t i c, a s ort of i mmedi at e
i ni t i at i on t hat pl ays by i t s own rul es
.
To be s educedi s t o be t urned
f romone' s t rut h. To s educe
i s t o l eadt he ot her f romhi s / her t rut h. Thi s t rut h t henbecomes
as ecret t hat es capes hi m/ her ( Vi ncent
Des combes : L' i ncons ci ent
mal gre l ua) .
Seduct i on i s i mmedi at el y revers i bl e, andi t s revers i bi l i t y
i s con-
s t i t ut ed by t hechal l enge
i t i mpl i es andt he s ecret i n whi ch i t
i s abs orbed.
I t i s a power of at t ract i on anddi s t ract i on,
of abs orpt i on and
f as ci nat i on,
apower t hat caus et he col l aps e of not j us t s ex, but
t hereal i n general -
apower of def i ance. I t i s never anecono-
my of s ex or s peech, but an es cal at i on
of vi ol ence andgrace,
ani ns t ant aneous
pas s i ont hat can res ul t i n s ex, but whi ch can
j us t as eas i l y exhaus t i t s el f i n t he
proces s of def i ance anddeat h.
I t i mpl i es a radi cal
i ndet ermi nat i on t hat di s t i ngui s hes i t f rom
adri ve - dri ves bei ng i ndet ermi nat ei n rel at i on
t o
t hei r obj ect ,
but det ermi ned
as f orce andori gi n, whi l et he pas s i onof s educ-
82 SEDUCTI ON
t i on has nei t her subst ance nor or i gi n. I t i s not f r omsome
l i bi di -
nal i nvest ment , some ener gy of desi r e t hat t hi s passi on acqui r es
i t s i nt ensi t y, but f r om
gami ng
as
pur e f or mand f r ompur el y f or -
mal
bl uf f i ng.
Li kewi se, t he
chal l enge. I t t oo has a duel f or mt hat wear s i t -
sel f out i n no t i me
at al l , dr awi ng i t s i nt ensi t y f r omt hi s i nst an-
t aneous r ever si on. I t t oo i s bewi t chi ng, l i ke a
meani ngl ess
di scour se t o whi ch one cannot
not r espond f or , t he ver y r ea-
son t hat i t i s absur d.
Why
does
one r espond t o a chal l enge?
The same myst er i ous quest i on
as : what i s i t t hat seduces?
What coul d be
mor e seduct i ve t han a chal l enge? Aseduc-
t i on or
chal l enge al ways dr i ves t he ot her mad, but wi t h aver -
t i go t hat i s
r eci pr ocal - an i nsani t y bor ne by t he ver t i gi nous
absence t hat uni t es
t hem, and by t hei r r eci pr ocal engul f ment .
Such i s t he
i nevi t abi l i t y of t he chal l enge, and why one cannot
but r espond t o
i t . For i t i naugur at es a ki nd of i nsane r el at i on,
qui t e unl i ke r el at i ons of communi cat i on or
exchange: a duel
r el at i on t r ansact ed by meani ngl ess si gns, but
hel d t oget her by
a f undament al r ul e and i t s secr et
obser vance. Achal l enge t er -
mi nat es al l cont r act s and exchanges r egul at ed by
t he l aw
( whet her t he l awof nat ur e or val ue) , subst i t ut i ng ahi ghl y con-
vent i onal and r i t ual i zed pact , wi t h an unceasi ng
obl i gat i on t o
r espond and r espond
i n spades - an obl i gat i on t hat i s gover ned
by a f undament al
game r ul e, and pr oceeds i n accor d wi t h i t s
own r hyt hm. I n cont r ast t o t he : l aw, whi chi s al ways
i nscr i bed
i n st one or t he sky, or i n one' s hear t , t hi s
f undament al r ul e never
needs t o be st at ed ; i ndeed, i t
must never be st at ed . I t i s i m-
medi at e, i mmanent , and
i nevi t abl e ( wher eas t he l awi s t r anscen-
dent and expl i ci t ) .
Ther e can never be seduct i on or
chal l enge by cont r act . I n
or der
f or a chal l enge or seduct i on t o exi st , al l cont r act ual r el a-
t i ons must di sappear bef or e t he duel
r el at i on - a: r el at i on com-
posed of secr et si gns t hat have been
wi t hdr awnf r omexchange,
and der i ve
t hei r i nt ensi t y f r omt hei r f or mal di vi si on and
i m-
medi at e r ever ber at i on. I n l i ke manner , seduct i on' s
enchant ment
put s an end t o al l l i bi di nal economi es, and
ever y sexual or psy-
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 83
chol ogi cal cont r act , r epl aci ng t hemwi t h
a
di zzyi ng
s pi r al of
r es pons es and count er - r es pons es
. I t i s never an i nves t ment but
a r i s k ; never a cont r act but a pact ; never
i ndi vi dual but duel ;
never ps ychol ogi cal
but r i t ual ; never nat ur al but ar t i f i ci al . I t i s
no one' s s t r at egy, but a des t i ny.
Chal l enge and
s educt i on ar e qui t e s i mi l ar . And yet t her e i s
a di f f er ence. I n a chal l enge
one dr aws t he ot her i nt o one' s ar ea
of s t r engt h, whi ch, i n vi ewof t he pot ent i al f or
unl i mi t ed es ca-
l at i on, i s al s o hi s or her ar ea of s t r engt h.
Wher eas i n a s t r at egy
( ? ) of s educt i on one dr aws t he ot her i nt o one' s ar ea
of
weak-
nes s , whi ch i s al s o hi s
or
her
ar ea of weaknes s . Acal cul at ed
weaknes s , an i ncal cul abl e weaknes s : one chal l enges
t he ot her
t o be t aken i n. A
weaknes s or f ai l ur e : i s n' t t he pant her ' s s cent
i t s el f a weaknes s , an abys s whi ch
t he ot her ani mal s appr oach
gi ddi l y? I n f act , t he pant her
of t he myt hi cal s cent i s s i mpl y t he
epi cent er of deat h, and f r omt hi s weaknes s
s ubt l e f r agr ances
emer ge
.
To s educe i s t o appear weak . To s educe i s t o r ender
weak
.
We
s educe
wi t h
our weaknes s , never wi t h s t r ong s i gns or pow-
er s . I n s educt i on we enact t hi s weaknes s ,
and t hi s i s what gi ves
s educt i on i t s s t r engt h.
We s educe wi t h our deat h, our vul ner abi l i t y,
and wi t h t he
voi d t hat haunt s
us . The s ecr et i s t o knowhowt o pl ay wi t h
deat h i n t he abs ence
of a gaze or ges t ur e, i n t he abs ence of
knowl edge or meani ng.
Ps ychoanal ys i s t el l s us t o as s ume our f r agi l i t y
and pas s i vi t y,
but i n
al mos t r el i gi ous t er ms , t ur ns t hemi nt o a f or mof r es i g-
nat i on andaccept ance i n
or der t o pr omot e a wel l t emper ed ps y-
chi c equi l i br i um. Seduct i on, by cont r as t , pl ays
t r i umphant l y
wi t h
weaknes s , maki ng a game of i t , wi t h
i t s own r ul es .
Ever yt hi ng i s s educt i on
and not hi ng but s educt i on.
They
want ed us t o bel i eve t hat ever yt hi ng was
pr oduct i on
.
The t heme s ong of wor l d
t r ans f or mat i on: t he pl ay of pr oduc-
8
4 SEDUCTI ON
t i ve
f or ces i s what r egul at es t he cour se of t hi ngs. Seduct i on i s
mer el y an i mmor al , f r i vol ous,
super f i ci al , and super f l uous
pr ocess,
l i mi t ed
t o
t he r eal mof si gns andappear ances, devot -
ed t o pl easur e and t he usuf r uct of
usel ess bodi es . But what i f
ever yt hi ng, cont r ar y t o appear ances - i n f act , i n accor d wi t h
asecr et r ul e of appear ances - oper at es by
seduct i on?
t he moment of seduct i on
t he
suspensi on of seduct i on
t he r i sk of seduct i on
t he acci dent of seduct i on
t he del i r i umof seduct i on
t he pause of
seduct i on.
Pr oduct i on onl y accumul at es,
wi t hout devi at i ng f r omi t s end.
I t r epl aces al l i l l usi ons wi t hj ust one, i t s own,
whi chbecomes
t he r eal i t y pr i nci pl e. Pr oduct i on,
l i ke r evol ut i on, put s an end
t o t he
epi demi c
of
appear ances . But seduct i on i s i nevi t abl e. No
one l i vi ng escapes i t - not even t he dead.
For t he' dead ar e onl y
dead
when t her e ar e no l onger anyechoes f r omt hi s
wor l dt o
seduce t hem, andno l onger
any
r i t es
chal l engi ng t hemt o exi st .
For us, onl y t hose who can no l onger pr oduce ar e
dead. I n
r eal i t y, onl y t hose who do not
wi sh
t o
seduce or be seduced
ar e dead. But seduct i on get s hol d of t hemnonet hel ess, j ust as
i t get s hol d of al l pr oduct i on and
ends up dest r oyi ng i t .
For t he voi d - t he hol e t hat , at any poi nt , i s bur ned out
by
t he r et ur n of t he f l ame of any si gn, t he
meani ngl essness t hat
makes f or seduct i on' s unexpect ed
char m- al so l i es i n wai t ,
wi t hout i l l usi on, f or pr oduct i on once t he l at t er
has r eached i t s
l i mi t s. Ever yt hi ng r et ur ns t o
t he voi d, i ncl udi ng our wor ds and
gest ur es . But bef or e di sappear i ng, cer t ai n wor ds,
andgest ur es,
by ant i ci pat i ng
t hei r demi se, ar e abl e t o exer ci se aseduct i on
t hat
t he ot her s wi l l never knowSeduct i on' s secr et l i es
i n t hi s
evocat i on andr evocat i on of
t he ot her , wi t hasl owness andsus-
pense t hat ar e poet i c, l i ke t he sl owmot i on f i l mof a
f al l
or
an
expl osi on, because
somet hi ng had t he t i me, pr i or t o i t s com-
pl et i on, t o
makes i t s absence f el t . Andt hi s, i f t her e
i s sucha
t hi ng, i s t he per f ect i on of " desi r e. "
THEEFFI GYOFTHESEDUCTRESS
Thepr i smat i c ef f ect of seduct i on pr ovi des anot her spaceof
r ef r act i on. Seduct i on does not consi st of a si mpl eappear ance,
nor apur eabsence, but t heecl i pseof apr esence. I t s sol est r at egy
i s t o be- t her e/ not - t her e, and t her eby pr oducea sor t of f l i cker -
i ng,
a hypnot i c mechani smt hat cr yst al l i zes at t ent i on out si de
al l concer n wi t hmeani ng. Absence her e seduces pr esence.
Thesover ei gn power
of
t heseduct r ess st ems f r omher abi l i -
t y t o " ecl i pse" any wi l l or cont ext . Shecannot al l owot her r e-
l at i ons t o beest abl i shed- even t hemost i nt i mat e, af f ect i onat e,
amor ous or sexual ( par t i cul ar l y not t hel at t er ) - wi t hout br eaki ng
t hem,
or
r epayi ng t hemwi t ha st r ange f asci nat i on. Shecons-
t ant l y avoi ds al l r el at i ons i n whi ch, at somegi ven moment , t he
quest i on of t r ut hwi l l beposed. Sheundoes t hemef f or t l essl y,
not by denyi ng
or
dest r oyi ng t hem, but
by
maki ng t hemshi m-
mer. Her el i es her secr et : i n t hef l i cker i ng of a pr esence. She
i s never wher eoneexpect s her , and never wher e onewant s
her . Seduct i on supposes, Vi r i l i o woul dsay, an " aest het i cs of di s-
appear ance. "
Theseduct r ess t ur ns desi r ei t sel f i nt o
an
i l l usi on
or
t r ap. For
her t her ei s no mor et r ut ht o desi r e - or t o t hebody - t han
t o
anyt hi ng el se. Lovei t sel f ,
or
t he. sex act , can becomemo-
ment s i naseduct i on i f gi vent heecl i pt i c f or mof appear ance/ di s-
86 SEDUCTI ON
appear ance, t hat i t t o s ay, a di s cont i nuous f or mt hat cut s s hor t
ever y emot i on, pl eas ur e and r el at i on i n or der t o r eaf f i r mt he
s uper i or char act er of s educt i on, i t s t r ans cendent aes t het i cs r el a-
t i ve t o t he i mmanent et hi cs of : pl eas ur e and des i r e.
Love and
t he car nal act ar e
onl y
s o much s educt i ve
f i ner y, t he mos t r e-
f i ned and s ubt l e i nvent ed by women t o s educe men. But
modes t y and r ej ect i on can pl ay t he s ame r ol e. ; Ever yt hi ng i s
f i ner y i n t hi s s ens e, andbel ongs t o t he geni us of appear ance.
" I do not want t o l ove, cher i s h, or even pl eas e you, but t o
s educe you- andmy onl y concer ni s not t hat you;
l ove
or
pl eas e
me, but t hat youar e s educed. " Thegame of t he s educt r es s i n-
vol ves a cer t ai n ment al cr uel t y, t owar ds her s el f as wel l as ot her s .
Any af f ect i on on her par t i s a weaknes s r el at i ve t o t he r i t ual
i mper at i ve. No quar t er canbe gi ven i n a chal l enge
wher e l ove
and des i r e ar e di s s ol ved. Nor
any
r es pi t e, l es t
t hi s f as ci nat i on
be
r educed t o not hi ng. The t r ue s educt r es s can onl y exi s t i n
as t at e of s educt i on. Out s i de t hi s s t at e, s he i s no l onger a wom-
an, nei t her an obj ect nor s ubj ect of des i r e, f acel es s and
unat -
t r act i ve - f or s he i s bor ne by an al l - cons umi ng pas s i on.
Seduct i on i s s over ei gn - t he onl y r i t ual t hat ecl i ps es al l ot her s
- but i t s s over ei gnt y i s cr uel , and car r i es a heavy pr i ce.
Thus ,
when s educi ng, her body and des i r es ar e no l onger
her
own.
But t hen what i s
t hi s
body, or t hes e
des i r es ? She
does n' t bel i eve i n t hem- and s o pl ays wi t h t hem. Wi t hout a
body of her own, s he t ur ns her s el f i nt o a pur e appear ance, an
ar t i f i ci al cons t r uct wi t h whi ch t o t r ap t he des i r es of ot her s .
Seduct i on cons i s t s i n l et t i ng t he ot her bel i eve hi ms el f t o be t he
s ubj ect of hi s des i r e, wi t hout ones el f bei ng caught i n
t hi s
t r ap.
I t can al s o
cons i s t i n becomi ng a.
.
" s educt i ve" s ex" obj ect , i f t hat
i s t heman' s " des i r e. " Thes pel l cas t by s educt i on pas s es t hr ough
s exual at t r act i on; but i ndeed, i t pas s es t hr ough
i n'
or der t o
t r an-
s cendi t . " I am
at t r act i ve,
but you
ar e capt i vat i ng. " - " Li f e has
i t s at t r act i ons , but deat h l eaves one s pel l bound. "
For s educt i on, des i r e i s not an end but a
hypot het i cal pr i ze.
Mor e pr eci s el y, t he obj ect i ve i s t o pr ovokeanddecei ve
des i r e,
whi ch exi s t s onl y t o bur nf or a moment andt hen be di s appoi nt -
ed - , i t bei ng del udedas t o i t s power , whi ch i s gi ven t o i t
onl y
i n or der t o be wi t hdr awn. The per s on mi ght not even
know
what has happened
. I t mi ght be t hat t he per s on s educi ng act u-
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 87
al l y l oves or desi r es t he per son seduced,
but at a deeper l evel
( or a mor e super f i ci al l evel i f one wi l l , i n
t he super f i ci al abyss
of appear ances) anot her game i s bei ngpl ayed
out , unbeknownst
t o
t he
t wo pr ot agoni st s who r emai n mer e puppet s.
For seduct i on,
desi r e i s a myt h. I f desi r e i s a wi l l t o power
andpossessi on, seduct i on
pl aces bef or e i t an equal wi l l t o power
by t he si mul acr um. I n f or mi ng a web of appear ances seduc-
t i on bot h sust ai ns t hi s hypot het i cal power
of desi r e and exor -
ci zes i t . J ust as f or Ki er kegaar d' s seducer t he gi r l ' s nai ve gr ace,
her spont aneous
er ot i c power i s mer el y a myt h, whi ch i s sus-
t ai ned onl y
so t hat i t canbe anni hi l at ed ( per haps he l oves her ,
but i n t he supr asensual r eal m
of seduct i on t he gi r l i s but t he
myt hi cal f i gur e of a sacr i f i ce) ; si mi l ar l y, f or t he
seduct r ess, t he
power of man' s desi r e i s a myt h t hat
she uses
i n
or der t o bot h
evoke and dest r oy i t . The seducer ' s ar t i f i ce, di r ect ed at t he gi r l ' s
myt hi cal gr ace,
i s
f ul l y
equal t o t he seduct r ess' ar t i f i ci al r ewor k-
i ngof her body, whi ch
i s di r ect ed at t he man' s myt hi cal desi r e.
I n bot h cases t he myt hi cal power ,
whet her t he power of gr ace
or desi r e, i s t o be r educed t o not hi ng. Seduct i on al ways seeks
t o
over t ur n
and exor ci ze a power . I f seduct i on i s ar t i f i cal , i t i s
al so sacr i f i ci al . One
i s
pl ayi ng
wi t h deat h, i t al ways bei nga mat -
t er of capt ur i ng or i mmol at i ng t he desi r e
of
t he ot her .
Seduct i on, by cont r ast , i s i mmor t al . The
seduct r ess, l i ke t he
hyst er i c, want s t o be i mmor t al and l i ve i n
an
et er nal
pr esent
- much t o ever yone' s ast oni shment , gi ven t he f i el d of decep-
t i on and despai r i n whi ch she moves, and gi ven t he cr uel t y of
her game. But her e she sur vi ves
because out si de psychol ogy,
meani ngor desi r e. What dest r oys peopl e, wear s t hemdown,
i s t he meani ngt hey gi ve t hei r act s . But t he
seduct r ess does not
at t ach any meani ngt o what she does, nor suf f er t he wei ght of
desi r e. Eveni f
she speaks of r easons or mot i ves, be t hey gui l t y
or cyni cal , i t i s a t r ap. And her
ul t i mat e t r ap i s t o ask: " Tel l me
who I am" - when she i s i ndi f f er ent
t o
what
she i s,
when
she
i s a
bl ank,
wi t h nei t her age nor hi st or y. Her power l i es i n t he
i r ony and el usi veness of her pr esence
. She may be bl i nd t o her
ownexi st ence, but she i s wel l awar e of al l t he mechani sms
of
r eason and t r ut h peopl e use
t o pr ot ect t hemsel ves f r omseduc-
t i on; and she i s awar e
t hat f r ombehi nd t he shel t er of t hese
mechani sms t hey wi l l nonet hel ess, i f handl ed
cor r ect l y, l et t hem-
88 SEDUCTI ON
sel ves be seduced.
" I am
i mmor t al , " i n ot her
wor ds,
r el ent l ess . Whi chi s t o say
t hat t he game must never st op, t hi s even bei ngone of i t s f un-
dament al r ul es . For j ust as no pl ayer can be gr eat er t han t he
game i t sel f , so no seduct r ess can be gr eat er t han seduct i on. None
of t he vi ci ssi t udes of l ove or desi r e can be
al l owed t o br eak
t hi s r ul e. One
must l ove i n or der t o seduce, andnot t he r ever se.
Seduct i on
consi st s
of
f i ner y, i t weaves andunweaves appear -
ances, as Penel ope weavedandunweavedher t apest r y, as desi r e
i t sel f was woven andunwoven beneat h her hands. For i t i s ap-
pear ances, and t he mast er y of appear ances, t hat r ul e.
No one has ever been di spossessed of t he power
associ at ed
wi t h seduct i on andi t s r ul es, t hi s f undament al f or m. Yes, wom-
en have been di spossessed of
t hei r bodi es, t hei r desi r es, hap-
pi ness and
r i ght s . But t hey have al ways r emai nedmi st r esses of
t hi s possi bi l i t y of ecl i pse, of seduct i ve di sappear ance andt r ans-
l uscence, andso have al ways been capabl e of ecl i psi ngt he pow-
er of t hei r mast er s .
But i s t her e af emi ni ne f i gur e, of seduct i on or , f or t hat
mat -
t er , amascul i ne f i gur e? Or i s t her e but one f or m, var i ant s of
whi ch cr yst al l i ze ar ound one or t he
ot her sex?
Seduct i on osci l l at es bet ween t wo pol es, apol e of st r at egy
andapol e of ani mal i t y ( andt hus r anges f r omt he most subt l e
cal cul at i on t o t he most br ut al physi cal suggest i on) whi ch we
associ at e
wi t h t he f i gur es
of
t he seducer and t he seduct r ess
r espect i vel y
.
But doesn' t
t hi s di vi si on mask asi ngl e f or m, an
undi vi ded seduct i on?
Ani mal seduct i on.
Wi t h ani mal s seduct i on achi eves i t s pur est f or m, i n t hat t he
seduct i ve
di spl ay appear s i nst i nct ual , i mmedi at el ygi ven i n r ef l ex
behavi our s andnat ur al f i ner y. But f or al l t hat , ani mal seduc-
t i on does not cease t o be per f ect l y r i t ual i st i c. I n t hi s sense,
ani mal s ar e t he l east nat ur al of bei ngs,
f or wi t h t hemar t i f i ce
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 89
- t he ef f ect s of mascarade andf i nery - i s at i t s most nai ve. I t
i s at t he heart of t hi s paradox, where t he di st i nct i onbet ween
nat ure and
cul t ure i s suppressed i nt he concept of f i nery, t hat
t he anal ogy bet weenani mal i t y andf emi ni ni t y pl ays i t sel f out .
I f ani mal s are seduct i ve, i s i t not because t hey are st rat egi c
el ement s i n
acampai gnt o deri de our pret ensi ons t o humani -
t y? I f t he f emi ni ne i s
seduct i ve, i s i t not because i t t oo t hwart s
our cl ai ms t o dept h? The f ri vol ous
has a power of seduct i on
whi ch concurs wi t h t hat of t he best i al .
What we f i nd seduct i ve i n ani mal s i s not t hei r "nat ural "
savagery. For t hat mat t er, are ani mal s real l y charact eri zed
by
savagery, by a hi gh degree of cont i ngency, unpredi ct abi l i t y, or
i mpul si veness, or
on
t he
cont rary by hi gh degrees of ri t ual i zed
behavi our? The same quest i on canbe
posed
f or
pri mi t i ve so-
ci et i es . The l at t er were once seenas cl ose
t o
t he ani mal real m,
andi ndeed, i n a sense, t hey are: f or t hey share acommondi s-
regard f or t he l aw, t i ed t o hi gh l evel s of observance of f i xed
f orms, whet her i n
t hei r rel at i ont o t hei r t erri t ory, ot her ani mal s
or men.
Eveni n t hei r dances and bodi l y ornament at i on, t hei r ani mal
grace i s a product of aseri es of observances, rul es and anal o-
gi es, whi ch makes i t t he
opposi t e of nat ural chance. Al l t he pres-
t i gi ous at t ri but es associ at ed wi t h
ani mal s are ri t ual t rai t s . The
"nat ural " f i nery of ani mal s i s si mi l ar
t o t he art i f i ci al f i nery of
humans, who, one mi ght add, have al ways sought t o i ncorporat e
t he f ormer
i nt o t hei r ri t es . I f t here i s a pref erence f or ani mal
masks, i t i s because ani mal s i mmedi at el y appear as ri t ual
masks,
as a pl ay of si gns and a st rat egy of f i nery - as i s t he case wi t h
humanri t ual s . The very
morphol ogy of pri mi t i ve ri t ual s, t hei r
f urs andf eat hers, gest ures anddances are a
prot ot ype of ri t ual
ef f i cacy. That i s, t hey never f orma f unct i onal syst em( reproduc-
t i on, sexual i t y,
ecol ogy, mi mi cry- t he post ul at es of anext remel y
i mpoveri shed et hol ogy reworked
and correct ed by f unct i on-
al i sm) ,
but an ost ent at i ous ceremony f or mast eri ng si gns, and
acycl e f or seduci ng
meani ng, where t he si gns gravi t at e i rresi st -
i bl y around each ot her so as t o reproduce t hemsel ves as i f by
magnet i c
recurrence,
resul t i ng
i ndi zzi ness, al oss of meani ng,
and
t he
seal i ng of an i ndest ruct i bl e pact amongst t he par-
t i ci pant s .
90 SEDUCTI ON
Gener al l y speaki ng, " r i t ual i t y" i s, as a f or m, super i or t o " so-
ci al i t y" .
Thel at t er i s onl y a r ecent , andnot ver y seduct i ve f or m
of
or gani zat i on andexchange, onei nvent edby humans
f or hu-
mans. Ri t ual i t y i s a muchl ar ger syst em,
encompassi ng t he l i v-
i ng andt he dead, humans andani mal s, as
wel l as a " nat ur e"
whoseper i odi c
movement s, r ecur r ences andcat ast r ophes ser ve,
seemi ngl y spont aneousl y,
as r i t ual si gns. By compar i son, so-
ci al i t y appear s r at her i mpover i shed: under t he si gn of t he
Law
i t i s
capabl e of br i ngi ng t oget her onl y one speci es ( and
even
t hen. . . ) . By cont r ast , r i t ual i t y succeeds
i n mai nt ai ni ng- not by
l aws, but by r ul es andt hei r i nf i ni t e
pl ay
of
anal ogi es - a f or m
of cycl i cal
or der anduni ver sal exchange of whi cht he Lawand
t he soci al ar e qui t e i ncapabl e.
I f we f i ndani mal s appeal i ngandseduct i ve, i t i s because
t hey
r emi ndus of t hi s r i t ual ar r angement . Theydo
not ; evoke anost al -
gi a f or t hesavage st at e, but a
f el i ne, t heat r i cal nost al gi a f or f i ner y,
f or t he seduct i on andst r at egy of
r i t ual f or ms whi cht r anscend
al l
soci al i t y andwhi ch, t her eby, st i l l enchant us .
I n t hi s sense onecansay t hat , wi t hseduct i on, ! one
" becomes
an ani mal , " or t hat f emal e seduct i on
i s ani mal - l i ke, wi t hout i m-
pl yi ng some
sor t
of
i nst i nct i ve nat ur e. For one i s sayi ng t hat
seduct i on i s pr of oundl y l i nked. t o body r i t ual s
; whi ch, l i ke al l
ot her r i t ual s, ser ve not t o est abl i sha nat ur e and
uncover i t s l aw,
but t o - set up appear ances and
or gani ze t hei r cycl e. Not t hat f e-
mal e seduct i on
i s et hi cal l y i nf er i or . On t he * cont r ar y, i t i s aes-
t het i cal l y super i or . I t i s ast r at egy of f i ner y.
Men, mor eover , ar e never seducedby nat ur al beaut y,
but by
an ar t i f i ci al , r i t ual beaut y
- because t he l at t er i s esot er i c and
i ni t i at or y, wher eas
t he f or mer i s mer el y expr essi ve. Andbecause
seduct i on l i es i n t he aur a of secr ecy pr oducedby
wei ght l ess,
ar t i f i ci al si gns, andnot i n some, nat ur al
economy of meani ng,
beaut y or
desi r e.
The cl ai mt hat anat omy ( or - t he body) i s not ! dest i ny i s
not
r ecent , but was made f ar mor e st r i dent l y
i n al l ; soci et i es pr i or
t o our own. Ri t ual s, cer emoni es,
r ai ment s, masks, desi gns, mu-
t i l at i ons and t or t ur e - al l i n or der t o seduce. . . ' t he gods, t he
spi r i t s, or t he dead. The body was t he
f i r st gr eat medi umof
t hi s i mmense
under t aki ng. For us al one does i nt ake on an aes-
t het i c,
decor at i ve char act er . ( Wi t hi t s t r ue char act er . t her ebyde-
ni ed: t he very i dea of
decorat i on i mpl i es a moral deni al of al l
t he body' s magi c. For t he
savages, not t o ment i on ani mal s, i t
i s not decorat i on, but f i nery. And
a uni versal rul e. He who i s
not
pai nt ed i s st upi d, say t he Caduveo) .
Wemi ght f i nd
t he f orms di sgust i ng: coveri ng t he body wi t h
mud, def ormi ng t he t he skul l
or f i l i ng t he t eet h i n Mexi co,
def ormi ng t he f eet i n Chi na, di st endi ng
t he neck, or maki ng
i nci si ons i n t he f ace, not t o ment i on
t at t oos, j ewel ry, masks, f i ne
rai ment s,
ri t ual pai nt i ngs ; or even t he
bracel et s made f romt i n
cans worn by
present - day Pol ynesi ans.
Thebodyi s made
t o si gni f y, but wi t h si gns t hat , st ri ct l y
speak-
i ng, have no meani ng.
Al l resembl ance has vani shed, al l
represent at i on i s absent . Thebody
i s covered wi t h appearances,
i l l usi ons, t raps, ani mal
parodi es andsacri f i ci al
si mul at i ons, not
i n order t o di ssembl e, nor
t o reveal ( a desi re, say, or a dri ve) ,
nor even
j ust f or f un ( t he spont aneous
expressi veness of chi l -
dren and
pri mi t i ves) . What i s i nvol ved
here i s an undert aki ng
t hat Art aud
woul d have , t ermed met aphysi cal :
a sacri f i ci al
chal l enge t o t he worl d
t o exi st . For not hi ng exi st s nat ural l y,
t hi ngs
exi st because chal l enged,
and because summoned t o
respond
t o t hat chal l enge. I t i s by bei ng
chal l enged t hat t he
powers of t he
worl d, i ncl udi ng t he gods, are
aroused; i t i s by
chal l engi ngt hese
powers t hat t hey are
exorci zed, seducedand
capt ured; i t
i s by t he chal l enge t hat t he
game andi t s rul es are
resurrect ed. Al l t hi s requi res
an art i f i ci al bl uf f i ng, t hat i t
t o say,
a
syst emat i c si mul at i on - t hat
t roubl es i t sel f wi t h nei t her
a
preest abl i shed
st at e of t he worl dnor bodi l y
anat omy. Aradi cal
met aphysi cs of si mul at i on, i t
need not even concerni t sel f wi t h
" nat ural " harmony. I n t he
f aci al pai nt i ngs of t he Caduveo,
t he
f aci al f eat ures
are not respect ed; t he
desi gn' s di agrams andsym-
met ri es bei ng l ai d
across t he f ace f romone
end t o t he ot her.
( Our makeup submi t s
t o t he body as a ref erent i al
syst em, i n
order
t o accent uat e i t s f eat ures and
ori f i ces . But does t hi s mean
t hat i t i s cl oser
t o t he nat ure of desi re? Not hi ng
coul d be l ess
cert ai n) .
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 91
Somet hi ng
of t hi s radi cal met aphysi cs
of appearances, t hi s
92 SEDUCTION
chal l enge bysi mul at i on, st i l l l i ves i n t he cosmet i c ar t s andt he
gl amour of moder n f ashi on. The Chur ch Fat her s wer e wel l
awar e of t hi s, anddenouncedi t as di abol i cal . "To be at t ent i ve
t o one' s body, t o car e f or andpai nt i t i s t o set onesel f
up
as
a r i val
of God
and
cont est
Hi s
cr eat i on. " Thi s st i gmat i zat i on
has cont i nued ever si nce, but i s nowr ef l ect ed; i n t hat ot her
r el i gi on, t hat of t he subj ect ' s l i ber t y andessent i al desi r es . Our
ent i r e mor al i t y condemns t he const r uct i on of t he f emal e as a
sexobj ect byt he f aci al andbodi l yar t s . Thef emal e i s no l onger
denouncedbyGod' s j udgment , but byt he di ct at es of
moder n
i deol ogy,
f or
pr ost i t ut i ng
her f emi ni ni t y i n
consumer
cul t ur e,
andsubj ect i ngher body
t o
t he r epr oduct i on
of
capi t al . "Femi -
ni ni t y i s woman' s al i enat edbei ng. " "Femi ni ni t ymani f est s i t sel f
as an abst r act t ot al i t y, devoi d of anyr eal i t yi t cancal l i t s own,
a pr oduct of t he di scour se and; r het or i c of adver t i si ng
. " "The
woman f l ushed wi t h
her
beaut y
masks andper pet ual l y f r esh
l i ps no
l onger l i ves her
r eal l i f e, "
et c. , et c.
In opposi t i on t o al l t hese pi ous di scour ses, we must agai n
pr ai se t he sex obj ect ; f or i t bear s,
i n
t he
sophi st i cat i on of ap-
pear ances, somet hi ng of a
chal l enge
t o
t he nai ve or der of t he
wor l dandsex; andi t , andi t al one, escapes t he r eal mof pr oduc-
t i on ( t hough one mi ght l i ke t o bel i eve i t subj ect edt o t he
l at t er )
andr et ur ns t o t hat of seduct i on.
In i t s unr eal i t y i n t he unr eal
def i ance of
i t s pr ost i t ut i on
of
si gns, t he sexual obj ect moves
beyondsexandat t ai ns seduct i on. It agai n becomes cer emoni -
al
. Thef emi ni ne was al ways t he ef f i gy of t hi s r i t ual , andt her e
i s a f r i ght f ul conf usi on i n want i ng t o de- sanct i f y i t as a cul t ob-
j ect i n or der t o t ur n i t i nt o a subj ect of pr oduct i on, or
i n want -
i ng t o r escue i t f r omar t i f i ce i n
or der
t o
r et ur n i t t o i t s own
"nat ur al "
desi r es.
Woman i s wel l wi t hi n her r i ght s, and i s i ndeed
f or mi ng a sor t of dut y, i n st udyi ng t o appear mag-
i cal and super nat ur al . It i s necessar y t hat she
shoul d ast oni sh andbewi t ch. Bei ng an i dol ; she
must be gi l ded andador ed.
She must t her ef or e
bor r owf r omal l t he ar t s t he means of r ai si ngher -
sel f above
nat ur e,
t he bet t er t o
subj ugat e hear t s and
st i r soul s. It
mat t er s ver yl i t t l e t hat her t r i cks and
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 93
ar t i f i ces s houl dbe knownt o al l , pr ovi ded t hat t hei r
s ucces s i s cer t ai nandt hei r ef f ect al ways i r r es i s t i bl e.
Such cons i der at i ons
pr ovi de t he ar t i s t - phi l os opher
wi t h a r eady j us t i f i cat i onf or al l t he pr act i ces
em-
pl oyed by womenof ever y per i od t o l end
s ub-
s t ance and, s o t o s peak, di vi ni t y t o t hei r f r agi l e
beaut y.
Anenumer at i on
of
t hes e pr act i ces woul d be i n-
t er mi nabl e . But t o conf i ne our s el ves t o what
our
cont empor ar i es vul gar l y cal l "t he us e of cos met -
i cs , " whocanf ai l t o s ee t hat t he us e of r i ce- powder
( s o
s t upi dl y anat hemat i s ed by our candi d
phi l os opher s ) has t he obj ect andr es ul t of bani s h-
i ng f r omt he compl exi ont he bl emi s hes whi chna-
t ur e has out r ageous l y s ownt her e, andof cr eat i ng
an
abs t r act uni t y
i nt he t ext ur e and col our of t he
s ki n; and t hat t hi s uni t y, l i ke t he uni t y pr oduced
by t he s cul pt or ' s chi s el , br i ngs t he humanbei ng
di r ect l y near er t o t he s t at ue - i n ot her wor ds , t o
a bei ng t hat i s di vi ne ands uper i or ?
As
f or t he l amp-
bl ackt hat out l i nes t he eye, andt he r ouge t hat em-
phas i zes t he upper par t
of
t he cheek, t he pl anned
r es ul t of t hes e - al t hough t hei r us e ar i s es f r omt he
s ame pr i nci pl e, t he need t o t r ans cend nat ur e - i s
t o s at i s f y anexact l y oppos i t e need. The r ed and
t he bl ackr epr es ent l i f e - a l i f e s ur pas s i ng and ex-
ceedi ng t hat of t he nat ur e. The bl ackf r ame ar ound
t he eye makes t he gl ance s t r anger and mor e
penet r at i ng; i t makes t he eye mor e di s t i nct l y
r es embl e a
wi ndow
openont he
i nf i ni t e
.
