READINGTRAUMAINPOSTMODERNANDPOSTCOLONIALLITERATURE:

CHARLOTTEDELBO,TONIMORRISON,
ANDTHELITERARYIMAGINATIONOFTHEAFTERMATH

ADissertation

SubmittedtotheGraduateFacultyofthe
LouisianaStateUniversityand
AgriculturalandMechanicalCollege
inpartialfulfillmentofthe
requirementsforthedegreeof
DoctorofPhilosophy
in
TheInterdepartmentalProgramin
ComparativeLiterature

by
SylvianeFinck
B.A.,UniversitCatholiqueLouvain,Belgium,1983
M.A.,NorthwesternStateUniversity,1997
December2006

Acknowledgements
Thisworkcouldnothavebeencompletedwithoutthecontinuedsupport, encouragements,
andexpertguidanceofsomeveryspecialpeople.Iwishtoacknowledgethemhere.
MywholeheartedthanksgotomymajorprofessoranddirectorPatrickMcGee.Asan
extremelylucidthinker,talentedwriter,andaudaciousscholar,hehasbeen asourceofcontinued
inspirationtome.Ithankhiminparticularforhisinvaluablequalitiesasamentor,his
unconditionalsupport,andforbeingatrueenablerandfriend.Myprofoundgratitudealsogoes
tothemembersofmycommittee:BainardCowanforhisenthusiasmaboutmyproject,Kate
Jensenforhercontinuouscooperation andJohnPizerforhispromptnessatrespondingpositively
tobeingonthecommittee.Specialthanksgotothemforreadingthemanuscriptsothoroughly.
ThankyoualsotoJosephRicapitoforhisconstantencouragements,andtoGregorySchufreider
forhisassistance.IamalsogreatlyindebtedtoRossChambers,whoseseminarontestimonial
narrativesliesattheheartofthisproject.
IalsowouldliketothankJosephRockyColavitoandHelenRazovskifromNorthwestern
StateUniversity,Natchitoches,Louisiana.Both haveencouragedmetopursuemyacademic
workpasttheMasterslevel.Iamgratefultheydid,andIamindebtedtothem.
Myacknowledgingspecialpeoplewouldnotbecompletewithoutmy thankingJoanMcGee
forherwarmhospitality,andConnieBrownforhertechnicalsupport.
Thecontinuedloveandencouragements thatIhavereceivedfrommyparentsVictorand
AngleFinckhasbeeninvaluable.Theiralwaysbeingthereformehasmeantimmenselyinmy
beingabletocompletesmallerorgreaterendeavors.Also,mydeepestthanksgotomyhusband
OscarLozadaandourlittlegirlAngelinafortheirterrificpatiencewithmeduringthe
completionofthisproject.

ii

TableofContents
Acknowledgements...........ii
Abstract.....................................iv
Chapter
1Introduction:ListeningtoSilence...................................1
2TheHauntingofthePast.....................47
3DiscursiveMemory...............105
4AmbiguousCommunities...............169
Conclusion:SomeKindofFutureCommunity...........224
Bibliography........233
Vita..............245

iii

Abstract
Somepersonalorcollectivehistoriescanneverbecompletelyintegratedintothe
continuumofonesemotionallife.Suchstoriesproducedintraumatictimesorindisastrous
eventsarelikelytoremainonlypartiallyunderstoodoraccepted.Examiningthehuman
consequenceoftraumaticeventssuchastheenslavementofAfricansintheUnitedStates orthe
attemptedextermination oftheJewishpeopleinEurope isonechallengingfocusofthiswork. It
iscomparativelyproductive,however,if theseeventsareapproachedfromtheperspectiveof the
traumatheyhaveproducedanapproachthatsuspendschronologicalandgeographicalbarriers
oftimeandspace. ThetrilogybypostmodernFrenchartistCharlotteDelbo,anAuschwitz
survivorwhonarratedherstoryintestimonialform,offersthatinsightintotrauma,asdoesthe
postcolonial workofToniMorrison.Thefirstvolumesofbothtrilogies,Aucundenousne
reviendraandBelovedexposethedamagedonetoindividualsandcollectivitiesintermsof
traumabyrevealingtheextenttowhichlivingattheedgeoflifeandwitnessinghorrificactsof
massivedeathanddestructionshapeandimpactnotonlyvictimsbutthesocietiestowhichthey
return.Attemptingtowork throughthosestrikinglytraumaticexperiencesfurtherhighlights
attitudescommonlyfoundinnarrativesofsurvival. UneconnaissanceinutileandJazz,the
secondvolumesofthetrilogies,enhancethatkindofunderstanding,whilebothpointatthe
necessaryimpossibilityofforgettingthetraumaticexperiencesthatremainclearlyundigested.
Eventssuchassenselessexterminationofanentirepeopleandthebrutalexploitationofanentire
racewerenotonlynotavoided,butsystematicallypromotedbythecommunitiesinquestion.
MesuredenosjoursandParadise,thelastvolumesofthetrilogies,clearlydocumentthelackof
attentivenesstothepleasofsurvivorsandemancipatedslavesbytheirrespectivecommunities

iv

afterliberationandemancipation.Eventhoughsupportwasnotshownbythesecommunitiesin
theaftermathofthetraumaticoccurrences,thisshouldnotdisengageusfromourgravest
responsibility:tobearwitnesstothesufferingsofanexcludedotherwhoseprocessesofrecovery
andworkingthroughremainelusive.

Chapter1.Introduction:ListeningtoSilence
IfIamgettingreadytospeakatlengthaboutghosts,inheritance,andgenerations,
generationsofghosts,whichistosayaboutcertainotherswhoarenotpresent,nor
presentlyliving,eithertous,inus,oroutsideus,itisinthenameof justice.Andthis
beingwithspecterswouldalsobe,notonlybutalso,apolitics ofmemory,ofinheritance,
andofgenerations.
Thefutureisitsmemory.
JacquesDerrida,SpectersofMarx
Memory(thedeliberateactofremembering)isaformofwilledcreation.Itisnotan
efforttofindoutthewayitreallywasthatisresearch.Thepointistodwellontheway
itappearedandwhyitappearedinthatparticularway.
Memoryisformealwaysfresh,inspiteofthefactthattheobjectbeingrememberedis
doneandpast.
ToniMorrison,Memory,Creation,andWriting
Ourmemoryrepeatstouswhatwehaventunderstood.Repetitionisaddressedto
incomprehension.
PaulValry,Oeuvres
Thewaycontemporarycultureengagesinthepresent,alongwiththewaysitprojectsits
future, mayilluminatethewayitreshapestheimageofitspast.Suchcultural
engagementswiththepast,astheepigraphsbyDerrida,Morrison,andValrysuggest,
necessarilyinvolveworksofremembrance,reflection,andinscription.Remembering,
reflecting,andinscribingthepastinconsciousnessandintherealmsofpresentandfuture
havebeenparticularlyresonantinsomepostcolonialandpostmoderndiscourses.Indeed,
whilepostcolonialandpostmodernnarrativeshavelookedatsomeinjusticeofthepast,
theyhaveengagedindiscoursestoawakenthedesireforafuturemorejust.Sodoing,
postcolonialandpostmoderntextshavemotivatedandinitiatednecessaryactsofcultural
crossingsbetweenwhathistoryhasdecidedtorememberandwhatourcollectivememory
ispreparedtoacknowledge.Withtheseacts,possibilitiesforprojectingafuturemore

