This is a pre-press version of

Roberts, Ben, 2010. The Gold Standard and Literature: Mone and Lan!ua!e in the "or# of $ean-
$oseph Gou%. &n R. Balfour, ed. Culture, Capital and Representation. Basin!sto#e: 'al!rave
Ma()illan, pp. 1*2-1+,.
&SB-: .,/02*02+0+1+
2hapter /
The Gold Standard and Literature: Mone and Lan!ua!e in the "or# of $ean-$oseph Gou%
Ben Roberts (University of Bradford)
1. &ntrodu(tion
It has been commonplace for critics to read Gides 1925 novel Les Faux-Monnayeurs, or The Counterfeiters,
as being concerned with the theme of sincerity. Yet, as the novels very title sggests, this is also a novel
preoccpied with something li!e the opposite of the sincere, that is, with the insincere, the inathentic and
the fa!e. Indeed, in a certain sense, the title of Gides novel is itself fradlent. "or only a handfl of the
novels three hndred or so pages are directly concerned with the matter of conterfeit money. #oreover,
the actal sbplot concerning the passing of fa!e gold coins by schoolboys is somewhat tangential to the
main thread of the novel. $ince Les Faux-Monnayeurs is a novel abot a novelist, %doard, who is himself
writing a novel called Les Faux-Monnayeurs, it is perhaps not srprising that the forgers are at one step
remove from the narrative. Yet it is possible to arge that whilst the real conterfeiters and actal conterfeit
money are somewhat marginal within Gides narrative, conterfeit money remains symbolically central to
the novel. Indeed this is very mch the argment of the "rench critic and philosopher &ean'&oseph Go( in
his inflential reading of Gides novel in his te(t Les monnayeurs du langage )The Coiners of Language*.
Go( ta!es as his starting point a brief scene in the novel where Gides novelist, %doard, is e(plaining
what his nwritten novel is abot and why he is so interested in the idea of conterfeit money+
,-imagine a false ten'franc gold piece. In reality its not worth two sos. .t it will be worth
ten francs as long as no one recogni/es it to be false. $o I start from the idea that -0
,.t why start from an idea10 interrpted .ernard impatiently. ,If yo were to start from a fact
and ma!e a good e(position of it, the idea wold come of its own accord to inhabit it. If I were
writing The Counterfeiters I shold begin by showing the conterfeit coin2the little ten'franc
piece yo were spea!ing of 3st now.0
$o saying, he plled ot of his poc!et a small coin which he flng on the table.
,&st hear how tre it rings. 4lmost the same sond as the real one. 5ne wold swear it was
gold. I was ta!en in this morning, 3st as the grocer who passed it on to me had been ta!en in
himself, he told me. It isnt 6ite the same weight, I thin!7 bt it has the brightness and the sond
of a real piece7 it is coated with gold, so that, all the same, it is worth a little more than two sos7
bt its made of glass. Itll wear transparent. 8o7 dont rb it+ yoll spoil it. 5ne can almost see
throgh it, as it is.0 )Gide, 1991, pp.1:2;9* <1=9>.
"or Go( the ?monetary metaphor provided by this fa!e coin not only represents the !ey idea of the
fictional novelist %doard, bt also comes to inhabit the entirety of Gides te(t. @his is becase, for Go(,
Gides novel in its entirety is something of a false coin+ a novel which while adhering on the srface to the
conventions of realist fiction continosly ndermines them from within. 4s he pts it+
@he only novel that Gide managed to write is a tric! novel, a conterfeit of the real thing. It is a
wor! with all the e(ternal trappings of the genre, one that ,passes itself off as0 the real thing -
bt whose sbstance and internal composition ma!e it something other than a novel+ it is a
challenge to the novelistic form, a critical essay disgised as a novel by the brilliant depiction of
pathetic themes woven or engraved in it7 a tre novel, bt one consmed from the inside by
critical reflection, by a perspicacity that wears throgh )abme* its fine appearance and discredits
its face vale, ntil it is devaled to a mere cheat of a to!en devoid of opacity and color, a clear
crystal of no accont among the circlating money that the athentic writer mst mint )Go(,
199A, p.1B*.
Go(s point here is not, of corse, that Gide fails as a novelist in Les Faux-Monnayeurs. Cather it is that
the speclative natre and refle(ive form that the novel adopts serve not so mch to ndermine its own
stats as novel, bt to challenge the novelistic form itself. If Les Faux-Monnayeurs is not an ?athentic
novel, it is becase it problemati/es the very ?athenticity of the novel form. Dere the particlar form of
conterfeit money that .ernard tosses in front of %doard in the scene above is particlarly pertinent for
Go(. of conterfeit money being discssed here2a crystal coin recovered in gold2is particlarly
significant for Go(. @he mise en abme which places %doards novel within Gides own itself reslts in a
wearing away )abme* of the realist facade of the novel, revealing nderneath the crystal of a pre
constrction. "or Go( the actal monetary metaphors of Gides novel are in a sense secondary to a formal
constrction which serves to ma!e it an e(ample of a to mch wider homology between literatre and
money.
i
"or what is at sta!e in Les Faux-Monnayeurs is really a crisis of literary representation, one which
is for Go( ine(tricably lin!ed to a crisis of financial representation or of crrency.