The r ed
bl aze ont he cheekf ur t her enhances t he br i ght -
nes s of t he eye, and l ends a woman' s l ovel y f ace
t he mys t er i ous pas s i on of a pr i es t es s .
Char l es Baudel ai r e, "I n Pr ai s e
of Cos met i cs
112
I f des i r e exi s t s - as moder ni t y hypot hes i zes - t hennot hi ng
mus t i nt er f er e wi t h i t s nat ur al har mony, and cos met i cs ar e
hypocr i t i cal . But i f des i r e i s a myt h - as s educt i onhypot he-
2. Char l es Baudel ai r e,
"I n
Pr ai s e of Cos met i cs " i nMy Hear t Lai dBar e and
Ot her
Pr os e Wr i t i ngs ( NewYor k: Vanguar d Pr es s , 1951) pp. 63- 64.
94 SEDUCTI ON
si zes - t hen not hi ng can pr event i t f r ombei ng put t o use by
si gns, unr est r ai ned by nat ur al l i mi t s . The power of si gns l i es
i n t hei r
appear ance anddi sappear ance ; t hat i s howt heyef f ace
t he wor l d
.
Cosmet i cs
t oo ar e
a
means of ef f aci ng t he f ace, ef -
f aci ng t he eyes behi nd
mor e beaut i f ul eyes, cancel l i ng t he
l i ps
behi nd mor e l uxur i ant l i ps
.
Thi s
" abst r act
uni t y
t hat
br i ngs t he
humanbei ngnear er t o abei ngt hat i s di vi ne, " t hi s " l i f e sur pass-
i ng and exceedi ng nat ur e" about whi ch Baudel ai r e speaks,
r esul t s f r omasi mpl e ar t i f i ci al st r oke t hat suppr esses al l expr es-
si on. Ar t i f i ce does not al i enat e t he subj ect , but myst er i ousl y
al t er s her / hi m. Womenar e awar e of t hi s t r ansf or mat i onwhen,
i n f r ont
of
t hei r mi r r or s,
t hey must
er ase t hemsel ves i n or der
t o appl yt hei r makeup, and when, by appl yi ng t hei r makeup,
t heymake t hemsel ves i nt o apur e appear ance denuded of mean-
i ng. Howcanone mi st ake t hi s " exceedi ng of nat ur e" f or avul -
gar camouf l agi ng of t r ut h? Onl y f al sehoods can al i enat e t he
t r ut h, but makeup i s not f al se, or el se ( l i ke t he game of
t r ans-
vest i t es) i t i s f al ser t han f al sehood and
so
r ecover s aki nd of su-
per i or i nnocence or t r anspar ency. I t absor bs al l expr essi on
wi t hi n i t s ownsur f ace, wi t hout a t r ace of bl ood or meani ng.
Cer t ai nl y t hi s i s chal l engi ng, and cr uel - but whoi s al i enat ed?
Onl yt hose
whocannot abi de t hi s cr uel per f ect i on, and can-
not def end t hemsel ves except by
mor al r epul si on - and t hey
ar e wr ong. Howcanone r espond t o pur e appear ances, whet her
hi er at i c or mobi l e, wi t hout f i r st r ecogni zi ng t hei r . sover ei gnt y?
Byt aki ng of f t he makeup, t ear i ng of f t he vei l , or enj oi ni ng t he
appear ances t o di sappear ? Howr i di cul ous! Ani conocl ast ' s
ut o-
pi a. Ther e i s no Godbehi nd t he
i mages, andt he ver ynot hi ng-
ness t hey conceal must r emai n a secr et . The seduct i on,
f asci nat i onand " aest het i c" at t r act i on of al l t he gr eat i magi nar y
pr ocesses l i es her e : i n t he ef f aci ng of ever y i nst ance, be
i t t he
f ace and
ever y subst ance,
be
i t desi r e
- .
i n t he ar t i f i ci al per f ec-
t i on of t he
si gn.
Undoubt edl y, t he best exampl e of t hi s i s t o be f ound
i n t he
onl y
i mpor t ant
const el l at i on of
col l ect i ve seduct i on pr oduced
by moder n t i mes, t hat of f i l mst ar s or ci nema i dol s . Nowt he
SUPERFI CI AL ABYSSES
95
s t a r , even i f a ma n,
i s f emi ni ne; f or i f Godi s ma s cul i ne, i dol s
a r ea l wa ys f emi ni ne. Andi n
t r ut h, t he bi gges t s t a r s wer ewom-
en. They wer e, however , no l onger bei ngs
of
f l es h
a nddes i r e,
but t r a ns exua l ,
s upr a s ens ua l bei ngs , a r oundwhomcr ys t a l l i zed
s t er nr i t ua l s a nd
a wa s t ef ul pr of us i onwhi ch t ur nedt hemi nt o
a gener a t i onof s a cr ed
mons t er s , endowedwi t h a power of a b-
s or pt i on equa l t o a ndr i va l i ng
t her ea l wor l d' s power s of pr oduc-
t i on. Theywer eour onl y myt h
i n a na gei nca pa bl e of gener a t i ng
gr ea t myt hs or f i gur es of
s educt i on compa r a bl e t o t hos e of
myt hol ogy or a r t .
The
ci nema ' s power l i ves i n i t s myt h . I t s
s t or i es , i t s ps ycho-
l ogi ca l por t r a i t s ,
i t s i ma gi na t i onor r ea l i s m, t hemea ni ngf ul i m-
pr es s i ons i t l ea ves -
t hes e a r e a l l s econda r y. Onl y t he myt h i s
power f ul , a nda t t he hea r t of t he
ci nema t ogr a phi c myt h l i es
s educt i on -
t ha t of t he r enowneds educt i ve f i gur e,
a ma nor
woma n( but a bove
a l l a woma n) l i nkedt o t her a vi s hi ng
but s pe-
ci ous power of t he
ci nema t ogr a phi c i ma gei t s el f . Ami r a cul ous
conj unct i on.

_ ,
Thes t a r
i s by no mea ns a n i dea l or s ubl i mebei ng:
s hei s a r -
t i f i ca l . She
neednot be a n a ct r es s i n t he
ps ychol ogi ca l s ens e;
her f a ce i s not t he
r ef l ect i on of a s oul or s ens i t i vi t y whi ch
s he
does not ha ve. Ont he
cont r a r y, her pr es ence s er ves t o s ubmer ge
a l l s ens i bi l i t y a ndexpr es s i on
benea t h a r i t ua l f a s ci na t i on wi t h
t hevoi d, benea t h t he
ecs t a cy of her ga ze a ndt henul l i t y of her
s mi l e. Thi s i s hows he a chi eves myt hi ca l s t a t us
a ndbecomes
s ubj ect
t o col l ect i ve r i t es of s a cr i f i ci a l a dul a t i on.
Thea s cens i on
of t heci nema i dol s , t hema s s es ' di vi ni t i es ,
wa s
a ndr ema i ns a cent r a l s t or y
of moder n t i mes - i t s t i l l count er -
ba l a nces a l l pol i t i ca l or s oci a l event s
. Ther e i s no poi nt i n di s -
mi s s i ng
i t a s mer el y t he dr ea ms of mys t i f i ed
ma s s es . I t i s a
s educt i ve occur r ence
t ha t count er ba l a nces ever y pr oduct i ve oc-
cur r ence.
To be s ur e, s educt i oni n t he a ge
of
t he
ma s s es i s no l onger
l i ke t ha t of The
Pr i nces s of Cl eves , Les Li a i s ons Da nger eus es
or Di a r y of t he Seducer ,
nor f or t ha t ma t t er , l i ke t ha t f oundi n
a nci ent myt hol ogy, whi ch
undoubt edl y cont a i ns t he s t or i es
r i ches t i n s educt i on.
I n t hes e s educt i on i s hot , whi l e
t ha t of
our
moder ni dol s i s col d, bei ng a t t he
i nt er s ect i on of t wo col d
medi ums ,
t ha t of t he i ma ge a ndt ha t of t he
ma s s es .
96
SEDUCTI ON
Thi s l at t er seduct i on
has t he spect r al whi t eness of t he
heaven-
l y st ar s, af t er
whi ch t hey ar e so appr opr i at el y named. The
masses
have
been "seduced" i n t he moder n er a by
onl y t wo gr eat
event s : t he whi t e l i ght of t he st ar s, and
t he bl ack l i ght of t er -
r or i sm. These t wo phenomena have much
i n common. Ter r or i st
act s, l i ke t he st ar s,
"f l i cker : " t hey do not not enl i ght en
; t hey
do not r adi at e a
cont i nuous, whi t e l i ght , but an
i nt er mi t t ent ,
col d l i ght ; t hey di sappoi nt
even as t hey exal t ; t hey f asci nat e
by
t he suddeness of
t hei r appear ance andt he i mmi nence of
t hei r
di sappear ance .
Andt hey ar e const ant l y bei ng
ecl i psed as t hey
each
t r y t o out do each ot her .
The gr eat st ar s or seduct r esses never
dazzl e because of t hei r
t al ent or i nt el l i gence, but because
of t hei r absence . They
ar e
dazzl i ng i n t hei r nul l i t y, and i n
t hei r col dness - t he col dness
of
makeup andr i t ual hi er at i ci sm
( r i t ual s ar e cool , accor di ng t o
McLuhan) . They t ur n
i nt o a met aphor t he i mmense
gl aci al
pr ocess whi ch has sei zed
hol d
of
our uni ver se of meani ng,
wi t h
i t s
f l i cker i ng net wor ks of si gns andi mages; but at
t he same t i me,
at a
speci f i c hi st or i cal conj unct ur e
t hat can no l onger be
r epr oduced, t hey t r ansf or mi t i nt o an
ef f ect of seduct i on.
The ci nema has never
shone except . by pur e seduct i on,
by
t he pur e vi br ancy of
non- sense - a hot shi mmer i ng
t hat i s al l
t he mor e
beaut i f ul f or havi ng come f r om
t he col d.
Ar t i f i ce and non- sense, t hey ar e t he
i dol ' s esot er i c f ace, i t s
mask of i ni t i at i on. The seduct i on of
a f ace pur ged of al l expr es-
si on, except t hat of t he r i t ual
smi l e and a no l ess convent i onal
beaut y. Awhi t e f ace, wi t h t he
whi t eness of si gns consecr at ed
t o r i t ual i zed
appear ances, no l onger subj ect t o some
deep l aw
of si gni f i cat i on . The
st er i l i t y of i dol s i s wel l - known
: t hey do
not r epr oduce, but
r i se f r omt he ashes, l i ke t he
phoeni x, or f r om
t hei r mi r r or , l i ke t he seduct r ess .
These gr eat seduct i ve
ef f i gi es ar e our masks, our
East er I s-
l and
st at ues . But do not be mi st aken: i f once,
hi st or i cal l y, t her e
wer e t hr ongs hot wi t h
ador at i on, r el i gi ous passi on,
sacr i f i ce
andi nsur r ect i on, nowt her e ar e
masses col dwi t h seduct i on
and
f asci nat i on. Thei r
ef f i gy i s ci nemat ogr aphi c and
i mpl i es a di f f er -
ent
sacr i f i ce .
The deat h of t he st ar s i s mer el y
puni shment f or t hei r r i t ual -
i zed i dol at r y. They must di e,
t hey must al r eady be dead -
so
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 97
t hat t hey can be per f ect andsuper f i ci al , wi t h or wi t hout t hei r
makeup
. But t hei r deat h must not l eadus t o a negat i ve abr eac-
t i on. For behi ndt he onl y exi st i ng f or mof
i mmor t al i t y, t hat of
ar t i f i ce, t her e
l i es t he i dea i ncar nat ed i n t he st ar s, t hat deat h
i t sel f shi nes by i t s absence,
t hat deat h canbe t ur nedi nt o a br i l -
l i ant
and super f i ci al appear ance, t hat i t i s i t sel f a seduct i ve
sur f ace. . .
THEIRONIC
STRATEGY
OF
THESEDUCER
If i t i s char act er i s t i c of t he s educt r es s
t hat s he t ur ns her s el f
i nt o an appear ance i n or der t o di s t ur b appear ances ,
what i s
char act er i s t i c of t hat ot her
f i gur e, t he s educer ?
He t oo
t ur ns hi ms el f i nt o an : i l l us i on i n or der , t o s owconf u-
s i on, but cur i ous l y, t hi s i l l us i on i s
par t
of
a cal cul at i on, wi t h
f i ner y_
gi vi ng way t o s t r at egy. Nowi f a woman' s f i ner y i s al s o
s t r at egi c, a cal cul at ed di s pl ay, i s not t he s educer ' s
s t r at egy a di s -
pl ay of
cal cul at i on wi t h whi ch t o def end hi ms el f f r oms ome
oppos i ng f or ce? As t r at egy of f i ner y vs . t he f i ner y of
s t r at egy . .
Di s cour s es t hat
ar e
t oo
s ur e of t hems el ves - as wi t h s t r at e-
gi es of
l ove - mus t be under s t ood di f f er ent l y. Though compl et e-
l y " r at i onal , " t hey ar e
s t i l l onl y t he i ns t r ument s of a l ar ger f at e,
of
whi ch t hey ar e as much t he vi ct i ms as t he di r ect or s . Does n' t
t he s educer endup l os i ng hi ms el f
i n hi s s t r at egy; as i n an emo-
t i onal
l abyr i nt h? Does n' t he i nvent t hat s t r at egy i n or der t o
l os e
hi ms el f i n i t ? Andhe whobel i eves
hi ms el f t he game' s mas t er ,
i s n' t he
t he f i r s t vi ct i mof s t r at egy' s t r agi c myt h?
Cons i der
t he s educer ' s obs es s i onwi t h t he gi r l i n Ki er kegaar d' s
Di ar y of t he Seducer. An obs es s i on wi t h an
i nvi ol at e, s t i l l as ex-
ual s t at e, a
char med s t at e of gr ace. Andbecaus e s he i s
gr aced,
one mus t f i nd gr ace
i n her
eyes ,
f or l i ke God s he pos s es s es a
SUPERFI CI AL
ABYSSES 99
mat chl ess vant age. As a r esul t , because nat ur al l y endowedwi t h
al l seduct i on, she becomes t he obj ect of asavage chal l enge and
must be dest r oyed.
The seducer ' s cal l i ng i s t he ext er mi nat i on of t he
gi r l ' s nat ur -
al power by an ar t i f i ci al power
of
hi s own. He wi l l del i ber at el y
under t ake t o equal or sur pass t he nat ur al power t o whi ch, i n
spi t e of al l t hat makes hi mappear as t he seducer , he has suc-
cumbedsi nce t he begi nni ng. Hi s st r at egy, hi s i nt ent i on anddes-
t i nat i on ar e a r esponse t o t he young gi r l ' s gr ace and
seduct i veness, t oapr edest i nat i on t hat i s al l t he mor e power -
f ul because unconsci ous, andt hat must ,
as
a r esul t , be exor ci zed.
The l ast wor dcannot be l ef t t o nat ur e: t hi s, f undament al l y,
i s what i s at i ssue. Her except i onal , i nnat e gr ace ( whi ch, l i ke
t he accur sedshar e, i s i mmor al ) must besacr i f i cedby t he seducer ,
who
wi l l
seek
wi t h al l
hi s ski l l t ol eadher t ot he poi nt of er ot i c
abandon, t he poi nt at whi ch she wi l l cease t o be a seduct i ve,
t hat i s, danger ous power .
The seducer by hi msel f i s not hi ng; t he seduct i on or i gi nat es
ent i r el y wi t h
t he
gi r l . Thi s
i s
why
J ohannes can
cl ai m
t o
have
l ear nedever yt hi ng f r om
Cor del i a.
He
i s not
bei ng hypocr i t i -
cal . The cal cul at ed seduct i on mi r r or s t he nat ur al seduct i on,
dr awi ngf r omt he l at t er as f r omi t s sour ce, but al l t he bet t er t o
el i mi nat e i t .
Thi s i s al so whyhe
does
not l eave anyt hi ng
t o
chance, t he
gi r l bei ng depr i vedof i ni t i at i ve, a seemi ngl y def ensel ess obj ect
i n t he game of seduct i on. She has al r eady pl ayedher handbe
f or e t he seducer begi ns t opl ay hi s. Ever yt hi nghas al r eady t aken
pl ace; t he seduct i on si mpl y r i ght s a nat ur al i mbal ance by t ak-
i ng upt he pr e- exi st i ng chal l enge const i t ut edbyt he gi r l ' s nat ur al
beaut y andgr ace.
Seduct i on
now
changes
i t s
meani ng. I nst eadof bei ngan
i m-
mor al andl i ber t i ne exer ci se, a cyni cal decept i on f or sexual ends
( andt hus wi t hout gr eat i nt er est ) , i t becomes myt hi cal andac-
qui r es t he di mensi ons
of
a sacr i f i ce. Thi s
i s
whyt he " vi ct i m' s"
consent i s soeasi l y obt ai ned. I n her abandonshe i s, i n asense,
obeyi ngt he commands of a di vi ni t y whowant s ever yf or ce t o
be over t ur nedandsacr i f i ced, be i t t hat
of
power
or
t hat
of
a nat ur al seduct i veness, because al l f or ce, andt hat of beaut y
i n
par t i cul ar ,
i s sacr i l egi ous . Cor del i a i s sover ei gn, andi s
100
SEDUCTION
sacr i f i ced t o her ownsover ei gnt y. The r ever si bi l i t y of sacr i f i ce
const i t ut es a
mur der ous
f or m
of symbol i c exchange; i t spar es
not hi ng, not evenl i f e i t sel f , nor even
beaut y or seduct i on,
whi ch
i s i t s most danger ous f or m. In t hi s sense, t he seducer cannot
cl ai mt o be t he her o of aner ot i c mast er pl an; he i s onl y t he
agent of a pr ocess t hat goes f ar beyond hi m. Nor i s t he vi ct i m
ent i r el y i nnocent , si nce, as a beaut i f ul and seduct i ve vi r gi n, she
i s i nher sel f a chal l enge whi ch canonl y be met by her deat h
( or her seduct i on, t he equi val ent of her mur der ) .
TheDi ar yof t he Seducer i s t he, scr i pt of aper f ect cr i me. None
of t he seducer ' s cal cul at i ons, none of hi s manoeuvr es f ai l . It
al l unf ol ds wi t h ani nf al l i bi l i t y t hat i s nei t her r eal nor psycho-
l ogi cal , but
myt hi cal . The
ar t i f i ce' s per f ect i on, t he
appar ent i n-
evi t abi l i t y t hat gui des t he
seducer ' s act i ons,
si mpl y
r ef l ect s, as
i na mi r r or , t he per f ect i onof t he gi r l ' s i nnat e gr ace, and t he i n-
exor abl e necessi t y of her sacr i f i ce. Thi s doesn' t r esul t f r omany
speci f i c per son' s st r at egy. It i s f at e, J ohannes bei ng
onl y i t s i n-
st r ument and, t her ef or e,
i nf al l i bl e
.
Ther e i s somet hi ng i mper sonal i never y pr ocess of seduct i on,
as i n ever y cr i me, somet hi ng r i t ual i st i c, somet hi ng supr a-
subj ect i ve and supr a- sensual , t he l i ved exper i ence, whet her of
t he seducer or
hi s vi ct i m, bei ng onl y i t s unconsi ous r ef l ect i on.
Dr amat ur gy wi t hout - a subj ect . The r i t ual execut i onof a f or m
t hat consumes i t s subj ect s . Thi s i s whyt he pi ece t akes onbot h
t he aest het i c f or mof a
wor k
of
ar t
. andt he r i t ual
f or m
of a
cr i me.
Int he end, Cor del i a i s seduced, del i ver ed t o t he er ot i c pl eas-
ur es of a ni ght and t henabandoned. One must n' t be sur pr i sed
at t hi s, nor consi der J ohannes, i n. l i ne wi t hbour geoi s psychol -
ogy, a hat ef ul per son. Seduct i on, bei ngasacr i f i ci al pr ocess, ends
wi t h a mur der ( t he def l ower i ng) - t hough t he l at t er need not
have t akenpl ace. For once J ohannes i s cer t ai nof
hi s vi ct or y,
Cor del i a i s, f or hi m, dead . It i s t he i mpur e seduct i ont hat ends
i nl ove andpl easur e, and i s, t her ef or e, no l onger a sacr i f i ce. Sex-
ual i t y mi ght be r eexami ned i nt hi s l i ght , as t he economi c r esi due
of
seduct i on' s sacr i f i ci al pr ocess, not unl i ke t he r esi dual por -
t i on t hat i nanci ent sacr i f i ces was l ef t t o ci r cul at e wi t hi nt he
economy. Sext henwoul dbemerel y t hedi scount or
bal ance
of amoref undament al process, a cri meor sacri f i ce,
whi chf ai l s
t oat t ai nt ot al reversi bi l i t y. Thegods
t aket hei r part ; humans share
what ' s l ef t .
Thei mpureseducer,
aDonJ uan
or
Casanova, dedi cat es hi m-
sel f t ot heaccumul at i on of t hi s resi due. Fl yi ng f romonesexu-
al conquest t oanot her, heseduces f or pl easurewi t hout
at t ai ni ng
what Ki erkegaardconsi deredt he" spi ri t ual "
di mensi on
of
seduc-
t i on - where t he
chal l enge pushes t he woman' s seduct i ve
resources and
powers
t o
t hei r l i mi t , so t hat , i n accord wi t h a
caref ul l y
l ai d
pl an, t hey canbe t urned agai nst t hemsel ves .
Thei nt ri gue
wherebyCordel i a i s sl owl ydi spossessedof her
powers, makes onet hi nk of t hei nnumerabl eri t es f or t heexor-
ci smof f emal e powers whi chcanbef oundt hroughout pri mi -
t i vesoci et i es ( Bet t el hei m) . Tocast out women' s
power
of
f ert i l i t y,
t o
enci rcl e andci rcumscri bet hat power, andevent ual l y si mu-
l at e and
appropri at ei t , i s t hepurposeof t hecouvades, t hear-
t i f i ci al i nvagi nat i ons, excori at i ons and scarri ngs - al l t he
i nnumerabl esymbol i cwounds ( up t o andi ncl udi ng t he
i ni t i a-
t i on andi nst i t ut i onof anewpower : pol i t i cal
power) f or sup-
pressi ng t hef emal es' i ncomparabl e
" nat ural " advant age. One
mi ght al soconsi der anci ent Chi nesei deas onsexual i t y, accord-
i ng t owhi cht hemal e, bymai nt ai ni ng t heorgasmi nsuspense,
draws i nt o hi msel f t hepower of t hef emal e yang.
I nanycase, somet hi nghas beengi vent o
woment hat must
be
exorci zedbya del i berat ecampai gnt odi spossess her of her
powers . Andf romt hi s " sacri f i ci al " perspect i ve, t herei s nodi f f er-
encebet weenf emi ni ne seduct i onand
t heseducer' s st rat egy:
t heybot h
i nvol vet heot her' s deat h andment al spol i at i on, t he
ot her' s abduct i onandt heabduct i onof hi s or her power. I t i s
al ways t hest oryof a
murder,
or bet t er of
anaest het i c andsacri f i -
ci al i mmol at i onsi nce, as Ki erkegaardsuggest s,
i t al ways occurs
at a
spi ri t ual l evel .
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 10
1
Concerni ng t he " spi ri t ual " pl easure of seduct i on.
The scenari o of seduct i on i s, accordi ng t o
Ki erkegaard,
spi ri t ual . I t demands a cert ai nspi ri t i nt heei ght eent h cent ury
10
2 SEDUCTION
sense, t hat i s t o say, i nt el l i gence, charmandref i nement , but al so
i n t he
modern sense of
t he
Wi t z or st roke of
wi t
.
Seduct i on never pl ays
on
t he ot her' s desi res
or
amorous
procl i vi t i es, t hi s bei ngvul gar, carnal , mechani cal and, i n short ,
uni nt erest i ng. Everyt hi ng must respondby subt l e' al l usi ons, wi t h
al l t hesi gns enmeshedi n t het rap. Thus t heseducer' s art i f i ces
ref l ect t hegi rl ' s seduct i venat ure, as t hough t hel at t er was part
of an i roni c st age product i on, a decept i on made t o measure,
t o
whi ch she woul d, ef f ort l essl y,
come
andbe' caught .
It i s not , t heref ore, a mat t er of a f ront al at t ack, but of a di -
agonal seduct i on t hat gl i des l i ke a (brush?) st roke (andwhat
i s more seduct i ve t han a st roke of wi t ?), wi t h i t s vi vaci t y and
economy, andi t s use of t he same dupl i cat edmat eri al s, t o use
Freud' s t erms. Theseducer' s weapons are t hesame as t hoseof
t he gi rl , but t urnedagai nst her; andi t i s t hi s reversi bi l i t y t hat
gi ves t he
st rat egy
i t s spi ri t ual appeal .
It has been sai d, andj ust i f i abl y so, t hat mi rrors are spi ri t ual
- t heref l ect i oni t sel f bei ng a st roke of wi t . For t hemi rror' s spel l
does not l i e wi t h t he f act t hat one recogni zes onesel f
i n i t -
i n i t sel f a rat her
appal l i ng
coi nci dence - but
wi t h t he i roni c
andmyst eri ous
st roke
of such
a redupl i cat i on. Nowt heseducer' s
st rat egy i s preci sel y t hat of t he mi rror. That i s why, ul t i mat el y,
he doesn' t decei ve anyone, andwhy he never decei ves hi m-
sel f : f or t he mi rror i s i nf al l i bl e (i f hi s manoeuvres and
snares
were t aken
f rom
out si de,
he woul dundoubt edl y commi t some
error) .
Consi der anot herst roke of t hi s t ype, wort hy of bei ngi ncl uded
i n
t he
annal s
of
seduct i on: t hesame l et t er wri t t enby t wodi f f er-
ent women- andwri t t ennot out of perversi t y, but
f rom
a
t rans-
parency of heart andsoul . Bot h l et t ers cont ai nt hesame amorous
emot i ons, t hese emot i ons are real , t hey each have t hei r own
qual i t y. But t he l at t er must not be conf usedwi t h t he "spi ri t u-
al " pl easure t hat emanat es f romt hemi rror ef f ect producedby
t het wol et t ers, andbet weent he t wo
women, whi ch
i s,
st ri ct -
l y speaki ng, apl easure of seduct i on. It i s anent i rel y di f f erent ,
l i vel i er, more subt l e rapt ure t han l ove. The emot i ons born of
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 10
3
desi r e cannever equal t he exuber ant , secr et j oy
one exper i ences
whenpl ayi ng wi t h desi r e i t sel f . Desi r e
i s
si mpl y ar ef er ent l i ke
any ot her , whi ch seduct i oni mmedi at el y bet t er s and t r anscends,
pr eci sel y by vi r t ue of i t s i t s spi r i t . Seduct i on i s ast r oke : her e
i t shor t - ci r cui t s t he t wo r eci pi ent s i n aki nd of i magi nar y over -
pr i nt i ng, wher ei n desi r e per haps conf uses t hem. At any r at e,
t hi s st r oke
conf uses desi r e, r ender s i t i ndi st i nt , pr oduci nga
sl i ght
gi ddi ness t hat pr oceeds f r omasuper i or i ndi f f er ence,
and
f r om
t he l aught er t hat under mi nes i t s st i l l t oo ser i ous ent angl ement .
To seduce, t hen, i s t o make bot h t he f i gur es and t he si gns
- t he l at t er hel d by t hei r owni l l usi ons - pl ay amongst t hem-
sel ves . Seduct i oni s never t he r esul t of physi cal at t r act i on, acon-
j unct i on of af f ect s or an economy of desi r e . For seduct i on t o
occur ani l l usi on must i nt er vene
and
mi x
up t he i mages ; ast r oke
has t o br i ng di sconnect ed t hi ngs t oget her , as i f i n a dr eam, or
suddenl y di sconnect undi vi ded t hi ngs . Thus t he second woman
i s
i r r esi st i bl y
t empt ed t o r ewr i t e t he f i r st l et t er , as i f a t empt a-
t i on coul d f unct i on aut onomousl y
and
i r oni cal l y,
as
i f
t he ver y
i dea coul d be seduct i ve. Agame wi t hout end, i n whi ch t he si gns
par t i ci pat e spont aneousl y, as i f f r oma
cont i nuous sense of i r o-
ny. Per haps t he si gns want t o be seduced, per haps t hey desi r e,
mor e pr of oundl y t han men, t o seduce and be seduced.
Per haps si gns ar e not dest i ned t o ent er i nt o f i xed opposi t i ons
f or meani ngf ul ends, t hat bei ng onl y t hei r pr esent dest i nat i on.
Thei r
act ual dest i ny i s per haps qui t e di f f er ent : t o seduce each
ot her and,
t her eby, seduce us . I f such i s t he case, an ent i r el y
di f f er ent l ogi c woul d l i e behi nd
t hei r ' secr et ci r cul at i on.
Canone i magi ne at heor y t hat woul d t r eat si gns i n t er ms of
t hei r
seduct i ve at t r act i on, r at her t han t hei r cont r ast s and op-
posi t i ons? Whi chwoul d br eak wi t h
t he specul ar nat ur e of t he
si gn and t he encoumbr ance of t he r ef er ent ? Ani n whi ch t he
t er ms
woul d pl ay amongst t hemsel ves wi t hi n t he f r amewor k
of an eni gmat i c duel and an i nexor abl e
r ever si bi l i t y?
Suppose t hat al l t he maj or , di acr i t i cal opposi t i ons wi t h whi ch
we or der our wor l d wer e t r aver sed by seduct i on, i nst ead of be-
i ng based
oncont r ast s and opposi t i ons . Suppose not j ust t hat
104 SEDUCTI ON
t he
f emi ni ne seduces t he mascul i ne, but t hat absence seduces
pr esence, col d seduces hot , t he subj ect seduces t he obj ect , and
t o
be sur e, t he r ever se. For seduct i on supposes t hat mi ni mum
r ever si bi l i t y whi ch put s an end t o ever y f i xed opposi t i on
and,
t her ef or e, ever y convent i onal semi ol ogy. Towar ds an i nver t ed
semi ol ogy?
One mi ght i magi ne ( but why i magi ne i t , wheni t occur ed
i n
anci ent Gr eece) t hat gods andmor t al s, i nst ead of
bei ng sepa-
r at edby t he mor al abyss of
r el i gi on, sought t o seduce each ot her
and, i ndeed, mai nt ai ned no
ot her r el at i ons but t hose of seduc-
t i on. Mor eover , per haps
al l
t he
: maj or di st i nct i ons we use t o
deci pher t he
wor l d and conf i ne i t wi t hi n i t s pr i son of mean-
i ng, t hose
bet ween, f or exampl e, good and evi l , or t r ue and
f al se
- al l t he t er ms t hat have been so car ef ul l y di st i ngui shed
at such enor mous cost s of ener gy - have not al ways
succeed-
ed. The r eal cat ast r ophes, t he r eal
r evol ut i ons al ways consi st
i n t he i mpl osi on of one of
t hese t wo- t er msyst ems. Auni ver se,
or f r agment of
t he uni ver se, t hen comes t o an end - t hough
usual l y t hi s i mpl osi on occur s sl owl y, t he
t er ms bei nggr adual -
l y wor n down. At pr esent we ar e wi t nessi ng
t he sl owandsi mul -
t aneous er osi on of al l t he pol ar
st r uct ur es, andt he movement
t owar ds a uni ver se
t hat i s l osi ng t he ver y di mensi onof
mean-
i ng. Di si nvest ed,
di senchant ed, anddi saf f ect ed- t he endof t he
wor l d as
wi l l and r epr esent at i on.
But t hi s neut r al i zat i on i s not seduct i ve.
Seduct i onpushes t he
t er ms t owar ds each ot her , and uni t es t hemat a
poi nt of maxi -
mumener gy and char m; i t does not bl ur t hemt oget her
i n a
st at e of mi ni mumi nt ensi t y.
Nowsuppose t hat wher ever r el at i ons of
opposi t i on pr esent l y
exi st , r el at i ons of
seduct i on ar e put i nt o pl ay. I magi ne a f l ash
of
seduct i on t hat causes t he pol ar or
di f f er ent i al , t r ansi st or i zed
ci r cui t s of meani ng t o mel t ? Ther e
ar e exampl es of of a non-
di acr i t i cal semi ol ogy
( t hat i s t o say, a non- semi ol ogy) . The
el e-
ment s of t he anci ent cosmogony; f or
exampl e, di d not ent er
i nt o st r uct ur al r el at i ons of cl assi f i cat i on
( wat er / f i r e, ai r / ear t h,
et c. ) : t hey
wer e not " di st i nct i ve" el ement s, but " at t r act i ve"
el e-
ment s t hat seduced each ot her : wat er
seduces f i r e, wat er
seduced by f i r e.
Such
seduct i on i s st i l l qui t e st r ong i n t he duel ,
r el at i ons of
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 105
non- i ndi vi dual i zed cast es and hi er ar chi es, andi n t he anal ogi -
cal syst ems
t hat pr eceded our l ogi cal syst ems of di f f er ent i at i on.
And no doubt l ogi cal sequences
of
meani ng
ar e
st i l l
wor ked
over by anal ogi cal sequences of seduct i on - l i ke an i mmense
f l ash of i nspi r at i on t hat ,
at a
si ngl e
st r oke, br i ngs opposi t es
t oget her . Beneat h meani ng l i es t he secr et ci r cul at i on of seduc-
t i ve anal ogi es .
We ar e not , however , deal i ng wi t h a newver si on of uni ver -
sal at t r act i on. The di agonal s
or t r ansver sal s of seduct i on may
wel l br eak t he opposi t i ons bet ween t er ms
; t hey do not l ead
t o f used or con- f used r el at i ons ( t hat ' s myst i ci sm) but t o dual
r el at i ons . I t i s not a mat t er
of a myst i cal f usi on of subj ect or
obj ect , or si gni f i er andsi gni f i ed, mascul i ne andf emi ni ne, et c . ,
but of a seduct i on, t hat
i s, a duel and agoni st i c r el at i on.
Ami r r or
hangs on t he opposi t e wal l
she does not r ef l ect on i t
but t he mi r r or
r ef l ect s her
Di ar y of t he Seducer 3
The
seducer ' s st r at egmwi l l be t o mer ge wi t h t he mi r r or
on
t he opposi t e wal l i n whi ch t he gi r l i s r ef l ect ed. She
does not
gi ve i t a t hought , but
t he mi r r or i s r ef l ect i ng on her .
Oneshoul d di st r ust t he humi l i t y of mi r r or s . The humbl e ser -
vant s of appear ances,
t hey can r ef l ect onl y t he obj ect s t hat f ace
t hem, wi t hout bei ng abl e t o conceal t hemsel ves
. The whol e
wor l d i s gr at ef ul
t o t hem( except i n deat h when, f or t hi s r ea-
son, one vei l s t hem) ; t hey ar e
t he wat chdogs of appear ance.
But t hei r f ai t hf ul ness
i s speci ous, f or t hey ar e wai t i ng f or some-
one t o cat ch hi msel f i n t hei r r ef l ect i on.
One does not easi l y
f or get t hei r
si del ong gaze. They r ecogni ze you, andwhen
t hey
sur pr i se you when you
l east expect i t , your t i me has come.
Such i s t he seducer ' s
st r at egy: he gi ves hi msel f t he humi l i t y
of t he mi r r or , but a ski l f ul mi r r or ,
l i ke Per seus' shi el d, i n whi ch
3 . Sor en Ki er kegaar d, Di ar y of t he Seducer , appended
t o
Ei t her l Or
( Pr i ncet on:
Pr i ncet on Uni ver si t y Pr ess, 1971) p. 3 11 .
l ob SEDUCTI ON
Medusaf ound
her sel f pet r i f i ed. Thegi r l t oo i s goi ng t o f al l cap-
t i ve t o
t he mi r r or t hat r ef l ect s andanal yzes her ' , wi t hout her
knowl edge.