promising,morejust,andforlivinginthepresentotherwise...andmorejustly,in
JacquesDerridaswords,havenotonlyilluminatedinterdependenciesbetweenpast,
present,andfuture(SpectersofMarxxviii).Thesetextshavealsocalledattentiontothe
importanceofbeingattentivetothelessonsthathistorycanrevealtous.
WhiletheworksofCharlotteDelboandToniMorrisonenableustoexplorethe
tensionsofanoppressivepastinconnectionwiththepresentandthefuture,theyalso
inviteustoparticipate,inMorrisonsterms,inaceaselessworkofactivereconstruction
ofaworld.Yetastwomodesofbearingwitnesstohistoriesofethnicandracial
oppression,bothauthorsalsoinsistonthenecessitytolivewiththememory,notonlyof
theliving,butofthedeadaswell.Similarly,Derridaarguesthatonepossibilityforajust
futureliesinourabilitytolivetorememberthevictimsofinjusticeindeedtoconjure
thedeadratherthantoburythem.Byrefusingtoburythepastentirely,bothDelbosand
Morrisonsartstressestheresponsibilitytoremember,ratherthanfailtoremember,the
deadandtheforgotten.Assuch,forDelboandaccordingtoMorrison,ifthelivingcan
beanobjectofliteraryreflectionandcelebration,andleadtotherevelationofakindof
truth,soarethedead(ThesiteofMemory95).Especiallyiftheirhumanexistenceis
beingorhasbeendisavowed.Turningtothepastandtothehistoriesthatitholdscan
thusinitiatenecessaryprocessesofremembranceofthosewhoserelevancehasbeen
denied.Itcanalsopossiblybringusclosertothatpartofhistorythatmaynotbeeasily
accessible.Thisworkofrecollectionofthepastandofthedeadwillcruciallyinform,
andpossiblyentrust,thelivingwithsomeformsofknowledge.Eventually,beingattuned
tothelessonsofboththepastandpresent,deadandlivingmayfacilitatenewformsof

wisdom.AndforDerrida,nothingismorenecessarythanthiswisdominlearningand
inlearningtolive(SpectersofMarxxx).
Thelearningtolive,asDerridainsists,cannotsimplyentaillearningtolivein
thepresent.Italsonecessitateslearningtolivebeyondthelivingpresentingeneral
(SpectersofMarxxx).Likewise,theseactsoflearningtolivesolelyfromoneselfand
byoneselfcan,inDerridascontention,onlyfallshort,becauselivingwouldthenbe
reducedtoan impossibility.Forhim,notonlyfromdeath,butalsofromtheother
cantheteachingsaboutlivingtakeplaceandbelearnt.Derridaphrasesthisnecessityof
learninginthefollowingterms:Buttolearntolive,tolearnitfromoneselfandby
oneself,allalone,toteach oneselftolive(Iwouldliketolearntolivefinally),isthat
notimpossibleforalivingbeing?Derridakeepsasking,Isitnotwhatlogicitself
forbids?DerridafurtherpositsthatTolive,bydefinition,isnotsomethingonelearns.
Notfromoneself,itisnotlearnedfromlife,taughtbylife.Onlyfromtheotherandby
death.Inanycasefromtheotherattheedgeoflife.Attheinternalborderorthe
externalborder,itisheterodidacticsbetweenlifeanddeath(xviii).
Ashelocatestheotheranddeathatthecenterofanargumentaboutlearning
tolivemorewiselyandmorejustly,Derridaalsoinsists,aspreviouslymentioned,onan
obligationtolivenotsolelyinthepresent,butbeyondalllivingpresent.For
Derrida,itwouldrequirelivingwiththebearingsofthepastandthepresenceofthe
futureinmind.Facingthepast,andtendingtoitasapresenceinthepresentmomentand
inthefutureconstitutes,forDerrida,ourgravestresponsibility.Itwouldhaveusface
thenecessityofourbeingattentivetowhathecoinsthenoncontemporaneityofthe
livingpresent.Itsignalsaresponsibilityforustoattendtothoseofthepastwhoareno

longeroraboutwhomthereisorhasbeenlittleordeniedawareness(xix).AsDerrida
argues,thedeadcanoftenbemorepowerfulthantheliving(48).Yetbeingattentive
tothoseofthefuturewhoarenotyetpresentandlivingisequallysignificant.Inother
words,living,whilerecognizingandholdinginrespectthosewhoarenolonger,or
thoseotherswhoarenotyetthere,presentlyliving,whethertheyarealreadydeador
notyetborn,canandshouldbeactivelyperformed.
ForDerrida,thiscompellingactoflearninglivingbeyondthepresentwith
respectandremembranceofthepast,andwithasenseofjusticeforthefuturemeansto
livewithghosts.Asheclaims,nojusticeispossiblewithoutbearinginmindthatwhich
disjoinsthelivingpresent.ForDerrida,whatdisruptsandunhingesthatpresentisthe
generationsofghosts,...certain otherswhoarenotpresent,norpresentlyliving,either
tous,inus,oroutsideus.Assuch,forjusticetobeconceivable,itmustbecalledfor
beforetheghosts ofthosewhoarenotyetbornorwhoarealreadydead.Theseghosts,
heremindsus,mayoriginatefromtroubledtimesorfrombeyondthepresent.They
includeallofthosewhohavebeenlivinginoppressionorinjustice,betheyvictimsof
wars,politicalorotherkindsofviolence,nationalist,racist,colonialist,sexist,orother
kindsofexterminations,victimsoftheoppressionsofcapitalistimperialismoranyforms
oftotalitarianism.Writingforatomorrowoffairersort,Derridaconcludesby posing
thefollowingquestion:Withoutthisnoncontemporaneitywithitselfoftheliving
present,withoutthatwhichsecretlyunhingesit,withoutthisresponsibilityandthis
respectforjusticeconcerningthosewhoarenotthere,ofthosewhoarenolongerorwho
arenotyetpresentandliving,whatsensewouldtherebetoaskthequestionwhere?
wheretomorrow?whither?(xix).

Inchapter1,Iwanttoexplorehowsomepostcolonialandpostmodernthinkers
havecalledforadutytoremembertheseghosts,thedead,thelivingandtheotherat
theedgeoflifewithaviewtojustice(xviii).Since,forDerrida,learningtolivecan
happenonlybetweenlifeanddeath,yetneitherinlifenorindeath alone,butbetween
thetwo,learningwillobviouslyinvolvesomeelementsofthespectralandof
spirits(xviii).Thisspectralspace,asonethatmaintainsitselfwithsomeghost,
can,forDerrida,beequatedwithaplace,whichisneithersubstance,noressence,nor
existence,norevensomethingthatiseverpresentassuch.Thisspacewillserveour
presentinquirybycallingtoattentionthespectralorhauntingpropertyofsomeformsof
memoriesthataretoberetrievedfromthepastdespitethepaintheycausedortheforms
ofdenialtheyproduced.Itwillalsoservetoinquireintohowthereconstructed
memoriesofthepastthatothershavemadeconsciouslymanifestthroughtestimonials
canaffectourperceptionofthatpast(xviii).Assuch,Iwanttoexplorehowandin what
wayswemaybecompelledtoaddresssomeofthetracesofaghastlypastthatvarious
postcolonialandpostmodernthinkershaveintentlyurgedustorememberthroughtheir
narrativerequests.Examininghowandinwhatwaysthespectralasaform ofreturn
ofsomerepressedordeniedhistoriescanimpingeonourunderstandingoftheworldis
partofthatconcern.Anotheristoinquireintohowourownperceptionofapastthathas
beenexperiencedorimagined,butrecollectedandputinwritingby othersandartistscan
affecttheconstructionofourownmemories.
Nolivingmemorycanmakeclaimsforthecertaintyortheenduranceofthe
rememberedobject.Memorymaynotevenwarrantthepermanenceoftheremembrance,
norevendesireit.ForMarianneHirsch,modesofrememberingmayactuallyaccountfor