Dow does Go( ma!e this comparison between literary and financial crrency1 @he financial crisis that
Go( has in mind is that of the decline of gold money, the disappearance of a crrency that is bac!ed by
gold and its replacement by a prely representative paper money. @he historical event of the replacement of
gold money in "rance precedes the writing of Gides novel yet2and this is crcial for Go(s reading2the
events depicted within it ta!e place before the first Eorld Ear, when gold money is still in force. Go(
comments+ ?the novel is conceived precisely at the time of a 6alitative rptre in the mode of economic
e(change, bt is fictionally set at a moment in history when gold money is still in force. Gides fiction is
therefore inflenced by the dis3nction between past and present, between the vanishing order and the
emerging order of the monetary ob3ect. %ven if the action internal to the novel necessarily ta!es place before
the war, at a time when gold coins are still in circlation, it is profondly hanted by the disappearance of
gold money and advent of the regime of inconvertibility )Go(, 199A, p.21*.
"or Go( the disappearance of gold money, while not being registered directly in the te(t, is paralleled by
a crisis in literary or representational langage that Go( locates in Gides novel. In short Gides novel
registers a strggle between the ?gold langage of literary realism and the ?inconvertible langage of
modern literatre+
@he type of langage that cold be compared to gold money wold be a fll, ade6ate langage
<un langage !lein>. In it and throgh it, the real wold be conveyed withot mediation, both as
the ob3ective reality of the e(ternal world and as the sb3ective reality of the internal world. @his
type of langage wold ex!ressive in its sb3ective aspect, relating to the sol and to others, and
it wold be des"ri!tive in its aspect of relation to the e(ternal world. $ch a gold langage
formlates trth immediately, ths dispensing those who avail themselves of it from 6estioning
the lingistic medium.
<->
If we now consider a system in which langage is compared to re!resentative !a!er "urren"y,
we enconter another sitation. In this case, the relationship between langage and being begins
to be problematic. &st as in the economic sphere there arises the 6estion of "onvertibility, that
is, the e(istence or not of a deposit of serving to bac! the to!ens in circlation, li!ewise in the
domain of signification the trth vale of langage will become a crcial concern. Fangage will
no longer be conceived as flly e(pressing )or as being "a!able of e(pressing* reality or being7 it
will necessarily be conceived as a means, a relatively atonomos instrment, by which it is
possible to represent reality to varying degrees of e(actitde. )Go(, 199A, p.1:*
Go( therefore associates ?gold langage with nineteenth'centry realism and ?to!en langage with an
emergent modern writing. @he nderstanding of langage as a ?to!en rather than rooted li!e gold in reality
will find its clmination, for Go(, in the wor! of $assre whose conception of a ?system of differences
withot positive terms2comprehending langage as arbitrary and conventional2corresponds to
representative paper crrency.
In the corse of his own reading of .adelaires mch earlier short essay ,@he conterfeiters0, Gerrida
refers in a footnote to Go(s analysis and comments as follows+
<in Go(s analysis> Gides novel wold mar!, both as a symptom and a writing that records the
event, the degradation or fictionali/ation of a literary langage that )after Eorld Ear I and the
transition to non'convertible money and to a fi(ed rate* is no longer ,comparable to gold
money0 <Go(, 19=A, p.29>. Eithot 6estioning either the interest of this hypothesis or the
necessity of trying to pinpoint the greatest possible historical differentiation, one wonders how
far one can credit the proposed brea! )between ,gold'langage0 and ,to!en'langage0* and its
analogy with an ,historical ru!ture in a literary periodi/ation ),romantic realism,0 Hola, Dgo,
on one side, #allarmI, JalIry, Gide, and a few others on the other side of a ,fndamental crisis0
of ,the langage of literatre, in its relation to being0. Goes not this hypothesis tend to natrali/e
and de'fictionali/e gold'money, that is, to confirm an old and stable convention, the very one
that <.adelaires> ,Konterfeit #oney0 interrogates obli6ely1 4nd above all+ where wold
one sitate <.adelaires> ,Konterfeit #oney0 in this historical schema1 4nd its athor1
)Gerrida, 1999, 11Bn1*
Dowever interesting the lin!s that Go( is ma!ing between money and literary langage may be, they
seem to reslt in a rather neat and at the same time rather violent historici/ation of literatre. 4s Gerrida
points ot, if the homology between the two ?crrencies carries the !ind of analytic force that Go( tends to
associate with it, there arises a compelling 6estion abot what to do with te(ts sch as .adelaires which
do not seem to fit into the historical relationship being asserted here. "or Gerrida it also seems as if the
association between gold'money and realism that Go( ma!es in The Coiners of Language might reslt, as
he pts it here, in a natrali/ation and defictionali/ation of gold'money. Indeed on a certain reading
)althogh Go( resists this* it might seem as if Go( is morning the decline of both gold'money and the
?fll, ade6ate langage of literary realism. Dowever that this is not in fact the argment Go( is advancing
becomes clear when one places The Coiners of Language in the conte(t of his earlier wor!.