He who does not knowhowt o compass
. a gi r l
about so t hat shel oses si ght of
ever yt hi ng whi ch
he does not
wi sh her t o see, he who does not
knowhowt o poet i ze
hi msel f i nagi r l ' s f eel i ng so
t hat i t i s f r omher t hat ever yt hi ng i ssues as he
wi sh-
es i t , he i s and r emai ns a
bungl er ; I do not
begr udge
hi mhi s enj oyment . Abungl er he' i s
and
r emai ns, aseducer , somet hi ng onecan
by
no
me-
ans cal l me. I amanaest het e, an
er ot i ci st , onewho
has under st ood t he nat ur e and
meani ng of l ove,
who bel i eves i nl ove and
knows i t f r omt hegr ound
up. . . I
know,
t oo,
t hat t hehi ghest concei vabl e
en-
j oyment l i es
i n bei ng l oved. . . To poet i ze
onesel f
i nt o a young gi r l i s anar t , t o poet i ze
onesel f out
of her i s amast er pi ece. (pp. 363- 64)
Seduct i on
i s never l i near , anddoes not wear
amask(t hat i s
vul gar seduct i on) - i t i s obl i que.
. . what weaponi s so shar p, so penet r at i ng, so,
f l ash-
i ng i n act i on, andhenceso decept i ve,
as t he eye?
Youf ei nt ahi gh
quar t , as f encer s say, andat t ack
i nsecond. . . Themoment of
t hef ei nt i s i ndescr i b-
abl e. Theopponent ,
as i t wer e, f eel s t hesl ash,
he
i s t ouched!
Aye, t hat i s t r ue, but i n
qui t e a di f f er -
ent
pl ace f r omwher ehe t hought . (p.
314)'
I do not
meet her , I t ouch onl y t heper i pher y of
her exi st ence I pr ef er t o ar r i ve a
l i t t l e ear l y and
t hent o meet her , i f
possi bl e, at t hedoor or ' upon
t hest eps as
shei s comi ng andI aml eavi ng,
when
I pass her by i ndi f f er ent l y. Thi s i s
t he f i r st net i n
whi ch shemust be
ent angl ed. I never st op her on
t hest r eet ;
I may bowt o her , but I never come
; cl ose
t o
her , but al ways keep mydi st ance. Our
cont i nu-
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 107
al encount er s
ar e cer t ai nl y not i ceabl e t o her ; she
does i ndeed per cei ve
t hat a new
body
has ap-
pear edon
her hor i zon whoseor bi t i n a st r angel y
i mper t ur babl e manner af f ect s her owndi st ur bi ng-
l y, but she has no concept i on of t he l awgover n-
i ng t hi s movement ; she i s r at her i ncl i ned t o l ook
about t o see
i f
she
can di scover t he poi nt cont r ol l -
i ng i t , but she i s as i gnor ant of
bei ng her sel f t hi s
f ocus as
i f
she wer e a Chi naman
. ( pp.
336- 37)
Ther e i s anot her
t ype
of
i ndi r ect r ever ber at i on: hypnosi s, a
sor t of
psychi c mi r r or i n whi ch, once agai n, t he gi r l i s r ef l ect -
ed wi t hout her awar eness, under someone el se' s gaze:
Today my eyes have f or t he f i r st t i me r est ed upon
her. Someonehas sai d t hat sl eep can make t he eye-
l i ds so
heavy t hat t hey
cl ose of
t hemsel ves; per haps
my gl ance has a si mi l ar ef f ect uponCor del i a . Her e
eyes cl ose, andyet an obscur e f or ce
st i r s wi t hi n
her.
Shedoes not see t hat
I aml ooki ng at her , she
f eel s i t , f eel s i t t hr oughher whol ebody. Her eyes
cl ose,
andi t i s ni ght
;
but wi t hi n her i t
i s
l umi nous
day. ( pp. 360- 61)
Thi s obl i qui t y of seduct i on i s not dupl i ci t y. Wher e a l i near
movement knocks agai nst t he wal l of consci ousness andac-
qui r es onl y meager gai ns, seduct i on has t he obl i qui t y of a dr eam
el ement or st r oke of wi t , and as such t r aver ses t he psychi c
uni ver se and i t s di f f er ent l evel s i n a
si ngl e
di agonal , i n or der
t o t ouch,
at t he f ar end, t he unknown bl i nd spot , t he secr et
t hat l i es seal ed, t he eni gma t hat const i t ut es t he gi r l , even t o
her sel f .
Seduct i on
has
t wo si mul t aneous moment s, or
t wo i nst ant s
of a si ngl e moment . Her ent i r e char act er , al l her f emi ni ne
r esour ces must be mobi l i zed, andsi mul t aneousl y suspended.
I t
i s
not a quest i on of sur pr i si ng her i n t he passi vi t y of her i n-
nocence; her f r eedomof act i on must be i n pl ay. Because i t i s
by t hi s f r eedom, by i t s movement - andby t he cur ves andsud-
den t wi st s i mpar t ed t o i t by seduct i on - t hat she must , seem-
i ngl y spont aneousl y, r each t hat poi nt wher e, unbeknownst t o
10
8 SEDUCTI ON
her sel f ,
she wi l l be l ost . Seduct i on engages a f at e ;
andi n or der
f or i t t o be r eal i zed, she must be
compl et el y f r ee, but i n her
f r eedom. she must r each out , as i f
somnabul i st i cal l y, t owar ds
her ownf al l . The gi r l must
be : pl unged i nt o t hi s second
st at e
whi ch r edupl i cat es
t he f i r st , t he st at e of gr ace and
sover ei gnt y.
And t hi s second,
somnambul i st i c st at e must be sust ai ned,
so
t hat a passi on,
once awakenedandi nt oxi cat ed
wi t h i t sel f , sl i ps
i nt o t he t r ap f at e has set f or i t . "Her eyes
cl ose, andi t i s ni ght ,
but wi t hi n her i t i s l umi nous
day. "
Omi ssi ons, deni al s,
def l ect i ons, decept i ons,
di ver si ons and
humi l i t y - al l ai med
at pr ovoki ng t hi s second
st at e, t he secr et
of t r ue seduct i on
. Vul gar seduct i on mi ght
pr oceed by per si s-
t ence, but t r ue
seduct i on pr oceeds by
absence; or bet t er i t
i n-
vent s aki nd of cur vedspace,
wher e t he si gns ar e def l ect ed
f r om
t hei r t r aj ect or y andr et ur ned t o
t hei r sour ce . Thi s st at e of
sus-
pense i s essent i al
: i t i s t he moment of t he gi r l ' s
di sar r ay bef or e
what awai t s her , even as
she knows - andt hi s i s somet hi ng
new
andal r eady f at al - t hat
somet hi ngawai t s her . A
moment of hi gh
i nt ensi t y, a
"spi r i t ual " moment ( i n
Ki er kegaar d' s sense) ,
si mi -
l ar t o t hat
i n games of chance bet weent he
t hr owandt he mo-
ment
when t he di ce st op
r ol l i ng.
Thus t he f i r st t i me
he hear s her gi ve out
her addr ess, he r e-
f uses t o r emember
i t :
I wi l l not l i st en t o i t ,
f or I do not wi sh t o depr i ve
mysel f of sur pr i se; I
shal l cer t ai nl y meet her agai n
i n l i f e, I shal l r ecogni ze
her , andper haps she wi l l
r ecogni ze me. . . I f she
does not r ecogni ze me,
i f
her gl ance does
not i mmedi at el y convi nce
me of
t hat , t hen
I shal l sur el y f i nd anoppor t uni t y t o
l ook
at
her f r omt he si de. I pr omi se t hat
she wi l l r emem-
ber
t he si t uat i on. No i mpat i ence,
no gr eedi ness,
ever yt hi ng shoul d be
enj oyedi nl ei sur el ydr aught s
;
she i s
mar kedout , she shal l be r undown
. ( p. 312)
The seducer i s pl ayi ng
wi t h hi msel f . At t hi s
poi nt i t i s not
even a r use, wi t h t he
seducer bei ng t he one
del i ght ed at t he
seduct i on' s
def er ment . Thi s, t he
pl easur e of t he
appr oach,
shoul d not be sl i ght ed; f or
i t i s i n t hi s i nt er val t hat
he begi ns
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 109
t o di g t he pi t i nt o whi ch she wi l l f a l l . I t
i s
l i ke f enci ng:
one needs
a
f i el d f or
t he f ei nt . Thr oughout t hi s per i od, t he
seducer ,
f a r
f r omseeki ng
t o cl ose i n on her , seeks t o ma i nt a i n hi s di st a nce
byva r i ous pl oys :
he does not spea k di r ect l y t o her but onl y
t o her a unt , a nd t hen a bout t r i vi a l
or st upi d subj ect s; he neu-
t r a l i z es ever yt hi ng byi r onya nd f ei gned
peda nt i ci sm; he f a i l s
t o r espond t o a nyf emi ni ne or er ot i c movement , a ndeven f i nds
her a si t com
sui t or t o di sencha nt her of her l ove.
To
keep
one' s
di st a nce,
t o
put her
of f , t o di sencha nt a nddecei ve her ,
t o
t he
poi nt wher e she her sel f
t a kes t he i ni t i a t i ve a nd br ea ks of f her
enga gement ,
t hus compl et i ng t he seduct i on a nd
cr ea t i ng t he
i dea l si t ua t i on f or
her t ot a l a ba ndon.
The seducer knows how
t o l et t he si gns ha ng
.
He knows t ha t
t hey
a r e f a vour a bl e onl y when l ef t suspended, a ndwi l l
move
of t hemsel ves t owa r ds
t hei r a ppoi nt ed dest i ny. He does not use
t he si gns up a l l a t once, but wa i t s f or
t he moment when t hey
wi l l a l l r espond, one a f t er t he ot her ,
cr ea t i ng a n ent i r el y uni que
conj unct ur e of gi ddi ness a nd col l a pse.
When
she i s i n t he compa nyof t he t hr ee J a nsens
she t a l ks ver y
l i t t l e, t hei r cha t t er evi dent l y bor es
her , a nd cer t a i nl y t he smi l e
on
her
l i ps seems t o
i ndi ca t e i t . I a mr el yi ng
on t ha t smi l e.
Toda yI went t o Mr s. J a nsen' s. I ha l f
opened t he
door wi t hout knocki ng. . . She sa t a l one a t t he pi -
a no. . . I mi ght
ha ve r ushed i n, sei z ed t he
moment
- t ha t woul d ha ve
been f ool i sh. . . . She i s evi dent -
l yconcea l i ng t he f a ct t ha t she
pl a ys. . . When some-
t i me
I
ca n t a l k mor e conf i dent i a l l y wi t h her , I sha l l
sl yl y l ea d her
t o
t hi s
poi nt a nd l et her f a l l i nt o t he
t r a p . ( pp. 338- 9) .
He ha s not r ea ched t he vul ga r
di ver si ons, t he bi t s of l i ber -
t i ne br a vur a ,
t he er ot i c whi ms ( whi ch wi l l occupya n
i ncr ea s-
i ngl yl a r ge pa r t of t he st or y, wi t h
Cor del i a ha r dl y ever a ppea r i ng
except benea t h a l i vel y, l i ber t i ne i ma gi na t i on
: "To l ove one a l one
i s t oo l i t t l e ; t o l ove t hema l l
suggest s t he l i ght ness of a super f i -
ci a l cha r a ct er ; but
t o l ove a s ma nya s possi bl e. . . Wha t pl ea sur e!
Wha t a l i f e! ") He ha s not
a cceded t o t he f r i vol ous seduct i on
11 0 SEDUCTION
whi chi s not par t of t he "gr and game" of s educt i on, wi t h i t s
phi l os ophy of obl i qui t y anddi ver s i on. The "gr and" s educt i on
maymake i t s way s ecr et l y al ong t he s ame pat hs as vi l e s educ-
t i on,
but
wi l l pl ay
t hemas s us pens e or par ody. Conf us i on i s
not
pos s i bl e: t he one i s a game of l ove, t he ot her a s pi r i t ual
duel
. Al l t he i nt er l udes onl y
accent uat e
t he s l ow, cal cul at ed,
and i nevi t abl e r hyt hmof "hi gh" s educt i on. The mi r r or s t i l l
hangs on t he oppos i t e wal l , even i f we ar e
no
l onger awar e of
i t - and t i me i n Cor del i a' s hear t i s on t he mar ch.
The pr oces s s eems t o r eachi t s l owes t poi nt wi t ht he~s educer ' s
bet r ot hal . Her e one has t he i mpr es s i onof havi ngat t ai ned apoi nt
of ext r eme numbnes s , wher e t he s educer pus hes t he s ubt er -
f uge of di s enchant ment or di s s uas i on t o an al mos t per ver s e
degr ee of mor t i f i cat i on. And one has t he i mpr es s i on t hat , as
a r es ul t , Cor del i a' s s pi r i t i s br oken, her f emi ni ni t y r un down,
neut r al i zed
by
t he i l l us i ons t hat s ur r ound her . The moment of
t heengagement - whi ch"has
s o
muchi mpor t ance f or a young
gi r l t hat her ent i r e s oul can be f i xed on i t , l i ke t hat of a dyi ng
manonhi s l as t wi l l " - t hi s moment , Cor del i a wi l l l i ve wi t hout
under s t andi ng, depr i ved of ever y r eact i on, muzzl ed, ci r cum-
vent ed
.
One wor d, ands he woul dhave l aughed at me, one
wor d, ands hewoul dhave been moved, one wor d,
and s he woul d have
f l ed f r omme; but no wor d
cr os s ed my l i ps , I r emai ned s t ol i dl y s er i ous , and
kept exact l y
t o
t he r i t ual . As r egar ds my engage-
ment , I do not boas t t hat i t i s poet i c, i t i s i n ever y
way phi l i s t i ne and bour geoi s . So nowI ' amen-
gaged; s o i s Cor del i a ( s o i s
Cor del i a! ) and t hat i s
al l s he knows about t hewhol e mat t er . ( pp. 370- 71)
It i s al l a ki nd of or deal , as f ound i n i ni t i at i on r i t es .
The i n-
i t i at ed mus t pas s t hr ougha phas e t hat mar ks hi s . or her deat h,
not as pat het i c s uf f er i ng, but as not hi ngnes s , as empt i nes s -
t hef i nal moment bef or e t he pas s i on' s i l l umi nat i on andt heer ot i c
abandon. In a s ens e, t he s educer adds an
as cet i c moment t o
t he aes t het i c movement he i mpar t s t o t he whol e
.
SUPERFI CI AL
ABYSSES I I I
Gener al l y I canassur e any
gi r l whoent r ust s her -
sel f t omea per f ect aest het i c conduct : onl y
i t
ends
wi t hher bei ng decei ved. . . ( p. 375)
Ther e i s a sor t of humour i n t he f act t hat t he engagement
coi nci des wi t ht he appar ent di sappear ance of
al l
t hat
was at
st ake i n t he seduct i on
. What i n t he bour geoi s vi si on of t he
ni net eent hcent ur y
const i t ut es a
j oyous
pr el ude t o mar r i age,
i s her e an aust er e i ni t i at i on i nt ot he subl i me ends of passi on
( whi char e, si mul t aneousl y, t he cal cul at ed ends of seduct i on)
by t he somnabul i st passage acr oss t he deser t s of bet r ot hal .
( Don' t f or get t hat t he engagement was a cr uci al moment i n t he
l i f e of many a r omant i c,
i ncl udi ng
Ki er kegaar d,
but
al so
and
mor e dr amat i cal l y
of
Kl ei st , Hol der l i n, Noval i s andKaf ka. Apai n-
f ul moment
of
seemi ngl y endl ess f r ust r at i on, t he al most mys-
t i cal passi on sust ai nedby t he engagement was per haps ( l et us
dr op
al l t al k of sexual i mpot ence! ) a mat t er of suspensi on,
of
a suspended enchant ment , haunt ed by t he f ear of sexual or
mat r i moni al di senchant ment . )
However , J ohannes cont i nues t o l i ve t he i nvi si bl e dance of
seduct i on, even as hi s obj ect i ve and
i t s pr esence appear t o
have
f aded. I ndeed, he wi l l never l i ve i t mor e i nt ensel y, f or i t i s her e,
i n t he nul l i t y, i n t he
absence, i n
t he mi r r or ' s
f ace t hat
i t s t r i -
umphi s assur ed: she cannot but br eak of f her f or mer engage-
ment andt hr owher sel f i nt ohi s ar ms . Al l t he f i r e of her passi on
l i es r eveal ed, j ust beneat ht he sur f ace, i n i t s t r anspar ence. He
wi l l never agai n f i nd i t as beaut i f ul as i n t hi s pr emoni t i on, f or
at t hi s moment t he gi r l st i l l r emai ns pr edest i ned- whi chwi l l
nol onger be t he case once t hi s moment i s over .
Nowt he gi ddi ness of seduct i on, as of ever ypassi on, l i es above
al l wi t hi t s pr edest i nat i on. The l at t er al one pr ovi des t hat f at al
qual i t y at t he basi s of al l pl easur e - t hat st r oke of wi t , as i t wer e,
whi ch
t i es, as i f
i n
advance, a movement of t he soul t oi t s des-
t i ny andi t s deat h. Her e l i es t he seducer ' s t r i umph. Andher e,
i n t he i nvi si bl e dance of t he bet r ot hal , one i s abl e t o see hi s
knowl edge of seduct i on, of t r ue seduct i on,
as
a spi r i t ual
economy.
My r el at i on t o her i s t hat of an unseen par t ner i n
11 2 SEDUCTION
a dance whi ch i s danced by. onl y one, when i t
s houl dr eal l y bedancedby t wo. Shemoves
as
i n
adr eam, andyet s hedances wi t hanot her , andt hi s
ot her i s mys el f , who, i n s o f ar as I amvi s i bl y
pr es ent , ami nvi s i bl e, i n s o f ar I ami nvi s i bl e, am
vi s i bl e. Themovement s of t hedance r equi r e apar t -
ner , s he
bows t o
hi m, s he
t akes hi s hand, s hef l ees ,
s he dr aws near hi m
agai n
.
I t ake her hand, I com-
pl et eher t hought
as
i f i t wer e compl et ed' i n her -
s el f . She moves t o t he i nner mel ody of her own
s oul ; I amonl y t he occas i on f or her movement .
I amnot amor ous , t hat woul donl y awaken her ;
I am
eas y,
yi el di ng, i mper s onal ,
al mos t
l i ke a
mood. ( p. 376)

.
Thus s educt i on i s pr es ent ed i n a s i ngl e movement as :
- a cons pi r acy of power : a s acr i f i ci al f or m.
- a mur der and, ul t i mat el y, a per f ect cr i me.
- a wor k of ar t : "Seduct i on cons i der ed as one of t he Beaux-
Ar t s " ( l i ke mur der ,
t o be
s ur e) .
- as t r oke
of
wi t
or
f l as hof i ns pi r at i on: a "s pi r i t ual " economy.
Wi t ht he s ame duel compl i t y as a s t r oke of wi t , her e ever y-
t hi ng i s exchangedal l us i vel y, wi t hout bei ng s pel l ed out , t he
equi val ent of t he al l us i ve, cer emoni al exchange, of a s ecr et
.
- an as cet i c
f or m
of a
s pi r i t ual , but al s o pedagogi cal or deal :
as or t of
s chool
of pas s i on, a
s i mul t aneous l y er ot i c andi r oni c
mai eut i cs .
I s hal l al ways acknowl edge t hat a young gi r l i s a
bor n
t eacher , f r omwhor e
one
can al ways l ear n,
i f not hi ngel s e, howt o decei veher - f or oneonl y
l ear ns t hi s bes t f r omt he gi r l s t hems el ves . . . ( pp.
382- 83)
Ever yyounggi r l i s , i n r el at i on t o t he l abr yi nt hof
her hear t , an Ar i adne; s he hol ds t he t hr ead by
whi chone f i nds hi s way t hr oughi t , but s he has
i t , wi t hout her s el f knowi ng howt o us e i t . ( p.
396)
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 113
- aformof duel or war, anagonal form. I t never t akes t he
form
of vi ol enceor arel at i onof force, but of awar game. I ni t one
di scovers t he t wosi mul t aneous movement s of seduct i on,
as
foundi n everyst rat egy:
Sonowt hefi rst war wi t hCordel i abegi ns, i nwhi ch
I fl ee, andt herebyt eachher t ot ri umphi npursu-
i ngme. I const ant l yret reat beforeher, andi n t hi s
ret reat , I t eachher t hroughmysel f t oknowal l t he
power of l ove, i t s unqui et t hought s, i t s passi on,
what
l ongi ng
i s,
andhope, andi mpat i ent expec-
t at i on. . .
She
wi l l gai n
couraget obel i eve
i nl ove. . .
Shemust never suspect t hat sheowes t hi s freedom
t ome. . . Whensheat l ast feel s free, sofreet hat she
i s al most t empt edt o break wi t hme, t hent hese-
cond
war
begi ns.
Now
she
has power andpassi on,
andt he st ruggl e becomes wort hwhi l e t ome.
Let her forsakeme, t hesecondwar i s j ust begi n-
ni ng. . . Thefi rst war was
a
war
of
l i berat i on,
i t
was
onl yagame; t hesecondi s a war of conquest , i t
i s for l i fe anddeat h. (pp. 379-80)
Thest akes areal l organi zedaroundt hegi rl as myt hi cal fi gure.
Bot hadversaryandobj ect i vei n t hi s many-si dedduel , shei s,
t herefore,
nei t her
asexobj ect nor afi gureof t heEt ernal
Femi -
ni ne- t het wogreat , West ernreferences t o womanareequal l y
forei gnt oseduct i on
.
Andt herei s nomoreani deal vi ct i mor .
i deal subj ect (t he
gi rl
and
her
seducer respect i vel y), t hant here
i s anexecut i oner andvi ct i mi nasacri fi ce. Thefasci nat i onshe
exerci ses i s t hat of a myt hi cal fi gure, aneni gmat i c part ner, a
prot agoni st equal
t o
t he
seducer
i n
t hi s
al most
l i t urgi cal
real m
of chal l enge andduel .
Howdi fferent from
Les
Li ai sons
Dangereuses! I nLacl os
t he
womant obeseducedappears as a st ronghol dt obet aken, i n
t he
manner of t hemi l i t aryst rat egyof t heperi od- t hest rat egy
11 4 SEDUCTION
maybe l es s s t at i c t han bef or e, but t he obj ec t i ve r emai ns t he
s ame, her s ur r ender . The Pr es i dent e
i s af or t r es s t o be
bes i eged,
ands he mus t f al l . Ther e i s
no s educ t i onher e - onl ys i egec r af t .
Wher e t her e i s s educ t i on i s not i n t he r el at i on bet ween
s educ er and vi c t i m, but i n
t hat
bet ween
t he s educ er s , de
Val mont and Mer t eui l , who s har e ac r i mi nal c ons pi r ac ybyi n-
t er pos ed vi c t i ms . Si mi l ar l yi n t he Mar qui s de Sade, t her e i s onl y
t he s ec r et s oc i et ygl or i f yi ng i n i t s c r i mes , whi l e t he vi c t i ms ar e
nul l i t i es .
Ther e i s none of t he s ubt l e ar t of t he t ur nar ound whi c h al -
r eadyappear s i n SunTs eu' s Ar t of War , or i n zen phi l os ophy
and t he or i ent al mar t i al ar t s . Or as her e, i n s educ t i on, wher e
t he gi r l , her
pas s i on
and l i ber t y, ar e ver y muc h
. a
par t
of
t he
s t r at egy' s unf ol di ng. "She was
an
eni gma t hat , eni gmat i c al l y,
pos s es s ed i n her i t s own
r es ol ut i on. "

i
In t hi s duel , ever yt hi ng t ur ns on t he movement f r omet hi c s
t o aes t het i c s , f r omanai ve t o a c ons c i ous pas s i on:
So f ar I s houl d c al l her pas s i on anai ve pas s i on.
Whent he c hange c omes , andI begi n
t o
dr awbac k
i n ear nes t t hen s he wi l l r eal l y mus t er al l her
r es our c es i n or der t o c apt i vat e me. She has no way
t o ac c ompl i s h t hi s exc ept bymeans of t he; er ot i c ,
but t hi s wi l l nowappear onaver ydi f f er ent s c al e.
It
t hen bec omes
t he weapon i n her hand whi c h
s he s wi ngs agai ns t me. Then I have t he r ef l ec t ed
pas s i on. She f i ght s f or her own s ake bec aus e s he
knows t hat
I
pos s es s t he
er ot i c ; s he f i ght s f or her
own
s ake
i n
or der t o over c ome
me. She devel ops
i n her s el f ahi gher f or mof t he er ot i c . What I t aught
her t o s us pec t byi nf l ami ng
her , myc ol dnes s now
t eac hes her t o under s t and, but i n s uc h away
t hat
s he bel i eves s he di s c over ed i t her s el f . Thr ough t hi s
s he wi l l t r y t o t ake me bys ur pr i s e
; s he wi l l
be-
l i eve t hat her bol dnes s has out s t r i pped me, and
t hat s hehas t her ebyc aught me. Then her pas s i on
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 11
5
becomes def i ni t e, ener get i c, concl usi ve, l ogi cal ; her
ki ss t ot al , her
embr acef i r m. ( p . 406)
The
et hi cs i s f or med of si mpl i ci t y and nat ur al ness ( i ncl ud-
i ng t hesi mpl i ci t y
of desi r e) , of whi ch t hegi r l ' s nai vegr aceand
spont anei t y
ar e a par t . Theaest het i cs i s f or med of ar t i f i ce, t he
pl ay of si gns - i t i s seduct i on .
Ever y et hi cs must r esol ve i t sel f
i nt o an aest het i cs. For Ki er kegaar d' s
seducer , as f or Schi l l er ,
Hbl der l i n, or even Mar cuse, t he
passage t o aest het i cs i s t he
hi ghest
movement gr ant ed t hehuman speci es
. But t heseducer ' s
aest het i cs i s qui t e
di f f er ent : i t i s not di vi ne and t r anscendent ,
but i r oni c and
di abol i cal ; i t does not havet hef or m
of
an
i deal ,
but of a st r oke of wi t ; i t
does
not
gobeyond et hi cs; i t i s def l ec-
t i on,
i nf l ect i on, seduct i on, and t r ansf i gur at i on,
as r eal i zed by
t he mi r r or of
decept i on . Thi s, however , i s not
t o
say
t hat t he
seducer ' s st r at egy i s
per ver se; i t i s a par t of t hat aest het i cs
of
i r ony
whi chseeks t o t r ansf or ma vul gar ,
physi cal er ot i ci smi nt o
a passi on,
and st r oke of wi t .
I have not i ced t hat sheal ways cal l s
memi newhen
shewr i t es t o me; but shel acks t he
cour aget o say
i t
t o
me.
Today I begged her t o doi t , wi t h al l
t he
i nsi nuat i ng
and er ot i c war mt h possi bl e. Shest ar t -
ed t o do
so;
an
i r oni c gl ance, i ndescr i babl y swi f t
and br i ef , was
enough t o make i t i mpossi bl e f or
her , al t hough my
l i ps ur ged her wi t h al l t hei r
mi ght . Thi s mood i s ent i r el y nor mal . ( p . 419)
Er ot i cal l y shei s compl et el y
equi pped f or t hest r ug-
gl e, she f i ght s wi t h t he dar t s
of
her
eyes, wi t h t he
command
of her br ows, wi t h t hesecr et i veness
of
her f or ehead, wi t h t he
el oquence of her bosom,
wi t h t he
danger ous al l ur ement of t he embr ace,
wi t h t hepr ayer
of
her
l i ps, wi t h t he. smi l e on her
f ace, wi t h al l t he sweet l ongi ng
of her ent i r e be-
i ng.
Ther e i s a power i n her , an ener gy,
as i f she
wer ea val kyr i e; but t hi s
er ot i c f or cei s i n t ur n t em-
per ed by a cer t ai n l angui shi ng
weakness whi ch i s
br eat hed out over her . -
Shemust not behel d t oo
l ong at t hi s peak . . . ( p. 419)
116 SEDUCTI ON
I r ony al ways pr event s t he mor t al emot i onal
demonst r at i ons
t hat ant i ci pat e t he game' s endandt hr eat en t o cut . shor t t he
un-
t r i ed possi bi l i t i es hel d by each of t he pl ayer s.
Seduct i on al one
can depl oy t he l at t er , but
onl y
by
keepi ng t hi ngs i n suspense,
byan i r oni c cl i namen, andby t hat di si l l usi on
whi chl eaves t he
f i el d of aest het i cs open.
Somet i mes t he seducer has
hi s weaknesses. Thus i t happens
t hat i n a sur f ei t of emot i onhe l aunches
i nt o a panegyr i c t o f e-
mal e beaut y i n i t s i nf i ni t e
di vi si bi l i t y, det ai l ed i n i t s' mi nut e er ot i c
var i at i ons ( pp.
423- 24) , andt hen assembl ed i nt o a
si ngl e f i gur e,
wi t hi n t he heat ed
i magi nat i on
of
an i nf l amed desi r e. Avi si on
of God- but
i mmedi at el y t aken up and~t ur ned ar ound
i n t he
i magi nat i on of
t he Devi l , i n t hecol d i magi nat i on of
appear ances.
Womani s man' s
dr eam- God, mor eover , dr ewher
f r omman
when he was asl eep. She t her ef or e has al l t he
t r ai t s of a dr eam,
andi n her , one mi ght say, t he
di ur nal scr aps of t he r eal com-
bi ne t o f or ma mi r age.

'
She awakens f i r st at t he t ouchof l ove;
bef or e t hat
t i me she i s a dr eam. Yet i n
her dr eaml i f e we can
di st i ngui sh t wo st ages
: i n t he f i r st l ove dr eams
about her
; i n t he second, she dr eams about
l ove
( p.
425)
The endcomes whenshe has gi venher sel f
f ul l y. She i s dead,
she has l ost t he gr ace of her
appear ance andbecome her sex
;
she becomes awoman.
For one l ast moment . "[W]hen
she t hen
st ands decked out as a
br i de, and al l t he magni f i cence of
her
at t i r e pal es bef or e
her beaut y, and she her sel f
t ur ns pal e. . . "
( p. 431) , she
st i l l has t he spl endour of
appear ances - but soon
i t wi l l be
t oo l at e.
Such
i s t he met aphysi cal l ot of t he seducer
. Beaut y, mean-
i ng, subst ance, and above
ever yt hi ng el se, God ar e et hi cal l y
j eal ous of t hemsel ves.
Most t hi ngs ar e et hi cal l y possessi ve
; t hey
keep t hei r secr et s, and
wat chover t hei r meani ngs.
Seduct i on,
bei ng on
t he si de of t he appear ances and
t he Devi l , i s aest het i -
cal l y possessi ve.
Af t er t he f i nal abandonment
( Cor del i a abandons
her sel f , and
SUPERFICIALABYSSES 117
she i s i mmedi at el y abandoned) ,
J ohannes asks
hi msel f : "Have
I
been const ant l y f ai t hf ul t o mypact i n myr el at i on t o Cor de-
l i a? That i s t o say, mypact wi t h t he aest het i c. For i t i s t hi s whi ch
makes mest r ong, t hat I al ways have t he i dea onmysi de. . . Has
t he
i nt er est i ng
al ways been pr eser ved? " ( p. 432) . Mer el y t o
seduce i s
i nt er est i ng onl y i n t he f i r st
degr ee; but her e
i t
i s
a
mat t er
of
what i s i nt er est i ng i n t he second
degr ee.
Thi s
dou-
bl i ng i s t he secr et
of
t he
aest het i cs .
Onl y
what i s
i nt er est i ng
about t he i nt er est i ng has seduct i on' s aest het i c f or ce.
Inasense, t he seducer st r i ves t o have t he gi r l ' s nat ur al char ms
r i se t o and shi ne i n t he wor l d of pur e appear ances, i . e. , i n t he
spher e of seduct i on - andt her e dest r oy t hem. For most t hi ngs,
al as, have meani ng
and
dept h;
but
onl y
some of t hemr i se t o
t he l evel of appear ances, and
t hey
al one ar e t r ul y seduct i ve.
Seduct i on l i es i n t he t r ansf or mat i on of t hi ngs i nt o pur e ap-
pear ances.
That
i s
how
seduct i on i s r eal i zed as
myt h, i n
t he gi ddi ness
of appear ances, j ust
bef or e
bei ng
commi t t edt o r eal i t y.
"Ever y-
t hi ng i s symbol ; I mysel f ama myt h about mysel f , f or i s i t not
as a myt h t hat I hast en t o t hi s meet i ng? . . . Dr i ve nowf or dear
l i f e, even i f t he hor ses dr op dead, onl y not a si ngl e secondbe-
f or e we r each t he pl ace. " ( p.
439)
Asi ngl e ni ght , andi t ' s al l over . "I hope never t osee her agai n. "
She gi ves ever yt hi ng and f al l s, l i ke t hose count l ess vi r gi ns
of
Gr eek myt hol ogywhower e t r ansf or medi nt o f l ower s, andt her e-
by achi eved
aveget at i ve andl ugubr i ous gr ace, t he echo of t he
seduct i on gr ace
of
t hei r f i r st l i f e
. But , adds Ki er kegaar d' s seducer
cr uel l y: ". . : t he t i me i s past whena gi r l suf f er i ng t he pai n
of
a
f ai t hl ess l ove can be changed i nt o asunf l ower . " ( p.
439)
And
i n ast i l l mor e
cr uel andunexpect edmanner : "If I wer e a god,
I woul d do f or her what Nept une di d f or a nymph: I woul d
change her i nt o a man. " ( p. 440) . In a wor d, t he womandoes
not exi st . Onl y t he gi r l
exi st s by t he subl i me nat ur e of her st at e,
and t he man, by hi s power t o dest r oy her .
But t he myt hi cal passi on of seduct i on does not cease t o be
i r oni c. It i s cr owned wi t h onel ast mel anchol y st r oke : t he ar -
11 8 SEDUCTION
rangement of thei nteri or that wi l l bethesetti ng f or thel overs'
abandon. Onel ast moment of suspense as the
seducer bri ngs
together
al l
thescattered
l i nes
of
hi s strategy andcontempl ates
themas though bef ore death. What shoul dhavebeena
tri um-
phant setti ngi s al ready nomorethanthedol ef ul
si te of adef unct
story. Everythi ng i n thi s house i s reconsti tuted so as to
sei ze
hol dof Cordel i a' s i magi nati onat a
stroke, at that f i nal moment
whenshe i s to be toppl ed.
Therei s the cabi net i n whi chthey
met, wi th the samesof a, thesame l amp, the same
tea tabl e, as
i t was al l "purportedto be" yesterday,
andi s here today, by vi r-
tueof an
exact resembl ance. Ontheopenpi ano, onthemusi c-
rest the samel i ttl e Swedi sh mel ody - Cordel i a
wi l l enter by
the door at theback . Everythi ng i s
f oreseen: she wi l l di scover
al l thescenes they l i ved together recapi tul ated. The
i l l usi on i s
perf ect . In f act, thegame has reached
i ts
end,
butt theseducer
reaches
newhei ghts of i rony by bri ngi ng together al l thethreads
he has wovensi nce the begi nni ng
i n one l ast di spl ay of f i re-
works,
whi ch i s, at thesame ti me, aparodi c f uneral
orati on to
.
thei r consummatedl ove.
Af ter whi chCordel i a wi l l no l onger appear, except
i n sever-
al desperate l etters that open
the story, andeven her despai r
i s
strange. She was not exactl y decei ved or
di spossessed, but
spi ri tual l y di vertedby agamewhose
rul es she was not aware
of . She was pl ayed
wi th, as though under aspel l . She
has the
i mpressi on of havi ng been, wi thout
real i zi ng i t, thetrophy i n
somevery
i nti mate anddevastati ng pl ot, theobj ect of aspi ri tual
abducti on. In ef f ect, she was robbedof
her ownseducti on,
whi chwas thenturnedagai nst
her. Hers i s anamel ess f ate, and
the stupor
that resul ts i s di f f erent f rommere despai r
.
Such vi cti ms were of a
qui te di sti nct' nature.
. . . There was no vi si bl e change
i n thei r appearance;
they mai ntai nedthei r customary
rel ati onshi ps, as
respected as ever, and yet they were
changed,
al most i nexpl i cabl y to
themsel ves . . . Thei r l i ves
were not l i ke those
snapped of f or broken, but
they hadbecomei ntrospecti ve; l ost
to others, they
vai nl y sought
to f i nd themsel ves . ( p. 303)
THEFEAR
OF
BEING
SEDUCED
If seduct i on
i s a passi onor dest i ny, i t i s usual l y t he opposi t e
passi ont hat pr evai l s - t hat of not bei ng
seduced. West r uggl e
t o
conf i r m
our sel ves i n our t r ut h: we f i ght agai nst t hat whi ch
seeks t o seduce us.