varyingdegreesofapproachingorgainingdistancefromthepast(Markedby
Memory74).Besides,appending,altering,andremovingmemoriesfromconsciousness
constituteactive,reactiveorcreativeactsofrememberingorforgetting.Theseacts,
alongwiththevitalityorthenumbingthattheyvariouslygenerateordiscourage,make
memorynotfixed,butchanging.Whetherthesetransactionswithlivedexperiencesor
recollectionsofeventsaredeliberateornot,theycanbemademanifestinsingularand
personalways,aswellasinpluralandcollectiveones.Besides,andmoreimportantly,
asErnestVanAlphennoticesthesememoriesneedtobemediatedthroughdiscourse.
Indeed,forVan Alphen,experiencesarenotdirect...subjectivelylivedaccountsof
reality,asitistraditionallyassumed.Rather,experiencedependsondiscoursetocome
about,andassuch,experienceisnecessarilyandfundamentallydiscursive.Thusfor
VanAlphen,formsofexperiencedonotjustdependontheeventorhistorythatisbeing
experienced,butalsoonthediscourseinwhichtheeventis
expressed/thought/conceptualized(SymptomsofDiscursivity24).
Memoryanddiscourse,itseems,arealwaysprocessesinthemaking.Assuch,
theykeepbeingreinvented.Frenchpoetandnineteenth centuryexperimentalartist
ArthurRimbaudservesasanillustrationofthispoint.Rimbaudspoetryisindeed
exemplaryofthemediationbetweenexperience,memory,anddiscoursethatIwantto
emphasizehere.HispoetryvergestowardswhatDerridacoinsapoliticsofmemory,of
inheritance,andimpartsknowledgetoothergenerations(SpectersofMarxxix).
Besides,Rimbaudsvisionofpoetryasameansfordiscoveringtheunknown,along
withhisdesiretoliberatehisegoandhisartfromallrestrictions,inthewordsofEnid
RhodesPeschel,bothallowforapossibleexpansionoftheimagination.Thisextension

oftheimaginationwascertainlymorethandesirableinthecaseofRimbaudsinceheset
outtoexploreanduncoversomeunfamiliarground.Asapoetalchemist,avisionary
makerofimageswho,byderanginghissenses,soughttouncovertheunconscious
sourcesofthepoeticimagination,Rimbaudindeedservesourpurposewell.Namely,
heenablesustoposethequestionofhowlivedexperiences,recollection,and
transcriptionofexperiencescanshape,mediate,andpermeateeachotherinnarrative
processes.
Rimbaudwasanartistwhocreativelyengagedinreinscribingrealitythrough
actsofsensuousperceptionsandilluminations.Becomingmoreandmoreaudaciousin
hisexperimentingtherealandtheunrealinvisionaryandhallucinatoryprojections,he
setouttoexploreininnovativewaysmodesofconnectingrealitywithmemoryand
imaginationwithlanguage(ArthurRimbaud:A SeasoninHell20).Hewentintosome
ofhisownpersonalexperiencesthathereminiscedandtranslatedintoliteraryform
throughhisartisticpractice.NamedasaSurrealistinthepracticeoflifeandelsewhere
byAndrBreton,Rimbauddidnotmerelyproberealityinordertoshapeitintovarious
aestheticforms.Healsocommittedhisarttoexaminingtheconflictingemotionsthathe
personallyexperiencedwhenhesubjectedhimselftonewexperiences,whethertheywere
actuallyfelt,imagined,ortheobjectsofhisreverieorrevolt(21).Rimbauddidthus
notonlyengageinvariousformsofartisticexpression.Healsosupplementedhispoetic
languagewithconstantlyrenewedformsofexperiencesthathereminiscedandinscribed
inthespacesofhisart.
Rimbaudsexperimentingwithlifeandarthadhimchallengesomeofthe
traditionallyacceptedboundariesaroundhim.Ashesetouttoexploretheborderswhere

lifeandartmeet,healsoexpandedtherealmsoftheirpossibleinteractions.Hedidsoby
settinginnewcontextsandnewexperiencesanimaginationpushedtotheextreme.
Rimbaudsworkpointsathowliteraryproductionscanmutuallyinformexperienceand
viceversa.Discussingthepossibilitiesofrhetoricalmodesofexpressioninrelationto
objectsofexperienceisourpointhere.ItcorrelateswellwithDelbosandMorrisons
art.Indeed,bothDelboandMorrison,alongwithRimbaud,demonstrateanurgent
concernforthepossibilitiesofexpressinginliterarylanguageexperiencesand
occurrencesthathaveborderedandareborderingoneventsoftheextreme.Rimbauds
workserveswelltoopenanexaminationofformsofknowledgeandofexperiencesthat
canbeconsideredoutoftheordinaryorculturallydifficulttoadmit.Hisworkalso
enablesadiscussionofhowsomeformsofhorrificknowledgecanbemediatedthrough
poetry.AsPierreBrunelobservesin ArthurRimbaud: Unesaisonenenfer,Rimbauds
DliresII.Alchimieduverbeisactuallythepoeticjourneyofthepoetintothehorror
ofhorrors,intothesocialdeathofanI,whichdealswithunehistoireatrocethat
attachesitselftounehistoiredelaposiethroughunparcourspotiquequinadur
queletempsdunesaison(17).
Rimbaudanticipatedthatoccurrencesofloveorbeauty,butalsoofdeathor
emptiness,couldbeinurgentneedofnewformsofrecollectionandexpression.These
occasionsofsocialdeathdemandedartisticreinvention.Thepoetsexprience
surhumainein Unesaisonenenferwhilehewasinsearchofnewsensations,even
hallucinations,isacaseinpointthatilluminateshisexperimentwithnewformsofpoetic
language(82).Experiencingtheextreme,probingitslimits,andinscribingthesein
poeticlanguageisthelegacyofRimbaudthatIwishtoretainhere.Itwillfacilitate

exploringsomeofthepossibilitiesoftransposingsurreal,quasiinexpressible,
experiencesintoactsofartisticcreation.AsnotedbycriticPauleLapeyre,thisiswhat
RimbaudsetouttodowhenheexpressedthelossofanIintheprisonofthesoul.In
Lapeyreswords,quotedbyBrunelinhiscriticaledition,Unesaisonenenferisindeeda
harrowingcryofanguishandloss. Moreprecisely,itislecridhorreurpoussparune
medontlepomeretracelachutelintrieurdeltre. Brunelgoesfurtherby
claimingthatthesurrealdeathexperiencedbythepoetisevenmoreresoundingbecause
itisactuallynottriggeredbythephysicalextinctionofthebody,butbytheimprisoning
oftheI. ForBrunel,cenestplusalorslecorpsquiestuntombeau,cestlemoi.
Cestluiquiestunenfer(42). Inotherwords,exploringvarioushistoriesofanIthat
survivedthedeadlymenaceofaprofoundlyshatteringreality,whethercolonial,
concentrationary,orsocialcanbedonethroughart.Throughartalso,canthosewho
survivedafragmentingorpartialdeadeningoftheself,offertheirtestimony.Through
theirartisticpoetryandprose,Rimbaud,Delbo,andMorrisonilluminatethoseprocesses
ofthedeadeningofthesoul.Moreimportantly,theyalsoenlightenwiththeirworkwhat
ittakestoreconnecttolifeandliving.Andtheyhavedonesowithforceandgrace.
Inafirststeptosearchthenewinordertoreachtheunknown,Rimbaud
explored,amongothers,thememoryofasensuousworld.InhisDliresII.Alchimie
duverbe,herecallsassigningcolorstovowels.Likewise,heascribedformsand
movementstoconsonants.Forandthroughpoeticverses,heactuallyrecreatedsenses
andmeanings.Theartistictranslationofhisexperimentationandhisconstrued
reminiscencesreadasfollows. Jinventailacouleurdesvoyelles!Anoir,Eblanc,I
rouge,Obleu,Uvert.Jerglailaformeetlemouvementdechaqueconsonneet,avec

