Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Trans Critique Preface
Trans Critique Preface
Three of my books have been translated into English so far. It is a true delight
that all of them will be translated into Turkish. At the same time, I am concerned that the
time lag--they were written years ago--and the order of publication might cause
confusion to the readers, and so I thought it would be appropriate to offer some
guidance. These three books, Origins of modern Japanese Literature, Architecture as
Metaphor , and Transcritique , represent my work from the 1970s, the 1980s and the
1990s respectively. They show apparent shifts on my part. I named such shiftcontaining movements of criticism Transcritique. After Transcritique I shifted yet again.
One example is my most recent book, Toward a World Republic--Beyond CapitalNation-State (2006).
The largest shift lies in the style. Before this, in dealing with Kant or Marx, I did
not take the common approach of evaluating and criticizing them while presenting their
historical limitations. However, I did not present my own theories either. In Transcritique
I tried to present the possibilities of Kant and Marx only through my readings of their
texts. Instead of presenting my own views straightforwardly, I rather let the texts of
others speak them. In this sense, Transcritique was an extension of my work in literary
criticism. However, after this, I started to present my own theories in a systematic
manner.
While my style changed, I still hold to the same basic observations presented in
Transcritique. The following passage is from Transcritique.
It was amid the bourgeois revolution that these three -- capitalist economy, state
and nation -- were officially married. As in the trinity intoned in the French Revolution-liberty, equality, and fraternity--capital, state and nation copulated and amalgamated
themselves into a force that was inseparable ever after. Hence the modern state must
be called, sensu stricto, the capitalist nation-state. They were made to be mutually
complementary, reinforcing each other. When economic liberty becomes excessive
and class conflict is sharpened, the state intervenes to redistribute wealth and regulate
the economy, and at the same time, the emotion of national unity (mutual aid) fills up
the cracks. When facing this fearless trinity, undermining one or the other does not
work. (Transcritique, 278-9)
As can be seen from this passage, in order to elucidate the trinity of
capitalnationstate, I suggested going back to three basic modes of exchange from
which the trinity originates: reciprocity, plunder/redistribution and commodity exchange.
But in Transcritique, these ideas had yet to be fully developed. Since then, I have been
working to clarify them.
I dealt with three different modes of exchange by going back to pre-capitalist
social formations. Any social formation stands as a combination of these modes of
exchange. The difference between them is determined by which one of them is
dominant and how they are combined. For example, in the primitive community of
hunters and gatherers, the principle of reciprocity is dominant. That is, although plunder
and trade also take place, they are not conspicuous. Likewise, the fact that the mode of
commodity exchange is dominant in capitalist social formation does not indicate the
disappearance of other modes. Rather, they are transformed, and appear as the
conjugation of capitalnationstate. Based on such a view, I have been aiming for the