In t hi s st r uggl e al l means ar e accept abl e, r angi ngf r omr el ent -
l essl y seduci ng t he ot her i n
or der not t o be seduced onesel f ,
t o pr et endi ng t o be seducedi n or der t o cut al l seduct i on shor t .
Thehyst er i c combi nes t he passi on of seduct i on wi t h t hat
of
si mul at i on. She
pr ot ect s her sel f f r omseduct i on by of f er i ng
booby-t r apped si gns whi ch, even as t hey put t hemsel ves f or -
war di n exagger at ed
f ashi on, cannot be bel i eved. Thescr upl es,
t he excessi ve r emor se, t he pat het i c advances and endl ess en-
t r eat i es, her way
of
spi nni ng
event s so t hat t hey di ssol ve and
she her sel f becomes el usi ve, t he
gi ddi ness she i mposes on
ot her s, andt he
decept i on - i t i s al l seduct i ve det er r ence, whose
obscur e obj ect i ve i s l ess t o seduce t han t o never l et onesel f
seduce.
The
hyst er i c has no i nt i macy, emot i ons, or secr et s. Shei s en-
t i r el y gi ven
over t o ext er nal bl ackmai l , t o t he ephemer al but
t ot al cr edi bi l i t y of her "sympt oms, "
t he absol ut e need t o be be-
12
0
SEDUCTI ON
l i eved ( l i ke t he myt homani ac wi t h hi s st or i es) but at
t he same
t i me, t o
di sappoi nt al l bel i ef - and t hi s wi t hout appeal i ng t o
some
shar ed del usi on. Anuncompr omi si ngdemand, but
com-
pl et el y i nsensi t i ve as t o i t s r esponse. Ademand
t hat i s put i nt o
quest i on by i t s chor eogr aphy, and by t he ef f ect of
i t s si gns .
Seduct i ont oomocks t he t r ut h of
si gns, but makes i t i nt o ar ever -
si bl e appear ance, whi l e t he hyst er i c pl ays wi t h t he si gns
but
wi t hout
shar i ng t hem. I t i s as i f she appr opr i at ed t he
ent i r e
pr ocess of
seduct i onf or her sel f ; , as i f she was
bi ddi ngwi t h her -
sel f , whi l e l eavi ng t he ot her onl yt he
ul t i mat umof her hyst er i -
cal conver si on, wi t hout any possi bl e
r ever si on. The hyst er i c
succeeds i n maki ng her ownbody
abar r i er t o seduct i on: a
seduct r ess par al yzed by
her ownbody and f asci nat ed by
her
own
sympt oms . And whoseeks t o pet r i f y ot her s i n t ur n, by
an
el usi veness t hat seeks t o al l ay suspi ci ons, but
r emai ns onl y
a pat het i c psychodr ama. I f seduct i on
i s a chal l enge, hyst er i a i s
bl ackmai l .
Most si gns and messages
t odaysol i ci t us i nt hi s hyst er i cal
man-
ner . Theywoul d
make- us- bel i eve, make- us- speak and
make- us-
come bydi ssuasi on
. Theywoul d bl ackmai l us wi t h abl i nd,
psy-
chodr amat i c t r ansact i on, usi ng si gns devoi d of
meani ng, t hat
mul t i pl y and hyper t r ophy
pr eci sel y because t heynol onger have
anysecr et s or cr edi bi l i t y
. Si gns wi t hout f ai t h, wi t hout af f ect or
hi st or y, si gns
t er r i f i ed at t he i deaof si gni f yi ng - j ust as
t he hys-
t er i c i s
t er r i f i ed at t he i dea of bei ng seduced.
I n r eal i t y, t he i nner absence t hat i nher es
i nt he sel f t er r i f i es
t he hyst er i c. She must dr ai n her sel f ,
wi t h her cont i nual pl ay,
of t hi s absence i nt he secr ecyof
whi ch she coul dbe l oved,
and
coul d l ove
her sel f . I nt hi s wayshe f or ms ami r r or behi nd
whi ch
- near sui ci de, but t ur ni ng sui ci de,
l i ke ever yt hi ng el se, i nt o a
bot her some, t heat r i cal pr ocess
of seduct i on- she r emai ns
i m-
mor t al i n her
"spect acul ar " domai n.
The same
pr ocess, but r ever sed, canbe f ound
i n anor exi a,
f r i gi di t y and i mpot ence. By
t ur ni ng one' s body i nt o ami r r or
- but ami r r or t hat has, as
i t wer e, beent ur ned agai nst t he
wal l
by
ef f aci ng t he pot ent i al seduct i veness of
one' s body- bydi s-
enchant i ng and desexual i zi ngi t , one i s
st i l l r esor t i ng t o bl ack-
mai l and del i ver i ng
anul t i mat um: "Youwi l l not seduce me,
I
dar e yout o
t r y. " Seduct i on, however , shows t hr ough
i n i t s ver y
negat i on, si nce t he dar e i s one of i t s f undament al f or ms.
A
chal l enge must
be met wi t h a r esponse, ( wi t hout want i ng t o)
a chal l enge has t o l et i t sel f seduce - but her e t hegame has been
cl osed down. And cl osed down al l t he mor e emphat i cal l y by
t he body, by
i t s
dr amat i zat i on of a r ef usal of seduct i on - whi l e
t he hyst er i c
get s out of t he game by dr amat i zi nga demand f or
seduct i on. I n bot h cases, however ,
seduct i on,
whet her
as
seducer or seduced, i s deni ed.
The pr obl em, t her ef or e, i s not one of sexual
or
al i ment ar y
i mpot ence, wi t h i t s t r ai n of psychoanal yt i c r easons and unr ea-
son, but concer ns an i mpot ence as r egar ds seduct i on . The di s-
af f ect i on, neur osi s, angui sh and f r ust r at i on encount er ed by
psychoanal ysi s comes
no doubt f r ombei ng unabl e t o l ove or
t o be l oved, f r ombei ng unabl e
t o gi ve or t ake pl easur e, but t he
r adi cal di senchant ment comes f r omseduct i on and i t s f ai l ur e.
Onl y t hose whol i e compl et el y out si de seduct i on ar e i l l , even
i f
t hey r emai n f ul l y capabl e of l ovi ng and maki ng l ove. Psy-
choanal ysi s
bel i eves i t t r eat s t he di sor der s of sex and desi r e,
but i n r eal i t y i t i s deal i ngwi t h
t he di sor der s of seduct i on( whi ch
i t has hel ped, not i nconsi der abl y, t o pl ace
out si de seduct i on
and i mpr i son wi t hi n t he di l emma of sex) . The
most ser i ous
def i -
ci enci es al ways concer n char mand not pl easur e, enchant ment
and not some vi t al or sexual sat i sf act i on, t he ( game' s) r ul e and
not t he ( symbol i c) Law. To be depr i ved of seduct i oni s t he onl y
t r ue f or mof cast r at i on .
For t unat el y, t he l at t er cont i nuousl y f ai l s
. Seduct i on r i ses l i ke
t he phoeni x f r omt he ashes, wi t h t he subj ect bei ng unabl e t o
pr event al l t hi s f r omagai n becomi ng,
as
wi t h
anor exi a or i m-
pot ence, a l ast desper at e at t empt at seduct i on, and t he
deni al
f r om
agai n becomi ng a dar e. Per haps i t i s i n t hese aggr avat ed
f or ms of sexual sel f - deni al
t hat seduct i on expr esses i t sel f i n i t s
pur est f or m, si nce i t st i l l asks t he ot her
t o : "Pr ove t o me t hat
i t ' s not j ust a mat t er of ` t hat : "
SUPERFI CI AL ABYSSES 121
Ther e ar e ot her passi ons opposed
t o
seduct i on,
t hough f or -
t unat el y, t hey
t oo usual l y f ai l when t aken t o ext r emes . The pas-
si on f or col l ect i ng, f or exampl e, t he f et i shi sm
of t he col l ect or .
12 2 SEDUCTI ON
I t s
ant agoni s t i c af f i ni t y wi t h s educt i on i s s t r ong, per haps
be-
caus e
i t
t oo
i nvol ves agamewi t h r ul es , whos e i nt ens i t y i s s uch
t hat i t can s ubs t i t ut e i t s el f f or any ot her game. For
i t
t oo
i nvokes
a pas s i on f or an abs t r act i on t hat
def i es ever y mor al l aw, i n
or der t o mai nt ai n t he r i gi d cer emoni al of
t he cl os ed uni ver s e
wi t hi n whi ch t he s ubj ect
conf i nes hi ms el f .
Thecol l ect or i s
pos s es s i ve. He s eeks excl us i ve r i ght s over t he
deadobj ect
wi t h whi chhe appeas es hi s f et i s hi s t pas s i on. Recl u-
s i on
andconf i nement : beyond al l el s e he i s col l ect i ng hi ms el f
.
Andhe i s not t o be di s t r act ed f r omhi s madnes s ,
s i nce hi s l ove
of
t he obj ect , t he amor ous s t r at agems wi t h
whi ch he s ur r ounds
i t , di s pl ay a hat r ed andf ear of s educt i on.
Andnot j us t t he s educ-
t i venes s of t he obj ect : he i s j us t as
r epel l ed by any s educt i on
t hat mi ght emanat e f r om
hi ms el f .
The Col l ect or , t he f i l mand
novel , i l l us t r at e t hi s del i r i um. The
pr ot agoni s t ,
bei ng unabl e t o s educe or be l oved ( but
does he
want s educt i on
andt he s pont anei t y of l ove? cer t ai nl y
not - he
want s t o f or ce t he s educt i on,
he want s t o f or ce l ove) , ki dnaps
a young womanand
conf i nes her i n t he bas ement of hi s coun-
t r y hous e,
whi chhas been s peci al l y equi pped f or t he pur pos e
.
He i ns t al l s her , car es f or her , s ur r ounds her wi t h
numer ous
cour t es i es , but checks
al l at t empt s at es cape, out s mar t s al l her
r us es , and
wi l l
s par e
her onl y i f s he admi t s her s el f def eat ed and
s educed,
onl y i f , i n t he, end,
She
l oves hi ms pont aneous l y
. I n
t i me,
however , wi t h t hi s f or ced pr omi s cui t y, an
i ndeci s i ve and
t r oubl ed conni vence f or ms bet ween t hem
- and one eveni ng
he- i nvi t es her t o di ne ups t ai r s , wi t h al l pr ecaut i ons
t aken . And
what happens ? She genui nel y
t r i es
t o
s educe hi mand of f er s
her s el f t o hi m. Per haps s he
l oves hi mat t hi s moment , per haps
s he onl y
want s
t o
di s ar mhi m. Bot h no doubt . ' But
what ever
t he cas e, her behavi our pr ovokes a
pani c r eact i on, andhe hi t s
her , i ns ul t s her andt hr ows
her back i n t he cave. . He no
l onger
r es pect s
her , he undr es s es her andt akes por nogr aphi c
pi ct ur es
whi ch he pl aces i n a phot o al bum( he
col l ect s but t er f l i es , and
has s hown her hi s col l ect i on
wi t h pr i de) . She get s s i ck andf al l s
i nt o a s or t of
coma: he no l onger car es f or
her : s he di es and
he bur i es her i n hi s yar d. I n t he l as t s cene,
he i s s een l ooki ng
f or anot her woman t o
ki dnap and s educe at what ever cos t .
Aneed t o be l oved,
but an i nabi l i t y t o be s educed.
When,
SUPERFI CI AL ABYSSES 12
3
f i nal l y, t he woman i s
s educed( i t i s enough t hat s he want s t o
s educe hi m) he cannot accept hi s vi ct or y :
he pr ef er s t o s ee i t
as a s exual
mal edi ct i on andpuni s hes her . I t i s not
a ques t i on
of i mpot ence ( i t i s never
a ques t i on of i mpot ence) . He pr ef er s
t he pos s es s i ve
s pel l cas t by a col l ect i on of
dead obj ect s - t he
dead s ex obj ect bei ng
as beaut i f ul as a but t er f l y wi t h
f l or es -
cent wi ngs - t o t he s educt i on
of a l i vi ng bei ngwhowoul dde-
mandhi s
l ove i n r et ur n . He pr ef er s t he
monot onous f as ci nat i on
of t he
col l ect i on, t he f as ci nat i on wi t h dead
di f f er ences , t hi s ob-
s es s i on wi t h t he
s ame, over t he s educt i on
of
t he
ot her . Thi s
i s why one
s ens es f r omt he begi nni ngt hat
s he wi l l di e, not be-
caus e he i s a danger ous
madman, but becaus ehe i s
l ogi cal , mot i -
vat edby an i r r ever s i bl e
l ogi c. Tos educe wi t hout bei ngs educed
- wi t hout
r ever s i bi l i t y.
I n t hi s
cas e, one of t he t wot er ms mus t
di e, andi t i s al ways
t he s ame s i nce t he
ot her i s al r eady dead. The ot her i s i mmor -
t al andi ndes t r uct i bl e, as i n ever y
per ver s i on . Thi s i s i l l us t r at ed
by t he f act
t hat t he f i l mends wher e i t
began ( andnot wi t hout
humour - pos s es s i ve
peopl e, l i ke per ver s e peopl e, have
a good
s ens e of humour out s i de t he
s pher e of t hei r obs es s i on, i ncl udi ng
i n
t he mi nut i ae of t hei r pr oceedi ngs )
. I n any cas e, t he col l ec-
t or has
encl os edhi ms el f wi t hi n an i ns ol ubl e
l ogi c: al l t he s i gns
of l ove s he can
gi ve hi mwi l l be i nt er pr et edi n
a cont r ar y man-
ner . Andt he
mos t t ender wi l l be t he mos t s us pect .
He
mi ght
per haps be s at i s f i ed wi t h t he
appr opr i at e s i gns , but he cannot
bear t he genui ne ent i cement s
of l ove. Wi t hi n hi s l ogi c, s he has
s i gned her
own deat h war r ant .
Thi s i s not a s t or y
about s adi s m- i t i s t oomovi ng. Who
s ai d
t hat t he bes t pr oof of
l ove i s t or es pect t he ot her andhi s
or
her
des i r es ? Per haps t he pr i ce
pai d by beaut y ands educt i on
i s t obe
conf i ned andput t o deat h, becaus e
t hey ar e t oodan-
ger ous , and
becaus e one wi l l never be abl e t or ender her
what
s he has gi ven . One can t hen onl y
r ewar d her wi t h her deat h.
I n a s ens e, t he gi r l
r ecogni zes t hi s s i nce s he r es ponds
t o t hi s
hi gher s educt i on of f er ed
her i n t he met aphor
of
her
conf i ne-
ment . I t
i s j us t t hat s he cannot r es pond
except by of f er i ng her -
s el f s exual l y - andt hi s
appear s t r i vi al r el at i ve t ot he chal l enge
s heher s el f pos es
by her beaut y. Sexual
pl eas ur e wi l l never abol -
i s h t he needf or s educt i on .
For mer l y al l mor t al s wer e obl i ged
12 4 SEDUCTI ON
t o redeemt hei r l i vi ng
bodi es wi t h a sacri f i ce; t oday
al l seduc-
t i ve f orms, perhaps
al l l i vi ng f orms, havet o redeem
t hemsel ves
by
t hei r deat h . Thi s i s a symbol i c l aw-
whi ch i s, moreover,
not al awbut
an unavoi dabl erul e, t hat i s,
weadhere t o i t wi t hout
grounds,
as somet hi ng arbi t rary yet
obvi ous, andnot i n accord
wi t h some
t ranscendent pri nci pl e.
Shoul d oneconcl ude t hat
every at t empt at seduct i on
ends
wi t h t he murder of t he
obj ect , or t hat i t al ways -
andt hi s i s
a vari at i on on
t he same t heme - i nvol ves an
at t empt t o dri ve
t he
ot her mad?I s t hespel l one
exerci ses over t heot her al ways
harmf ul ? I s oneonl y seeki ng t o
avenget hespel l , t hat t he
ot her
exerci ses over you? I s t he gams
: bei ng pl ayed here a
game of
l i f e or deat h, or at l east cl oser t o
deat h t han t heserene
exchange
of sexual pl easure? To
seduce i mpl i es t hat t he
ot her wi l l pay
f or t hef act of
bei ng seduced, t hat i s, f or havi ng
been t orn f rom
hi m/ hersel f
andmade i nt o an obj ect of
sorcery. Here every-
t hi ng
obeys t he symbol i c rul e of
i mmedi at e apport i onment
whi ch di ct at es t he
sacri f i ci al rel at i ons bet ween men
andt hei r
gods i n cul t ures of
cruel t y, t hat i s, rel at i ons of
recogni t i on and
di spensat i on
of unl i mi t edvi ol ence.
Nowseduct i on bel ongs t o
cul t ures
of cruel t y, andi s t he
onl y ceremoni al f ormof
t he l at -
t er l ef t t o us . I t i s what
draws our at t ent i on t o
deat h, not i n i t s
organi c andacci dent al
f orm, but as somet hi ng
necessary and
ri gorous,
t he i nevi t abl e consequence of t he
game' s rul es. Deat h
remai ns t heul t i mat e
ri sk i n every symbol i c pact , bei t
t hat sup-
posedby a chal l enge, a
secret , a seduct i on or a
perversi on.
Seduct i on andperversi on
mai nt ai n subt l e rel at i ons. Doesn' t
seduct i on i mpl y a f ormof
t hedi versi on of t he
worl d' s order?
Andyet , of
al l t he passi ons, of al l t he
movement s of t hesoul ,
perversi on
i s perhaps t he most opposed
t o seduct i on.
Bot h are cruel and
i ndi f f erent rel at i ve t o sex. .
Seduct i on i s
somet hi ng t hat sei zes hol d of
al l pl easures, af -
f ect s and
represent at i ons, andget s ahol dof
dreams t hemsel ves
i n order
t o rerout et hemf rom
t hei r pri mary course,
t urni ng t hem
i nt o a sharper, more subt l e
game, whosest akes
have nei t her
an endnor an ori gi n,
andconcerns nei t her
dri ves nor desi res.
SUPERFI CI ALABYSSES 12
5
I f sex has a nat ural l aw, a
pl easure pri nci pl e, t hen seduct i on
consi st s i n denyi ng t hat pri nci pl e
andrepl aci ng i t wi t h a rul e,
t he arbi t rary rul e of a game. I n t hi s sense, seduct i on
i s
per-
verse. Thei mmoral i t y
of perversi on, l i ke t hat of seduct i on, does
not come f romabandoni ng
onesel f t o t he j oys of sex i n oppo-
si t i on t o al l moral i t y; i t
resul t s f romsomet hi ng more seri ous
and subt l e, t he abandonment of sex i t sel f
as a ref erent and a
moral i t y, even i n i t s "j oys. "
Pl ay, not sensual pl easure. Thepervert i s col d wheni t comes
t o sex. He t ransmut es
sex andsexual i t y i nt o a ri t ual carri er, a
ri t ual andceremoni al
abst ract i on, aburni ngconcernwi t h si gns
rat her t han an exchange
of desi res. Wi t h t he pervert , al l t he
i nt ensi t y of sex i s di spaced ont o t he si gns andt hei r
sequence,
j ust
as
i n
Art aud t hi s i nt ensi t y i s di spl aced
ont o
t he
t heat eri cal
unf ol di ng( t he savage
i rrupt i onof si gns i nt o real i t y) . Thei r vi o-
l ence i s ceremoni al - and by
no means i nst i nct ual ; onl y t he
ri t e i s vi ol ent , onl y t he rul es
of t he game are vi ol ent , because
t hey put an end t o t he syst emf ormed by real i t y
. Thi s i s t rue
cruel t y, and
has not hi ngt o do wi t h bl oodl ust . Andi n t hi s sense,
perversi on i s
cruel
.
Perversi on' s power of f asci nat i on
comes f roma ri t ual cul t
basedon rul es. Thepervert i s not someone who
t ransgresses
t he l aw, but someonewhoel udes t he l awi n
order t o dedi cat e
hi msel f t o t he rul e, someone, t hen, who evades not
j ust
t he
reproduct i ve f i nal i t y
of
t he
sexual order, but t hat order i t sel f ,
wi t h i t s symbol i c l aw, i n
order t o l i nk upwi t h a regul at ed, ri t u-
al i zed, ceremoni al f orm.
Perversi on supposes a cont ract t hat i s not a cont ract , t hat i s,
a t ransact i on bet ween t wo
f ree agent s, but a pact uphol di ng
t he obsevance of a rul e. As such i t est abl i shes
a duel rel at i on
( l i ke
a chal l enge) t hat excl udes al l t hi rd part i es ( unl i ke a con-
t ract ) and
cannot be di ssoci at ed i nt o i t s i ndi vi dual t erms. I t
i s
t hi s pact , t hi s
duel rel at i on, wi t h i t s webof obl i gat i onsf orei gn
t o t he l aw, whi ch renders perversi on
i nvul nerabl e t o t heext er-
nal worl d - and i mpenet rabl e t o anal ysi s i n
t erms of t he i n-
di vi dual unconsci ous,
andt hus t o psychoanal ysi s . For t he real m
of
t he
rul e i s not part of psychoanal ysi s' s j uri sdi ct i on, whi ch
concerns l awal one. Perversi on,
ont he ot her hand, bel ongs t o
t hi s ot her uni verse.
12 6 SEDUCTI ON
Theduel r el at i on abol i shes t he l awof
exchange. Ther ul es
of
per ver si on abol i sh sex' s nat ur al l aw. Ar bi t r ar y,
l i ke t her ul es
of
a game, t he cont ent s ar e of l i t t l e consequence
; what i s es-
sent i al i s t he i mposi t i on of ar ul e or
si gn, or syst emof si gns,
whi chabst r act s fr omt hesexual
or der ( i t mi ght be, as wi t hKl os-
sowski , coi ns t hat , obl i vi ous t o t he nat ur al l awof exchange,
become
t he r i t ual car r i er of per ver si on) .
Hencet he affi ni t y bet weenconvent s, secr et
soci et i es, Sade' s
chat eaux, andt he uni ver se of per ver si on
. Theoat hs, t her i t es,
t he i nt er mi nabl e Sadi an pr ot ocol s.
What j oi ns t hemt oget her
i s a cul t of t her ul e - and
not i t s absencei n l i cent i ousness. And
wi t hi n t hese r ul es, t he
per ver t or per ver se coupl e can
admi t
soci al
st r ai ns anddi st or t i ons wi t hout di ffi cul t y,
si ncet hel at t er
concer n
t he l awal one( t hus, accor di ngt o Gobl ot ,
wi t hi n t he
t he
bour geoi s cl ass, onecando anyt hi ngpr ovi ded
t hecl ass r ul e,
t hesyst emof ar bi t r ar y si gns t hat
defi nes i t as acast e, r emai ns
unhar med) . Al l t r ansgr essi ons ar e possi bl e, but
not an i nfr ac-
t i on- of t he Rul e.
Thus, i n t hei r common
chal l enge t o t he nat ur al or der ,
per -
ver si on and
seduct i on r esembl e each ot her. But . on numer ous
occasi ons t hey ar e vi ol ent l y opposed, as
i n t he st or y of The
Col l ect or , wher ea
per ver se, possessi ve passi ont r i umphs
over
seduct i on. Or
i n t he st or y of "The Dancer " r el at ed by
Leo
Scheer : Aconcent r at i on
camp guar dfor ces a young
J ewess t o
dancefor
hi mbefor eher deat h. Shedoes so, andas
her danc-
i ngl eaves
hi mspel l bound, she i s abl e t o appr oach
hi m, st eal
hi s weapon andki l l hi m. Of t he t wo uni ver ses,
t hat of t he SS,
exempl i fyi nga
st agger i ng, per ver se power , a power of fasci na-
t i on ( t hat vest ed i n t he
sover ei gnt y of t he per son who
hol ds
al i fe i n
hi s hands) , andt hat of t hegi r l , exempl i fyi ng
seduct i on
by
t hedance, t he l at t er t r i umphs. Seduct i on
i nvades t heor der
of fasci nat i on andt ur ns
i t upsi de down ( t hough most of
t he
t i me i t i s
not even gi ven t he chance t o ent er )
. I t ; i s cl ear her e
t hat t het wol ogi cs excl udeeachot her ,
andt hat eachr epr esent s
a mor t al danger for t he ot her.
But i sn' t t her e a
cont i nuous cycl e of r ever si on; bet ween t he
t wo? The
col l ect or ' s passi on ends up, aft er
al l , exer ci si ng a ki nd
of
seduct i on over t he gi r l ( or i s i t
onl y fasci nat i on? But , once
agai n, wher e' s t he di ffer ence?) .
A cer t ai n ver t i go' r esul t s fr om
SUPERFI CI AL ABYSSES 12
7
her desper at e at t empt t o ci r cumscr i be a f or ecl osed uni ver se,
wher eby, at t he same t i me, she di scl oses a si nk hol e or voi d
t hat exer ci ses, by i t s
ant i - seduct i on, a newf or mof at t r act i on.
Acer t ai n ki nd of seduct i on i s per ver se: hyst er i a, si nce i t uses
seduct i on t o def end i t sel f f r omseduct i on. But a cer t ai n per -
ver si on i s
seduct i ve, si nce i t uses t he det our of per ver si on t o
seduce.
Wi t h hyst er i a seduct i on
becomes obscene. But i n cer t ai n
f or ms of por nogr aphy, obsceni t yagai n
becomes seduct i ve. Vi o-
l ence can
seduce, andeven r ape. Theodi ous andt he abj ect can
seduce. Wher e
does t he det our of seduct i on st op? Wher edoes
t he cycl e of r ever si on end,
and shoul d i t be st opped?
However , a pr of ound di f f er ence r emai ns
:
t he
per ver t i s r adi -
cal l y suspi ci ous of seduct i on and t r i es
t o
codi f y i t .
He
t r i es
t o
f i x i t s
r ul es, f or mal i ze t hemi n a t ext , expr ess t hemi n a pact .
I n so doi ng, he br eaks
a basi c r ul e, t hat of t he secr et . I nst ead
of uphol di ng seduct i on' s
suppl e cer emoni al , t he per ver t want s
a f i xed cer emoni al , a f i xed
duel
.
By maki ng t he r ul e i nt o some-
t hi ng sacr ed andobscene, by desi gnat i ng i t as an end, t hat i s
t o
say,
as
a
l aw, he t r aces an uncompr omi si ng def ense: f or i t
i s t he t heat er of t he r ul e
t hat gai ns ascendancy, as i n hyst er i a
t he t heat er of t he body. Mor e gener al l y,
al l t he per ver se f or ms
of seduct i on have t he
f ol l owi ng i n common: t hey bet r ay i t s
secr et and t he f undament al
r ul e, whi ch i s t hat t he r ul e r emai n
unspoken .
I n t hi s sense, t he seducer hi msel f i s per ver se. For he t oo
def l ect s seduct i on
f r omi t s r ul e of secr ecy, anddoes so i nt en-
t i onal l y. Hei s t o seduct i on what t he
cheat er i s t o t he game. I f
t he pur pose of t he game i s
t o
wi n, t hen
t he cheat er i s t he onl y
t r ue pl ayer . I f seduct i on had an obj ect i ve, t hen t he
seducer
woul d be i t s i deal
f i gur e. But nei t her seduct i on nor t he game
can be t hus char act er i zed,
andt her e i s a good chance t hat what
det er mi nes t he cheat er ' s act i ons, hi s
cyni cal st r at agems t o wi n
at al l cost s, i s hi s hat r ed of t he game, hi s r ej ect i on of t he seduc-
t i on pr oper t o t he game
- j ust as t her e i s a good chance t hat
t he seducer ' s behavi our i s det er mi ned by hi s f ear
of
bei ng
seduced, and
of
havi ng
t o f ace t he r i sk of a chal l enge t o hi s
own
t r ut h. Thi s i s what l eads hi mt o hi s f i r st sexual
conquest ,
andt hen t o t he count l ess
conquest s wher ehe can f et i shi ze hi s
12 8 SEDUCTI ON
st r at egy.
The per ver t al ways get s i nvol ved i n a mani acal
uni ver se of
mast er y andt he
l aw. He seeks mast er y over t he f et i shi zed r ul e
andabsol ut e
r i t ual ci r cumscr i pt i on. The l at t er i s
nol onger pl ay-
f ul . I t no l onger moves . I t i s dead, and
can no l ong put any-
t hi ng i nt o pl ay except i t s
owndeat h. Fet i shi smi s t he seduct i on
of
deat h, i ncl udi ng t he deat h of t he
r ul e i n per ver si on.
Per ver si on i s a f r ozen chal l enge; seduct i on,
a l i vi ng chal l enge.
Seduct i on i s
shi f t i ng and ephemer al ; per ver si on,
monot onous
andi nt er mi nabl e. Per ver si oni s
t heat r i cal andcompl i ci t ; seduc-
t i on, secr et and
r ever si bl e.
Syst ems obsessed wi t h t hei r
syst emat i ci t y ar e f asci nat i ng: t hey
t une i n deat has
an ener gy of f asci nat i on. Thus
t he col l ect or ' s
passi on t r i es t o ci r cumscr i be
andi mmobi l i ze seduct i on
bef or e
t r ansf or mi ng i t i nt o a deat hener gy. I t i s t hen
t hef l awof such
syst ems t hat becomes
seduct i ve. Ter r or i s di ssi pat ed by
i r ony.
Or el se
seduct i on l i es i n wai t f or syst ems
at t hei r poi nt of i ner -
t i a, t hat poi nt at
whi cht hey st op, wher e t her e i s no
l onger any
beyond, nor any possi bl e r epr esent at i on
- a poi nt of no r et ur n
wher e t he
t r aj ect or i es sl owdown and
t he obj ect i s absor bed
by i t s own f or ce of r esi st ance
and densi t y. What happens
i n
t he envi r ons of
t hi s poi nt of i ner t i a? The obj ect
i s di st or t edl i ke
t he sun r ef r act ed by t he di f f er ent l ayer s
of t he hor i zon; cr ushed
by i t s own mass,
i t no l onger obeys i t s own l aws .
We know
al most not hi ng about such
pr ocesses of i ner t i a, except t hat
at
t he edge of
t hi s bl ack hol e t he poi nt of no
r et ur n becomes a
poi nt of t ot al r ever si bi l i t y, a cat ast r ophi c
poi nt wher e deat hi s
pul l ed
t i ght t o be r el eased i n a newseduct i on
ef f ect .
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NY
OF
SEDUCTI ON
V
THEPASSI ONFORRULES
Nopl ayer must begreater than the
game i tsel f
Rol l erbal l
TheDi ary of the Seducer cl ai ms that i n seducti on the sub-
j ect i s never the master of hi s master
pl an, andevenwhenthe
l atter i s depl oyed i n f ul l consci ousness, i t sti l l submi ts to
the
rul es of a game that goes beyondi t . Ari tual
dramaturgy be-
yond
thel aw, seducti oni s bothgameandf ate, andas suchpush-
es theprotagoni sts towardsthei r i nevi tabl e endwi thout
therul e
bei ngbroken- f or i t i s therul e that bi nds them. Andtherul e' s
basi c di ctumi s that the game conti nuewhatever
the cost, be
i t death i tsel f
. There
i s,
then, a sort of passi on that bi nds the
pl ayers
to
therul e that ti es themtogether - wi thout whi ch the
game woul dnot be possi bl e.
Ordi nari l y wel i ve wi thi n the real mof the Law, even when
f antasi zi ng i ts abol i ti on. Beyondthe l awwesee
onl y i ts trans-
gressi on or
thel i f ti ng of aprohi bi ti on. For the di scourseof l aw
andi nterdi cti on determi nes thei nverse
di scourseof transgres-
si on
andl i berati on. However, i t i s not the absenceof the l aw
that i s opposed to the l aw, but the
Rul e
.
TheRul epl ays onani mmanent sequence of arbi trary si gns,
whi l e the Lawi s basedonatranscendent sequence of
neces-
sary si gns. Theoneconcerns cycl es, therecurrenceof conven-
ti onal procedures,
whi l e
the other
i s an i nstance basedi n an
i rreversi bl e conti nui ty. Theonei nvol ves obl i gati ons, theother
constrai nts andprohi bi ti ons. BecausetheLawestabl i shes al i ne,
i t canandmust be transgressed. Bycontrast,
i t makes
no
sense
13
2 SEDUCTION
t o " t r ansgr ess" agame' s r ul es ; wi t hi n acycl e' s r ecur r ence, t her e
i s no l i ne one can j ump( i nst ead, one si mpl y l eaves t he game) .
Because t he Law-
whet her t hat of t he si gni f i er , cast r at i on, or
a soci al i nt er di ct i on -
cl ai ms t o be t he di scur si ve si gn of a l egal
i nst ance and hi dden t r ut h, i t
r esul t s
i n
r epr essi on and
pr ohi bi -
t i ons, and t hus t he di vi si on i nt o
amani f est and al at ent di scour se.
Gi ven t hat t he r ul e i s convent i onal and ar bi t r ar y, and has no
hi dden t r ut h, i t knows nei t her r epr essi on nor t he di st i nct i on
bet ween t he mani f est and t he l at ent . It does not car r y any mean-
i ng, i t does not l ead anywher e; by cont r ast , t he Lawhas a de-
t er mi nat e f i nal i t y. The endl ess, r ever si bl e cycl e of t he Rul e i s
opposed
t o
t he l i near , f i nal i zed
. pr ogr essi on of t he Law.
Si gns do not have t he same st at us i n t he one as i n t he ot her .
The Lawi s par t of t he wor l d of r epr esent at i on, and i s t her e-
f or e subj ect t o i nt er pr et at i on or deci pher ment . It i nvol ves
decr ees or st at ement s, and i s not i ndi f f er ent t o t he subj ect . It
i s a t ext , and f al l s under t he i nf l uence of meani ng and r ef er en-
t i al i t y. By cont r ast , t he
Rul e has no subj ect , and t he f or mof
i t s ut t er ance i s of l i t t l e consequence; one does not deci pher
t he r ul es, nor der i ve pl easur e f r omt hei r compr ehensi on- onl y
t hei r obser vance mat t er s, and t he r esul t i ng gi ddi ness . Thi s al so
di st i ngui shes t he
passi on
f or t he
game' s r i t ual s and i nt ensi t y
f r om
t he pl easur e t hat at t aches
t o obedi ence t o t he
Law,
or i t s t r ans-
gr essi on.
In or der t o under st and t he i nt ensi t y of r i t ual f or ms, one must
r i d onesel f of t he i dea t hat al l happi ness der i ves f r omnat ur e,
and al l pl easur e f r omt he sat i sf act i on of a desi r e. On t he con-
t r ar y, games, t he spher e
of
pl ay, r eveal a passi on f or r ul es, agi d-
di ness bor n of r ul es, and a f or ce t hat comes f r omcer emony,
and not desi r e.
Does t he del i ght one exper i ences i n a game come f r oma
dr eam-l i ke si t uat i on, wher e one moves f r ee of r eal i t y, but whi ch
one can qui t at any t i me? Not at al l . Games, unl i ke dr eams, ar e
subj ect t o r ul es, and one j ust doesn' t l eave a game. Games cr e-
at e obl i gat i ons l i ke t hose f ound i n chal l enges . To l eave a game
i s unspor t smanl i ke.
And
t he f act t hat one cannot r ef use t o pl ay
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NY
OF
SEDUCTI ON
13 3
agamef romwi t hi n - a f act t hat expl ai ns i t s enchant ment and
di f f erent i at es i t f rom" real i t y" - creat es asymbol i c pact whi ch
compel s onet o observet herul es wi t hout reserve, andt o pur-
suet hegamet o t heend, as
onepursues achal l enge t o t heend.
Theorder
i nst i t ut edby t hegame, bei ngconvent i onal , i s i n-
commensurabl ewi t h t henecessary order of t he real worl d: i t
i s nei t her et hi cal nor psychol ogi cal , andi t s accept ance( t heac-
cept anceof t herul es) i mpl i es nei t her resi gnat i onnor const rai nt .