desrythmesinstinctifs,jemeflattaidinventerunverbepotiqueaccessible,unjourou
lautre,touslessens. Ashekeptexploringprosaicpoeticwriting,herecollected,Je
rservaislatraduction. Cefutdabordunetude.Jcrivaisdessilences,desnuits,je
notaislinexprimable. Jefixaisdesvertiges(AlchimieduverbeOeuvres223). Ina
stateofnearmadness,wornbyhisexcessivelifeexperiences,Rimbaudwaseventually
tornbetweenadesiretospeakandanimpossibilityofspeaking(MauvaisSang
Oeuvres209).ClosetoapoeticdeathrenderedbyhisJenesaisplusparler,Rimbaud
threatenedtomufflehisimagination,deadenhismemories,andsilencehispoeticart
(MatinOeuvres234).Towardstheendofhislifeandinanactofhumility,he
confessed,Jaiessaydinventerdenouvellesfleurs,denouveauxastres,denouvelles
chairs,denouvelleslangues. Jaicruacqurirdespouvoirssurnaturels.Ehbien!Jedois
enterrermonimaginationetmessouvenirs. Returnedtoarealitythathedutifullyfelt
compelledtoacknowledgeandaccountfor,Rimbaudaccepted,however,theweightof
realitysdeadeningburden.Inthefaceoflife,laviecametobeseenbythepoetasa
despairingfarce.Lamentinglifessenselesscomponent,herelatedittolafarcemener
partous(AdieuOeuvres235).Yet,compelledbyasenseofdutytokeepexploring
lifeshold,hewrote,Moi! Moiquimesuisditmageouange,dispensdetoutemorale,
jesuisrenduausol,avecundevoirchercher,etlaralitrugueusetreindre
(MauvaisSang,andAdieu,Oeuvres214,235).
ThisdiscussionofRimbaudmayseemremovedfromtheobjectofmyinquiry.It
isonlysoinappearance.Indeed,Rimbaudsstruggletoreturntorealityafteranalmost
completesilencingofhispoeticsiscrucialtoanexplorationofaliteratureofloss,quasi
death,andsurvivalwhichinvolvesapoeticsofdescentintohellorfrombeyondthe

10

grave.ThispoeticsfrombeyondthegravewasobviouslyexploredbyRimbaud
himselfinUnesaisonenenfer,butalsobyotherFrenchsurrealistpoetssuchasGrard
deNerval,with Aurlia,andAugustedeChateaubriand,with Mmoiredoutretombe,
amongothers.ThepointthatIwanttomakehereisactuallyareminderofDerridas
insistenceonthenecessitytoattendtotheotherattheedgeoflife,ifwewantto
accessmeaningfulwaystolearnaboutlife.WerememberthatforDerrida,lifemustbe
learnedthroughtheheterodidacticsbetweenlifeanddeath(SpectersofMarxxviii).
MydiscussionofRimbaudinitiatestwoquestionsthatIwanttoaddress.They
canbeposedasfollows. First,whatcanpossiblybeleftoraliveoftheimaginationand
inthememoriesofindividualswhohaveexperienceddirectlyornotextremeformsof
trauma?Second,howcansurvivorsofextremeexperiencesphrase,putintowords,and
sharewithacommunityofreaderswhatisleftoftheircapacitiestoimagineand
remember?Ormoreprecisely,howcansurvivingartistsrecollectandtranscribethatof
which,inPrimoLeviswords,itisbetterthatthereremainsnomemory(Survivalin
Auschwitz16). Inotherwords,howdidsurvivorsoftraumaticexperienceskeepan
imaginationactiveandalive?Howdidtheytransposetheirpainfulmemoriesinartistic
forms?ForPrimoLevi,attemptsatworkingthroughsomeatrociousexperiences,
especiallythosehesufferedatAuschwitz,tiealso,asforRimbaud,Morrison,andDelbo,
intoprocessesofcreativeactsofwriting.In ThePeriodicTable,PrimoLeviclaimsa
senseofexaltationinrecreatingthroughlanguagesomeofhisexperiencesandemotions,
howeverdreadful.Hewrites,Itwasexaltingtosearchandfind,orcreate,therightword
...todredgeupeventsfrommymemoryanddescribethemwiththegreatestrigorand

11

theleastclutter.Paradoxically,mybaggageofatrociousmemoriesbecameawealth,a
seeditseemedtomethatbywriting,Iwasgrowinglikeaplant(153).
Examiningthedifficultiesinherentintransmittingtraumaticknowledgetofuture
generationsisacomplexandsensitiveprojecttoundertake.Suchaprojectdealswith
eventsthatmaybeverypainful,arecertainlydisturbing,andsituatedatthelimitsofthe
conceivableorimaginable.Besides,theethicalimplicationsbroughtaboutbynarrated
testimonialsofexperiencesdealingwithatrocityoratrociouslivedcircumstancesraise
majorquestions.One,forinstance,relatestoouracceptanceofthetermbeinghuman
andtothemeaningthatwemayhaveattachedtotheword.Whilewemayhavetakenfor
grantedourhumancharacter,wecertainlyhavetoponderwhatitmeanstobehumanin
thefaceofcircumstancesthatchallengeourexpectationsofwhatconstitutehumanacts.
Thesignificanceofthetermbeinghuman,surroundedbyfellowhumans,incollective
spacesandtimesthatinscribethemselvesinwhatwecannormally expectinacivilized
culturethus,andinthescopeofthisproject,demandreexaminationandreappraisal.
If,inthewordsofDavidPatterson,thatwhichishumanisthatwhichspeaks,the
processofdehumanization,ontheotherhand,isaprocess ofrenderingsilent.If,as
Pattersonargues,TheHolocaustnoveladdressesthisdivision[oftheworddivorced
fromthething,ofthehumanseveredfromthevoice,oftheselfagainstitself],itstruggles
toworkoutsomekindofreconnectionbetween theterms(TheShriekofSilence12).
Also,onemaywanttoask,isitstillrelevant,orevenpossible,toinitiatedialogueswithin
framesofreferencethatmakeuseofcommonlyacceptedtermssuchashumanity,
culture,progress,artandbeauty?Ifso,howhavetheunderlyingrelationsbetween

12

significanceandreferenceintheseconceptsshiftedinanewcontextoftraumatic
aftermath?ThesearethequestionstowhichIwouldliketoattendfornow.
Thereisalwaysadecisionfororagainstsilence,saysGeoffreyHartmaninthe
IntroductiontohisworkinHolocauststudiesTheLongestShadow (3).Hispoint
exposeschoicesaboutdecidingfororagainstthemakingknownofanexperienced
reality.Withtheposingofthischoicecomesacorollary decision.Hartmanreferstothat
decision,thatdifficultyofmakinganinformeddeterminationtoremainsilentorquiet
aboutanexperience,adilemmathatweneedtoconfront.Thisdilemmaisespecially
brutalwhenitinvolveschoosingwhattodiscloseornottodiscloseintextualaccounts
thatdealwithdisaster.Itmayevenbemoreharrowingifitcentersarounddisclosingan
experiencethathasbeenthreateningtooneslife,shatteringtoonesego,and
endangeringtoonessenseofsocialbeingforexample,intheliteratureoftestimonials
thatexploreeventsofdisastrousconsequences,suchasareproducedinanaftermathof
bondageordeportation.
ForHartman,notremainingsilentmayhaveusfacethepossibilitythatourtrust
inhumanityhasbeenshattered.Itmayhaveusconfronttherealizationthatourfaithin
mankindhasbeenirremediablylost.Thisisespeciallytrueforthosewhohavebeen
closelyconnectedtotheeventsoftraumaticmagnitudesuchasslaveryintheUSorthe
ShoahinEurope.IndiscussingtheattemptedannihilationofEuropeanJewrybythe
Nazis,HartmanclaimsthattointegratetheHolocaustintoourimageofhumannatureis
todespairofhumanity,aswellasoflanguage.Remainingsilentaboutthegenocide
may safeguardacontinuedbeliefinhumanity.Butsuchasemblanceofoptimisminthe
humanlypossible,hecontends,wouldbeselfdefeating.AsHartmanhasit,Yetto