"or in some ways Go(s argments in The Coiners of Language simply develop those he has laid ot in
the earlier #"onomie et $ymboli%ue. In #"onomie et $ymboli%ue Go( sets ot a thesis abot the
fndamental ?isomorphism between varios different symbolic economies )langage, ob3ects and sb3ects*
and commodity e(change. @he evoltion of the money form as what #ar( calls the ?general e6ivalent
form of commodity e(change wold find its correlative in the field of ob3ects and sb3ects+ ?the phalls is
the general e6ivalent of ob3ects7 the father is the general e6ivalent of sb3ects, in the same way that gold is
the general e6ivalent of prodcts.
ii
4ll these different vale systems )?distant registers of the general social
body*
iii
display this remar!able isomorphism+ ?%very genesis of a ma3or symbol -is isomorphic to that of
the discontinos elaboration of the monetary form.
iv
In each case, in each evoltion or genesis, the
disappearance or effacement of the history of that genesis is mar!ed by the appearance of a fetishi/ed
e6ivalent form. @he genesis of the money form is demonstrated by #ar( in the transition from simple
commodity e(change, where one commodity determines its vale in relation to another commodity which
stands in relation to the first as the e%uivalent form of its vale, to the sitation where all commodities
measre their vale in relation to one commodity alone, the general e6ivalent form or gold )#ar(, 19:L,
pp.1=9'A,1==*. 5nce it has achieved this stats of general e6ivalent in which all commodities determine
their vale, gold becomes in effect the fetishi&ed form of vale itself.
In a similar way, as Go( attempts to show with reference to "redian'Facanian psychoanalysis, the child
first finds its own vale as a sb3ect, the moi by identification with another, its mother+ Facans mirror stage
)Go(, 19:9, p.5=*. In a manner analogos to that by which for #ar( the commodity can only find its
e(change'vale in the se'vale of another commodity, for Facan it is ?in the other that the sb3ect
identifies and even e(periences itself first of all.
v
4fter finding its identity first in the mother, in a second
stage, li!e a commodity in a bstling mar!et place, the child finds itself standing in a series of relations to
diverse ?others+ brothers, sisters and father. Go( comments that, ?the sb3ect2newly born into the
commerce of hmans2reflects bit by bit its vale )its sol* in the body of its nmeros li!enesses, <6oting
#ar(> ,the total )or developed* form of relative vale pts a commodity in social relation with everything0.
vi
.t, 3st as a mar!et withot money form sffers from nmeros practical difficlties, the childs relations
to these diverse others is ltimately nsatisfactory+
Ehat is it <for the child>, this being always relative to others as different as they are nmeros1
@hey all reflect his sol only fragmentarily. Ehat shold he do in order to really !now what he
is in appealing to each one1 @o ma!e himself recogni/ed by each one1 -.t moreover, here, at
the same time that he appeals, speclarly, to the image of sch and sch other, he also plays
himself the role of the mirror+ the ine(tricable relations of domination and sbordination find
themselves lin!ed, activity and simltaneos passivity, antagonism, reversible polarity, or, better
said, ambi'valen"e.
vii
Fi!e the commodity, which in what #ar( calls the ?total or ?developed form of vale, finds its vale
reflected in the form of diverse other commodities2as well as itself reflecting their vale bac! to them2the
child finds itself ma!ing a diverse series of identifications, bt can secre its identity as sb3ect in no
particlar identification or e6ation, only in the total system. In effect this series of diverse and ambivalent
relations is nsatisfactory to the child and poses a problem+ a problem that is, Go( comments, ?6asi'
algebraic2it amonts to the need to redce the diverse relations or ?e6ations in which the child finds
himself sitated, or the need for a common denominator )p.LB*. &st as gold answers this demand in the
realm of commodity e(change, the father fills this role in the development of the sb3ect+
Ehat is it abot, if not that the father becomes the reflective and ni6e image of all sb3ects in
search of their price1 Ehat is it abot, if not that access to their reciprocal atonomy, at the same
time as their social stats, conferred by the assmption of the norm, passes throgh this
mediation1 @he passage from the developed form of vale )"orm II* to the general form of vale
)"orm III* 2 which is effected on the basis of a ?retrn, of a ?reciprocity 2 is isomorphic to
the denoement of the oedipal crisis+ the image of the father fnctioning in this economy as
general e6ivalent and the image of particlar others )and of the moi* as relative form.
viii
Identification as a sb3ect can only ta!e place on the basis of the mrder of the ?real father, who
henceforth is fetishi/ed as paternal totem, the abstract general e6ivalent vale of sb3ectivity )L2*. In the
same way that one commodity, gold, emerges as the form of vale for commodities in general, identification
with the father here becomes the standard for sb3ectivity and replaces a comple( series of identifications
with diverse others. @he resoltion of the 5edipal crisis is ths the installation of the ?father as the
prototype or measre of the sb3ect.
#oreover, for Go(, in psychical organi/ation, as it is for the ?sb3ect so it is for the ob3ect+ Go( goes
on to s!etch, with reference to "reds Three 'ssays on $exuality and Facans reading of "red in #"rits
how the phalls emerges from a series of partial ob3ects )breast, e(crement, etc.* with their own libidinal
investments as the privileged ob3ect for the child, conclding that ?castration, ,the elision of the phalls0,
whatever the more or less bloody dramati/ation that decides the scenario be, is nothing other than the
syntactical e(clsion of the general e6ivalent from the world of relative vales )partial ob3ects*.
i(

In each case, then, Go( is able to map #ar(s thesis abot the commodity onto psychical systems of
vale. In each case the for stages in the evoltion of the money form2that is, the simple or accidental form
of vale )"orm I*, the total and developed form of vale )"orm II*, the general form of vale )"orm III* and
the money form itself )"orm IJ*2are fond to have corresponding phases in the evoltion of psychical
vale systems. It is, therefore, according to Go(, no accident that "red finds for stages in the
developmental organi/ation of se(ality )the oral, anal, phallic and genital phases*, for it is ?-the same
genetic process, the same principle of discontinos and progressive strctration that orders the accession
to normative sovereignty of gold, the father and the phalls.