As such, t herei s nof reedomi n our moral andi ndi vi dual sense
of t hat t erm, i n games. They arenot t o beequat ed
wi t h l i bert y.
Games do not obey t hedi al ect i c of f reewi l l , t hat hypot het i cal
di al ect i c of t he sphereof t hereal andt he l aw. To ent er i nt o
a
gamei s t o ent er asyst emof ri t ual obl i gat i ons.
I t s i nt ensi t y der-
i ves f romi t s i ni t i at ory f orm- not f romour l i bert y, as wewoul d
l i ke t o bel i eve, f ol l owi ng an i deol ogy t hat sees onl y a
si ngl e,
" nat ural " source of happi ness and
pl easure.
Thegame' s sol e
pri nci pl e,
t hough
i t
i s
never posedas uni ver-
sal , i s t hat by choosi ngt he rul e one i s del i veredf romt he l aw.
Wi t hout apsychol ogi cal or met aphysi cal f oundat i on,
t herul e
has nogroundi ngi n bel i ef . Onenei t her bel i eves
nor di sbel i eves
a rul e- oneobserves i t . Thedi f f use
sphere of bel i ef , t heneed
f or credi bi l i t y t hat encompasses t he real , i s di ssol ved i n t he
game. Hencet hei r i mmoral i t y : t oproceedwi t hout
bel i evi ng i n
i t , t o sanct i on adi rect f asci nat i on wi t h convent i onal
si gns and
groundl ess
rul es
.
Debt s t ooare annul ed. I n games t herei s not hi ngt o redeem,
noaccount s t o set t l e wi t h t hepast . For t hi s reason, games ap-
pear unawareof t he di al ect i c of t hepossi bl e and
i mpossi bl e,
t herebei ngnoaccount s t o set t l e
wi t h
t he
f ut ure. Therei s not h-
i ng" possi bl e, " si nceeveryt hi ngi s pl ayed, everyt hi ngdeci ded,
wi t hout hopeandwi t hout al t ernat i ves,
accordi ng
t o
arel ent -
l ess, unmedi at edl ogi c. That i s why t herei s nol aught er around
t hepoker t abl e, , f or i t s l ogi c i s cool ( but not casual ) ; and t he
gamebei ngwi t hout hope, i s never obsceneand
never l ends
i t sel f t o l aught er
.
Games areseri ous,
moreseri ous t han l i f e, as
seen i n t heparadoxi cal f act t hat i n agamel i ves canbeat st ake.
Games,
t heref ore, are
no
morebased
on
t hepl easurepri nci -
pl et han t hereal i t y pri nci pl e. _They supposet he
enchant ment
of t herul e, andt hesphere t hat t he rul edescri bes .
Andt he l at -
13
4 SEDUCTI ON
t er i s not as pher e of i l l us i on or di ver s i on, but i nvol ves anot her
l ogi c, an ar t i f i ci al , i ni t i at or y l ogi c
wher ei n
t he nat ur al det er -
mi nant s of l i f e and deat h have beenabol i s hed.
Thi s cons t i t ut es
t he s peci f i ci t y
of
games and t hei r s t akes . I t makes nos ens e t o
r educe t hem
t o
an economi c
l ogi c
t hat woul d s peak
of
cons -
ci ous i nves t ment , or t o a l ogi c of des i r e t hat woul d s peak of
uncons ci ous mot i ves . Cons ci ous or uncons ci ous - t hi s dou-
bl e det er mi nat i onmay be val i d f or t he s pher e of . meani ng and
l aw,
but not
f or
r ul es and games .
The Lawdes cr i bes a pot ent i al l y uni ver s al s ys t emof mean-
i ng and val ue. I t ai ms at obj ect i ve r ecogni t i on. Ont he bas i s of
i t s under l yi ng t r ans cendence, t he Lawcons t i t ut es i t s el f i nt o an
i ns t ance f or t he t ot al i zat i on of t he r eal , wi t h al l t he r evol ut i ons
and t r ans gr es s i ons cl ear i ng t he way t o t he l aw' s uni ver s al i za-
t i on. By cont r as t , t he Rul e i s i mmanent t o a l i mi t ed and r es -
t r i ct ed s ys t em,
whi ch
i t des cr i bes
wi t hout t r ans cendi ng, and
wi t hi n
whi ch
i t i s i mmut abl e. The r ul e does not as pi r e t o
uni ver -
s al i t y and, s t r i ct l y s peaki ng, i t l acks al l ext er i or i t y s i nce i t does
not i ns t i t ut e ani nt er nal s ci s s i on. I t i s t he Law' s t r ans cendence
t hat es t abl i s hes t he i r r ever s i bi l i t y of meani ng and val ue.
And
i t i s t he r ul e' s i mmanence, i t s ar bi t r ar y, ci r cums cr i pt i ve char ac-
t er , t hat l eads , i n i t s owns pher e, t o t he r ever s i bi l i t y of meani ng
and t he r ever s i on of t he Law.
The i ns cr i pt i on of r ul es i n a s pher e wi t hout a beyond ( i t ' s
no
l onger
auni ver s e, s i nce
i t
no
l onger as pi r es
t o
uni ver s al i t y)
i s as di f f i cul t
t o
under s t and as t he i dea
of
a f i ni t e uni ver s e. A
boundar y wi t hout s omet hi ng beyond i t i s uni magi nabl e. For
us t he f i ni t e i s al ways s et agai ns t t he i nf i ni t e ; but t he s pher e
of
games i s nei t her f i ni t e nor i nf i ni t e - t r ans f i ni t e per haps . I t
has i t s ownf i ni t e cont our s , wi t h whi ch i t r es i s t s t he i nf i ni t y
of anal yt i c s pace. Tor ei nvent ar ul e i s t o r es i s t
t he l i near i nf i ni -
t ude of anal yt i c s pace i n or der t o r ecover a r ever s i bl e s pace
.
For ar ul e has i t s ownr evol ut i on, i n t he l i t er al s ens e of t he wor d:
t he convect i on t owar ds a cent r al poi nt and t he cycl e' s r ever -
s i on ( t hi s i s howr i t ual s f unct i on. wi t hi n a cycl i cal wor l d) ,
i n-
dependent of ever y l ogi c of caus e and
ef f ect , or i gi n and end.
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON 13 5
Thi s
marks t he end
of
t he cent ri f ugal di mensi on: t he sud-
den, i nt ensi ve gravi t at i on
of
space andabol i t i onof t i me, whi ch
i mpl odes i n af l ash t o become so dense t hat i t escapes t he t radi -
t i onal l aws of physi cs - i t s ent i re course
spi ral i ng i nwards
t owards
t he
cent er
where
t he densi t y i s great est .
Thi s
i s
t he
game' s f asci nat i on, t he cryst al l i ne passi ont hat erases memory
t races andf orf ei t s meani ng. Al l passi oncomes cl ose, i ni t s f orm,
t o t he l at t er, but t he passi on f or gami ng i s t he purest .
The best anal ogy woul dbe wi t h pri mi t i ve cul t ures, whi ch
have beendescri bedas cl osedi n ont hemsel ves, i ncapabl e of
concei vi ng of t he rest of t he worl d. But i n our soci et y t he rest
of t he worl dexi st s onl y f or us . Thei r cl osure, f ar f rombei ng
rest ri ct i ve, deri ves f romadi f f erent l ogi c whi ch, because we are
t rapped
wi t hi n t he i magi nary
of
t he uni versal , canno l onger
concei ve of except pej orat i vel y, as l i mi t ed.
The symbol i c sphere of t hese cul t ures knows no remai ns.
I ngames t oo, unl i ke t he real , t here i s not hi ng l ef t over. Because
t hey have nei t her
hi st ory, memory nor i nt ernal accumul at i on
( t he st akes are const ant l y bei ng consumedandreversed, i t be-
i ng anunspokenrul e t hat , whi l e t he game i s i n progress, one
cannot wi t hdrawanyt hi ng i n t he f ormof a gai n or "surpl us
val ue") , t hey l eave no resi due
wi t hi n. Nor i s t here anyt hi ng t hat
remai ns out si de t he game.
The "remai nder"
supposes
anun-
sol ved equat i on, an unreal i zed dest i ny, somet hi ng subt ract ed
or repressed. But a game' s equat i on i s al ways perf ect l y
bal anced, andi t s dest i ny al ways f ul f i l l ed, wi t hout l eavi ng any
t races ( somet hi ng t hat di st i ngui shes i t f romt he unconsci ous) .
The t heory of t he unconsci ous supposes t hat
cert ai naf f ect s,
scenes or
si gni f i ers
canno
l onger
be put
i nt o pl ay, t hat t hey
are f orecl osed, out si de- t he- game. The game, ont he ot her hand,
i s basedont he hypot hesi s t hat everyt hi ng canbe put i nt o pl ay.
Ot herwi se i t woul dhave
t o be admi t t ed
t hat one has al ways
al ready l ost , t hat one i s pl ayi ng i norder t o al ways l ose. I nt he
game, however, no obj ect s are wast ed. There i s not hi ng i rredu-
ci bl e t o t he game
whi ch
precedes t he game - andi n
part i cul ar,
no previ ous debt s. I f wi t hi ngames, somet hi ng i s exorci sed, i t
i s not some debt cont ract ed vi s- a- vi s t he l aw. I t i s t he Lawi t -
sel f t hat i s exorci sedas anunf orgi vabl e cri me, as di scri mi na-
t ory, ani rreconci l abl e t ranscendence wi t hi n t he real . Andi t s
13 6
SEDUCTI ON
t r ansgr essi on onl y
adds
a newcr i me
t o
t hat
of t he
l aw- and
newdebt s and gr i ef s .
The Lawest abl i shes equal i t y as a pr i nci pl e: i n pr i nci pl e ever y-
one i s equal bef or e t he Law. By cont r ast , t her e i s no equal i t y
bef or e t he r ul e; f or t he l at t er has no j ur i sdi ct i on over pr i nci -
pl es . Mor eover , i n or der f or ever yone t o be equal t hey must
be separ at ed. The
pl ayer s,
however ,
ar e
not separ at e
or
i ndi vi du-
al i zed: t hey ar e i nst i t ut ed i n a
dual
andagoni st i c r el at i on. They
ar e not even sol i dar y - sol i dar i t y supposi ng a f or mal concep-
t i on
of
t he
soci al , t he
mor al
i deal of a gr oup i n compet i t i on
.
The pl ayer s ar e t i ed
t o
each ot her ; t hei r par i t y ent ai l s an obl i -
gat i on t hat does not r equi r e sol i dar i t y, at l east not as somet hi ng
t hat needs t o be concept ual i zed or i nt er i or i zed.
The r ul e has no needof a f or mal st r uct ur e or super st r uct ur e
- whet her mor al or psychol ogi cal - t o f unct i on. Pr eci sel y be-
cause r ul es ar e ar bi t r ar y and ungr ounded, because t hey have
no r ef er ent s, t hey do not r equi r e: a consensus, nor anycol l ec-
t i ve wi l l or t r ut h. They exi st , t hat ' s al l . Andt heyexi st onl ywhen
shar ed, whi l e t he Lawf l oat s above scat t er ed i ndi vi dual s .
Thei r
l ogi c i s cl ear l y i l l ust r at ed by what Gobl ot cl ai ms, i n
La Bar r i er e
et l e
Ni veau,
i s
t he
cul t ur al r ul e of cast es
( and
of
t he bour geoi s cl ass as wel l ) :
1 . Tot al par i t y amongst t he pl ayer s wi t hi n t he space
cr eat ed by t he Rul e: t hi s i s t he " l evel . "
2 . Beyond t he Rul e, t he f or ecl osi ng
of
t he r est of t he
wor l d
:
t hi s
i s t he " bar r i er
. "
Wi t hi n i t s owndomai n,
ext r at er r i t or i al i t y,
i n
t he
obl i gat i ons
andpr i vi l eges, absol ut e r eci pr oci t y: games r est or e t hi s l ogi c i n
i t s pur e st at e. The agoni st i c r el at i on bet ween t he pl ayer s can
never j eopar di ze t hei r r eci pr ocal , , pr i vi l eged st at us . The game
mi ght come t o naught and i t s st akes l ost - st i l l t he r eci pr ocal
enchant ment , andt he ar bi t r ar i ness of t he Rul e at i t s sour ce, must
be pr eser ved.
Thi s i s whyduel r el at i ons can excl ude al l ef f or t ,
mer i t
or
per -
sonal qual i t i es ( above
al l , i n
t he pur e f or mof games of chance) .
Per sonal t r ai t s ar e admi t t ed onl y as a ki nd of f avour or ent i ce-
ment , andhave no psychol ogi cal equi val ent s . Thi s i s howgames
go - as demanded by t he di vi ne t r anspar ency of t he Rul e.
I n a
f i ni t e
space, one i s
del i ver ed f r omt he uni ver sal - wi t h
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON
13
7
ani mmedi at e, duel par i t y, one i s del i ver ed f r omequal i t y - wi t h
obl i gat i ons one i s del i ver ed f r omf r eedom- i n t he ar bi t r ar i -
nes s of t he Rul e and i t s cer emoni al , one i s del i ver ed
f r omt he
l aw. Thus t he enchant ment of games .
I n
a s ens e, we ar e mor e equal
wi t hi n cer emoni al s t han be-
f or e t he Law( per haps t hi s
account s
f or
t he
i ns i s t ence
on po-
l i t enes s , oncer emoni al conf or mi t y, par t i cul ar l y amongs t t he l es s
cul t i vat ed cl as s es ; i t bei ng eas i er t o s har e convent i onal s i gns
t hans i gns l adenwi t h meani ng or s i gns of " i nt el l i gence" ) . We
al s o have mor e f r eedomi n games t han anywher e el s e, f or we
do not have t o i nt er nal i ze t he r ul es ; we owe t he r ul es onl y a
t oken f i del i t y, and do not f eel we have t o t r ans gr es s t hem, as
i s t he cas e wi t h t he l aw. Wi t h t he r ul e we ar e f r ee of t he Law
- and
of
al l t he
cons t r ai nt s of choi ce, f r eedom, r es pons i bi l i t y
and meani ng! The
t er r or i s mof meani ng canonl y be di s s i pat -
ed by ar bi t r ar y s i gns .
However , make nomi s t ake about i t : convent i onal or r i t ual
s i gns
ar e bi ndi ng. Onei s not f r ee t o s i gni f y i n i s ol at i on whi l e
s t i l l mai nt ai ni ng a
coher ent r el at i on wi t h r eal i t y or t r ut h. The
f r eedomdemanded by moder ns i gns , l i ke moder ni ndi vi dual s ,
t o ar t i cul at e t hems el ves accor di ngt o t hei r af f ect s or des i r e ( f or
meani ng) does not exi s t f or convent i onal s i gns
.
The
l at t er can-
not s et of f ai ml es s l y, wi t h t hei r ownr ef er ent or s cr ap of mean-
i ng as bal l as t . Each s i gn i s t i ed t o ot her s , not wi t hi n t he abs t r act
s t r uct ur e of l anguage, but wi t hi n t he
s ens el es s
unf ol di ng
of a
cer emoni al ; t hey echo each ot her and r edupl i cat e t hems el ves
i n ot her , equal l y ar bi t r ar y s i gns .
The
r i t ual
s i gn
i s not ar epr es ent at i ve s i gn. I t i s not , t her e-
f or e, s omet hi ng wor t hunder s t andi ng. I ns t ead, i t del i ver s us f r om
meani ng. Thi s i s why we ar e s o commi t t ed
t o
s uch s i gns
.
The
gami ng debt i s a debt of honour ; ever yt hi ng concer ni ng t he
game i s s acr ed becaus e convent i onal .
I nALover ' s
Di s cour s e Rol and Bar t hes j us t i f i es hi s choi ce of
13 8 SEDUCTI ON
an al phabet i cal or der i n t he f ol l owi ng t er ms
: " t o di scour age t he
t empt at i onof meani ng, i t was necessar y
t o choose, an absol ut el y
i nsi gni f i cant or der , " t hat i s t o say, nei t her an i nt ended
or der ,
nor
one of pur e chance, but a per f ect l y convent i onal or der . For
" we must not , "
he wr i t es, ci t i ng a mat hemat i ci an, " under est i -
mat e t he power
of chance t o engender monst er s, " t hat i s, l ogi -
cal sequences - meani ng.
I n ot her wor ds, t ot al
l i ber t y, or t ot al i ndet er mi nacy ar e not
opposed t o meani ng. One can
pr oduce
meani ng
si mpl y by pl ay-
i ng wi t h chance or di sor der . Newdi agonal s
of
meani ng, new
sequences can be engender ed f r omt he unt amed f l ood t i des
of desi r e - as i n cer t ai n moder n phi l osophi es, t he mol ecul ar
or
i nt ensi ve
phi l osophi es, whi ch cl ai mt o under mi ne meani ng
by
di f f r act i on,
hook- ups andt he Br owni anmovement s of desi r e.
As
wi t h
chance, we must not under est i mat e t he power of desi r e
t o
engender ( l ogi cal )
monst er s.
One does not
escape
meani ng
by di ssoci at i on, di sconnec-
t i on or det er r i t or i al i zat i on . One escapes meani ngby r epl aci ng
i t wi t h a
mor e
r adi cal si mul acr um,
a
st i l l
mor e
convent i onal
or der - l i ke
t he al phabet i cal or der f or Bar t hes, or t he r ul es of
a game, or t he i nnumer abl e r i t ual s
of ever yday
l i f e whi ch
f r us-
t r at e bot h t he ( pol i t i cal , hi st or i cal or soci al ) or der of meani ng
and t he di sor der ( chance) whi ch one woul d i mpose on t hem.
I ndet er mi nacy,
di ssoci at i on or pr ol i f er at i on i n t he f or mof
a st ar or r hi zome onl y gener al i ze meani ng' s
spher e of
i nf l uence
t o t he ent i r e spher e of non- sense. That i s, t hey mer el y gener al -
i ze meani ng' s pur e f or m, an abst r act f i nal i t y wi t h nei t her a de-
t er mi nat e end nor cont ent s . Onl y r i t ual s abol i sh meani ng.
Thi s i s why t her e ar e no " r i t ual s of t r ansgr essi on. " The ver y
expr essi on makes no sense, especi al l y whenappl i ed t o t he f es-
t i val . The l at t er has pr oved ver y pr obl emat i c f oi our r evol u-
t i onar i es: i s t he f est i val a t r ansgr essi on or r egener at i on of t he
Law? Anabsur d quest i on, f or r i t ual s, i ncl udi ng t he r i t ual l i t ur -
gy of
t he f est i val , bel ong t o nei t her t he
domai n of
t he Law, nor
i t s t r ansgr essi on, but t o t hat of t he Rul e.
The same appl i es t o magi c. We ar e const ant l y i nt er pr et i ng
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON 13 9
what
f al l s
under
the rul e i n the terms
of
thel aw. Thus , magi c
i s s eenas an
attempt
to outwi t thel aws of
producti onandhard
work
. Pri mi ti ves have the s ame " uti l i tari an" ends as us , but i n
order to real i ze them, they woul drather avoi d rati onal exer-
ti on. Magi c, however, i s s omethi ng very di f f erent : i t i s a ri tual
f or the mai ntenance of the worl das a pl ay of anal ogi cal rel a-
ti ons , acycl i cal progres s i onwhereeverythi ngi s l i nked together
by
thei r s i gns . Ani mmens egame, rul e governs magi c, andthe
bas i c probl emi s to ens ure, by means of ri tual , that everythi ng
conti nues to pl ay thus , by anal ogi cal conti gui ty andcreepi ng
s educti on. I t has nothi ng to do wi th l i near rel ati ons of caus e
andef f ect . Thel atter - our way of unders tandi ng the worl d
- i s obj ecti ve but uns ettl ed. For i t has broken the rul e.
Magi c does not s eek to f ool
the
l aw. I t does n' t cheat -
and
to j udge i t as s uch i s abs urd. One mi ght j us t as wel l di s pute
the arbi trari nes s of agame' s rul es i n terms of the " obj ecti ve"
gi vens of nature.
Thes ames i mpl i s ti c andobj ecti vi s ti c mi s unders tandi ng oc-
curs
wi th gambl i ng.
Here
the obj ecti ve woul dbe economi c:
to become ri ch wi thout exerti ng ones el f . The s ameattempt to
s ki p s teps as i n magi c. Thes ametrans gres s i onof the
pri nci pl e
of
equi val ence and hard work whi chrul es the " real " worl d.
Thecl ai m, then, i s that gambl i ng' s truth
i s
to bef oundi n the
tri cks i t pl ays on val ue.
But onei s f orgetti ng here thegame' s power of s educti on. Not
j us t thepower oneexperi ences whenmomentari l y carri edaway,
but the power
to
trans mute
val ues
that
comes
wi th the rul e.
I ngambl i ng money i s s educed, def l ected f romi ts truth. Hav-
i ngbeencut of f f romthe l awof equi val ences ( i t " burns " ) and
thel awof
repres entati on,
money
i s
no
l onger as i gn
or
repres en-
tati on once trans f ormed i nto as take. Andas takei s not s ome-
thi ng one i nves ts . As an i nves tment money takes the f ormof
capi tal , but as as take i t appears i n thef ormof achal l enge. Pl ac-
i ngabet has as l i ttl e to do wi thpl aci ngani nves tment, as l i bi di -
nal i nves tment wi th the s takes of s educti on.
I nves tments andcounter- i nves tments - they bel ong
to
the
ps ychi c economy of dri ves and s ex. Games , s takes and
chal l enges arethef i gures
of
pas s i onands educti on. Moregener-
al l y, al l the s tuf f of money, l anguage, s ex andaf f ect undergo
14
0 SEDUCTION
acompl et e change of meani ngdependi ngonwhet her t hey are
mobi l i zedas ani nves t ment or t rans pos ed i nt o as t ake. Thet wo
moment s are i rreduci bl e.
If games hada f i nal i t y, t he onl y t rue pl ayer woul d be t he
cheat er. Now, i f acert ai n amount of pres t i ge canbe acqui red
by t rans gres s i ngt he l aw, t here i s no pres t i ge i ncheat i ng or t rans -
gres s i ng arul e. Int rut h, t he cheat er cannot t rans gres s
t he rul es
s i nce t he game, not bei ng a s ys t emof i nt erdi ct i ons , does
not
have l i nes one can cros s . Onedoes
not "t rangres s " arul e, one
f ai l s
t o
obs erve i t . Andnon- obs ervance does not l ead t o as t at e
of
t rans gres s i on; i t bri ngs one back under t he j uri s di ct i on of
t he l aw.
Thi s i s t he cas e wi t h t he cheat er, whodeni es or, evenbet t er,
prof anes t he game' s ceremoni al convent i ons
f or economi c rea-
s ons ( or ps ychol ogi cal reas ons , i f he cheat s s i mpl y f or t he pl eas -
ureof wi nni ng) , andt hereby res t ores t he l aws of t he real worl d.
By i nt roduci ngf act ors of ani ndi vi dual nat ure, he des t roys t he
game' s "duel " enchant ment . If cheat i ng was once puni s hedby
deat handi s s t i l l condemned
s t rongl y,
i t i s becaus e,
as acri me,
i t res embl es i nces t : cul t ural rul es bei ngbrokent o t he s ol e prof i t
of
t he "l aws
of
nat ure. "
For t he cheat er, t here i s nol onger anyt hi ngat s t ake. He con-
f us es t hes t akes wi t hs urpl us - val ue. But t he s t akes are what ena-
bl es one t o pl ay, andt o t urn t hemi nt o t he game' s purpos e i s
t o abus e one' s pos i t i on of t rus t .
Inas i mi l ar manner, t he rul es
es t abl i s h t he very pos s i bi l i t y of pl ayi ng, t he s pace wi t hi nwhi ch
t he s i des conf ront each ot her. To t reat t he rul es as ends ( or as
l aws or t rut hs ) i s t o des t roy bot h t he game andi t s s t akes . The
rul es have no aut onomy, t hat qual i t y whi ch, accordi ngt o Marx,
charact eri zes commodi t i es , bot h i ndi vi dual l y and i n general ,
andi s
t he
s acros anct
val ue
of
t he economi c domai n. Thecheat er
t oo i s aut onomous : he es t abl i s hes a l aw, hi s ownl aw, agai ns t
t he arbi t rary ri t ual s of t he rul e - t hi s i s what di s qual i f i es
hi m
.
Andhe i s f ree
- t hi s expl ai ns hi s downf al l . Moreover, he i s rat her
dreary, becaus ehe nol onger expos es hi ms el f t o t he s educt i on
of games , becaus ehe ref us es t he vert i go of s educt i on. By way
THE
POLI TI CAL DESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON 141
of hypot hesi s, one mi ght
post ul at e t hat per sonal advant age i s
onl y anal i bi : i n r eal i t y
he cheat s i nor der t o escape seduct i on;
he cheat s because he i s af r ai d
of bei ng seduced.
The
chal l enge of a game i s ver y di f f er ent ,
andgames ar e al -
ways a chal l enge
- and not j ust whenpl ayed
ar ound a t abl e.
Consi der t he Amer i can
whohad t he f ol l owi ng cl assi f i ed
ad-
ver t i sement
pr i nt ed i n t he paper : "Send
me a dol l ar ! " Andt hen
r ecei ved t ens
of t housands of dol l ar s . He di d not pr omi se any-
t hi ng - he was not ,
t her ef or e, swi ndl i ng anyone. Nor di d he
say: "I need a dol l ar " -
nobody woul d have ever gi venhi m
a dol l ar
under such ci r cumst ances. Somewher e
he hadl et f l oat
t he of f - chance
of a mi r acul ous exchange. Somet hi ng
mor e t han
anequi val ence. A
bl uf f . He was of f er i ng t he publ i c
achal l enge. . .
What sor t of subl i me
t r ansact i onwer e t hey negot i at i ngwhen,
i nst ead of buyi ng a dol l ar ' s wor t h
of i ce cr eam, t hey sent i n
t hei r
money? They never r eal l y bel i eved t hey
woul d r ecei ve
t en t housand
dol l ar s i n r et ur n. I n t r ut h, t hey
t ook up t he
chal l enge i n t hei r ownway,
and i t was as val i d as any ot her ,
f or t hey wer e bei ng
of f er ed a wi shbone wher e one wi ns
on
bot h count s :
One never knows, i t mi ght
wor k ( t en t housand dol -
l ar s i nt he mai l ) , i n whi ch
case, one has r ecei ved
a si gn
of t he Gods' f avour ( whi ch Gods?
t hose
who
had pr i nt ed
t he ad) .
I f i t doesn' t wor k,
i t i s because t heobscur e i nst ance
t hat gave me t he si gn
di d not t ake up mychal l enge.
So much t he bet t er . Psychol ogi cal l y I
have beat -
en t he
Gods .
Adoubl e chal l enge: t he
conmanchal l enges t he sucker and
t he l at t er chal l enges f at e. I f he i s
over whel med by f at e, he i s
i n t he cl ear .
One can al ways count oncul pabi l i t y t o l ook f or
ways of bei ng exor ci sed, but i t r eal l y
i sn' t a quest i on of gui l t .
To send a dol l ar i n
r esponse t o t he absur d chal l enge
of t he ad-
ver t i sement , i s t he sacr i f i ci al
r esponse par excel l ence. I t canbe
14
2 SEDUCTI ON
summedup as: "There
must besomethi ngbehi ndthi s.
I wi l l
summontheGodsto
respondor el seto di sappear" - and
reduc-
i ng the Gods to nothi ng i s
al ways a source of pl easure
.
Stakes andchal l enges,
summoni ngandbl uf f i ng - therei s no
questi on of bel i ef i n al l thi s.
Moreover, onenever "bel i eves"
i n anythi ng. I t i s never a
questi on of bel i evi ng or
not bel i ev-
i ng, no morethan
f or Santa Cl aus. Bel i ef i s anabsurd
concept,
of thesame
typeas moti vati on, need, i nsti nct,
i . e, dri ve, desi re,
and, Godknowswhat el se - f aci l e tautol ogi es
that hi de f rom
us
thef act that our acti onsare
never groundedpsychol ogi cal -
l y i n bel i ef , but i n stakes
andchal l enges. I t i s never a
matter
of caref ul l y reasoned
specul ati ononexi stence( onthe
exi stence
of God, or of
someonewi th a dol l ar) , but of
conti nual provo-
cati on, of
a game. Onedoes not
bel i eve i n God, j ust as one
does
not "bel i eve" i n chance - -
except i n the humdrum
di s-
courses of rel i gi on or
psychol ogy. Onechal l enges
them, they
chal l engeyou,
onepl ays wi th them, andthey pl ay
wi th you:
f or thi s one does not haveto
bel i eve i n them.
Thus f ai th i n the
rel i gi ous spherei s si mi l ar to
seducti on i n
thegameof l ove.
Bel i ef i s turnedto theexi stenceof
God- and
exi stencehas
onl y ani mpoveri shed, resi dual
status, bei ngwhat
i s l ef t
whenal l el sehasbeenremoved-
whi l ef ai th i s a chal l enge
to God' sexi stence, a
chal l engeto Godto exi st, andi n
return,
to di e. OneseducesGodwi th
f ai th, andHecannot but respond,
f or seducti on,
l i ke thechal l enge, i s a reversi bl e
f orm. AndHe
responds
a hundredf ol dby Hi s graceto
thechal l engeof f ai th.
As
wi th al l ri tual exchanges, the
whol ef orms a systemof
obl i -
gati ons, wi th God
bei ngobl i gedandevencompel l ed
to respond
- evenas He
i s never compel l edto exi st .
Bel i ef i s satsi f i edwi th
aski ng
Hi mto exi st andunderwri te
theworl d' s exi stence -
i t
i s thedi senchanted,
contractual f orm. But
f ai th turnsGodi nto
a stake: God
chal l enges manto exi st ( andhe
canrespondto
thi s chal l enge wi th hi s death) ,
andmanchal l enges God
to
respondto
hi s sacri f i ce, that i s, to di sappear i n
return.
One
al ways aspi res to somethi ng more
thanmereexi stence,
andsomethi ngmorethanan
equi val ent val ue- and
thi s some-
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NY
OF
SEDUCTI ON 14
3
t hi ng
mor e,
t he chal l enge' s i mmoder at i on compar edt o t he con-
t r act ,
i t s i nt emper ance
compar ed t o
t he
equi val ence
of cause
andef f ect , i s cl ear l y t he r esul t of seduct i on - t hat of games and
magi c. I f wehave exper i encedt hi s i n amor ous seduct i on,
why
not i n our r el at i ons wi t h t he wor l d? Symbol i c ef f i cacy i s not
an empt y concept . I t r ef l ect s t he exi st ence of anot her f or mof
t he
ci r cul at i on
of goods
and
si gns, a
f or mf ar mor e ef f ect i ve
and power f ul t han economi c ci r cul at i on . What i s f asci nat i ng
about a mi r acul ous wi n at t he gami ng t abl es i s not t he money:
i t i s t he r esumpt i on of t i es wi t h t hese ot her , symbol i c ci r cui t s
of unmedi at ed and i mmoder at e bi ddi ng, whi ch concer n t he
seduct i on of t he or der of t hi ngs .
I n t he l ast
anal ysi s, t her e i s not hi ng t o pr event
t hi ngs f r om
bei ng seducedl i ke bei ngs - one si mpl y has t o f i nd t he game' s
r ul es .
Theent i r e pr obl emof chance appear s her e. Magi c, as awager ,
i s
si mi l ar
t o our games of chance. What i s at st ake i s t he par t i -
cl e of val ue t hr own i n t he f ace of chance consi der ed as a t r an-
scendent i nst ance, not i n or der t o wi n i t s f avour s, but t o di smi ss
i t s t r anscendence, i t s abst r act i on, and t ur n i t i nt o a par t ner , an
adver sar y. The st ake i s a
summons, t he game a duel
:
chance
i s summoned t o r espond, obl i ged by t he pl ayer ' s wager t o
decl ar e i t sel f ei t her f avour abl e
or
host i l e. Chance i s never neu-
t r al , t he game t r anf or ms i t i nt o a pl ayer and agoni st i c f i gur e.
Whi ch i s anot her way of sayi ng t hat t he basi c assumpt i on
behi nd t he game i s t hat chance does not exi st .
Chance i n i t s moder n, r at i onal sense, chance as an al eat or y
mechani sm, pur e pr obabi l i t y subj ect ed t o t he l aws of pr oba-
bi l i t y ( and not t o t he r ul es of a game) - a sor t of Gr eat Neut r al
Al eat or i um( G. N. A. ), t he epi t ome of a f l uct uat i ng uni ver se domi -
nat edby st at i st i cal abst r act i ons, a secul ar i zed, di senchant ed and
unbounddi vi ni t y. Thi s ki nd of chance does not exi st i n games ;
t hey exi st
t o
war di t of f .
Games of chance deny t hat t he wor l d
i s ar r anged cont i ngent l y ; on t he cont r ar y t hey seek t o over r i de
any
such
neut r al
or der andr ecr eat e a r i t ual or der of obl i gat i ons
whi ch under mi nes t he f r ee wor l dof equi val ences . I n t hi s man-
ner games ar e r adi cal l y opposedt o t he economy andLaw. They
quest i on t he r eal i t y of chance as an obj ect i ve l awandr epl ace
i t wi t h an i nt er - connect ed, pr opi t i ous, duel , agoni st i c andnon-
144 SEDUCTI ON
cont i ngent uni ver se - a char med uni ver se ( char med, i n t he
st r ong sense of t he t er m) , a uni ver se of seduct i on.
Thus t he super st i t i ous mani pul at i ons sur r oundi ng games,
whi chmany( Cai l l oi s)
vi ew
onl y i n
t er ms of debasement
. The
r esor t t o magi cal pr act i ces, f r ompl ayi ng one' s bi r t hdat e t o l ook-
i ng f or r ecur r ent ser i es ( t he el even came up el even t i mes r un-
ni ng i n Mont e Car l o) , f r omt he most subt l e wi nni ng f or mul as
t o t he r abbi t ' s f oot i n one' s coat pocket , t heyal l f eed on t he
i dea t hat chance does not exi st , t hat t he wor l di s bui l t of net -
wor ks of symbol i c r el at i ons - not cont i ngent connect i ons, but
webs
of
obl i gat i on, webs
of
seduct i on. One
has
onl y t o pl ay
one' s handr i ght . . .
Thebet t or def ends hi msel f at al l cost s f r omt he' i dea of a neu-
t r al uni ver se, of whi chobj ect i ve chance i s a par t . The bet t or
cl ai ms t hat anyt hi ng canbe seduced- number s, l et t er s, or t he
l aws t hat gover n t hei r di st r i but i on
.
He
woul d
seduce
t he Law
i t sel f. The l east si gn, t he l east gest ur e has a meani ng, whi ch
i s not t o say t hat i t i s par t of some r at i onal pr ogr essi on, but
t hat ever ysi gn i s vul ner abl e t o, andcan be seducedbyot her
si gns. The wor l di s hel d t oget her byunbr eakabl e chai ns, but
t hey ar e not t hose of t he Law.
Her e l i es t he "i mmor al i t y" of games, of t en at t r i but ed t o t he
f act t hat t heyencour age onet o want t o wi nt oo mucht oo qui ck-
l y. But t hi s i s t o gi ve t hemt oo muchcr edi t . Games ar e mor e
i mmor al t han t hat . Theyar e i mmor al because t heysubst i t ut e
an
or der of seduct i on f or an or der
of
pr oduct i on.
I f a game i s a vent ur ef or t he seduct i on of chancet hat at t aches
i t sel f
t o
combi nat i ons
of
si gns ( but not t hose of , cause andef -
f ect , nor t hose of cont i ngent ser i es) and i f games t end t o
el i mi nat e t he obj ect i ve neut r al i t y of chance andi t s st at i st i cal
"l i ber t y" by har nessi ng t hemt o t he f or mof
t he duel , t he
chal l enge, andor der l y bi ddi ng -- t hen i t i s absur d t o i magi ne,
as does Gi l l es Del euze i nLogi que du Sens, an "i deal game" t hat
woul dconsi st of a f ur y of
cont i ngenci es and, t hus,
of
a r adi -
cal l yi ncr eased i ndet er mi nacy whi ch, i n t ur n, woul dgi ve r i se
t o t he si mul t aneous pl ayof ever yser i es and, t her ef or e, t o t he
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON 14 5
radi cal expressi on
of
becomi ngand desi re.