13

concludethat[theHolocaust]cannotbeintegratedisalsotodespairifitmeans
abandoningthehopethataremedymaybeavailablethroughcollectiveactionbasedon
selfunderstandingandtradition.Theunderlyingquestionbecomesthus,Asnew
detailsornewperspectivesemerge,canwedrawanypracticalconsequencesfromwhat
wehavelearned?(4).
Hartmansarguingthedilemmaandthepriceofbreakingsilenceshadalready
beenprefiguredbyPrimoLeviafterhisharrowingexperienceatAuschwitz.By
reflectingonahumancondition,whoseideaheexploredandexposedin Survivalin
Auschwitz,LeviilluminatesHartmansconflict(17).Hartmanspoint,werecall,isabout
breakingsilencearoundasenselessevilthatmaybeatthecoreofhumanity.Levis
reflectionrevolvesmorearoundexaminingthepossibilityofintegratingarealityatthe
confinesoftheinhuman(e)andthebarbaric.Eventhough,inhisworkoftestimonial,
Levi,likeHartman,exploresthepossiblelossoffaithinourimageofhumanity,healso
appealstoformsoffraternitythatcanpartiallyrestorethatimage.Alongwith
emphasizinganunderlyingpresenceofevilinhumanity,PrimoLeviindeedalsoinquires
intowhatcomesintoplayinreshapingasenseofhumanityinmorepositiveterms.For
PrimoLevi,thisreshapingcancomethroughasenseofresponsibilitytowardsaless
fortunateother.
PrimoLevifirstobservedanoutrageousrealityatAuschwitzthatbaffledhimto
hisutteramazement.Inapproachingthisreality,hecontendedthatnewperceptionsof
reality,especiallythosethatvergeontheatrociousandhorrific,mayarisewhenreality
brutallycollideswithourhabitualexpectations.PartofwhatPierreBourdieucallsthe
habitus,thesestructuredandstructuringdispositionswouldpredict,toalarger

14

extent,thewaysinwhichweoperate,represent,orrespondtoourreality (lesens
pratique88).InthecaseofLevi,thesewereseriouslythrownoffbalance.ForLevi,
upsettingnewresponseshadthustocomeintoplay.Thisactuallyismeanttohappenifor
whenournaturaltrustinhumanityisfractured.Assuch,anew,profound
amazementattheuncertaintyofourconceptualframesofreference,inthewordsof
PrimoLevi,canoccur.Thisnewuncertainty,howeversudden,canbevery
destabilizingforahumanbeing.Likewise,thecollisionbetweenrealityandwhatwe
mayexpectofrealitymaynotinducetotaldespairabouthumannature.Itmay,however,
profoundlyshatteritsfoundations.
Levisdiscussionfirstgroundsitselfinhumanchoicesthathaveledtobarbaric
actions,suchasthosehewitnessedduringhisinternment.Inauniverseofsenselessand
atrocioushumanviolenceandcrimesagainsthumanity,Leviraisesquestionsaboutthe
humanmindanditsmotivesfordestruction.Alongwithaddressingupsettingquestions
suchashowonecanhitamanwithoutanger?,Levisearched,andfoundthebasisof
humanresistance(16).Alsoweneedtoconsiderwhatcanpossiblybeexperiencedand
survivedbyanotherattheedgeoflife,inresponsetoathreatatthelimitofthe
humanlyimaginable,butalsowithresponsibilitytofellowothersdefeatedbydeath.
ByrefusinghisconsenttotheannihilatingNazimachine,Leviattemptedto
remainhumaninaninhumanworld.Heunderscored,assuch,thepossibilityof
inscribingcultureintherealmsoftheextreme.Ashereflectedontheactualpresenceof
thecivilizedinthedomainofbarbarity,heemphasizedthatpointinhiswritings.
Significantly,hisworkshowsthatbothcultureandbarbarismactuallyinteractwith each
otherinvariouscomplexsituations.Hisdiscussionoftheboundariesbetweenatrocity

15

andhumanity,fashionedwithinthescopeofhisdirectandlivedexperience,is
particularlyresonantwiththeliterarygenreoftheextremethatweareexploringhere.
Thisisespeciallyso,becausewewanttoinquirenotsomuchintotheexactpointwhere
cultureendsandwherebarbarismbegins,animpossible,probablydogmatictaskinitself,
butbecausewewishtoexploretheparticularinstancesinwhichcultureandbarbarism
areineachothersproximity.Wealsowishtoexplorehowtheyinformeachother.The
questionsraisedbyLevisargumentarethustothepointandcrucialinsuggestingthat
evilandhumanitymaynotbetwoseparateanddistinctcategoriesexclusiveofeach
other.Buttheyare,orcanbe,actuallyinteractivewithandconstantlypresenttoeach
other.Inthisregard,attendingtoonequestionsuggestedbyLevisworkisparticularly
revealing.Dealingwiththepossiblecooccurrencesandinstancesinwhichculturemet
withbarbarism,theproblemresultingfromtheirencountercanbeposedasfollows.In
whatborderlandsofthehardlyconceivable,yetpossible,didbarbarityandculturemeet?
Howdidtheycoexistwithoneanotherin themakingofacontemporaryrealitymarked
byevil?
ExploringwhatLevicallsthegrayzone,alongwiththesinisternewsofceque
lhomme,Auschwitz,apufairedunautre,willserveourpointhere.Levisgray
zonereflectsoncultureandbarbarismfromaperspectiveilluminatingthewayshumans
workwithinanoutoftheordinaryoroutoftheexpectedculturalframework(Si
cestunhomme82).Thisculturebeyondnormalitycanbebestrevealedherethrough
instancesofhumandestructionthatLevipersonallywitnessed.Theseevents,afterhe
directlyconfrontedandrecollectedthem,matchednopriorknowledge.Herecountsthe
musicandtheplayingofsongsdeartoGermanearsthatwereplayedattheLager

16

duringhistenmonthsintheGermandeathcamp. LevirecallsUnedouzainedemotifs
seulement...desmarchesetdeschansonspopulaireschresauxcoeursallemands.He
furtherpondersonthemarchingsongs,andreflects,ellessontlavoixduLager,
lexpressionsensibledesafoliegomtrique,deladterminationaveclaquelledes
hommesentreprirentdenousanantir,denousdtruireentantquhommes(7374). In
theseblurredspaces,inwhichscrapsofculturetheplayingofmusicandblatant
barbarismtheorchestratedwilltoexterminatemerge,sodoessenselessness.A
senselessnessdescribedbyAharonAppelfeld,whowasachildduringtheHolocaust,as
anotherexpressionofhorror,thatrevealsthedepthsofhumandegradation(Beyond
Despair27).Asbothsignsofcultureandbarbarismmergedinakindoffoggyzonein
whichhumanityisimminentlythreatened,Leviremembersthefollowing. Hewrites,
Quandcettemusiqueclate,noussavonsquenoscamarades,dehorsdanslebrouillard,
semettentenmarchecommedesautomatesleursmessontmortesetcestlamusique
quilespousseenavantcommeleventlesfeuillessches,etleurtientlieudevolont.
Carilsnontplusdevolont.Ponderingontheanonymityandimmensityofthedamage
donetomenturnedintononmen,Levireminisces,Ilssontdixmillehommes,etilsne
formentplusquunemmemachinegriseilssontexactementdterminsilsnepensent
pas,ilsneveulentpas,ilsmarchent(Sicestunhomme75).
Probingthegrayspacesthattransformcultureandhumanityintobarbarityand
anonymity,Levieventuallyinsistedonpossibilitiesforretainingspacesforthehuman.
Thesepossibilities,hesuggests,arosenotoutside,butwithintheborderlandsofatrocity
thathewitnessed.Opposingtheorchestratedactsofannihilationandanonymitythathe
saw,Levialsowitnessedactsofsurvival.Theseactsofsurvivalwerenotsomuchacts