(
#oreover, in both cases, it is the forgetting of
the evoltionary process that is responsible for the fetishi/ed form of the general e6ivalent.
(i
Dere Go(
refers e(plicitly to both #ar(s remar!s in Ca!ital on the way in which the money form fetishi/es the
6alities of precios metals and Facans analysis of the fetishi/ation of the phalls being derived from its
stats as a privileged signifier )Facan, 19::, pp.911'22*.

Ehat they have in common is that, for Go(, ?it is
from the effa"ement of a genesis that fetishism is born-"rom the effacement of a history. 4nd only an
analysis can lift that illsion.
(ii
Go( nderlines here the word ?analysis in order to point ot the
fndamental homology between the analysis #ar( sees as being called for by the fetishi/ation of gold and
!sy"hoanalysis itself. Gold in effect is here the ?symptom of the capitalist mode of prodction.
Go( attempts to show that #ar(s ?science of money can be e(tended to any system of symbolic vale
that reglates social e(change ):9*, and ths inform a criti6e of those systems. @he moment where any
symbolic system has recorse to a general e6ivalent, whether it be gold, father or phalls, playing the role
of the niversal intermediary, assmes a legal or legislative significance. @he point that Go( seems to want
to nderline is that this process of legislated e6ivalence2be it nmerative or nominative2has the stats
not merely of a "onvention, or "onvenien"e by which reciprocal needs )for e(ample, for food or clothing*
can be satisfied, or an individal sb3ect can commnicate or relate to others, bt carries with it the force of
law, the force of complsion or interdiction+
$o, in the same way that ,it is cortesy of the 8ame'of'the'"ather that man does not remain
attached to the se(al service of the mother )-* and that the Faw is at the service of a desire
which it instittes by the interdiction of incest0 <Facan>, it is cortesy of money )to the nmerary
<num(raire>, to the name of gold* that the commodity, 1* defers its immediate usage, 2* defers
its immediate ex"hange,2and desires to relate its price to coinage <monnaie fra!!(e>, entering
into the detor of e(change fonded by the law.
(iii
&st as the price of parta!ing in a hman commnity, according to the 5edipal scenario, is abiding by the
law that prohibits incest, the price of the entry of the commodity into the commnity of commodities is that
it assme its ?price, or its vale in the e6ivalent form of gold. Ehat is at sta!e in both is the assmption of
what Go( calls the ?common denominator. Dere denomination carries both its nmerate sense and the
string of meanings tied to its Gree! root of nomos, that is, of naming and of la).
@he general e6ivalent is the place of a law, the place from where one names. If the father is the
common denominator of particlar sb3ects2and the transmission of the proper name is made
throgh the father2, if the signs of langage, by their very fnction of denomination, of
articlation of names, are the common denominators !ar ex"ellen"e, similarly money is the
*"ommon denominator of all "ommodities +Marx,-. in the same way that the phalls is ,the
smallest common denominator of what is ob3ect <Facan>0.
(iv
@he e6ivalent form, then, annonces the law by legislating and normali/ing vale )one might thin! here
of #ar(s comparison of money with weights and other measres*. $ince there is nothing natral !er se
abot the fact that, for e(ample, the e6ivalent form of monetary vale shold be gold, it comes not from
natre bt from law.
In a general fashion the instittion of money obliges relations between ?commodities to ma!e a
legislative detor. 4ristotle writes, ?#oney becomes, by convention, the sole means of e(change
with a view to satisfying reciprocal needs. It bears also the name of 8M#I$#4 becase it
proceeds not from natre bt from law )nomos*. @he monetary detor is therefore the
assmption of the law. If one thin!s abot the role )isomorphic to the whole of this process* of
lingistic signs, if one thin!s abot denomination, a numismati" chain is broght to light2a
legislative and 3ridic chain which renites the name, the nmber, nmeration, nomination and
denomination.
(v
4s the Gree! word ?nomos here might ma!e one sspect2Go( is 6oting here from 3st before the
section of the /i"oma"hean 'thi"s #ar( cites in his commodity analysis2
(vi
this process of legislation is
analogos to that of naming and ths also to the whole process of signification which Go( will trn to in
the following chapters. @he point here for Go( is to lay ot the manner in which the emergence of a general
e6ivalent2gold, for e(ample2is in effect an event of naming and of legislation. 5n the one hand, then,
Go( simply reiterates the force of the criti6es he is drawing on+ commodity e(change is no more ?natral
for #ar( than sb3ectivity and desire are for Facan7 for both writers they are contingent on the symbolic
instittions )general e6ivalents* that ma!e them possible. 5n the other hand, what Go( seems to want to
nderline is that the development of the general e6ivalent in general, if one can say that )thogh the
ine(tricable relationship between the possibility of general e6ivalents and the possibility of a general
analysis or criti6e of general e6ivalents may be e(actly what is at sta!e here*, the process of nomination
or denomination, has an intrinsic legislative and political significance. "or Go( is engaged on a pro3ect
with a mch wider scope, that is, to lin! the development of the ?nmismatics he has otlined with respect
to the father, the phalls and money2the formation of general e6ivalents in general2with the political
centrali/ation characteristic of modernity )Go(, 19:9, p.=5*. @hs Go(s concern here is not with the
effacement of a !arti"ular symbolic genesis, or numismati%ue, li!e that of money, bt the general process
by which general e6ivalents are prodced, which Go( lin!s more widely to the history and ideology of the
Eest.