Theprobabi l i ty that twosequences wi l l never - or hardl y
ever - cross el i mi nates thegame' s verypossi bi l i ty ( i f sequences
never cross onecannot evenspeakof chance) . But sodoes the
l i kel i hood that ani ndefi ni te
number of sequences
wi l l cross
eachother at anygi venmoment . For gamesareonl yconcei ved
fromthej uncti onof afewsequences wi thi na ti me-spaceframe
l i mi tedbyrul es. I ndeed, thel atter i s a condi ti onfor theproduc-
ti on of chance; the rul es donot restri ct the freedomof a "to-
tal " chance, but consti tute the very mode
of
the game' s
appearance.
I t i s not the case that the "more"
chance
therei s, themore
i ntense the -game. Thi s i s to conceptual i ze bothgames and
chancei nterms of a sort of "freedom" of combi nati on, ani m-
manent dri fti ng, a
constant di ssoci ati onof orders
and
sequences,
an unbri dl edi mprovi sati onof desi re- a ki nd of dai monwho
bl ows i n al l di recti ons, breathi nga l i ttl e uncertai nty, an addi -
ti onal i nci dencei nto the worl d' s orderl y economy.
Nowal l thi s i s absurd. Becomi ngi s not a matter of moreor
l ess. Therei s nodoseor overdose. Ei ther the worl di s engaged
i n a cycl e of becomi ng, andi s so engaged at al l ti mes, or i t i s
not. At anyrate, i t makesnosenseto "takethesi de" of becom-
i ng, assumi ngi t exi sts - nomorethanthat of chance, or desi re.
For onehasnochoi ce: "Totakethesi deof thepri maryprocess
i s sti l l a consequence of secondaryprocesses" ( Lyotard).
Theveryi dea that games canbe i ntensi fi ed
by
theaccel era-
ti onof chance( as thoughonewerespeaki ngof the aci di c con-
tent of achemi cal sol uti on), thei dea that becomi ngcanthereby
beextended exponenti al l y, turns chancei nto anenergi zi ngfunc-
ti on, andstems
di rectl y
froma confusi onwi ththe noti on of
desi re. But thi s i s not chance. Perhaps oneshoul d even admi t,
as the bettor secretl y postul ates, that chance does not exi st .
Qui tea number of cul tures havenei ther theword
nor the
con-
cept, for they donot vi ewanythi ngi n terms of conti ngency,
nor even i n termsofprobabi l i ty. Onl your cul turehas i nvent-
ed thepossi bi l i ty of astati sti cal response, an i norgani c, obj ec-
ti ve and fl uctuati ng response, the dead response of the
phenomena' s obj ecti vei ndetermi nacyandi nstabi l i ty
.
When
one
thi nks about i t, the assumpti on of a conti ngent uni verse,
146 SEDUCTI ON
st r i pped of a l l obl i ga t i ons a ndpur ged of ever y symbol i c or f or -
ma l . r ul e, t he i dea
t ha t
t he
wor l d of t hi ngs i s subj ect ed t o a
mol ecul a r a nd obj ect i ve di sor der - t he sa me di sor der t ha t i s
i dea l i zed a nd gl or i f i ed i n t he mol ecul a r vi si on of desi r e - t hi s
a ssumpt i on i s i nsa ne. Sca r cel y l ess dement ed t ha n t he a ssump-
t i on of a n obj ect i ve or der , of a n unbr oken cha i n of ca use a nd
ef f ect , whi ch bel ongs t o t he gl or y da ys of cl a ssi ca l r ea son, a nd
f r omwhi ch, f ur t her mor e, t he a ssumpt i on of di sor der f ol l ows
i n a ccor d wi t h t he l ogi c of r esi dues .
The i dea of cha nce f i r st emer ged a s t he r esi due of a l ogi ca l
or der of det er mi na t i on . But even hypost a si zed a s a r evol ut i on-
a r y va r i a bl e, i t st i l l r ema i ns t he mi r r or i ma ge of ; t he pr i nci pl e
of ca usa l i t y. I t s gener a l i za t i on, i t s uncondi t i ona l " l i ber a t i on, "
a s i n Del euze' s " i dea l ga me, " i s pa r t of t he pol i t i ca l a nd myst i -
ca l economy of r esi dues a t wor k ever ywher e t oda y, wi t h i t s
st r uct ur a l i nver si on of wea k i nt o st r ong t er ms. Cha nce, once
per cei ved a s obscene a nd i nsi gni f i ca nt , i s t o be' r evi ved i n i t s
i nsi gni f i ca nce a nd so become t he mot t o of a noma di c econo-
my of desi r e.
Ga mes a r e not t o be conf used wi t h " becomi ng, " t hey a r e
not
noma di c,
a nd
do not bel ong t o t he r ea l mof desi r e.
They a r e
cha r a ct er i zed, even when ga mes
of
cha nce,
by
t hei r ca pa ci t y
t o r epr oduce a gi ven a r bi t r a r y const el l a t i on i n t he sa me t er ms
a n
i ndef i ni t e number of t i mes. Thei r
t r ue
f or mi s cycl i ca l or
r ecur r ent . Anda s such t hey, a nd t hey a l one, put a def i ni t e st op
t o ca usa l i t y a nd i t s pr i nci pl e - not by t he ma ssi vei nt r oduct i on
of r a ndomser i es (whi ch r esul t s onl y i n t he di sper sa l of ca usa l -
i t y, i t s r educt i on
t o
sca t t er ed f r a gment s, a nd not i t s over com-
i ng) - but by t he pot ent i a l r et ur n (t he et er na l r et ur n i f one wi l l )
t o a n or der l y, convent i ona l si t ua t i on.
Nei t her t he
t empor a l i t y
of desi r e a nd
i t s
" f r eedom, "
nor t ha t
of
some na t ur a l devel opment (a s wi t h t he pl a y of chi l dr en, or
t he pl a y of t he wor l d descr i bed by Her a cl i t us) , but t ha t of t he
et er na l r et ur n of a r i t ua l f or m- a nd wi l l ed a s such
. Thus ea ch
of t he ga me' s sequences del i ver s us f r omt he l i nea r i t y of l i f e
a nd dea t h.
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON
14
7
Thereare twoki nds of
eternal return. Thestati sti c al ki nd -
neutral , obj ec ti ve and
i nsi pi d
-
where, gi ven that the c ombi -
nati ons,
however numerous, i n a f i ni te systemc annot bei nf i ni te,
probabi l i ty demands that the same arrangement eventual l y
rec ur, ac c ordi ng to an i mmense c yc l e. Athi n metaphysi c s: i t
i s a
natural eternal return, i n ac c ord wi tha natural , stati sti c al
c ausal i ty. Theother vi si on i s tragi c andri tual : i t i s the wi l l ed
rec urrenc e, as i n games,
of
an arbi trary andnon- c ausal c onf i g-
urati on of si gns, whereeac hsi gn seeks out thenext rel entl ess-
l y, as i n the c ourse of a c eremoni al . I t i s the eternal return
demanded by rul es - as i n a mandatory suc c essi on of throws
and wagers . And i t makes no di f f erenc e whether they be the
rul es
of
thegame
of
theuni verse i tsel f : there i s nometaphys-
i c s l oomi ng on thehori zon of the game' s i ndef i ni tel y reversi -
bl ec yc l e - and c ertai nl y not themetaphysi c s of desi re, whi c h
i s sti l l dependent on the worl d' s natural order, or natural
di sorder.
Desi re may
wel l
be
the
Lawof
theuni verse,
but
theeternal
return i s i ts rul e . Luc ki l y f or us - otherwi se, where woul dbe
the pl easure i n pl ayi ng?
Thec onsummateverti goi nduc ed
by
agame: when thethrow
of the di c e ends up "el i mi nati ng c hanc e, " when, f or exampl e,
thesamenumber appears agai nst al l odds several ti mes i n a row.
Agame' s ul ti mate f antasy, the ec stasy of c hec ki ng c hanc e -
when, i n
the gri p
of
a
c hal l enge, the same
throw
i s repeated,
the pri soner of a rec urri ng seri es, and as a resul t the l awand
c hanc e are abol i shed. Onepl ays i n anti c i pati on of thi s sym-
bol i c transc ursi on, that i s to say, i n anti c i pati on of an event that
wi l l put an end to a randomproc ess wi thout,
however, f al l -
i ngprey to an obj ec ti ve l aw. By i tsel f
eac h
throwproduc es
onl y a moderate gi ddi ness, but when f ate rai ses thebi d- a si gn
that
i t
i s
trul y
c aught
up i n the
game -
when
f ate
i tsel f seems
to throwa c hal l enge to the natural order of thi ngs and enters
i nto a f renzy
or
ri tual verti go, then the
passi ons areunl eashed
and the spi ri ts sei zed by a trul y deadl y f asc i nati on
.
There i s nothi ng i magi nary
about
thi s,
but an
i mperi ous
148 SEDUCTI ON
necessi t y t o put ast op t o t he
nat ur al pl ay of di f f er ences as
wel l
as
t he hi st or i cal devel opment of
t he l aw. Ther e i s no gr eat er
moment . The onl y way t o
r espond t o t he nat ur al
advances of
desi r e i s i n t er ms of
t he r i t ual one- upmanshi pof
seduct i on and
games; and t he
onl y way t o r espond t o t he cont r act ual
pr oposal s
of t he l awi s
i n t er ms of t he one- upmanshi pand
f or mal ver t i go
of
r ul es. Acr yst al l i ne passi on
wi t hout equal .
Games do not bel ong
t o t he r eal mof f ant asy,
and t hei r r ecur -
r ence i s not t he
r epet i t i on of a phant asy. The
l at t er pr oceeds
f r om
an- " ot her " scene, and i s af i gur e of
deat h. The game' s r ecur -
r ence
pr oceeds f r oma r ul e, and i s
a f i gur e of seduct i on and
pl easur e
. Ever y r epet i t i ve f i gur e of
meani ng, whet her
af f ect or
r epr esent at i on, i s a f i gur e of
deat h. Pl easur e i s r el eased
onl y
by a
meani ngl ess r ecur r ence, one t hat
pr oceeds f r om
nei t her
aconsci ous
or der nor anunconsci ous
di sor der , but r esul t s
f r om
t he r ever si on
and r ei t er at i on of apur e
f or mt hat chal l enges
and
out does t he l awof
cont ent s and t hei r accumul at i on
.
The game' s r ecur r ence
pr oceeds di r ect l y f r omf at e,
and ex-
i st s as f at e. Not as
a deat h dr i ve or t endent i al
l ower i ng of t he
r at e of
di f f er ence, r esul t i ng i n t he
ent r opi c t wi l i ght s of
syst ems
of
meani ng, but as a f or mof
r i t ual i ncant at i on - a
f or mof
cer emoni al wher e t he
si gns, because t hey ar e so
vi ol ent l y at -
t r act ed t o each ot her ,
no l onger l eave any r oom
f or meani ng,
andcan onl y dupl i cat e
t hemsel ves . Her e t oo one
f i nds t he ver -
t i go of
seduct i on, t he ver t i go t hat comes of
bei ng absor bed i n
a
r ecur r ent f at e. Al l soci et i es
ot her t han our own ar e
f ami l i ar
wi t h t hi s t heat er of r i t ual ,
whi ch i s al so a t heat er of
cr uel t y.
Games r edi scover
somet hi ng of t hi s cr uel t y.
Compar ed wi t h
games,
ever yt hi ng r eal i s sent i ment al
. The t r ut h, , and
t he Law
i t sel f
ar e sent i ment al r el at i ve t o
t he pur e f or ms of
r epet i t i on.
J ust
as i t i s not l i ber t y t hat
i s opposed t o t he l aw,
but t he r ul e,
si mi l ar l y i t i s not
i ndet er mi nacy t hat i s
opposed; t o causal i t y,
but
obl i gat i on. The l at t er i s
nei t her a l i near chai n, nor an
un-
chai ni ng ( whi ch i s
mer el y t he r or nant i ci smof a
der anged causal -
i t y) ; i t
f or ms ar ever si bl e chai n
t hat , movi ng f r omsi gn t o
si gn,
i nexor abl y compl et es i t s cycl e,
t ur ni ng i t s or i gi n i nt o
an el l i pse
THEPOLI TI CAL
DESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON 149
andeconomi zi ngoni t s end, l i ke t he
s hel l s andbr acel et s i n Pol y-
nes i an exchange r el at i ons hi ps
.
The
cycl e of obl i gat i ons i s not
a code. Wehave conf us edobl i gat i on i n t he s t r ong
s ens e, i n i t s
t i mel es s , r i t ual
s ens e, wi t h l aws andcodes , andt hei r common-
pl ace cons t r ai nt s ,
whi ch r ul e over us under t heoppos i t e s i gn,
t hat of l i ber t y.
I nDel euze' s pur e, nomadi c chance, i n hi s
" i deal game, " t her e
i s onl y di s j unct i onand
di s per s edcaus al i t y. But onl y aconcep-
t ual er r or al l ows one
t o di s s oci at e t he game f r omi t s r ul es i n
or der t o r adi cal i ze i t s ut opi an f or m. And t he s ame i nt emper -
ance,
or t he s ame f aci l i t y, al l ows onet o di s s oci at e
chance f r om
what def i nes i t -
anobj ect i ve cal cul us of s er i es andpr obabi l i -
t i es - i n or der
t o
t ur n
i t i nt o t he t heme s ong f or an i deal i n-
det er mi nacy, an i deal des i r e
compos ed of t he endl es s
occur r ence of count l es s s er i es . But why
mor es er i es ?
Why
not
apur eBr owni an
movement ? But t hent he l at t er , t hough i t s eems
t o have become t he
phys i cal model f or r adi cal des i r e, has i t s
l aws , and i s not a game.
To gener al i ze chance, i n t he f or mof an" i deal
game, " wi t hout
s i mul t aneous l y gener al i zi ng t he
game' s r ul es , i s aki nt o t hef an-
t as y
of r adi cal i zi ng des i r e by r i ddi ng i t of ever y l aw
andever y
l ack . The obj ect i ve
i deal i s mof t he " i deal game, " andt he s ub-
j ect i ve i deal i s m
of des i r e.
Agame f or ms as ys t em
wi t h nei t her cont r adi ct i onnor i nt er -
nal negat i vi t y. That i s why one
cannot l augh at i t . Andi f i t can-
not bepar odi ed, i t i s becaus e i t s ent i r e or gani zat i on
i s par odi c.
Ther ul e
f unct i ons as t he par odi c s i mul acr um
of
t hel aw
. Nei t her
ani nver s i onnor s ubver i on
of t he l aw, but i t s r ever s i oni n s i mu-
l at i on. The
pl eas ur e of t he game i s t wof ol d: t he
i nval i dat i on
of t i me and
s pacewi t hi n t he enchant eds pher e of ani ndes t r uct -
i bl e f or mof r eci pr oci t y - pur e s educt i on-
andt he par odyi ng
of r eal i t y, t he f or mal out bi ddi ng of t he l aw' s
cons t r ai nt s .
Canone pr oduce a f i ner
par ody of t he et hi cs of val ue t han
by s ubmi t t i ng ones el f , wi t h al l t he i nt r ans i gence
of vi r t ue, t o
t he out comes of chance or t he
abs ur di t y of a r ul e? Cant her e
be af i ner par ody of t he val ues of wor k,
economy, pr oduct i on
15 0 SEDUCTI ON
andcal cul at i on t han
t he chal l enge andt he wager , or
t he f an-
t as t i c non- equi val ence
bet weenwhat i s at s t ake and
what mi ght
bewon( or l os t - bot h
bei ngequal l y i mmor al ) ? Or ' a
f i ner par ody
of
ever y i deaof cont r act andexchange t hant hi s
magi cal com-
pl i ci t y, t hi s "duel " obl i gat i on r el at i ve t o t he
r ul es , t hi s agoni s -
t i c
at t empt t o s educe one' s opponent ,
and t o s educe chance
i t s el f ? What bet t er deni al of t he val ues
of wi l l , r es pons i bi l i t y,
equal i t y andj us t i ce t hant hi s
exal t at i on of ( goodandbad)
l uck,
t hi s
exul t at i on i n pl ayi ng wi t h f at e as
anequal ? Cant her e be
amor e beaut i f ul par ody of
our i deol ogi es of l i ber t y
t han t hi s
pas s i onf or r ul es ?
I s t her e a
bet t er par ody of "s oci al i t y" i t s el f
t han t hat f ound
i n Bor ges ' f abl e, "The Lot t er y
i n Babyl on, " wi t h i t s i nes capa-
bl e andf at ef ul
l ogi c andi t s s i mul at i onof t he s oci al
by t he game?
"I
come
f r omadi zzy l and wher e t hel ot t er y
i s t he bas i s of
r eal i t y. " Thus begi ns a s t or y about
as oci et y wher e t he l ot t er y
has s wal l owedup al l t he
ot her i ns t i t ut i ons . I n t he
begi nni ng
i t was onl y agameof pl ebei an
char act er , andt he mos t one
coul d
do was wi n. But
"t he- l ot t er i es " wer e bor i ng, s i nce
"t hey wer e
not di r ect ed
at al l of man' s f acul t i es , but
onl y at hope. " One
t hen "t r i ed
a r ef or m: t he i nt er pol at i on of a
f ewunf avour abl e
t i cket s i n t he l i s t of f avour abl e
number s " - wi t h t he r i s k of pay-
i ng acons i der abl e
f i ne. Thi s was ar adi cal modi f i cat i on
: i t el i mi -
nat ed t he i l l us i on t hat
t he game hadan economi c
pur pos e.
Hencef or t h one
ent er edapur e game, and t he
di zzi nes s t hat
s ei zed hol d of
Babyl oni an s oci et y knew
no l i mi t s . Anyt hi ng
coul dhappen
by dr awi ng l ot s , t he l ot t er y
became "s ecr et , f r ee
andgener al , " "ever y f r ee man
aut omat i cal l y par t i ci pat ed
i nt he
s acr eddr awi ngs
whi cht ook pl ace ever y s i xt y
ni ght s andwhi ch
det er mi ned hi s des t i ny unt i l t he next
dr awi ng. " Al ucky dr aw
coul dmake hi ma
r i ch manor a magi , or gi ve hi m
t he women
he des i r ed; an
unl ucky dr aw coul d
br i ng hi mmut i l at i on or
deat h
.
I ns hor t , t he i nt er pol at i on
of chance i n al l t he
i nt er s t i ces of
t he s oci al or der
and"i n t he or der of t he
wor l d. " Al l t he l ot -
t er y' s er r or s
wer e good, s i nce t hey
onl y i nt ens i f i ed i t s l ogi c.
THE
POLI TI CAL
DESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON 15 1
I mpost ur es, r uses,
andmani pul at i oncoul dbe per f ect l y i nt egr at -
edi nt o t he al eat or y syst em: whocoul dsay
i f
t hey
wer e " r eal , "
t hat i s,
whet her t hey wer e t he r esul t
of
some nat ur al or r at i on-
al causal i t y, or r esul t ed f r omchance as det er mi ned by t he l ot -
t er y? I n pr i nci pl e no one. Pr edest i nat i on encompassed
ever yt hi ng, t he l ot t er y' s ef f ect s wer e uni ver sal . The
Lot t er y and
t he Company coul dcease t o
exi st , t hei r si l ent f unct i oni ng woul d
be exer ci sed over af i el d
of
t ot al si mul at i on. Al l " r eal i t y" had
ent er ed t he secr et deci si ons of t he Company, andt her e was,
i n al l l i kel i hood, no l onger any di f f er ence bet weent he r eal r eal -
i t y andt he cont i ngent r eal i t y.
I ndeed
i t
i s possi bl e t hat
t he Company never exi st ed, and
t he wor l d' s or der woul dr emai n t he same. But t he assumpt i on
of i t s exi st ence changes ever yt hi ng . The assumpt i on al one i s
enough t o change r eal i t y, as i t i s, as i t cannot be ot her wi se, i nt o
one
i mmense si mul acr um. Real i t y i s not hi ng ot her t hani t s own
si mul at i on.
I n our " r eal i st " soci et i es, t he Company has ceased t o exi st .
Our soci et i es ar e obl i vi ous t o andbui l t ont he r ui ns of t hi s pos-
si bl e t ot al si mul at i on. We ar e no l onger consci ous of t he spi r al
of si mul at i on t hat pr ecededr eal i t y. I n t r ut h, our unconsci ous
i s f oundher e:
i n our i ncompr ehensi onbef or e t he ver t i gi nous
i ndet er mi nat i onandsi mul at i on t hat r ul es t he sacr ed di sor der
of our
l i ves
.
Not i n t he r epr essi on
of a
f ewaf f ect s
or
r epr esen-
t at i ons - our i nsi pi d concept i on of t he unconsci ous - but i n
our bl i ndness bef or e t he Bi g Game, bef or e t he f act t hat our
" r eal " f at e wi t h al l i t s " r eal " event s has al r eady passed t hr ough,
not some
ant er i or l i f e ( t hough
by
i t sel f t hi s hypot hesi s i s su-
per i or
t o
our met aphysi cs
of
obj ect i ve causes) , but acycl e of
i ndet er mi nat i on, agame cycl e t hat i s si mul t aneousl y ar bi t r ar y
andf i xed. Bor ges' Lot t er y i s t he symbol i c i ncar nat i on of t hi s
game, whi ch has gi ven our f at e t hat hal l uci nat or y qual i t y we
t ake f or i t s t r ut h. The l ogi c escapes us, t hough our consci ous-
ness of t he r eal i s basedon
our
unconsci ousness of
si mul at i on.
Remember t he Babyl oni anLot t er y. Whet her or not i t exi st s,
t he vei l of i ndet er mi nat i on i t t hr ows over our l i f e i s absol ut e.
I t s ar bi t r ar y decr ees r ul e t he l east det ai l s
of
our exi st ence. We
dar e not speak of ahi ddeni nf r ast r uct ur e, f or
t he l at t er wi l l even-
t ual l y be cal l ed upont o appear as t r ut h - whi l eher e i t i s amat -
15
2 SEDUCTI ON
t er of f a t e, t ha t i s , of a ga me
t ha t ha s a l wa ys a l r ea dy been
wor ked
out , yet r ema i ns f or ever
i ndeci pher a bl e .
Bor ges ' or i gi na l i t y
i s
t o
ha ve ext ended t hi s ga me
t o t he en-
t i r e s oci a l s t r uct ur e.
Wher e we s ee ga mes a s
s uper s t r uct ur e, a s
r el a t i vel y wei ght l es s
compa r ed t o t he good, s ol i d
i nf r a s t r uct ur e
of s oci a l r el a t i ons ,
he ha s t ur ned. t he ent i r e
edi f i ce ups i de down
a nd ma de
i ndet er mi na t i on i nt o t he
det er mi na nt i ns t a nce .
I t i s
no l onger economi c
r ea s on, t ha t of l a bour
a nd hi s t or y, nor t he
" s ci ent i f i c"
det er mi ni s mof excha nges
whi ch det er mi nes
t he
s oci a l
s t r uct ur e a nd f a t e of
i ndi vi dua l s , but a t ot a l
i ndet er mi ni s m,
t ha t of t he Ga me a nd of Cha nce.
Pr edes t i na t i on coi nci des
her e
wi t h a t ot a l mobi l i t y, a nd
a na r bi t r a r y s ys t emwi t h t he
mos t r a d-
i ca l democr a cy
( t he i ns t a nt a neous excha nge
of a l l pos i t i ons -
s omet hi ngt o
s a t i s f y t he pr es ent - da y' s
t hi r s t f or pol yva l ence) .
Thi s
r ever s a l i s ext r emel y i r oni c
r el a t i ve t o ever y
cont r a ct ,
ever y r a t i ona l f ounda t i on of
t he s oci a l . Pa ct s
concer ni ngr ul es ,
a nd concer ni ng t hei r
a r bi t r a r i nes s ( t he Lot t er y) '
el i mi na t e t he
s oci a l a s we
under s t a nd i t , j us t a s r i t ua l s put
a nend t o t he l a w.
I t ha s never been ot her wi s e
wi t h s ecr et s oci et i es ;
i n t hei r ef -
f l or es cence one s houl d s ee
a r es i s t a nce t o t he s oci a l
.
The nos t a l gi a f or a
pa ct ua l , r i t ua l , a nd
cont i ngent s oci a l i t y,
t he yea r ni ng t o
be f r ee of t he cont r a ct
a nd s oci a l r el a t i on,
t he
l ongi ngf or a
cr uel er i f mor e f a s ci na t i ng
des t i ny f or excha nge,
i s deeper
t ha n t he r a t i ona l
i mper a t i ves of t he s oci a l wi t h
whi ch
we ha ve been l ul l ed.
Bor ges ' t a ke i s per ha ps
not a f i ct i on, but
a des cr i pt i on t ha t
comes cl os e t o our f or mer
dr ea ms , t ha t i s
t o s a y, t o our
f ut ur e a s wel l .
I n Byza nt i um,
s oci a l l i f e, t he
pol i t i ca l or der , i t s hi er a r chi es
a nd expendi t ur es
wer e r egul a t ed. by
hor s e r a ces . Toda y one
s t i l l
bet s on
t he hor s es , but t he
mi r r or of democr a cy
pr oduces onl y
a f a i nt r ef l ect i on.
The enor mous a mount of
money excha nged
i n bet t i ng
i s not hi ngcompa r ed t o
t he ext r a va ga nce of
t he Byza n-
t i nes ,
wher e a l l publ i c l i f e
wa s t i ed t o eques t r i a n
compet i t i ons .
St i l l i t i s
s ympt oma t i c of t he ga me' s
i mpor t a nce i n ma ny
s oci a l
a ct i vi t i es a nd i n t he r a pi d ci r cul a t i onof
goods a nd s oci a l
pos i -
t i ons . I nBr a zi l t her e i s
t he J ogo de Bi cho: bet t i ng,
l ot t er i es a nd
ot her ga mes
ha ve s ei zed hol d of
ent i r e s ect or s of t he popul a -
t i on
who r i s k t hei r l i f e' s
s a vi ngs a nd s t a t us . A
di s t r a ct i on f r om
under devel opment
one mi ght cl a i m, but
eveni n i t s wr et ched
THE
POLI TI CALDESTI NY
OFSEDUCTI ON 15 3
modernversi on, i t
provi des anechoof cul t ures wherel udi c
andsumpt uary pract i ces generat ed
t heessent i al f orms andst ruc-
t ures of exchange -
aschemat hat goes very much
agai nst t he
grai nof our owncul t ure,
most not abl y i n i t s Marxi st versi on.
Underdevel oped? Onl y t hepri vi l eged,
t hoseel evat ed by t he
soci al cont ract , or
by t hei r soci al st at us - i t sel f onl y
a
si mul acrum, andonewi t hout even t he
val ueof adest i ny - can
j udgesuch
al eat orypract i ces as wort hl ess
whent hey are qui t e
superi or t o t hei r own. For
i t i s as mucha chal l enge t ot heso-
ci al as
t o chance, andi ndi cat i ve of a yearni ng
f or a moread-
vent urous worl d,
whereonepl ays wi t hval uemore
reckl essl y.
THEDUAL,
THEPOLARANDTHE
DI GI TAL
Al ot t er y i s
as i mul acr um- t her e
bei ng not hi ng mor e ar t i f i -
ci al t han t o r egul at e t he cour s e
of event s by t he abs ur d
decr ees
of chance.
But l et us not f or get t hat t hi s
i s what ant i qui t y di d
wi t h t he ar t s of di vi nat i on,
us i ng t he ent r ai l s of chi ckens
and
t he
f l i ght of bi r ds ; andi s n' t i t what t he
moder nar t of i nt er pr e-
t at i on cont i nues t o do,
t hough wi t h f ewer gr ounds ? I t i s
al l a
s i mul acr um
. The di f f er ence i s t hat i n
Bor ges ' Fi cci ones t he
game' s r ul es compl et el y
r epl ace t he l awandt he game
deci des
one' s des t i ny,
whi l e i n our s oci et y games
ar e s i mpl y mar gi nal
and f r i vol ous di ver s i ons .
Compar ed t o
Bor ges ' f i ct i onal s oci et y,
bas ed on chance
decr ees anda t ype of
pr edes t i nat i on by t he game,
r el at i ve t o
s uch a cr uel
or der wher e t he r i s ks ar e
never - endi ng and t he
s t akes abs ol ut e, we l i ve
i n
a
s oci et y of mi ni mal s t akes
andr i s ks .
I f t he t er ms
wer e not cont r adi ct or y, one
coul ds ay t hat s ecur i -
t y has become our des t i ny. I t
mi ght be t he cas e, mor eover ,
t hat
t hi s out come
wi l l be f at al f or our s oci et y - t he
mor t al i t y of over -
pr ot ect ed s peci es whi ch,
i n t hei r domes t i cat i on, ar e
dyi ng of
t oo much s ecur i t y
.
Nowi f t he Babyl oni ans
s uccumbed t o t he l ot t er y' s
ver t i go,
i t was becaus e
t her e was s omet hi ng i n
t he l ot t er y t hat com-
pl et el y s educed t hem, t hat
enabl ed t hemt o chal l enge
ever y-
t hi ngwor t h
exi s t i ng, i ncl udi ng t hei r
ownexi s t ence - andt hei r
THEPOLI TI CAL
DESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON
155
owndeat h. Bycont r ast , f or us t he
soci al i s wi t hout seduct i on.
What i s l ess seduct i ve t hant he ver y i dea
of t he soci al ? The
degr ee zer oof seduct i on. EvenGodnever f el l sol ow.
Rel at i ve t ot he danger s
of seduct i ont hat haunt t he uni ver se
of games and r i t ual s, our own
soci al i t y and t he f or ms of com-
muni cat i onand exchange i t i nst i t ut es, appear i n
di r ect pr opor -
t i on
t o t hei r secul ar i zat i on under t he si gn of t he Law,
as
ext r emel y i mpover i shed, banal and
abst r act .
But t hi s
i s st i l l onl y ani nt er medi ar yst at e, f or t he
age of t he
Lawhas passed, and
wi t h
i t
t hat of t he soci us and t he soci al
cont r act . Not onl y ar e we
nol onger l i vi ng i naner a of r ul es
andr i t ual s, wear e nol onger l i vi ng i n
aner a of l aws and con-
t r act s .
We
l i ve
t oday accor di ng t oNor ms andModel s,
andwe
donot evenhave a
t er mt o desi gnat e t hat whi ch i s r epl aci ng
soci al i t y and t he soci al .
t he RULE

t he LAW

t he NORM
Ri t ual ( i t y) Soci al ( i t y) ????????
Wear e pr esent l y
l i vi ngwi t h a mi ni mumof r eal soci al i t y
and
amaxi mumof si mul at i on.
Si mul at i onneut r al i zes t he pol es t hat
or gani ze t he per spect i val space
of t he r eal and t he Law, whi l e
dr ai ni ng of f t he ener gy pot ent i al
t hat st i l l dr i ves t he space of
t he Lawandt he soci al . I nt he
er a of model s, one must speak
of
t he
det er r ence of t he ant agoni st i c st r at egi es t hat gave t he Law
andt he soci al t hei r st akes
- i ncl udi ng ast ake i nt hei r t r ansgr es-
si on
.
Nomor e t r ansgr essi on, and
nomor e t r anscendence. But
f or al l t hat ,
we ar e nol onger i nt he t r agi c i mmanence
of r ul es
andr i t ual s,
but
i n
t he cool i mmanenceof nor ms and
model s .
Det er r ence, r egul at i on,
f eed- back, sequences of t act i cal el ement s
i na
non- r ef er ent i al space. . . But aboveal l , i n
t hi s age of model s,
t he di gi t al i t y
of t he si gnal as ar epl acement f or
t he pol ar i t y of
t he si gn.
DUALI TY
POLARI TY DI GI TALI TY
These t hr ee
l ogi cs ar e excl usi ve of each ot her :
- t he
dual r el at i ondomi nat es t he
game, t he r i t ual andt he en-
t i r e spher e
of t he r ul e.
156
SEDUCTI ON
- t he pol ar rel at i on, or
t he di al ect i cal or cont radi ct ory rel a-
t i on, organi zes t he uni verse of t he Law, t he soci al , and
meani ng.
- t he di gi t al rel at i on ( but i t i s no
l onger a" rel at i on" - l et us
speak i nst ead of t he di gi t al connect i on) al l ocat es t he
space of
Norms and Model s .
I n t he cross-pl ay of t hese t hree l ogi cs, t he concept of
seduc-
t i on i n i t s radi cal sense ( as duel ,
ri t ual i st i c, agoni st i c, wi t h t he
st akes
maxi mi zed) must be repl aced by seduct i oni n i t s " sof t "
sense - t he seduct i onof an " ambi ence, " or t he
pl ayf ul erot i ci -
zat i on of auni verse
wi t hout st akes .
V
THE"LUDIC" AND
COLDSEDUCTION
For
weare l i vi ng of f seducti on
but wi l l di e i nf asci nati on.
Thepl ay of model s wi th thei r ever- changi ng
combi nati ons,
i s characteri sti c of a
l udi c uni verse, whereeverythi ng operates
as possi bl esi mul ati on, whereeverythi ng, i n the
absenceof a
Godto acknowl edgehi s creati ons, can act as counter- evi dence
.
Subversi veval ues
haveonl y towai t thei r turn, andvi ol enceand
cri ti que arethemsel ves presented as
model s. Wearel i vi ng i n
a suppl e,
curved uni verse, that no l onger has any
vani shi ng
poi nts. Formerl y thereal i ty
pri nci pl ewas def i nedi n terms of
the
coherenceof obj ects andthei r use, f uncti ons andthei r i n-
sti tuti on, thi ngs andthei r
obj ecti vedetermi nati on - today the
pl easurepri nci pl e i s def i ned i n terms of the conj uncti on
of
desi res andmodel s ( of ademand
andi ts anti ci pati on by si mu-
l ated
responses) .
The"l udi c" i s f ormed
of
the
"pl ay" of the model wi th the
demand. But gi ven
that thedemandi s promptedby themodel ,
and
themodel ' s precessi on i s absol ute,
chal l enges arei mpossi -
bl e. Most of our exchanges
are regul ated by gamestrategi es;
but thel atter,
def i nedas acapaci ty to f oreseeal l of one' s
oppo-
nent' s
moves andcheckthemi n advance, renders al l
stakes i m-
possi bl e. Gametheory descri bes the
l udi c character of aworl d
15
8 SEDUCTI ON
wher e,
par adoxi cal l y, not hi ng i s at s t ake.
The"Wer bung, "
t he s ol i ci t at i on of adver t i s ement s
and pol l s ,
al l t he model s of t he medi a and. pol i t i cs , no
l onger cl ai mcr e-
dence, onl y cr edi bi l i t y. They ar e no
l onger obj ect s of l i bi di nal
i nves t ment ; f or t hey ar e mades el ect i vel y
avai l abl e wi t hi nar ange
of choi ces - wi t h l ei s ur e i t s el f
nowappear i ng, r el at i ve t o
wor k,
as j us t anot her channel on
t he s cr een of t i me ( and
wi l l t her e
s oonbe a t hi r d or
f our t h channel ?) . Amer i can t el evi s i on,
one
mi ght add, wi t h i t s 83
channel s i s t he l i vi ng i ncar nat i on
of t he
l udi c :
onecan no l onger do anyt hi ng but
pl ay - change chan-
nel s ,
mi x pr ogr ams and cr eat e one' s
own mont age ( t he
pr edomi nance of TVgames i s
mer el y anecho, at t he l evel of
cont ent , of t hi s l udi c empl oyment
of t he medi um) .
And l i ke
ever y combi nat or i al , i t i s
a s our ce of f as ci nat i on' . But
onecan
no l onger s peak of a
s pher e of enchant ment or
s educt i on; i n-
s t ead, an er a of
f as ci nat i on i s begi nni ng.
Obvi ous l y, t he l udi c cannot be equat ed
wi t h havi ng f un. Wi t h
i t s pr opens i t y f or
maki ngconnect i ons , t he l udi c, i s mor e
aki n
t o det ect i ve wor k
. Mor e gener al l y, i t
connot es net wor ks and
t hei r mode of
f unct i oni ng, t he f or ms of
t hei r per meat i on and
mani pul at i on
. Thel udi c encompas s es al l
t he di f f er ent ways one
can
"pl ay" wi t h net wor ks , not
i n or der t o es t abl i s h
al t er nat i ves ,
but t o di s cover t hei r s t at e of
opt i mal f unct i oni ng.