17

ofwillfullivingastheywereofwillfulremembranceonhispart.Offeringresistanceto
dehumanizationthroughdeliberateactsofreflectionandtestimonialisthusthehuman
stancethatLeviposed.HedidsoveryearlyandthroughouthisinternmentinAuschwitz.
Whentheywerethreatenedtothecoreoftheirbeing,Levisfellowmenbecame
nonmen,ornonhuman.Thiswassobecauseatsomepoint,theysurrenderedtheir
capacitytothink.Reflectingontheirnonhumancondition,Leviforesawthatsomanyof
thesemenwerelost.Theywerelostbecausetheyhadlostthememoryof,orthe
possibility,ofhumanaction.Likewise,manyhadlostthecomfortingprospectofdivine
interventionaswell.Assuch,thenonmenthatLevidescribedwithsomuchaccuracy
wereactuallymadetojoinandreinforcetheNazimachineryofinhumanedestruction.
Madeawareofthedehumanizingprocessinflictedonallatthecamp,Levinoticedthe
onesleastabletofacetheruthlessprocessofNaziselection.Hesawthemasthe
drowned,notthesaved.Assuch,Leviconcludedthatdehumanizationproduceda
lossoffaithinhumanpossibilities.Thislossoffaithinthehumanwasfurtheredbythe
destructionofhopeinthedivine.Forthedrowned,bothlossesirremediablybrought
aboutsevereformsofhopelessnessanddespair. AsLeviponderedanddeclared,Ce
sonteux,lesMuselmnner,lesdamns,...desnonhommesenquiltincelledivine
sestteinte,etquimarchentetpeinentensilence,tropvidesdjpoursouffrir
vraiment.
Inhisvisionofwhatconstitutedradicalevilinhiseyes,namelythede
humanizationofmanandthedetachmentfromhishabitus,Leviwashauntedbyavision
thatrootsitself,notinDantesinferno,butinAuschwitzshell.Attentivetothis
hauntinganddauntingvisionofhell,Levi,however,reclaimedsomeformofhumanity

18

forthosemen.Hedidsothroughcommittingtomemorytheonesindangerofbeing
forgotten,theimmenselylonely,thedefeated. Ashereflected,Ilspeuplentma
mmoiredeleurprsencesansvisage.Indeed,asheponderedonthebarbarismthathe
wasforcedtowitness,hewillfullytranscribedhisvisionintoanactofrecollection,
remembrance,andreflection,forfuturegenerationstoponder. Stillin Sicestunhomme,
heproposed,asaresultofhiswitnessingdehumanizationandevil,thatSijepouvais
rsumertoutlemaldenotretempsenuneseuleimage,jechoisiraiscettevisionquimest
familire:unhommedcharn,lefrontcourbetlespaulesvotes,dontlevisageetles
yeuxnerefltentnulletracedepense(138).
AsLevistextindicates,presentingevilinitsstarkestaspectorinitsmostde
humanizingformmaybediscomfortingandupsetting.Thisdehumanizingevilofthe
Holocaustdid,however,unquestionablyhappen,asdidslavery.Keepingsilentaboutit
wouldonlystrengthenthepositionsofthosewhowouldwishtodenyorevadethat
horrificknowledge.AsGeoffreyHartmansummarizesin TheLongestShadow,Now
thatthepublicsilencehasbeenbroken,itwillbebroken.Hefurtherstatesthatno
shameattachestothosewhoevokethatdarkesttimetogiveitmeaning,noshame
shouldattachtothosewhodisputethemeaningsgiven(44).Addressingtheworksof
survivors,suchasPrimoLevis,butalsoofElieWiesels,JorgeSempruns,andmany
others,Hartmancommendstheseauthorsforbreakingsilences.Also,alongwithhis
acknowledgementoftheirworksoftestimonial,Hartmanpleadsfortheliftingofthe
stigmaorshamethatattachestothosewhodiscloseshamefulevents.Atthispoint,the
discussionbyTheodorAdornoofaculturethatcanbeassociatedwithshamebecauseit

19

faileddisastrouslyofferssomeinsightintotheproblematicofdisclosureorsilence,of
rememberingorforgetting.
LikePrimoLevi,theGermanphilosopherofJewishdescentTheodorAdorno
survivedtheNaziextermination.UnlikeLevi,however,hedidnotspendthewaryears
inconcentrationaryinternment.Withhisfamousstatementthatitisnolongerpossibleto
writepoetryafterAuschwitz,ormorepreciselythattowritepoetryafterAuschwitzis
barbaric,Adornoexpressedhisdisappointmentinandbitternessaboutaculturethat
locateditselfattheconfinesofbarbarism(Prisms34).Hisdictumwasmeanttoreach,
however,beyondhisdisappointmentinatotalitarianculture.Ittargetedalsototalitarian
formsofartandaesthetics.Itispreciselytotalitarianaesthetics,whoselackofautonomy
hedenouncedwithexpressbitternessthatIwanttoaddressnow.
TheuncompromisingattackonartthatAdornolaunchedaftertheHolocaustwas
clearlyaimedatculturebeforetheHolocaustalso.Indeed,Adornosremarkrevealed
thatGermansocietyhadbeencorruptlongbeforetheNazismadethattruthbrutallyclear.
Whenheformulatedhisdictumabouttheimpossibilityof artorpoetryafterAuschwitz,
heharshlycriticizedvariousformsofaestheticrepresentation.Hisstatementeven
questionedtheculturalpossibilitiesforadequatelybeingabletoreflectonarealityinan
autonomousmanner.Whetherhispronouncementsignalledaquasidefeatof
imaginativewritinginthefaceofthebarbariccharacterofaculture,suchastheone
displayedbytheNazis,isaninterestingpoint.Ifso,couldalsothechargebyAdornobe
thatpublicrecognitionoftheHolocaustmayincreasetheexploiting,profaning,or
trivializingofsuffering,andbegroundsforimposingsilenceaboutwhathappened