@hs even if in later wor! Go( will concern himself directly with the historical moment of ?money,
where paper money and the ?virtali/ation of gold will be tied to the emergence at the end of the nineteenth
centry of whole new cltral and specifically literary forms, what concerns Go( in #"onomie et
$ymboli%ue is to trace, somewhat s!etchily, with reference to Degels remar!s in the 'n"y"lo!edia and the
Nhilosophy of Cight, the development of the monarch as a !ind of symbolic general e6ivalent of the law.
@he development of the modern constittional monarchy wold represent in effect the trimph of the
monarch as a symbol in which competing !arti"ular interest grops, sch as the aristocracy, wold
recogni/e the niversality of 3stice. .oth individals and interest grops give way to the institted general
e6ivalence of the monarch as symbol of law, which is their condition of access to the commnity
represented by the law. 4n access which re6ires, as a sort of law of general e6ivalence, an alienation from
their immediate needs and interests+ ?@here is therefore, as we see, a strict homology between the alienation
from individal wor! in the process of e(change, as a correlative of the a !riori legislation of all e(change
in the field of commodity circlation, and the total alienation of individals as the a !riori condition of all
e(change )between rights and dties*.
(vii
&st as the prodcers of commodities, as we have seen, mst
become alienated from the immediate se'vale of their wor!2ma!ing prodcts not to satisfy their own
needs bt prely with a view to their mar!etable vale2the individal, in order to become a citi/en of the
state, mst alienate his or her own needs and interests into an identification with the rights and dties of a
sb3ect of the law+
In each case )economics, politics, se(ality* it is alienation which permits, obliges, the accession
to the social norm and to the e(changes that it reglates following a certain common evalation.
In this way it appears that the general e6ivalent, as measre of vales and standard of prices,
comes to precisely occpy and o""ult this previosly transcendent place2where it fnctions as
the sensible delegate. In the same way that the 8ame'of'the'"ather comes to occpy the place of
the 5ther and represents the law that the latter instittes, gold comes to occpy the place of the
reglative law of commodity vales, and the monar"h, in order for 3stice to be made to reign,
comes to occpy the place of the ,original contract0 )which wold be nothing other than, as
e(treme point of philosophical mystery from Nlato to Degel, that of the un)ritten la)s of the
"ity*.
(viii
@he general e6ivalent2monarch or gold2then comes to both represent and conceal )the strctre of
maintenance and disavowal characteristic of the fetish for "red*
(i(
a self'alienating strctre which gives
access to the social norm, whether that norm be ?price or ?sb3ect nder the law. 4nd ths the appearance
of general e6ivalents of this !ind are the driving force of the historical process of alienation and
centrali/ation characteristic of Eestern modernity. Indeed for Go(, what one might call ,the Eest0 is
constitted by this very process+ ?Eestern civili/ation defines itself formally as that which has pshed to the
e(treme limits, and in every register, this soltion of the organi/ation of social elements by <their>
sbordination to an e6ivalent.
((
4s the term ?sbordination here implies, Go( seems to view this process
of Eestern civili/ation as a !ind of sppression or repression of what he calls ?vital activities )?a"tivit(s
vitales, p.119* or ?concrete and particlar forces )p.11B*.
@he sphere of prodction pts in play for"es )libido, labor power...individal and collective
social forces* which find themselves occlted by the sphere of circlation 2 fonded on the
detor of e(change. .t the forces pt in play reestablish themselves in the world of e(change in
the form of values of which they are the nrecogni/ed substan"e.
((i
@he ?sbordination to general e6ivalents is therefore an ?antagonistic circit between diversified and
prodctive investments <sbstantial forces> and conter'investments <ideali/ed vales> which repress and
niversali/e them.
((ii
@he sppression represented by the geneses of ?general e6ivalents is that of an
historical ongoing process of abstraction and ideali/ation or, as Go( pts it, a ?redction of the material
)112*. Ehat is re6ired in response to this sppression therefore, for Go(, is a ?materialist overtrning. "or
Go(, ?<the> materialist overtrning <renversement mat(rialiste>, dialectically restores meaning and vale in
a direct material contination of vital social activity. It is the profond meaning, generali/ed, of a triple
criti6e+ philosophical2of idealism7 economic2of fetishism7 political2of "a!italism.
((iii
"or Go(, the
main model for sch a criti6e, overtrning or reversal is, of corse, #ar(. 4 #ar( who, in his criti6e of
political economy wold have demonstrated that the root of the abstract and ideali&ed system of monetary
vale was in fact to be fond in the material world, in a finite e(penditre of "on"rete labor. 4nd ths also
a #ar( who wold have made "ons"ious the hitherto nconscios laws governing economic e(change
)p.112*+
#ar( is therefore really the place of a radical brea!, in that his movement inagrates and
prefigres all those who will set ot their themes after him. .e it 8iet/sche or "red, this is the
strggle against the hy!ostasi&ed result of an effa"ed genesis. @he battle against the otcome of a
history which, in establishing vales in their crrent abstract and ideali/ed role, is the very
effacement of its material base.