We haveal r eady
wi t nes s ed t he debas ement of
pl ay t o t he l evel
of
f unct i on - i n pl ay t her apy, pl ay s chool ,
pl ay- as =cat har s i s and
pl ay- as - cr eat i vi t y
. Thr oughout t he f i el ds of
educat i on andchi l d
ps ychol ogy,
pl ay has become a "vi t al
f unct i on" ' or neces s ar y
phas e of
devel opment . Or el s e i t has
beengr af t ed ont o t he
pl eas -
ur e pr i nci pl e t o become a
r evol ut i onar y al t er nat i ve, a
di al ect i -
cal over comi ngof
t he r eal i t y pr i nci pl e i n
Mar cus e, an i deol ogy
of pl ay and
t he f es t i val f or ot her s .
But even as t r ans gr es s i on,
s pont anei t y, or aes t het i c
di s i nt er es t ednes s , pl ay r emai ns
onl y
a s ubl i mat ed f or mof
t he ol d, di r ect i ve pedagogy
t hat gi ves i t
a
meani ng, as s i gns i t anend, and
t her eby pur ges i t of i t s power
of
s educt i on. Pl ay as dr eami ng,
s por t , wor k, r es t or as
a t r ans i -
t i onal obj ect - or as
t he phys i cal hygi ene
neces s ar y f or ps y-
chol ogi cal
equi l i br i umor f or a s ys t em' s
r egul at i onor evol ut i on
.
The
ver y oppos i t e of t hat pas s i on
f or i l l us i on whi ch
once
char act er i zed i t .
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NY
OFSEDUCTI ON159
Wear es t i l l s peaki ng, however , of f unct i onal at t empt s t o s ub-
j ect pl ay t o t hel awof val ue. What i s mor es er i ous i s t hecyber -
net i c abs or pt i on
of pl ay i nt o t hegener al cat egor y of t hel udi c.
The
gener al evol ut i on of games i s r eveal i ng: f r omcompet i -
t i ve games - t eam
s por t s , ol d- f as hi oned car d games , or even
t abl ef oot bal l - t o t hegener at i on of pi nbal l machi nes ( whi ch
al r eady had s cr eens but wer enot yet " t el evi s ed, " a mi xt ur eof
el ect r oni cs and hand movement s ) , nowr ender ed obs ol et eby
el ect r oni c t enni s andot her comput er i zed games , t hei r s cr eens
s t r eaked wi t h
hi gh- s peed mol ecul es . And t heat omi s t i c mani pu-
l at i on r equi r ed by t hel at t er i s not t o bedi s t i ngui s hed f r om
t he
pr act i ces of i nf or mat i on cont r ol i n t he" l abour pr oces s "
or
t he
f ut ur eempl oyment of comput er s i n t hedomes t i c s pher e, whi ch
wer eal s o pr eceded by t el evi s i on and
ot her audi ovi s ual ai ds .
Thel udi c i s ever ywher e, even i n t he " choi ce"
of
a br and
of
l aundr y det er gent i n t he s uper mar ket . Wi t hout t oo much ef -
f or t ones ees
s i mi l ar i t i es wi t h t hewor l d of ps ychot r opi c dr ugs :
f or t hel at t er t oo i s l udi c, bei ng not hi ng
but t hemani pul at i on
of a s ens or i al keyboar d or neur oni c i ns t r ument panel . El ect r oni c
games ar ea s of t dr ug - onepl ays t hemwi t h t hes ames omnam-
bul ar abs ence and t act i l e euphor i a.
Even t hegenet i c codeappear s
as a commandkeyboar d
f or
t hel i vi ng, on whi char epl ayed t hei nf i ni t es i mal
combi nat i ons
and var i at i ons t hat det er mi net hei r " des t i ny" - a- " t el e" - onomi c
des t i ny t hat unf ol ds on t hemol ecul ar s cr een of t hecode. Much
can bes ai d about t heobj ect i vi t y of t hegenet i c codet hat s er ves
as a " bi ol ogi cal " pr ot ot ypef or
t he ent i r e uni ver s e, t hi s com-
bi nat or y, al eat or y and l udi c uni ver s et hat nows ur r ounds us .
Af t er al l , what i s " bi ol ogy" ? What i s t hi s t r ut h i t pos s es s es ? Or
i s i t t hat i t pos s es s es
onl y t r ut h
. . .
des t i ny t r ans f or med i nt o an
oper at i onal i ns t r ument panel . Behi nd t hes cr een
of
bi ol ogi cal
r emot econt r ol , t her ei s no l onger any pl ay - no s t akes , i l l u-
s i ons ,
or
r epr es ent at i ons
. I t i s s i mpl y a mat t er of modul at i ng
t hecode, pl ayi ng wi t h i t as onepl ays wi t h t het onal i t i es and
t i mbr es of a s t er eophoni c
s ys t em.
Thel at t er i s a good exampl e
of
t he
l udi c. When mani pul at -
160 SEDUCTI ON
i ng t he st er eo' s cont r ol s, one' s
concer ns ar e no l onger musi cal
but
t echnol ogi cal : t he opt i mal r nodul at i on of
. t hesyst em' s r ange.
Wi t h t he magi c of t he consol e
and i nst r ument panel ,
t he
mani pul at i on of
t he medi umpr edomi nat es .
Consi der a game of
comput er chess . Wher e i s t he
i nt ensi t y
of t he game of
chess, or t he pl easur e pr oper t o
comput er s? The
one i nvol ves pl ay, t he ot her t he
l udi c. The same appl i es t o
a
soccer mat cht hat has been t el evi sed
. Don' t t hi nk t hat t hey
ar e
t he same mat ch: one i s
hot , t he ot her cool - one i s
a game,
wi t h i t s
emot i onal char ge, i t s br avado and
chor eogr aphy, t he
ot her i s t act i l e, modul at ed ( pl ay- backs,
cl ose- ups, sweeps, sl ow
mot i on shot s, di f f er ent
angl es of vi si on, et c. ) . , The t el evi sed
mat ch i s, above
al l el se, a t el evi sed event , l i ke
t he Hol ocaust
or t he war
i n Vi et nam, and i s bar el y di st i ngui shabl e
f r omt he
l at t er
.
Thus
t he i nt r oduct i on of col our
t el evi si on i n t he Uni t ed
St at es,
whi chhad been sl owand
di f f i cul t , onl y t ook of f when
oneof
t he maj or net wor ks deci ded t o
i nt r oduce col our t o t el -
evi sed j our nal i sm. I t was
t he per i od of t he war i n Vi et nam,
and
st udi es
have shownt hat t he "pl ay" of col our s,
and t he t echni -
cal
sophi st i cat i on bor ne by t hi s i nnovat i on,
r ender ed t he i m-
ages
of war mor e bear abl e t o
t he vi ewi ng publ i c . The
"mor e"
t r ut h, t he gr eat er t he
l udi c di st ant i at i on f r omt he
event .
The Hol ocaust , t he t el evi si on
speci al .
TheJ ews ar e no l onger f or ced t o
pass t hr ought he gas cham-
ber s and cr emat or i um
ovens, but t hr ought he sound t r ack
and
pi ct ur e st r i p,
t he cat hodi c scr een and
mi cr opr ocessor . The
amnesi a, t he
obl i vi on, t her eby f i nal l y at t ai ns an
aest het i c di men-
si on -
consummat ed i n r et r ospect i ve and
r et r ogr essi ve f ashi on,
r ai sed her e t o mass di mensi ons
. Tel evi si on as t he
event ' s t r ue
"f i nal sol ut i on. "
The di mensi onof hi st or y t hat once
r emai ned i n t he shadows
as gui l t , no l onger exi st s,
si ncenow"t he whol ewor l d
knows, "
t he whol e
wor l d has been shaken - a sur e
si gn t hat "i t " wi l l
never
happen agai n. I n ef f ect , what i s
exor ci zed at t he cost of
onl y a f ewt ear s wi l l
not happen agai n, because i t , i s
nowr ecur -
r i ng, andi n t he ver y f or mof
i t s al l egeddenunci at i on,
t he ver y
THE
POLI TI CAL
DESTI NY
OFSEDUCTI ON 161
medi umof i t s al l egedexorci s m- t el evi s i on. The
s amef orget -
f ul nes s , t hes amel i qui dat i on, ext ermi nat i on,
andeven anni hi -
l at i on of memoryandhi s t ory- t hes amereces s i vei rradi at i on,
t he s ame
echol es s abs orpt i on, t hes amebl ack hol e as Aus ch-
wi t z . And
onewoul dhaveus bel i eve t hat t el evi s i on i s goi ng
t o rel eas e us f romt he
burden of Aus chwi t z byrai s i ng col l ec-
t i vecons ci ous nes s , whent el evi s i on perpet uat es i t i n ot her ways ,
no l onger under t heaus pi ces of a pl ace
of anni hi l at i on, but of
a medi umof di s s uas i on.
TheHol ocaus t i s , f i rs t of al l ( andexcl us i vel y) a t el evi s edevent
( one mus t not f orget McLuhan' s bas i c rul e) . That i s , i t i s
an at -
t empt
t o reheat a t ragi c but col dhi s t ori cal event , t hef i rs t great
event of t he
col ds ys t ems , t he- cool i ng s ys t ems , t hes ys t ems of
di s s uas i on andext ermi nat i on whi chwoul dt hen
bedepl oyed
i n ot her f orms
( i ncl udi ng t he Col d War, et c. ) - andan event
t hat concerns col dmas s es ( t he
J ews no l onger i mpl i cat ed, but
i n t he endf orced
t o manage t hei r own deat h, t hemas s es no
l onger rebel l i ous - di s s uaded
bydeat h, di s s uadedunt o deat h) .
Acol devent warmedup bya col d
medi umf or mas s es , t hem-
s el ves col d, who aregoi ng t o experi ence onl y
a pos t humous
emot i on, a t act i l eanddi s s uas i ves hudder t hat wi l l enabl et hem
t o l et t hecat as t rophes l i p i nt o
obl i vi on wi t h a s ort of aes t het i c
goodcons ci ence.
I n order t o reheat al l t hi s , t he
pol i t i cal andpedagogi cal or-
ches t rat i on t hat f ol l owedt he( t el evi s ed) event i n
an at t empt t o gi ve
i t meani ng was not exces s i ve. Thepani c bef ore t he
program' s
pos s i bl e
cons equences on t hemi nds of chi l dren; al l t hos es oci al
workers mobi l i zedt o f i l t er i t , as i f t hi s art i f i ci al
res urrect i on carri ed
a danger of cont agi on! I n f act , t hedanger
was qui t et heoppo-
s i t e:
t hat res ul t i ng f romt hes oci al i nert i a of col ds ys t ems -
col d
produci ng col d. Thus t hewhol e
worl dhadt o bemobi l i zedi n
order t o recons t i t ut e
t hes oci al ( warmt h) of communi cat i on out
of t hecol dmons t er
of ext ermi nat i on. Theprograms ervedt o
capt uret heart i f i ci al warmt hof a deadevent i n
order t o reheat
t hedeadbodyof t hes oci al . Hencet he
s uppl ement arycont ri -
but i ons of t heot her
medi a at t empt i ng t o ext endt heprogram' s
ef f ect s byi t s f eed- back: t heconcurrent pol l s s econdi ng t he
pro-
gram' s enormous , col l ect i vei mpact - when,
needl es s t o s ay, t hes e
pol l s
onl y
veri f i edt het el evi s ual s ucces s
of
t he
medi umi t s el f .
162 SEDUCTION
Oneshoul d speak of t el evi si on' s col d l i ght , and
whyi t i s i n-
of f ensi vet o t hei magi nat i on( i ncl udi ng t he
i magi nat i onof chi l -
dr en) . It i s i nnocuous becausei t no
l onger conveys ani magi nar y,
f or t hesi mpl er easont hat i t i s no l onger an
i mage. Her ei t con-
t r ast s wi t h t heci nemawhi ch( t hough
i ncr easi ngl ycont ami nat ed
byt el evi si on) i s
st i l l endowedwi t h ani nt ensei magi nar y- be-
cause i t i s ani mage.
Thi s i s not si mpl y t o speak of f i l mas a
mer escr eenor vi sual
f or m, but as a myt h, somet hi ng t hat
st i l l
r esembl es a doubl e,
ami r r or , a f ant asy, a dr eam, et c. Noneof
t hi s i n t he TVi mage.
It doesn' t suggest anyt hi ng, i t mesmer -
i zes. . . It i s
onl yascr eenor , bet t er , i t i s ami ni at ur i zed
t er mi nal
t hat i mmedi at el yappear s i nyour head ( you ar et he
scr eenand
t het el evi si oni s wat chi ng you) , t r ansi st or i zes
al l , your neur ons
and passes f or a magnet i c t ape- a t ape, not an
i mage.
Al l t hi s bel ongs t o t hel udi c r eal m
wher eoneencount er s a
col d seduct i on- t he " nar ci ssi st i c" spel l of el ect r oni c
and i n-
f or mat i onsyst ems, t hecol d
at t r act i onof t het er mi nal s andmedi -
ums t hat we
havebecome, sur r ounded as wear eby
consol es,
i sol at ed and seduced
byt hei r mani pul at i on.
The possi bl i t y of
modul at i ons wi t hi n an
undi f f er ent i at ed
uni ver seandof t he" pl ay" of unst abl eset s of
el ement s, i s never
wi t hout
f asci nat i on. It i s evenhi ghl ypossi bl e t hat
l udi c and
l i bi nal f l i r t wi t h each ot her somewher ei n
t hedi r ect i onof r an-
domsyst ems, by
vi r t ue of a desi r e t hat no l onger l eads t o
i n-
f r act i ons
i nt hel egal sense, but ent ai l s di f f r act i oni n
al l senses
wi t hi na uni ver set hat no l onger knows t he
l egal spher e. Thi s
desi r eal so bel ongs t o t he
l udi c r eal mwi t h i t s t opol ogyof
shi f t -
i ng syst ems, and i s anadded
sour ceof pl easur e( or angui sh)
f or each of
t hepar t i cl es movi ng wi t hi nt he
net wor ks. Wear e
al l accor ded t hi s l i ght , psychedel i c gi ddi ness
whi chr esul t s f r om
mul t i pl eor successi veconnect i ons and
di sconnect i ons . Wear e
al l i nvi t ed t o
become mi ni at ur i zed " game syst ems, "
i
. e. ,
mi cr osyst ems wi t h t hepot ent i al t o r egul at e
t hei r ownr andom
f unct i oni ng .
THEPOLI TI CAL
DESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON 163
Thi s i s t he modern
meani ng
of
pl ay, t he "l udi c" sense, con-
not i ng t he suppl eness andpol yval ence of combi nat i ons
. Un-
derst oodi nt hi s sense, "pl ay, " i t s
very possi bi l i t y, i s at t he basi s
of
t he met ast abi l i t y of syst ems. I t has
not hi ng
t o do
wi t h pl ay
as a dual or agoni st i c
rel at i on; i t i s t he col d seduct i on t hat
governs t he spheres of i nf ormat i onand
communi cat i on. And
i t i s i n t hi s col d seduct i on
t hat t he soci al andi t s represent a-
t i ons are
nowweari ngt hemsel ves t hi n.
We are al l qui t e f ami l i ar wi t h t hi s
i mmense process of si mu-
l at i on
. Non- di rect i ve i nt ervi ews, cal l - i n shows, al l - out
part i ci -
pat i on
- t he ext ort i onof speech: "I t concerns you, you are
t he
maj ori t y, you are what ' s
happeni ng. " Andt he probi ngof opi n-
i ons,
heart s, mi nds, andt he unconsci ous t o show
howmuch
"i t " speaks . The news has beeni nvadedby t hi s
phant omcon-
t ent , t hi s homeophat hi c t ranspl ant , t hi s waki ngdreamof com-
muni cat i on. Aci rcul ar
const ruct i on where one present s t he
audi ence
wi t h what i t want s, ani nt egrat edci rcui t of perpet ual
sol i ci t at i on. The i mmense energi es spent
i n mai nt ai ni ngt hi s
si mul acrum
at arm' s l engt h, t oavoi dt he brut al di s- si mul at i on
t hat woul doccur shoul dt he real i t y of a radi cal
l oss
of
mean-
i ng become t oo
evi dent .
Seduct i on
/ si mul acrum: communi cat i onas t he
f unct i oni ng
of t he soci al wi t hi n a cl osedci rcui t , where si gns
dupl i cat e an
undi scoverabl e real i t y. The soci al
cont ract has become a"si mu-
l at i on pact " seal edby t he medi aandt he news.
Andnobody,
one mi ght add, i s compl et el y t akeni n: t he news
i s experi enced
as
anambi ence, aservi ce, or hol ogramof t he soci al . The mass-
es respondt o t he si mul at i onof
meani ngwi t h aki ndof reverse
si mul at i on; t hey respondt o di ssuasi on wi t h di saf f ect i on, and
t o i l l usi ons wi t h aneni gmat i c bel i ef
. I t al l moves around, and
cangi ve t he i mpressi on of anoperat i ve seduct i on. But such
seduct i onhas nomore
meani ngt hananyt hi ngel se, seduct i on
here connot es onl y aki ndof l udi c adhesi ont osi mul at ed
pi eces
of i nf ormat i on, a
ki nd
of
t act i l e at t ract i on mai nt ai ned by t he
model s.
164 SEDUCTI ON
"Tel e- phat hi cs . "
"Roger s her e - I amr ecei vi ng
you
f i ve
on f i ve. " "Doyouhear
me? Yes, I hear you. " . "We r ecei ve you, come i n. " "Yes, we ar e
speaki ng
. "
Thi s i s t he l i t any of t he r adi o bands, par t i cul ar l y t he
al t er nat i ve
or pi r at e st at i ons . One pl ays at speaki ng and l i st en-
i ng; one pl ays at communi cat i on
usi ng t he most sophi st i cat ed
t echnol ogy f or t he l at t er ' s mi se en scene. The phat i c f unct i on
of l anguage, used
t o
est abl i sh
cont act and sust ai n speech' s f or -
mal di mensi on: t hi s f unct i on f i r st i sol at ed
and descr i bed by
Mal i nowski wi t h r ef er ence t o t he Mel anesi ans, t hen byJ akob-
son i n hi s gr i d of l anguage' s f unct i ons, becomes hyper t r ophi ed
i n t he t el e- di mensi on
of t he communi cat i ons net wor ks . Con-
t act f or cont act ' s sake becomes t he empt yf or mwi t h whi ch l an-
guage seduces i t sel f when i t
no
l onger
has anyt hi ng t o say.
The l at t er concer ns our own cul t ur e. What Mal i nowski
descr i bed was somet hi ng qui t e di f f er ent : a symbol i c al t er cat i on
or duel of wor ds. Byt hese r i t ual phr ases and pal aver s wi t hout
cont ent , t he nat i ves
wer e
st i l l
t hr owi ng a chal l enge and of f er -
i ng a gi f t , as i n a pur e cer emoni al . Language has no need f or
"cont act " : i t i s wewhoneed communi cat i on t o have a speci f i c
"cont act " f unct i on, pr eci sel y because i t i s el udi ng us . That i s
whyJ akobson was abl e
t o
i sol at e i t i n hi s
anal ysi s of
l anguage,
whi l e bot h t he concept and t he t er ms
t o expr ess
i t ar e
absent
f r omot her cul t ur es . J akobson' s gr i d and hi s axi omat i cs of com-
muni cat i on ar e cont empor aneous wi t h a change i n l anguage' s
f or t une - i t i s begi nni ng t o no l onger communi cat e anyt hi ng .
I t has t hus become ur gent t o anal yt i cal l y r est or e t he f unct i on-
al possi bi l i t y of communi cat i on, andi n par t i cul ar t he "phat i c"
f unct i on t hat ,
i n
l ogi cal t er ms, i s a si mpl e t r ui sm: i f i t speaks,
t hen i t speaks . But i n ef f ect i t no l onger
speaks, ' and
t he
di s-
cover y of t he "phat i c" f unct i on i s sympt omat i c of t he need t o
i nj ect cont act , est abl i sh
connect i ons, and speak t i r el essl y
si m-
pl yi n or der t o r ender l anguage possi bl e. Adesper at e si t uat i on
wher e even si mpl e cont act appear s wondr ous .
I f t he phat i c has become hyper t r ophi ed i n al l
our
communi -
cat i ons syst ems ( i . e. , wi t hi n t he medi a and i nf or mat i on pr ocess-
i ng
syst ems) , i t i s because t el e- di st ance ensur es t hat speech
l i t er al l y no l onger has anymeani ng. One says t hat one i s speak-
i ng, but byspeaki ng one i s onl y ver i f yi ng t he net wor k andt he
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NYOF
SEDUCTI ON 16
5
f act t hat onei s l i nked upwi t h i t .
Therei s not evenan"ot her"
at t heot her end, f or i na s i mpl ereci procat i on
of s i gnal s of recog-
ni t i ont herei s no
l onger ani dent i f i abl e t rans mi t t er or recei ver,
but
s i mpl y t wot ermi nal s . Theonet ermi nal ' s s i gnal t o t he
ot her
i s merel y an
i ndi cat i on t hat s omet hi ng i s goi ng t hrough and
t hat , t heref ore,
not hi ng i s happeni ng. Perf ect di s s uas i on.
Twot ermi nal s donot t woi nt erl ocut ors make. I n"t el e"
s pace
( t he f ol l owi ng al s o hol ds t rue f or t el evi s i on) ,
t herearenol onger
any det ermi nat et erms or pos i t i ons .
Onl y t ermi nal s i n a pos i -
t i on of ex- t ermi nat i on
. I t i s here, morever, t hat J akobs on' s en-
t i re gri d f al l s apart , f or i t s val i di t y i s
res t ri ct ed t o t he cl as s i c
conf i gurat i onof
di s cours eandcommuni cat i on. Thegri d l os es
i t s
meani ng whenappl i ed t o net works wherepure
"di gi t al i t y"
rei gns . I ndi s cours e t herei s s t i l l a pol ari t y of t erms ,
di s t i nct i ve
oppos i t i ons t hat regul at e
t he advent of meani ng. As t ruct ure,
s ynt ax and s pace of
di f f erence, s t i l l regul at e di al ogue, as i m-
pl i ed
by
t he s i gn ( s i gni f i er / s i gni f i ed) and t he mes s age ( t rans -
mi t t er/ recei ver) , et c. But t he 0/ 1 of bi nary or di gi t al
s ys t ems
i s nol onger a di s t i nct i veoppos i t i on or
es t abl i s hed di f f erence.
I t i s a "bi t , " t hes mal l es t uni t of el ect roni c
i mpul s e- nol onger
a uni t of meani ng, but an i dent i f i cat ory
pul s e. I t i s nol onger
l anguage, but i t s radi cal di s s uas i on. Thi s i s what t he mat ri x of
i nf ormat i onandcommuni cat i oni s l i ke, andhowt henet works
f unct i on. Theneed f or "cont act " i s mos t cruel l y f el t ,
f or not
onl y i s t here noduel rel at i onas
wi t h t heMel anes i an' s l i ngui s -
t i c pot l ach, but t herei s no
l onger event he i nt er- i ndi vi dual l ogi c
of
exchangef ound i ncl as s i cal l anguage( t hat of J akobs on) . Di s -
curs i ve dual i t y and pol ari t y havebeens ucceeded by
t he di gi -
t al i t y of dat a proces s i ng. Thet ot al as cendancy of t he
medi a and
net works
. Thecol d el evat i on of t heel ect roni c medi a, and of
t he mas s i t s el f as medi um.
TELE: t hereareno
l onger anyt hi ng but t ermi nal s . AUTO: each
pers oni s
hi s
or
her ownt ermi nal . ( ` Tel e" and"aut o" cant hem-
s el ves bes eenas worki ng pi eces or commut i ng
part i cl es t hat
are connect ed t o
words , l i ke a vi deoi s connect ed t o a group
of
peopl e, or t el evi s i ont o t hos e wat chi ng i t ) . Thegroup
wi t h
a vi deocamera i s i t s el f
i t s ownt ermi nal . I t records , adj us t s and
manages i t s el f el ect roni cal l y. I t t urns i t s el f on, s educes
i t s el f .
Thegroupi s s educed and even erot i ci zed
by t he i ns t ant ane-
166 SEDUCTI ON
ous r epor t i t has
of
i t sel f .
Soonsel f - management
wi l l
be uni ver -
sal , t he pr ovi nce of ever y per son, gr oup and t er mi nal . Sel f -
seduct i on wi l l become t he nor m
of
al l
t he char gedpar t i cl es
i n t he net wor ks or syst ems.
The body i t sel f , oper at ed
by r emot e cont r ol f r omt he genet -
i c code, i s i t sel f no mor e t hani t s ownt er mi nal ;
i t has no ot her
concer nt hant he opt i mal sel f - management
of
i t s memor ybanks.
Pur e magnet i zat i on - t hat of t he
r esponse by t he quest i on,
t he r eal by t he model , t he 0by t he 1, t he net wor k by i t s ver y
exi st ence, t he
speaker s by t hei r mer e connect i on, t he pur e t ac-
t i l i t y
of
t he si gnal ,
t he sheer vi r t ue of " cont act , " t he t ot al af -
f i ni t y
of one t er mi nal f or anot her : t hi s i s t he i mage of seduct i on,
scat t er ed anddi f f used t hr oughout al l
our
cur r ent
syst ems.
A
sel f - seduct i on/ sel f - management
t hat si mpl y r ef l ect s t he net -
wor ks" ci r cul ar i t y, andt he
shor t ci r cui t i ng of each of t hei r at oms
or par t i cl es. (Some mi ght speak. her e of nar ci ssi sm, andwhy
not ?
I f onl y
because one shoul dnot t r anspose t er ms l i ke nar -
ci ssi smandseduct i ont o a r egi st er t hat
does
not concer nt hem,
t hat of si mul at i on) .
Thus accor di ng t oJ eanQuer zol ai n" Lesi l i ci umf l eur de peau"
(Tr aver ses,
no. 14/ 15) : psychobi ol ogi cal t echnol ogy - al l t he
comput er pr ost hesi s and
sel f - adj ust i ng el ect r oni c' net wor ks we
possess - pr ovi des us wi t h a ki nd
of
st r ange bi oel ect r oni c mi r -
r or , i nwhi cheach per son, l i ke some di gi t al nar ci ssus, i s goi ng
t o
sl i de al ong
t he t r aj ect or y of adeat h dr i ve andsi nk i nhi s or
her owni mage. Nar ci ssus
=nar cosi s (McLuhan had al r eady
made t he connect i on) :
El ect r oni c nar cosi s: i t i s t he ul t i mat e r i sk of di gi -
t al
si mul at i on
. . .
We woul dsl i p f r omOedi pus t o
Nar ci ssus. . . At t he end
of
t he sel f - management
of
our bodi es andpl easur es t her e woul dbe asl ow
nar ci ssi st i c
nar cosi s.
I n
a wor d, wi t h si l i con, what
happens t o t he r eal i t y pr i nci pl e? I amnot sayi ng
t hat t he wor l d' s di gi t al i zat i on wi l l soonput anend
t o
Oedi pus
.
I
amnot i ng t hat t he devel opment of
bi ol ogy andi nf or mat i on
t echnol ogy i s accompa-
ni ed by t he di ssol ut i on of t he per sonal i t y st r uc-
t ur e we cal l Oedi pal . The di ssol ut i on of t hese
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON 167
st r uct ur es uncover s anot her r egi on,
wher e t he
f at her i s absent : i t has t odo wi t h t he mat er nal , t he
oceani c
f eel i ng andt he deat h dr i ve. I t
i s
not a neu-
r osi s t hat t hr eat ens, but somet hi ng of t he or der of
a psychosi s . Apat hol ogi cal nar ci ssi sm. . . We bel i eve
t hat we under st and t he f or ms of t he soci al bond
bui l t on Oedi pus.
But when t he l at t er
no
l onger
f unct i ons, what wi l l power do?
Af t er aut hor i t y,
seduct i on?
The f i nest exampl e of t hi s "bi oni c mi r r or " and"nar ci ssi st i c
necr osi s" i s cl oni ng, t he ext r eme f or mof sel f - seduct i on: f r om
t he Same t o t he Same wi t hout goi ng t hr ough t he Ot her
.
I n t he Uni t ed St at es a chi l dmi ght be bor n i n t he same way
as ager ani um, by t aki ng cut t i ngs . The f i r st chi l d- cl one - geneal -
ogy by veget at i ve mul t i pl i cat i on. The f i r st chi l dbor n f r omt he
si ngl e cel l of an i ndi vi dual , hi s "f at her , " t he sol e par ent , of whi ch
he wi l l be t he exact
copy,
t he per f ect t wi n, t he
doubl e ( D
. Ror -
vi k, `Asoni mage: l a copi e d' un homme") . I nf i ni t e humanpr opa-
gat i on by cut t i ngs, wi t h each cel l of an i ndi vi duat edor gani sm
capabl e of becomi ng t he mat r i x f or an i dent i cal i ndi vi dual .
My genet i c i nher i t ance was f i xedonce andf or al l
whena cer t ai n sper mat ozoi dmet a cer t ai n ovar y.
Thi s i nher i t ance bear s t he f or mul a f or al l t he bi o-
chemi cal pr ocesses t hat have cr eat edme
anden-
sur e my f unct i oni ng. Acopy of t hi s f or mul a i s i n-
scr i bedi n each of t he t ens of bi l l i ons of cel l s t hat
const i t ut e me. Each of t hemknows my makeup;
bef or e bei ng a cel l of my l i ver or bl ood, i t i s a cel l
of me. I t i s t her ef or e t heor et i cal l y possi bl e t o con-
st r uct an i ndi vi dual i dent i cal t o mysel f f r omany
one of t hem. ( Pr . A
.
J acquar d)
Pr oj ect i on andi nt er nment i n t he mi r r or of t he genet i c code.
Ther e
i s no bet t er pr ost hesi s t han D. N. A
. ,
no
f i ner
nar ci ssi st i c
ext ensi on t han t hat newi mage best owedonmoder nbei ngs i n
pl ace of t hei r specul ar i mage: t hei r mol ecul ar f or mul a. Her e
i s wher e one wi l l f i nd one' s "t r ut h" - i n t he i ndef i ni t e r epet i -
168 SEDUCTI ON
t i on
of
one' s " r eal , " bi ol ogi cal bei ng. Thi s nar ci ssi sm, whose
sour ce i s no l onger a mi r r or but a f or mul a, i s a monst r ous par o-
dyof t he myt h of Nar ci ssus . Acol d nar ci ssi sm, a col d sel f -
seduct i on, wi t hout even t hat mi ni mal di st ance
necessar y f or
t he exper i ence of onesel f as an
i l l usi on. The mat er i al i zat i on of
t he r eal , bi ol ogi cal doubl e i n t he cl one cut s shor t t he possi bi l -
i t yof pl ayi ng wi t h one' s owni mage and, t her eby, pl ayi ng wi t h
one' s own deat h.

'
The doubl e i s an i magi nar yf i gur e t hat , l i ke t he, soul or
one' s
shadow, or one' s i mage
i n a mi r r or , haunt s t he subj ect wi t h a
f ai nt deat h t hat has t o be const ant l ywar dedof f . I f i t mat er i al -
i zes, deat h i s i mmi nent . Thi s f ant ast i c pr oposi t i on i s nowl i t er -
al l y r eal i zed i n cl oni ng. The cl one i s t he ver y i mage of
deat h,
but wi t hout t he symbol i c i l l usi on t hat once gave i t i t s
char m.
Somet hi ng of t he subj ect ' s i nt i macywi t h hi msel f
r est s
on
t he
i mmat er i al i t y of
hi s
doubl e, on
t he f act t hat i t i s andr emai ns
a phant asy. One
can andmust dr eamt hr oughout one' s l i f e of
t he per f ect dupl i cat i on or mul t i pl i cat i on of one' s
bei ng, but i t
r emai ns a dr eam, andi s
dest r oyed when one t r i es t o make i t
r eal . The same hol ds
f or t he pr i mal scene or t hat of seduct i on:
t heyt oo
onl ywor k when r ecal l edandphant asi zed, never when
r eal . I t was up t o our per i od t o t r yandmat er i al i ze t hi s
phant a-
sy - l i ke so manyot her s - andbywayof t ot al conf usi on,
change
t he pl aywi t h one' s doubl e
f r oma
subt l e
exchange wi t h deat h
andt he ot her i nt o an et er ni t y of t he same.
The dr eamof et er nal t wi ns as a subst i t ut e f or sexual r epr oduc-
t i on . Acel l ul ar dr eamof schi zogenesi s - t he
sur est f or mof
par ent hood, si nce
i t f i nal l yal l ows one t o bypass t he ot her , and
go f r omt he same t o t he same
( one wi l l st i l l r equi r e a woman' s
ut er us, anda hol l owedout ovum, but t hese ai ds ar e shor t - l i ved
andanonymous - any f emal e pr ost hesi s wi l l do) .
A
mono-
cel l ul ar ut opi a t hat , by way of genet i cs, wi l l enabl e
compl ex
bei ngs t o at t ai n
t he dest i ny
of
pr ot ozoa .
I s t her ea deat h dr i ve t hat pushes sexedbei ngs t owar ds a f or m
of r epr oduct i on ant er i or t o t hei r acqui si t i on of sexual
i dent i -
t i es - ( mor eover , doesn' t
t hi s f i ssi par ous f or m, t hi s pr ol i f er a-
t i on bycont i gui t yconj ur e up deat h i n t he deepest r ecesses of
our i magi nar y- as somet hi ng t hat deni es sexual i t yandseeks
t o anni hi l at e i t , t he l at t er bei ng t he bear er of
l i f e andt her ef or e
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON 169
a cr i t i cal andmor t al f or mof r epr oduct i on?)
-
and
t hat si mul -
t aneousl y pushes
t hem
t o deny
al l al t er i t y
so
t hat t hey need
no
l onger st r i ve f or anyt hi ng but t he per pet uat i onof ani den-
t i t y, t he t r anspar ency of a genet i c code al l t he mor e dedi cat ed
t o
pr ocr eat i on?
Let us l eave t he deat h dr i ve. Per haps we ar e deal i ng wi t h a
f ant asy of sel f - engender i ng? But no, f or t he subj ect mi ght dr eam
of el i mi nat i ng t he par ent al f i gur es andeven subst i t ut i ng hi m-
sel f f or t hem, but he cannot el i mi nat e t he symbol i c st r uct ur e
of pr ocr eat i on
: when
one becomes one' s
ownchi l d, one i s st i l l
t he chi l d
of someone. Cl oni ng by cont r ast , abol i shes not j ust
t he Mot her , but t he Fat her , t he cr ossi ng of t hei r genes, t he i m-
mi xt ur e of t hei r di f f er ences, andabove al l t he duel act t hat en-
gender i ng supposes
.
The
per son cl oned does not engender
hi msel f : he comes
t o bud
f r oma segment . One mi ght specu-
l at e ont he weal t h of t hese pl ant - l i ke br anchi ngs t hat di ssol ve
Oedi pal sexual i t y i n f avour of an "non- human" sex - but t he
f act r emai ns t hat bot h t he Fat her andMot her have di sappear ed,
andi n f avour
of
a mat r i x/ code [ t he
wor d
"mat r i ce" means bot h
"mat r i x" and "womb"]. No mor e mot her , j ust a mat r i x. And
hencef or t h i t i s t he mat r i x of t he genet i c code t hat wi l l "gi ve
bi r t h" wi t hout
end
i n
anoper at i ve
manner
pur gedof
al l con-
t i ngent sexual i t y.
Nor canone speak any l onger of a subj ect , si nce t he i den-
t i t ar i an r edupl i cat i on
put s
anend
t o
i t s di vi si on. The mi r r or
st age i s abol i shed, or r at her par odi ed i n monst r ous f ashi on,
mar ki ng t he endof t he age- ol d dr eamof t he subj ect ' s nar ci s-
si st i c pr oj ect i on
.