20

between1933and1945inWesternEurope?(TheLongestShadow 44).Wouldartthen
beworthlessinthefaceoflife?
If,inAdornoswords,culturehasfailedmiserably,itsfailureisnotsolely
attributabletotheideathatAuschwitzwasasocialdisasterthatdefiedhuman
imagination(NegativeDialectics361).Culturewasflawedalsobecauseitcouldnot
initiateanexaminationofitself,norgenerateorsustainacritiqueoftheideologiesthatit
diffused.AsAdornostressedinthe60s,AllpostAuschwitzculture,includingitsurgent
critique,isgarbage.Inrestoringitselfafterthethingsthathappenedwithoutresistancein
itsowncountryside,culturehasturnedentirelyintotheideologyithadbeenpotentially
(367).
Adornosargumentfurtheropensthedividebetweencultureandbarbarism.As
heconceded,culturalcriticismfounditselffacedwiththefinalstageofthedialecticof
cultureandbarbarism(Prisms34).Seekinganimpossibleresolution,becausehis
negativedialecticsdemandedacleardefinitionofthetermscultureandbarbarism,an
impossibilityinitself,Adornosargumentseemedlockedinaselfdefeatingimpasse.
Besides,alongwiththenegativecriticalframingofthetermsthatbroughtaboutthe
deadlockinthefirstplace,Adornoofferedlittlehopeforourpresenttimescapabilities
ofdisengagingfrom,oratleastfacingculturaldecay andguilt.Littleground,itseems,
wasofferedin NegativeDialecticsforcontemplatingthepossibilitiesofafuturea
futureculturallyacceptableoratleastpossiblyviable.AsAdornoposited,whoever
pleadsforthemaintenanceofthisradicallyculpableandshabbyculturebecomesits
accomplice.Butyet,themanwhosaysnotocultureisdirectlyfurtheringthe
barbarismwhichourcultureshoweditselftobe(NegativeDialectic367).Howcanwe

21

then,followingthislogic,posethepreviouslyaskedquestionbyDerridaofwhere?
wheretomorrow?whither?(SpectersofMarx xix).
InTheGraveintheAir:UnboundMetaphorsinPostHolocaustPoetry,Sidra
DeKovenEzrahiquestionsthenegativedialecticalimpasseinwhichAdornolocked
himself.Claimingthathisdictumwasappropriatedunreflectivelysincehisdeathin
1969bytheverycultureindustryhesovigorouslyattackedinhislifetime,Ezrahi
contends,however,thatAdornoreturnedtohisstatementtimeandagaintorefineand
restateit.Yet,forEzrahi,Adornosdialecticscouldnotallowtoposetheproblemina
differentmanner.Oneproblemthatarose,forEzrahi,wastheimpossibilitytoposehow
distinctionsbedrawnbetweenbarbarity,whichisbydefinitionoutsidethecivilized
discourse,andliminality,whichisnot?(260).Herquestion,outofscopeforour
discussionatthistime,reengages,however,thefollowingpoint.Itsuggests,as
previouslymentioned,thatbarbarityandcivilizedcultureshouldnotbeposedin
mutuallyexclusiveterms.Theyrathertendtoremaininaspacecriticallyblurredthat
resistseasyarticulation.
ItisthiscriticalstancethatRossChambersadoptsinhisUntimelyInterventions.
Hestartsthediscussionbyremindingusthathumanevolutionmayhaveproduceda
species,termedhybrid,thatisneithersimplyanimalinnature,noryetcultured,in
themeaningofcivilizedorhumane.Culture,itwouldseem,regularlyfailsusaswe
plungeintoanimalisticbehaviorandinstinctswhichkickourhumanidealstotheside.
ForChambers,thus,theevidenceisthatthebrutalities,atrocities,andactsofviolence,
ofwhichhumansaresoobviouslycapable,arethemselvestheproducts,notofan
animalnature,butofculture.Inthetermsproductsofculturethatheuseshere,he

22

clearlyreferstocultureasthegeneralmediatorofrelations,thatwhichisatthecoreof
civilizationitself(xviii).Hisargumentsuggests,then,thatbarbarismisnotlocated
outsideof culture,oralientoit,butratherisconstitutiveofit.Assuch,themenacing
presenceandfrequentreoccurrenceofbarbarisminherentlyattachestotheverycondition
ofculture.InalineofthoughtsimilartoPrimoLevisandAdornos,Chambersphrases
theproblemassuch.Hewrites,theoccasionsonwhich...cultureletsusdownare
theoccasionsonwhichhumanculturerevealssomethingcrucialaboutitself.Namely
thatithasanessentialfaultlinerunningthroughit,oradarkside thatisnotaccidental
butratherconstitutive,definitional.Assuch,theviolencethatculturepretendsto
holdatbayisactuallysomethingthatitdoesproduce,quaculture,withfrightening
regularity(xviii).
Whatistobedone,then?Shouldthewitnessofinhumanedeedskeepsilentfor
fearofshatteringourtrustinhumanity?Shouldwedespairofhumanityandtakefor
granteditspossibilitiesforevil?Shouldweshyawayfromaestheticorphilosophical
culturebecauseofitsfailurein producingunambivalentsocialgood?
TheliteraryandcriticalreflectionscontributedbyPrimoLeviandAdorno,but
alsobyEzrahiandChambers,uncovervariousvenuesforthefurtherexplorationofthese
questions.GoingbeyondAdornosdialectic,Chamberssuggeststhatsomeformsof
literaturehaveactuallyastheirpoint,andevenastheirburden,theviewthatatrocityor
disastercanhappenhereorthere.Theseliterarypiecesarethusmeanttorevealthat
thesehumancatastrophescaneruptatanymoment,inanylocation,andasweknow
incrediblywell,theyhaveinthepastandstilldo.WithhisUntimelyInterventions,
Chambershimselfsetsouttoremindusofwhatweneedtoknowandacknowledge.In

23

thefaceofinstancesofbarbaricatrocities,weneedtoberemindedagainandagainand
again,oftheirpotentialoutbursts,ifonlytobeawakenedsufficientlytothesignsthey
mayproducebeforetheystrikethere(xx).
Thenecessityofreadingthosesignsmay,actuallyandafterall,havebeen
indirectlyintroducedandsuggestedbyAdornohimself.Theapproachbywhichweare
encouragedtoremainalerttothepossibilityofculturalviolencemayindeedbeassumed
inAdornosrevisedpositiononart.Althoughthepointismadenotexplicitly,but
implicitly,AdornosafterAuschwitzprovides,oratleastsuggests,atheoretical
impetusforsearchingfornewformsofcognitionandrepresentationofculture.Also,if
authenticformsofknowledgeareconstantlyinthemakingandareindeednecessary,they
areallthemoresoincircumstancesoftheextreme.Theybecomeurgentwhenthe
potentialstrikesthatcultureunleashesaredeadly.AshasbeenpresumedbyAdorno,
initiatedbyPrimoLevi,andexplicitlyformulatedbyChambers,newformsof
representationbecomethusallthemorecrucialwhenrealityorculturebrutallycollide
withthehabitualexpectationwehaveofthatrealityorofthatculture.This,as
previouslymentioned,isparticularlytruewhentherealitywearefacinggroundsitselfin
barbaricorevilexperiences.
AsMichaelRothbergcommentsin TraumaticRealism,Adornoswritings...
suggesttheneedfornewformsofrepresentationcapableofregisteringthetraumatic
shockofmoderngenocide.Assuch,Rothbergnotonlycallsfornewformsof
representationtorevealdestructiveviolenceinourmodernage.Healsosummonsthese
formsofrepresentationatacollectivelevel.Likewise,headdressesthenecessitytofind
newformsofpublicitythatwilltranslateknowledgeofextremityforamass