((iv
It is these analyses in #"onomie et $ymboli%ue that will lead Go( in the later The Coiners of Language
to concern himself directly with the historical moment of ?money, where2as we have seen2paper money
and the ?virtali/ation of gold will be tied to the emergence at the end of the nineteenth centry of whole
new cltral and specifically literary forms. #oreover, Go(s argments abot the conventional and
?nmismatic natre of gold in his earlier te(t serve to contest the criticism that his reading of Gide
somehow natrali/es or normali/es either ?gold money or the ?gold langage of realism to which it is
compared. @his criticism is not confined to Gerridas reading. #ichael Fcey has arged, for e(ample+
<Go(s> discssion of a sspiciosly sdden disappearance of a niversal e6ivalent -recasts
the sincerity game into economic terms, which Go( then applies homologically to diverse
realms. In these applications we can begin to sense how easily the sincerity game )a.!.a. the
niversal e6ivalent game* leads into both misogynistic and homophobic assertions of the
valed stability of what is nonetheless a clearly imaginary normativity against which free'
floating and spriosly sbse6ent perversions will be measred and fond wanting -the
apparently ,rigoros0 system Go( ncovers in Les Faux-Monnayeurs need not be seen as sch,
nless one has a sta!e in inathenticity verss sincerity, in standards verss an nanchored
system of desires )Fcey, 1995, p.11B;1*.
Fcey may well be 3stified in the general criticism that Go( fails to pay sfficient attention to the
6estion of the overt homose(ality present in the novel. .t he is certainly mista!en in the view he presents
of Go( as a sort of anti'postmodernist, morning the loss of the athenticity and ?standards of the
niversal e6ivalent in the face of a desire that is as free'floating as the circlation of paper money. "or as
we have seen in or reading of Go(s earlier #"onomie et $ymboli%ue, Go(s wor! in fact maintains a
consistent criti6e of the general or niversal e6ivalent in all its forms. It is never a 6estion of regarding
one particlar form of vale as more athentic than another, bt rather of developing a theory of the
historical development of vale systems as being ?isomorphic to that of the money form.
It is perhaps nderstandable that, if one confines oneself to reading Go(s Les monnayeurs du langage
in isolation, one might come to the conclsion that Go( is valori/ing gold2in both its literary and
financial forms2over its replacements. In voicing this sspicion Fcey echoes Gerridas remar! )cited
above* that Go(s analysis tends to ?natrali/e and ?defictionali/e gold money. .t when these remar!s
are set in the conte(t of Go(s earlier wor! it becomes clear that this is not at all Go(s pro3ect. Go(s
aim, rather, is to demonstrate a homology between the historical evoltion of different forms of symbolic
vale. It is 6ite clear from #"onomie et $ymboli%ue that it is demonstrating the for'stage evoltion of the
symbolic form that is at sta!e for Go( and not the speriority of one stage of evoltion over another.
5n the other hand, having placed Go(s analysis of Gide in the conte(t of his earlier wor!, it is 6ite
clear that Gerridas second criticism of Go( stands. @hat is to say, whatever the similarity between
different forms of symbolic vale, Go(s historici/ation of their co'evoltion, his desire to ?locate a
historical trning point, seems problematic )Go(, 199A, p.A*. @he idea that one cold locate a particlar
point in time where realistic representational forms give way to modernist representational forms2
analogos to the point at which crrency brea!s with the gold standard2wold raise the 6estion, as we
have seen Gerrida observe, of what to do with wor!s either side of the brea! that dont fit into the schema. It
is perhaps finally on the 6estion of historicity that Go(s homology between literary and financial
representation brea!s down.
Biblio!raph
4ristotle )192L* The /i"homa"hean 'thi"s. Fondon+ Eilliam Deinmann. Foeb edition. @ranslated by D.
Cac!ham.
Gerrida, &. )1999* 0iven Time1 23 Counterfeit Money. Khicago+ M. of Khicago N. @ranslated by Neggy
Oamf.
GiNiero, @. )19==* .ying into fiction. 4ia"riti"s 1=)2*, pp.9;15.
"red, $. )192:* "etishism. In &. $trachey )%d.*, $tandard 'dition of the Com!lete 5sy"hologi"al 6or7s of
$igmund Freud )19L1 ed.*, Jolme 21, pp. 152;:. Fondon+ Dogarth.
Gide, 4. )19LL <1991>* The Counterfeiters. Fondon+ Nengin. @ranslated by Gorothy .ssy.
Go(, &.'&. )19:9* #"onomie et $ymboli%ue1 Freud. Marx. Naris+ Pditions d $eil.
2222. )19=A* Les Monnayeurs du Langage. Naris+ GalilIe.
2222. )199A* The Coiners of Language. 8orman+ Mniversity of 5!lahoma Nress. @ranslated by &ennifer
Krtiss Gage.
Dart/, N. )1991* 5n $ymbolic %conomies. 8meri"an 9ournal of $emioti"s =)1;2*, pp.19:;A:.
Facan, &. )19LL* #"rits. Naris+ $eil.