For t he l at t er st i l l supposes a
mi r r or ,
t he
mi r -
r or i n whi ch t he
subj ect al i enat es hi msel f i n or der t o f i nd
hi msel f , or st ar es at hi msel f onl y
t o
see hi s owndeat h. But her e
t her e i s no mi r r or : ani ndust r i al obj ect wi t hi na ser i es does not
"mi r r or " t he i dent i cal obj ect t hat succeeds i t . The one i s never
ami r age, ani deal or danger f or t he ot her . At most such obj ect s
canbe addedup, f or t hey have not beenengender edsexual l y
andar e not awar e of deat h.
Asegment
does not r equi r e t he medi at i on of t he
i magi nar y
f or i t s r epr oduct i on- no mor e t hananear t hwor m. Each seg-
ment of a
wor m
i s r epr oduced di r ect l y as t he compl et e
wor m
- each cel l of anAmer i cani ndust r i al i st cangi ve r i se t o a new
170 SEDUCTI ON
i ndust r i al i st . J ust as each f r agment of a hol ogr amcan become
a mat r i x of t he compl et e hol ogr am; al l t hei nf or mat i on bei ng
cont ai ned i n each of t he scat t er ed f r agment s .
The
same l ogi c mar ks t he end of t he concept of t ot al i t y.
I f
al l t he i nf or mat i on can bef ound i n each of t he par t s, t he whol e
l oses i t s meani ng. I t al so mar ks t heend of t he body, of t hi s si n-
gul ar bei ng we cal l t he body, t hi s si ngul ar conf i gur at i on t hat
cannot be segment ed i nt o addi t i onal cel l s, as wi t nessed by t he
f act of sexual i t y. Par adoxi cal l y, cl oni ngwi l l f abr i cat e sexed be-
i ngs i n per pet ui t y,
si nce t hey
wi l l
r esembl e
t hei r
model s,
even
as
t he
sex or gans l ose
t hei r
f unct i on . But t hen sex
' i s
not a f unc-
t i on, f or i t exceeds al l t he body' s par t s and f unct i ons . I ndeed,
i t exceeds al l t he dat a t hat can be obt ai ned about t he body,
whi cht hegenet i c code cl ai ms t o col l ect . Thi s i s why t hel at t er
can onl y cl ear t heway t o a t ype of aut onomous r epr oduct i on,
i ndependent
of
sex and
deat h
.

;
The bi o- physi o- anat omi cal sci ences had al r eady begun t he
anal yt i cal decomposi t i on
of
t he
body
wi t h i t s di ssect i on i nt o
or gans and f unct i ons. Mi cr o- mol ecul ar genet i cs i s i t s l ogi cal con-
sequence at a much hi gher l evel of abst r act i on and si mul at i on
:
t he nucl ear l evel of t he command cel l , t he di r ect i ve l evel of
t hegenet i c code ar ound whi ch t hi s ent i r e phant asmagor i a i s
or gani zed .
I n t hemechani st i c vi si on
we can
st i l l
speak of
" t r adi t i onal "
si mul at i on, eachor gan bei ng onl y a par t i al and di f f er ent i at ed
pr ost hesi s . I n t he bi o- cyber net i c vi si on, t he smal l est undi f f er en-
t i at ed el ement , t he cel l becomes an embr yoni c pr ost hesi s of
t he ent i r e body.
The
f or mul a i nscr i bed i n each cel l becomes
t he t r ue moder n pr ost hesi s of al l bodi es . For i f a pr ost hesi s i s
gener al l y an ar t i f act t hat r epl aces a f ai l i ng or gan, or an i n-
st r ument al pr ol ongat i on of t he body, t hen t he
DNA
mol ecul e
t hat cont ai ns al l t he dat a r el at i ve t o a l i vi ng bei ng, i s t he pr ost he-
si s par excel l ence, si nce i t wi l l al l owt hat bei ng t o pr ol ong i t -
sel f i ndef i ni t el y. I n t r ut h, i t wi l l becomenot hi ng mor et han t he
i ndef i ni t e ser i es of i t s cyber net i c avat ar s .
Wear e speaki ng of a pr ost hesi s even mor ear t i f i ci al t han any
THEPOLI TI CAL DESTI NY
OFSEDUCTI ON 171
mechani cal pr ost hesi s . For t he genet i c code i s not " nat ur al . "
Whenever a par t
i s abst r act ed f r omt he whol e andr ender ed
aut onomous, i t al t er s t he whol e
by subst i t ut i ng i t sel f f or i t ( pr o-
t hesi s - t hi s i s i t s et ymol ogi cal meani ng) .
I n t hi s sense onecan
say t hat t he genet i c code, whi ch cl ai ms
t o condense anent i r e
l i vi ng bei ng
becausei t cont ai ns al l t he l at t er ' s " dat a"
( genet i c
si mul at i on
i s i ncr edi bl yvi ol ent ) i s anar t i f act , an ar t i f i ci al mat r i x,
a si mul at i on mat r i x, f r omwhi ch
wi l l pr oceed, no l onger by
r epr oduct i on, but by pur e andsi mpl e r epet i t i on,
i dent i cal be-
i ngs assi gned
t o t he same commands .
Cl oni ng
i s, t her ef or e, t he ul t i mat e st at e of t he body' s si mul a-
t i on, wher e
t he i ndi vi dual , r educedt o anabst r act genet i c f or -
mul a, i s dest i nedt o
ser i al mul t i pl i cat i on
.
Wal t er Benj ami n sai d
t hat i n t he age of mechani cal r epr oduct i ont he wor k
of
ar t
l oses
i t s " aur a, " t he uni que qual i t y of i t s her e andnow, i t s aest het i c
f or m: i t
i s no l onger dest i nedf or seduct i on but r epr oduct i on,
andi n i t s newdest i ny, t akes
onapol i t i cal f or m. The or i gi nal
i s l ost , andonl y nost al gi a can r est or e
i t s " aut hent i ci t y. " Theex-
t r eme f or mof t hi s pr ocess i s t o be f oundi n
our cont empor ar y
mass medi a, wher e t her e never was an or i gi nal , t hi ngs bei ng
concei vedf r omt he st ar t i n t er ms of t hei r unl i mi t edr epr oduci -
bi l i t y.
Thi s i s exact l y what happens t o humanbei ngs wi t h cl oni ng.
Thi s i s what happens t o t he body whenconcei ved onl y
as
i n-
f or mat i onal
st ock, or as dat a t o be pr ocessed. Not hi ng t hen pr e-
vent s i t s ser i al r epr oduct i on i n
t he same t er ms Benj ami nused
when speaki ng of i ndust r i al obj ect s
or i mages . The genet i c
model has pr ecedence over al l possi bl e bodi es .
Behi nd t hi s
r ever sal l i es t he i ncur si on of a t echnol ogy t hat
Benj ami n hadal r eady descr i bed
as a t ot al medi um- an enor -
mous pr ost hesi s f or t he gener at i on of i dent i cal andi ndi st i n-
gui shabl e
obj ect s andi mages - but wi t hout yet concei vi ng of
t he cur r ent deepeni ng
of t hi s t echnol ogy, whi ch makes possi -
bl e t he gener at i on of i dent i cal bei ngs, wi t hout any
possi bl e
r et ur n t o an or i gi nal bei ng. The
pr ost hesi s of t he i ndust r i al age
wer e st i l l ext er nal ,
exot ecbni cal - whi l et hose t hat wear e comi ng
17 2 SEDUCTI ON
t o knowhave branched
out andbeeni nt eri ori zed: esot echni cal .
Wel i ve i nanageof
sof t t echnol ogi es, of genet i c andment al
sof t ware. Theprost hesi s of t he i ndust ri al age, i t s machi nes,
st i l l
pai d heed t o t he bodyi norder t o modi f y
i t s i mage- andwere
t hemsel ves met abol i zed
i n
an
i magi nary, t hi s met abol i smbe-
comi ngpart of t he body' s
i mage: . But whensi mul at i onreaches
t he poi nt of no ret urn,
whent he prost hesi s i nf i l t rat e t he body' s
anonymous, mi cro- mol ecul ar core,
whent heyf orce t hemsel ves
ont he bodyas i t s
mat ri x, andburnout al l t he succeedi ngsym-
bol i c
ci rcui t s such t hat al l f ut ure bodi es wi l l be onl y
i t s i mmut a-
bl e repet i t i on - t hent hebodyandi t s hi st oryhave come t o an
end, t he i ndi vi dual bei ngno more t hant he
cancerous met ast asi s
of hi s basi c f ormul a.
I s not t he cl oni ngof i ndi vi dual s
f romani ndi vi dual Xsi mi -
l ar t o t he prol i f erat i onof a
si ngl e cel l onei dent i f i es wi t h cancer?
There i s a cl ose
rel at i on bet weent he concept of t he
genet i c
code
and t he pat hol ogy of cancer . The code desi gnat es
t he
mi ni mal f ormul a t o whi chone canreduce an
i ndi vi dual such
t hat he can
( and canonl y) be repeat ed, whi l e wi t h cancer
t he
same
t ype
of
cel l prol i f erat es wi t hout concernf or t he
organi c
l aws
of
t he whol e. Thus wi t h cl oni ngonewi t nesses
t he repet i -
t i onof t he Same, t heprol i f erat i onof
a si ngl e mat ri x. Formerl y
sexual reproduct i on prevent ed t hi s, but t oday
one canf i nal l y
i sol at e t he genet i c
mat ri x
of
i dent i t y, and el i mi nat e al l t he
di f f erent i al
vi ci ssi t udes t hat gave i ndi vi dual s t hei r al eat ory
charm. Or t hei r seduct i veness.
Themet ast asi s t hat beganwi t h i ndust ri al obj ect s ends
i ncel -
l ul ar organi zat i on. Cancer i s t he di sease
t hat domi nat es con-
t emporarypat hol ogy, because i t i s t he very
f ormof t he code' s
vi rul ence: t heaggravat ed
redundancyof t hesame cel l s, or t he
same
si gnal s.
Cl oni ng i s very much i n
keepi ng wi t h t he i rreversi bl e t en-
dencyt o
"ext endanddeepent he syst em' s i nt ernal t ransparen-
cy
byi ncreasi ng i t s possi bi l i t i es of sel f - regul at i onand
modi f yi ng
i t s i nf ormat i onal economy" ( Querzol a)
.
Al l dri ves wi l l be expel l ed.
Everyt hi ng i nt eri or ( net works,
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NY
OF
SEDUCTI ON
173
f unct i ons, or gans, consci ous or unconsci ous ci r cui t s) wi l l be
ext er i or i zed i n t he f or mof pr ost hesi s t hat wi l l const i t ut e an i deal
cor pus or bi t i ng ar ound t hebody, but wi t h t hel at t er as i t s own
sat el l i t e. Ever y nucl eus wi l l be enucl eat ed and pr oj ect ed i nt o
spat i al or bi t .
Thecl onei s t hemat er i al i zat i on of t hegenet i c f or mul a i n hu-
man f or m. But i t wi l l not st op t her e. Al l t he body' s secr et s -
sex, angui sh, even t hesubt l e pl easur es der i ved f r ommer eex-
i st ence - ever yt hi ng t hat you do not , and do not want t o know
about your sel f ,
wi l l
bet ur ned i nt o bi o- f eed- back, and r et ur ned
t o you
i n
t he
f or m
of " bui l t - i n" di gi t al i nf or mat i on. I t i s t hebi -
oni c mi r r or st age ( Quer zol a) .
Adi gi t al Nar ci ssus i nst ead of a t r i angul ar Oedi pus. The
hypost asi s of t hear t i f i ci al doubl e, t hecl onewi l l be your guar -
di an angel , t he vi si bl e f or mof your unconsci ous and t hef l esh
of
your f l esh, not met aphor i cal l y but l i t er al l y. Your " f el l owcr ea-
t ur e" wi l l hencef or t h bet he cl onewi t h i t s hal l uci nat or y r esem-
bl ance, such t hat you wi l l never beal one, and wi l l never have
any secr et s . " Love your nei ghbour as your sel f " - t he di f f i cul -
t i es of l i vi ng t he Gospel wi l l be r esol ved . Your nei ghbour i s
your sel f . Love i s t her ef or e t ot al . Tot al sel f - seduct i on.
Themasses t hemsel ves f or ma cl one- l i ke appar at us t hat f unc-
t i ons wi t hout t he medi at i on of t he ot her . I n t he l ast anal ysi s,
t he masses ar e si mpl y t he sum
of
al l t he
syst ems'
t er mi nal s
-
a net wor k t r avel l ed by di gi t al i mpul ses ( t hi s i s what f or ms a
mass) . Obl i vi ous t o ext er nal i nj unct i ons, t hey const i t ut e t hem-
sel ves i nt o i nt egr at ed ci r cui t s gi ven over t o mani pul at i on ( sel f -
mani pul at i on) and " seduct i on" ( sel f - seduct i on) .
I n t r ut h, nobody any l onger knows howa r epr esent at i onal
appar at us wor ks, or even i f i t st i l l exi st s . St i l l , i t i s becomi ng
i ncr easi ngl y ur gent t o r at i onal i ze possi bl e occur r ences i n t he
uni ver se of si mul at i on. What happens bet ween an absent ,
hypot het i cal
pol e of
power
and t heneut r al , el usi ve pol e f or med
by t he masses? The answer : seduct i on . Thi ngs wor k by
seduct i on.
But such seduct i on suggest s t he wor ki ngs of a soci al wor l d
174 SEDUCTI ON
t hat weno l onger compr ehend, anda pol i t i cal ' wor l dwhose
st r uct ur es havef aded. I npl aceof t hel at t er , seduct i ongi ves r i se
t o ani mmensebl ankar ea t r aver sedby t epi dcur r ent sof
speech,
or a mal l eabl enet wor k l ubr i cat ed bymagnet i c
i mpul ses. The
wor l di s nol onger dr i ven by power , but f asci nat i on, no
l onger
bypr oduct i on, but seduct i on.
Thi s
seduct i on
i s, however , no
mor et hananempt ydecl ar at i on f or medof si mul at edconcept s.
The
di scour ses
hel d by bot h t he" st r at egi st s" of mass desi r e
( t hepol i t i ci ans, adver t i ser s, or gani zer s, engi neer s of t hesoul ,
andof t hemi nd, et c. ) andt he" anal yst s" of
t hei r st r at egi es, t hese
di scour ses t hat descr i bet hef unct i oni ng of t hesoci al or
t he
po-
l i t i cal , or what
r emai ns
of
t her e, i n
t er ms of
seduct i on, t hey
ar eas vacuousas t hepol i t i cal spacei t sel f . They, si mpl yr ef r act
t heempt i ness
of
t hat about whi ch t hey speak. " Themedi a
seducet hemasses, " " t hemasses seducet hemsel ves" - t heuse
of t hewor dseduct i onher ei s i ncr edi bl yshal l owandhackneyed.
Cor r upt ed
of
i t s l i t er al meani ng, whi ch i mpl i eschar mandmor t al
enchant ment , t het er mcomest o si gni f y t hesoci al andt echni -
cal l ubr i cat i onr equi r ed f or smoot h r el at i ons - a smoot h semi -
ur gy, a sof t t echnol ogy. Thet er mt hen has an " ecol ogi cal "
connot at i on, andmar kst hepassagef r omhar dt o sof t
ener gi es.
Sof t ener gy, sof t seduct i on
. The
soci al
madescar ce.
Wi t h t hi s
di f f use,
t ensi l ef or m
of
seduct i on, or i ei s nol onger
speaki ng of t hear i st ocr at i c seduct i onof duel
r el at i ons. Onei s
speaki ngof a seduct i onr evi ewedandr evi sedby t hei deol ogy of
desi r e. Apsychol ogi zedseduct i ont hat r esul t sf r omi t s vul gar i zat i on
wi t h t her i se i n t heWest of t hei magi nar y f i gur e of
desi r e.
Thi s f i gur e
does
not bel ong
t o
t hemast er s, but washi st or i -
cal l ypr oducedbyt heoppr essedunder t hesi gnof t hei r l i ber a-
t i on, and has been deepened by t he
f ai l ur e
of
successi ve
r evol ut i ons. As a f or m, desi r emar kst hepassagef r omt hei r st a-
t us as obj ect s t o t hat of subj ect s, but t hi s passagei s i t sel f
onl y
a mor er ef i ned, i nt er i or i zedper pet uat i onof
t hei r ser vi t ude. The
f i r st gl i mmer i ngs
of
mass subj ect i vi t y at t hedawn of moder n
andr evol ut i onar y t i mes - t hef i r st gl i mmer i ngs of t hef act
t hat
t hemasses wer esubj ect s andcoul dmanage
t hei r ownser vi -
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON 17 5
t ude under t he si gn of t hei r owndesi res! Large- scal e seduct i on
nowbegi ns. For i f anobj ect cansi mpl y be domi nat ed, t he sub-
j ect of desi re, by cont rast , has t o be seduced.
Thi s sof t st rat egy wi l l spread, soci al l y and hi st ori cal l y. The
masses wi l l be psychol ogi zed i n order t o be seduced, t hey wi l l
be ri gged up wi t h desi res
i n
order t o be di st ract ed.
Yest erday
t hey hada ( myst i f i ed! ) consci ousness
and
were
al i enat ed
- t o-
day t hey have an unconsci ous and ( repressed and corrupt ed)
desi res andare seduced. Yest erday
t hey
were di vert ed f romt he
( revol ut i onary) t rut h of hi st ory - t oday t hey are di vert ed f rom
t he t rut h of t hei r owndesi res . Thepoor, seducedandmani pu-
l at ed masses! Where once t hey had t o endure domi nat i on un-
der t he
t hreat
of vi ol ence, nowt hey must accept i t
by di nt
of
seduct i on.
Speaki ng more general l y, t he t heoret i cal hal l uci nat i on of
desi re, wi t h i t s di f f use l i bi di nal
psychol ogy, serves as a
back-
drop t o t hat si mul acrumof seduct i on whi ch one nowf i nds
everywhere. Havi ng repl acedt he worl d of survei l l ance, i t charac-
t eri zes t he vul nerabi l i t y of bot h i ndi vi dual s andmasses t o sof t
i nj unct i ons
.
Di st i l l ed i n homeophat i c
doses
t hroughout al l per-
sonal andsoci al rel at i ons, t he seduct i ve shadowof t hi s di scourse
hovers t oday over t he desert
of
soci al rel at i ons, and of power
i t sel f .
I nt hi s sense, we t rul y l i ve i nanera of seduct i on. But we can
no l onger speak of t hat f ormof absorpt i on
or
pot ent i al engul f -
ment , t hat f at ef ul di st ract i on f romwhi chno oneor no " real i -
t y" canever be compl et el y saf e ( perhaps t here i s no l onger
enoughreal i t y t o def l ect , nor t rut h t o subvert ) . Nor evenof t he
corrupt i on of i nnocence
or
vi rt ue ( t here i s
no
l onger suf f i ci ent
moral i t y - or perversi on - f or t hat ) . Al l t hat remai ns i s t o seduce
i n order t o seduce? " Seduce me. " " Let me seduce you. " I t i s
t he
seduct i ont hat remai ns when
al l
t he st akes have been
wi t h-
drawn. We are no l onger speaki ng about a vi ol ence commi t -
t ed agai nst meani ng or about i t s si l ent ext ermi nat i on, but about
what i s l ef t t o l anguage wheni t no l onger has anyt hi ng t o say.
No l onger a vert i gi nous l oss, but t he mi ni mal i st f ormof mut u-
17 6 SEDUCTI ON
al gr at i f i cat i on t wo l i ngui st i c bei ngs can gi ve each ot her i n an
ener vat ed soci al r el at i on. "Seduce me. " "Let me seduce you. "
I n t hi s sense, seduct i on i s ever ywher e, sur r ept i t i ousl yor open-
l y, bl endi ng i n wi t h t he ambi ance, t he const ant sol i ci t at i ons,
wi t h exchange pur e and si mpl e. I t i s t he seduct i on of st udent
andt eacher ( I
am
seduci ng you
andyou
ar e seduci ng me, t her e
bei ng not hi ng el se
t o
do) , of t he pol i t i ci an and hi s publ i c, of
power ( ah, t he seduct i on of power and t he power of seduc-
t i on! ) , of t he anal yst and t he anal ysand, et c .
TheJ esui t s wer e al r eady f amous f or havi ng used seduct i on
i n a r el i gi ous gui se, f or havi ng r et ur ned t he t hr ongs t o t he bos-
omof t he Cat hol i c chur chby
t he
wor l dl yand
aest het i c seduc-
t i onof t he bar oque, andhavi ng : r ecapt ur ed t he consci ences of
t he power f ul byt he expedi ent of f ancygoods andf ancywom-
en . I n ef f ect , t heJ esui t s pr ovi de: t he f i r st moder n exampl e of
t he el abor at i on of a st r at egy of mass desi r e anda soci et yof
mass
seduct i on
. Andt hey wer e r el at i vel y successf ul . I t
i s
ent i r el y pos-
si bl e t hat ,
once
t he aust er e char ms
of
pol i t i cal economyand
pr oducer capi t al i sm- capi t al i sm' s pur i t an cycl e - have been
swept away, a cat hol i c andJ esui t i cal er a wi l l begi n,
wi t h
a sof t
t echnol ogy of seduct i on anda sof t , r osy semi ur gy.
I t i s no l onger a mat t er of seduct i on as passi on, but of a de-
mandf or seduct i on
.
Of an i nvocat i on of desi r e and
i t s r eal i z a-
t i on i n pl ace of t he f al t er i ng r el at i ons of power
andknowl edge
t hat i nher e i n l ove andt r ansf er ence. What
happens
' t o
t hemast er -
sl ave
di al ect i c when t he mast er has been seducedbyt he sl ave,
and
t he
sl ave by
t he mast er ? Seduct i on becomes no mor e t han
an ef f usi on of di f f er ences or a di scur si ve l i bi di nal st r i pt ease. Wi t h
a vague col l usi on
bet ween
suppl y
and demand, seduct i on be-
comes
not hi ng mor e t han an exchange val ue, ser vi ng t he ci r -
cul at i on of exchanges and t he l ubr i cat i on of soci al r el at i ons.
What r emai ns of t he enchant r r i ent of t hat l abyr i nt hi ne st r uc-
t ur e wi t hi n whi chone coul d l ose
onesel f ? What
i s
l ef t of seduc-
t i on' s i mpost ur e? "Ther e i s anot her t ype of vi ol ence, whi chhas
nei t her i t s name nor out war d appear ance, but whi ch i s no l ess
danger ous .
I
amspeaki ng of seduct i on"
( Rol l i n) . Tr adi t i onal l y,
t he seducer was
an i mpost or who empl oyedsubt er f uge andvi l -
l ai ny t o achi eve hi s ends - or at l east who bel i evedhe was em-
pl oyi ng t hem. For t he ot her , byal l owi ng her sel f t o be seduced,
THEPOLI TI CAL DESTI NY
OF
SEDUCTI ON 177
by succumbi ngt o t he i mpost ur e, of t envoi ded i t , st r i pped t he
seducer of hi s cont r ol . I nef f ect , he f al l s i nt o hi s ownt r ap f or
havi ng f ai l ed t o consi der seduct i on' s r ever si bl e power
.
The f ol l owi ngal ways hol ds: t he one who seeks t o pl ease t he
ot her has al r eady succumbed t o t he ot her ' s char ms. Ont hi s
basi s, an ent i r e r el i gi on or cul t ur e canbe or gani zed ar oundr e-
l at i ons of seduct i on ( as opposed t o r el at i ons of pr oduct i on)
.
Thus
t he Gr eek
gods
-
seducer s / i mpost or s -
used t hei r power
t o seduce men, but wer e seducedi nt ur n, andi ndeed wer e of t en
r educed t o seduci ngmen, t hi s bei ngt hei r mai nt ask. Thus t hey
pr ovi ded t he i mage of a wor l d or der r ul ed not by l aws, as i n
t he Chr i st i an uni ver se or pol i t i cal economy, but by a mut ual
seduct i ont hat ensur edt he symbol i c equi l i br i um
bet weengods
and men.
What r emai ns of t hi s vi ol ence t r apped by i t s ownar t i f i ce?
That uni ver se wher e gods andmensought t o pl ease
each ot her
- even
by t he vi ol ent
seduct i on of
sacr i f i ce
- has
ended
.
As
has t he secr et under st andi ngof si gnsandanal ogi es t hat pr ovi ded
magi cwi t h i t s power of enchant ment . Andwi t h i t , t he assump-
t i on t hat t he ent i r e wor l di s suscept i bl e t o seduct i onandr ever -
si bl e i n si gns - not j ust t he gods, but i nani mat e bei ngs,
t hi ngs,
andt he dead
t hemsel ves
who
have al ways hadt o be seduced,
bewi t chedandcast out wi t h t heai dof numer oussi gnsandr i t u-
al s, l est t hey
do
anyhar m. Todayone has t o wor k t hr ough one' s
ownmour ni ng, an i ndi vi dual and eer i e t ask of r eor i ent at i on
andr edepl oyment . We
now
l i ve
i n
a uni ver se of
f or ces and r e-
l at i ons of f or ce, a uni ver se t hat has mat er i al i zed as i n a voi d,
anobj ect of mast er y andnot seduct i on. Auni ver se of pr oduc-
t i on, i nvest ment s, count er - i nvest ment s and t he l i ber at i on of
ener gi es, a uni ver se of t he Lawand obj ect i ve l aws,
a uni ver se
of t he mast er - sl ave di al ect i c.
Sexual i t y i t sel f ar ose wi t hi nt hi s uni ver se as one of i t s obj ec-
t i ve f unct i ons, andnowt ends t o over det er mi ne al l t he ot her s,
subst i t ut i ng i t sel f
as
anal t er nat i ve f i nal i t y f or t hose t hat ar e di s-
appear i ngor al r eady def unct . Ever yt hi ngi s sexual i zed andt her e-
by acqui r es somet hi ng of a t er r ai n f or advent ur e and
pl ay.
Ever ywher e t he i d speaks. Ever ydi scour se appear as anet er -
nal comment ar y onsex anddesi r e. I n t hi s sense, one mi ght say
t hat t hey have al l become di scour ses of seduct i on,
di scour ses
178 SEDUCTI ON
t hat r egi st er an expl i ci t demandf or seduct i on, but a sof t seduc-
t i on, whose weakenedcondi t i on has become synonymous wi t h
so much el se i n t hi s soci et y- t he ambi ence, t he mani pul at i on,
t he per suasi on, t he gr at i f i cat i on, t he st r at egi es of desi r e, t he mys-
t i que of per sonal r el at i ons, t he l i bi di nal economy and i t s
smoot hedover r el at i ons of t r ansf er ence whi ch r el ays t he com-
pet i t i ve economy and
i t s
r el at i ons of
f or ce. Thi s seduct i on,
whi ch per meat es t he ent i r e expanse of l anguage, has no mor e
subst ance or sense t han t he power t hat per vades al l t he i nt er -
st i ces of t he soci al net wor k. Thi s i s whyt hey ar e abl e t o com-
bi ne t hei r di scour ses so easi l y
.
The degener at edmet al anguage
of
seduct i on combi nedwi t h t he degener at edmet al anguage of
pol i t i cs i s ever ywher e oper at i ve ( or i f one wi l l , , i s absol ut el y
non- oper at i ve) . I t i s enough t hat t her e be a consensus concer n-
i ng t he model of seduct i on' s si mul at i on, t he di f f use st r eamof
speech anddesi r e - j ust as t he mur kymet al anguage of par t i ci -
pat i on suf f i ces t o saf eguar dan : appear ance of soci al i t y.
The di scour se
of
si mul at i on
i s
not
an
i mpost ur e. I t has onl y
t o have seduct i on act as a si mul acr umof af f ect , desi r e, or l i bi di -
nal i nvest ment , i n a wor l dwher e t he needf or t hese i s cr uel l y
f el t . However , j ust as t he " r el at i ons of f or ce" wer e never abl e
t o
expl ai n t he vi ci ssi t udes
of
power i n t he panopt i c age - ex-
cept i n Mar xi ani deal i sm- si mi l ar l y seduct i on, or t he r el at i ons
of seduct i on, cannot account f or cont empor ar y pol i t i cal event s .
I f ever yt hi ng i s dr i ven by seduct i on, i t woul dnot be
by t hi s
sof t seduct i on, as r evi sedby t he i deol ogy of desi r e, but by a
def i ant seduct i on, a
dual ,
ant agoni st i c seduct i on
wi t h t he st akes
maxi mi zed, i ncl udi ng t hose t hat ar e secr et . I t woul dnot be by
a game st r at egy, but bya myt hi cal seduct i on,
not a psychol ogi -
cal andoper at i ve seduct i on, not a col d, mi ni mal i st seduct i on.
V
SEDUCTIONASDESTINY
Ar e wet o t hi nk t hat t hi s di f f us e s educt i on, whi chi s nei t her
at t r act i ve nor danger ous , t hi s s pect er
of s educt i on
t hat haunt s
our ci r cui t s wi t hout s ecr et s , our phant as i es wi t hout af f ect , and
our
cont act net wor ks
wi t hout cont act s , t hat t hi s i s i t s pur e f or m?
As i f t he moder n happeni ngwi t h i t s par t i ci pat i on and expr es -
s i venes s , wher e t he s t age andi t s magi c have di s appear ed, woul d
be t he t heat er ' s pur e
f or m? Or as i f t he hypot het i cal and hyper -
r eal mode of i nt er vent i on i n r eal i t y - i n act i ng pi ct ur es , l and-
ar t and body ar t - wher e t he
obj ect ,
f r ame
and s t agi ng of
i l l u-
s i ons have di s appear ed, woul d be t he pur e f or mof pai nt i ng
and ar t ?
We ar e l i vi ng, i n ef f ect , amongs t pur e f or ms , i n a r adi cal ob-
s ceni t y, t hat i s
t o
s ay, i n t he
vi s i bl e, undi f f er ent i at ed obs ceni t y
of f i gur es t hat wer e once s ecr et and di s cr et e. Thes ame i s t r ue
of t he s oci al , whi ch t oday r ul es i n i t s
pur e -
i
. e. , empt y and
obs cene - f or m. The s ame f or s educt i on, whi ch i n i t s pr es ent
f or m, havi ng l os t i t s el ement s
of
r i s k,
s us pens e ands or cer y, t akes
t he
f or m
of a f ai nt , undi f f er ent i at ed obs ceni t y.
Shal l we r ef er t o Wal t er Benj ami n' s geneol ogy
of t he
wor k
of ar t and i t s des t i ny? At
f i r s t , t he wor k of ar t has t he s t at us
of a r i t ual obj ect , r el at ed t o an ances t r al f or mof cul t . Next i t
t akes on a cul t ur al or aes t het i c f or mi n a s ys t emwi t h f ewer ob-
l i gat i ons ; i t s t i l l r et ai ns a s i ngul ar char act er , t hough t he l at t er
180 SEDUCTI ON
i s nol onger i mmanent to the r i tual obj ect, but tr ans cendental
andi ndi vi dual i zed. Las tl y, the aes theti c f or mgi ves way to apo-
l i ti cal f or mi nwhi ch the
wor k
of
ar t
as s uch
di s appear s bef or e
the
i nevi tabl e pr ogr es s
of
mechani cal r epr oducti on. I f i n the
r i tual f or mther e ar e no
or i gi nal s ( the aes theti c or i gi nal i ty of
cul t obj ects i s of
l i ttl e concer n i n the s acr ed) , the or i gi nal i s
agai nl os t i n the pol i ti cal f or m. Ther e i s onl y the mul ti pl i ca-
ti onof obj ects ; the pol i ti cal f or mcor r es pondi ng to the obj ect' s
maxi mumci r cul ati on and mi ni mumi ntens i ty.
Seducti ontoo
woul d have
had
i ts r i tual phas e ( duel , magi -
cal , agoni s ti c) ; i ts aes theti c phas e ( as
r ef l ected i nthe " aes theti c
s tr ategy" of
the s educer , whos edomai nappr oaches that of the
f emi ni ne ands exual i ty, the i r oni c and the di abol i c - i t i s
then
that s educti ontakes onthe meani ngi t has f or us : the pos s i bl y
accur s ed di s tr acti onof appear ances , thei r s tr ategi es ,
thei r pl ay) ;
and f i nal l y i ts " pol i ti cal " phas e
( taki ng upBenj ami n' s ter m, her e
s omewhat ambi guous ) . I nthi s l as t phas e the or i gi nal of s educ-
ti on, i ts r i tual and aes theti c f or m, di s appear s
i n f avour
of
an
al l - out venti l ati on wher eby s educti on
becomes ' the i nf or mal
f or mof pol i ti cs , the s cal ed- down
f r amewor kf or anel us i ve po-
l i ti cs devoted to
the endl es s r epr oducti on of a f or mwi thout
content .
( Thi s i nf or mal f or mi s i ns epar abl e f r omi ts
techni cal
natur e, whi ch i s that of networ ks - j us t as the pol i ti cal f or m
of the obj ect i s i ns epar abl e f r omthe
techni ques of s er i al
r epr oducti on) . As
wi th
the
obj ect, thi s " pol i ti cal " f or mcor -
r es ponds tos educti on' s maxi mum
di f f us i onandmi ni mumi n-
tens i ty.
I s thi s to be s educti on' s des ti ny? Or canwe oppos e
thi s i nvol u-
ti onal f ate, and l ay a
wager
on
s educti on as des ti ny? Pr oduc-
ti on as
des ti ny, or s educti on as des ti ny? Agai ns t the
deep
s tr uctur es
and thei r tr uth, appear ances and thei r des ti ny? Be
that as i t may, we ar e l i vi ng today i n
non- s ens e, and i f s i mul a-
ti on i s i ts
di s enchanted f or m, s educti oni s i ts enchanted f or m.
Anatomy i s
not des ti ny, nor i s pol i ti cs : s educti oni s des ti ny.
I t i s what r emai ns of amagi cal , f atef ul wor l d, ar i s ky,
ver ti gi nous
andpr edes ti ned wor l d; i t i s
what i s qui etl y ef f ecti ve i n a vi s i -
bl y
ef f i ci ent and s tol i d wor l d.
THEPOLI TI CALDESTI NYOFSEDUCTI ON 181
Theworl di s naked, t heki ng i s naked, andt hi ngs are cl ear
.
Al l of product i on, and t rut h i t s el f , are di rect ed t owards di s -
cl os ure,
t he
unbearabl e
"t rut h"
of
s ex bei ng but t he mos t re-
cent cons equence. Lucki l y, at bot t om, t here i s not hi ng t o i t .
Ands educt i on_ s t i l l hol ds , i n t hef ace of t rut h, a mos t s i byl l i ne
res pons e,
whi ch
i s t hat "perhaps wewi s ht ouncover t he
t rut h
becaus ei t i s s o di f f i cul t t o i magi ne i t naked. "
CultureTexts
General Editors

Arthur andMarilouise Kroker
SIEIDUC .TUGII~
Jean Baudrillard
translated by Brian Singer
NOTHING CAN
BE
GREATER THANSEDUCTION
ITSELF,
NOTEVENTHEORDER THAT
DESTROYS IT
"Seduction is
a
theory-fiction
which
resembles
nothing which has preceded
it . It turns manycontemporary discourses inside out, eventhe most radical,
andcould very well challenge all moderntheory, even, indeed, the rules of
theoretical production itself ." Liberation
. . . probably the most influential contemporary media analyst and social
theorist ." NewStatesman
". . . for Baudrillard, is not seduction a newfigure of our freedom?" L'Express
Seduction is Jean
Baudrillard's most provocative book. Here, under the sign of
seduction all of moderntheory is put into question, feminism andpsychoanalysis
most of
all . Seduction speaks of the sudden reversibility in the order of things
wherediscourse is absorbed into its ownsigns without atrace of meaning. In
the sudden
triumph
of
seduction in apocalyptic culture there is also signalled
the end of history .
JeanBaudrillard is lecturer in Sociology, University of Nanterre .
Amonghis works
translated into English are America, Simulations andSimulacra, Forget Foucault,
In the Shadowof the Silent Majorities, andFor aCritique of the Political Economy
of the Sign.
Brian Singer teaches at GlendonCollege, York University, and is the author of
Society, Theory andthe French Revolution (Macmillan/St . Martin's Press, 1986).
Cover : ManRay Femme aux longs cbeveux, 1929 VIS ART
Bookand Cover Design: Marilouise Kroker
Printed
in
Canada
ISBN