Paul de Man - literary critic, literary philosopher, "American deconstructionist" - changed the landscape of criticism through his rigorous theories and writings. Upon its original publication in 1988, Christopher Norris' book was the first full-length introduction to de Man, a reading that offers a much-needed corrective to the pattern of extreme antithetical response which marked the initial reception to de Man's writings. Norris addresses de Man's relationship to philosophical thinking in the post-Kantian tradition, his concern with "aesthetic ideology" as a (...) potent force of mystification within and beyond that tradition, and the vexed issue of de Man's politics. Norris brings out the marked shift of allegiance in de Man's thinking, from the thinly veiled conservative implications of the early essays to the engagement with Marx and Foucault on matters of language and politics in the late, posthumous writing. At each stage, Norris raises these questions through a detailed close reading of individual texts which will be welcomed by those who lack any specialised knowledge of de Man's work. (shrink)

Unable to respond to the questions, to all the questions, I will ask myself instead whether responding is possible and what that would mean in such a situation. And I will risk in turn several questions prior to the definition of a responsibility. But is it not an act to assume in theory the concept of a responsibility? Is that not already to take a responsibility? One’s own as well as the responsibility to which one believes one ought to summon (...) others?The title names a war. Which war?Do not think only of the war that broke out several months ago around some articles signed by a certain Paul de Man, in Belgium between 1940 and 1942. Later you will understand why it is important to situate the beginning of things public, that is the publications, early in 1940 at the latest, during the war but before the occupation of Belgium by the Nazis, and not in December 1940, the date of the first article that appeared in Le Soir, the major Brussels newspaper that was then controlled, more or less strictly, by the occupiers. For several months, in the United States, the phenomena of this war “around” Pula de Man have been limited to newspaper articles. War, a public act, is by rights something declared. So we will not count in the category of war the private phenomena—meetings, discussions, correspondences, or telephonic conclaves—however intense they may have been in recent days, and already well beyond the American academic milieu. Jacques Derrida is Directeur d’Études at the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales and also teaches at the University of California, Irvine. A teacher at Yale for ten years, he is the author of Mémoires: for Paul de Man .Peggy Kamuf is associate professor of French at Miami University. She is the author of Fictions of Feminism Desire: Disclosures of Heloise and Signature Pieces: On the Institution of Authorship . Her article “Pieces of Resistance” is forthcoming in Reading de Man Reading. (shrink)

The inability of reformist socialism to cape with the rise of fascism and the Great Depression led to a significant challenge by neo-socialists.In Belgium, this challenge was led by De Man and Spaak. In 1933, the POB accepted De Man's Plan as its program of action; in 1935 it entered into the Van Zeeland government. Although in many ways, theneos showed greater understanding of the nature of advanced capitalist society than the orthodox reformists, they displayed an alarming tendency to try (...) to preempt fascism by emulating certain fascist positions.De Man and Spaak broke with socialist internationalism and collective security. De Man became convinced of the bankruptcy of democratic institutions and of the democratic states. This attitude ultimately led him from neutralism to collaboration, in the belief that fascism was indeed the wave of the future. (shrink)

It is questioned whether Belgian planism of the 1930's has been a movement that broke with socialist internationalism and displayed a tendency to preempt fascism by emulating some of its positions, asS.P. Kramer argued in the previous issue of Res Publica. Unlike French neo-socialism, planism was a call to action within the party against the crisis. Whether it was merely a personalities' matter is doubtful. Byindividualizing its failure one leaves unsolved essential problems like the attraction of fascism for the masses (...) and the real spread of the planist idea. Socialisme nationaI was a bow to the circumstances, not to the fascist spirit. The breach in socialist internationalism did not result from a deliberate political wilt but was rather forced upon it by the breakdown of collective security. As for internal policy de Man suggested an unequivocal partnership favouring structural reforms. His failure cannot be dissociated from the failure of democracy and socialism. He eventually blunderel against his own ethics by admitting the destructive revolutionary potentiality of the 1940 defeat. Nevertheless Belgian planism can only be understood along with its historical connections. (shrink)