2222. )19::* #"rits1 a sele"tion. Fondon+ @avistoc!. @ranslated by 4lan $heridan.
Fcey, #. )1995* 0ide:s Bent1 $exuality. 5oliti"s. 6riting. 5(ford+ 5(ford Mniversity Nress.
#ar(, O. )19:L* Ca!ital, Jolme 1. Fondon+ Nengin. @ranslated by .en "ow!es.
Ceynad'Nactat, N. )19==* &ean'&oseph Go( and the metaphor of the promissory note in Gstave "laberts
Madame Bovary. 4ia"riti"s 1=)2*, pp.L9;=B.
Coff, $. )1995* Ceview+ The Coiners of Language. #F8 11B)A*, pp.1BB:;1B1B.
Eood, N. C. )1991* Going off gold. $tanford Fren"h Revie) 15, pp.995;:.
i
3ndnotes
?@he themes of Gides novel, then, bear witness to a crisis of representation, since the general e6ivalents he illstrates
are Re!resentatives. 4t the same time, his literary devices are formally in the grip of a challenge to the representational
system similar to the challenge already e(perienced in the field of painting+ Go(, 199A, p.11.
ii
?Fe phalls est lI6ivalent gInIral des ob;ets 7 le pQre est lI6ivalent gInIral des su;ets, de mRme 6e lor est
lI6ivalent gInIral des prodits + Go(, 19:9, p.L9, his emphasis.
iii
?registres distants d corps social gInIral + Go(, 19:9, p.L5.
iv
?@ote genQse des symboles ma3ers . . .est isomorphe S celle de lIlaboration discontine de la forme monItaire +
Go(, 19:9, p.L5.
v
?Kest dans latre 6e le s3et sidentifie et mRme sIprove tot dabord. + Facan, 19LL, p.1=1, my emphasis.
vi
.le s3et 2 novea nI dans le commerce des hmains 2 reflQte pe S pe sa valer )son Tme* dans le corps de
nombre( de ses semblables, U la forme totale )o dIveloppIe* de la valer relative met ne marchandise en rapport
social avec totes V + Go(, 19:9, p.59.
vii
?Wel'est il, cet Rtre to3ors relatif S des atris assi diffIrents 6e nombre( 1 @os ne li rIflIchissent son Tme
6e fragmentairement. Gevrait'il por savoir rIellement ce 6il est en appeler S chacn 1 se faire reconnaXtre pas
chacn 1 . . .#ais davantage encore + voici 6en mRme temps 6il en appelle, spIclairement, S limage de tel o tel
atre, il 3oe assi bien, li'mRme, le rYle de miroir + 2 des rapports ine(tricables de domination et de sbordination se
trovent ainsi noIs, dactivitI et de passivitI simltanIe, dantagonisme, de polaritI renversable, o por mie( dire
dambi'valen"e + Go(, 19:9, p.LB.
viii
?Wen est'il sinon 6e le pQre devient limage rIflIchissante et ni6e de tos les s3ets en 6Rte de ler pri( 1
Wen est'il, sinon 6e laccQs S ler atonomie rIcipro6e en mRme temps 6S ler statt social, entIrinI par
lassomption de la norme, passe par cette mIdiation 1 Fe passage de la forme valer dIveloppIe )"orme II* S la forme
valer gInIrale )"orme III* 2 6i seffecte sr la base dn U retornement V , dne U rIcipro6e V , est isomorphe a
dInoement de la crise Zdipienne + limage d pQre fonctionnant dans cette Iconomie comme I6ivalent gInIral et
limage des atris particliers )et d moi* comme forme relative. + Go(, 19:9, p.L1.
i(
?Fa castration U lIlision d phalls V , 6elle 6e soit la dramatisation pls o moins sanglante 6i en dIcide le
scInario, nest pas atre chose 6e le(clsion synta(i6e de lI6ivalent gInIral d monde des valers relatives )des
ob3ets partiels*. . . + Go(, 19:9, p.L=.
(
?Kest n mRme processs gInIti6e, cest le mRme principe de strctration discontine et progressive 6i commande
laccession S la soverainetI normative de lor, d pQre et d phalls. + Go(, 19:9, p.L9.
(i
?Kest U le caractQre f(ti"he 6e la forme monnaie imprime a( mIta( prIcie( V . Ge mRme dans le registre d se(e,
et de sa U fonction signifiante V privilIgiIe, U lorgane 6i en est revRt prend valer de fItiche V + Go(, 19:9, p.:=7
6oting #ar( )19:L*, Facan )19::*.
(ii
?. . .cest de l:effa"ement d:une gen<se 6e naXt le fItichisme . . .Ge leffacement dne histoire. %t sele ne analyse
pet lever cette illsion. + Go(, 19:9, p.:9.
(iii
?4insi de mRme 6e U cest grTce a 8om'd'pQre 6e lhomme ne reste pas attachI a service se(el de la mQre
). . .* et 6e la Foi est a service d dIsire 6elle instite par linterdiction de linceste V , cest grTce S la monnaie )a
nmIraire, a nom de lor* 6e las marchandise, 1* diffQre son usage immIdiat, 2* diffQre son ("hange immIdiat, 2 et
d(sire de rapporter son pri( S la monnaie frappIe, entrant dans le dItor dIchange de la circlation instarI par la loi +
Go(, 19:9, p.=A, his emphasis.
(iv
?FI6ivalent gInIral est le lie dne loi, le lie do[ lon nomme. $i le pQre est le commn dInominater des s3ets
particliers, 2 et 6e la transmission d nom se fait par le pQre 2, si les signes d langage, par ler fonction mRme de
dInomination, darticlation des noms, sont par e(cellence les dInominaters commns de tos les signes d monde,
pareillement l:argent est le = d(nominateur "ommun de toutes les mar"handises > . de mRme 6e le !hallus est = le !lus
!etit "ommun d(nominateur de "e %ui est ob;et > + Go(, 19:9, p.=A;5.
(v
?Gne fa\on gInIrale linstittion monItaire oblige les relations entre U marchandises V S passer par n dItor
lIgislatif. U Fargent devient par convention, Icrit 4ristote, lni6e moyen dIchange en ve de satisfaire des besoins
rIcipro6es. 4ssi porte't'il le nom de 8M#I$#4 parce 6il procQde non de la natre mais de la loi V )nomos*. Fe
dItor monItaire est donc lassomption de la loi. $i lon pense a rYle )isomorphe S tot ce procQs* des signes
lingisti6es, si lon pense S la dInomination, est mise alors S 3or ne chaXne numismati%ue. Mne chaXne lIgislative et
3ridi6e 6i rInit le nom, le nmIraire, la nmIration, la nomination et la dInomination. + Go(, 19:9, p.=A.
(vi
$ee 4ristotle 192L+ .!. J, Kh. v, 2=5.
(vii
?Il y a donc on le voit ne homologie Itroite entre laliInation des trava( des individels dans le procQs dIchange,
comme corrIlTt de la lIgislation a !riori de tot Ichange dans le champ de la circlation marchande, et laliInation
totale des individs comme condition a !riori de tot Ichange )entre les droits et les devoirs*. + Go(, 19:9, p.1BA.
(viii
?Gans tos les cas )Iconomie, politi6e, se(alitI* cest laliInation 6i permet, oblige, daccIder S la norme sociale
et a( Ichanges 6elle rIglemente sivant ne certaine Ivalation commne. Il apparaXt ainsi 6e lI6ivalent gInIral,
comme mesre des valers et Italon des pri(, vient occper prIcisIment et o""ulter ce lie transcendent et prIalable, 2
o[ il y fonctionne comme le dIlIgI sensible. Ge mRme 6e le 8om'd'NQre vient occper le lie de l4tre et
reprIsente la loi 6e ce dernier instite, lor vient occper le lie de la loi rIglatrice des valers marchandes, et le
monar%ue, por faire rIgner la 3stice, vient occper le lie d U contrat dorigine V )6i ne serait atre, de Nlaton S
Degel, comme e(trRme d mystQre philosophi6e, 6e celi des lois non-("rites de la "it(* + Go(, 19:9, p.1B5.
(i(
4s "red otlines in the essay ?"etishism, the fetish ?is a sbstitte for womans )the mothers* penis that the little
boy once believed in. Cefsing to give p on this symbolic phalls, ?a very energetic action has been nderta!en to
maintain the disavowal. In the fetish, the fetishist has, ?retained the belief <in the womans phalls>, bt he has also
given it p. In "reds accont2and this spports Go(s analogy with the commodity2the fetish is fndamentally
rather sccessfl+ ?Ee can now see what the fetish achieves and what it is that maintains it. It remains a to!en of
trimph over the threat of castration and a protection against it )"red, 192:, pp.152;A*.
((
?Fa civilisation occidentale se dIfinit formellement comme celle 6i a possI 3s6S ses e(trRmes limites, et dans
tos les registres, cette soltion de lorganisation des IlIment socia( par la sbordination S n I6ivalent. + Go(,
19:9, p.91.
((i
?Fa sphQre de la prodction met en 3e des for"es )libido2force de travail. . .forces sociales, individelles et
collectives* 6i se trovent occltIes par la sphQre de la circlation 2 basIe sr le d(tour d:("hange. #ais les forces
mises en 3e se r(tablissent dans le monde de lIchange sos la forme de valeurs dont elles sont la substan"e
mIconne + Go(, 19:9, p.11B.
((ii
?. . .circit antagoni6e entre des investissements diversifiIs et prodcters et les contre'investissements 6i les
refolent et les niversalisent . . . + Go(, 19:9, p.11B.
((iii
?Fe renversement mat(rialiste remet dialecti6ement le sens et la valer dans le prolongement matIriel direct de
lactivitI vitale socialisIe. Kest le sens profond, gInIralisI dne triple criti6e + philosophi6e2de lid(alisme 7
Iconomi6e 2 d f(ti"hisme 7 politi6e 2 d "a!italisme + Go(, 19:9, pp.112;9.
((iv
?#ar( est donc bien le lie dne copre radicale, en ce 6e son geste inagre et prIfigre to( ce( 6i aprQs li
vont tracer ler motif. Wil sagisse de 8iet/sche o de "red, cest la ltte contre le r(sultat hy!ostasi( d:une gen<se
effa"(e. Fa ltte contre le rIsltat dne histoire, 6i en Itablissant dans ler rYle S prIsent abstrait, idIalisI, les valers,
ft leffacement mRme de sa base matIrielle + Go(, 19:9, p.111.