24

audience(58).Ezrahimakesasimilarpointalsoinherattempttomovebeyond
Adornoscritique.Hercriticalintuitionistoarticulatenewinsightsforart.Shethusnot
onlyattemptstomovethediscussionofthedutyofartbeyondtheshatteredlossofits
autonomy.Sheasksforappraisingsomenewformsofartisticrepresentationasarts
objectandpurpose.
Art,sinceitreduceditselftoareflection,notacritique,oftotalitarianideology
andNazism,becameinacertainway,accordingtoAdornosdialecticalrationale,
disconcertinglybarbaric.Butalso,Adornosobjectiontothecriticalvalueofart,whichI
wanttoquestionhere,supposesanothercontention.Adornoindeedarguedthatartafter
Auschwitzwouldoperate,becauseofitsaestheticqualities,asasortofanestheticto
barbarism.Inotherwords,forAdorno,thefocusonformwouldactuallypreemptan
assimilationofthecontent.IfweattributethestatementtoAdorno,quotedinEzrahi,that
themorepoeticallycraftedatext,themoreinherentlyestrangedfromtherealityitis
meanttorepresent,thenhisstatementaboutartmaypointnotonlyataradical
separationbetweenartandexperienceinsomecases.Italsomeansthatsomestylethat
artemploysmightbeinappropriate.Ashestressestheunsuitablecharacterofartsstyle
specificallyinregardtoaliteratureofatrocity,heclaims,Throughtheaesthetic
principleofstylization...anunimaginablefatestillseemsasifithadsomemeaningit
becomestransfigured,withsomethingofthehorrorremoved(TheGraveintheAir
267).
TheprocessbywhichartisclaimedbyAdornotolosecriticalautonomyand
authenticityontheonehand,andaestheticorethicalrelevanceontheother,isan
importantone.Artiseithertooinvolvedinrealityortooremovedfromit.YetAdornos

25

restrictionsmayserveasanewbackgroundtofurtherexplorethepossiblerelevanceof
artinregardtoaliteratureofatrocity.Examininghowaestheticproductionsthatare
motivatedbycriticalandsocialresponsibilityproveactuallynotonlypossiblebut
desirableisthusournextpoint.AsDerridaandChamberssuggest,remainingattentiveto
thesignsofcultureanditspotentialforviolenceandatrocitymayinvestartwithrenewed
criticalprospects.
Asweturntotheseprospects,itisnecessarytoberemindedofthe
interdependenciesbetweenlifeandart.Thenecessaryinterconnectionsbetweenart,
reality,andmodesofrepresentingthatrealityareparticularlywellargued,inyetanother
context,byPatrickMcGeeashediscussesAdornosAestheticTheory.Inrelationtothe
worksofAfricanAmericanartistIshmaelReed,McGeemakesapointaboutthe
interrelationsbetweenartandideology.Hispointisofparticularrelevance,andIwill
followithere.Itindicateswhereartmaybemeanttoopenup,notlimit,newcreative
culturalpossibilities.
Inassessingtheartistsplaceintheartisticprocess,McGeepointsatthecomplex
interrelationsthatcomeintoplayinaestheticproduction.In ISHMAELREEDandthe
EndsofRace,McGeearguesthatspecificformsofknowledgeandlifeexperience...
haveabearingontheprocessofaestheticproduction.Thesetofabilitiesandpre
dispositionsthatmakeupwhatAdornocallsthemtieroftheartistare,inacertain
way,theimprintofsocietyontheartist.Thisimprintofsocietyontheartistconstitutes
alsotheactualproductiveforcesthatmakeartpossiblein thefirstplace.Viewedinthis
light,art,whichmayhaveseemedtoforeclosespacesforautonomyofexpressionor
independenceofthought,mayactuallyopenthosespaces,notlimitthem.Especiallyif

26

theartist,whoengagesinartisticproduction,specificallyandpurposefullymeansto
bringintoherworkspecificformsofknowledgeandlifeexperience.Shealso
continuouslyshapesandtransformstheimprintofsocietythroughhersubjectiveart.It
seems,then,thattheartistmaypurposefullychoosenottodisengageherselffromher
milieu.Onthecontrary,theartistmayratherdecidetoengagemoreinitsreality.In
doingso,shemaysituateherselfinapositiontobetterapprehenditandcriticallyreflect
onit,inrelationtoherself,andthecommunity(63).
ToniMorrisonhasdiscussedthisattentiveengagementoftheartistwithher
milieuatgreatlength.Shehasdonesoparticularlyinreferencetoandwithinthe
AfricanAmericancommunity.Oneofherpointsorganizesitselfaroundtheconflict
betweenpublicandprivatelife.Conflictingonlyinappearance,thesepositionsofthe
individualatbothasingularlevelandwithincommunityarecrucialforMorrison.She
makesthatpointinRootedness:TheAncestorasFoundation. Whileshediscussesthe
roleoftheartistinhercriticalwork,sheassertsthefollowing:Theremusthavebeena
timewhenanartistcouldbegenuinelyrepresentativeofthetribeandinit.Shefurther
explainsthatthattimewasalsowhenanartistcouldhaveatribalorracialsensibility
andanindividualexpressionofit.Alongwiththatsensibilityandexpressionof
individualconsciousness,therewerespacesandplacesinwhichasinglepersoncould
enterandbehave...inthecontextof thecommunity.InMorrisonscontention,
personalstatements,madeorperformedinBlackchurchservicesorthroughmusic,
inthepresenceofasupportiveorprotectingcommunity,oncefulfilledthatsingularand
collectivefunctionofart(339).Atthesametime,alongwithfunctioningasart,these

27

statementsandperformancesalsoenabledanindividualvoicetofulfillthesocialdutyof
theartist.
ForMorrison,novelscanalsoperformthiscrucialfunction.Assheclaims,it
seemstomethatthenovelisneededbyAfricanAmericansnowinawaythatitwasnot
neededbefore.Sheregardsthecontemporarynovelasawaytoaccomplishcertain
verystrongfunctions,oneofwhichistogetnewinformationoutthere.Hersenseof
thenovelisthat,ithasalwaysfunctionedfortheclassorthegroupthatwroteit.Her
claimisparticularlyvalidinlightoftheemergenceofthenovelatatimewhenotherart
formswereindecline.Indeed,atsomepoint,artintheguiseofstorytelling,songsand
dances,andceremony,andgossips,andcelebrations,forthelowerclasses,or
patronizedartforthearistocracyfellshort.Artcouldnolongerfulfillembracing,
instructiveorseparatingfunctionsfortheindividualorthegroup.InMorrisons
contention,itwasatimewhennewartformshadtobeproduced(340).
Thisspecificnewartformthathasbecomeapredominantsocialandaesthetic
vehicle,Morrisonclaims,isnotonlythenovel,buttheautobiographicalnovel.Thisform
ofartisparticularlyrelevantforher,notonlybecauseitisinkeepingwiththeexigencies
ofitstimes,butalsobecausetheautobiographicalnovelisaprivilegedinstancethat
fulfilsacrucialsocialfunction.Asitseekstoreflect,presentor inscribethemoral
dilemmasofthesingleindividualinthefaceofthetribe,anovelofautobiographical
inclinationcanservetotiesingularlifeexperiencesintocommunalformsof
knowledge.Forher,itprovidestheartistaninstanceinwhich(s)hecanbe
representative.Assuch,theartistcansay,mysinglesolitaryandindividuallifeislike
thelivesofthetribeitdiffersinthesespecificways,butitisabalancedlifebecauseitis

28

bothsolitaryandrepresentative(339).Eventhoughtheslavenarrativesand
autobiographicalworksthatMorrisondiscussesmayactuallybelessopenendedand
moreconstrainedinformthanmostcontemporarypieces,includingMorrisonsown
work,theywerevitalinprefiguringtherolesofartandoftheartistthatMorrison
endorses.Besides,Morrisonisthattypeofanartistwhoproducesart,whois
inextricablyembeddedinhermilieu,andwhofeelsurgedtocriticallyreflectonit.Her
criticalandliteraryinsightonartandlifemaythusbemore thanadisillusionedand
discreditedreceptacleofculture.Itmaybeapowerfulvehicleforshapingsubjective
storiesandmappingcollectiverealities,pastandpresent.
Contemporaryauthorandincisiveliterarycritic,Morrisonisattentivetothesocial
responsibilitythatherartismeanttoembrace.Assheclaims,anovelshouldbenotonly
beautiful,andpowerful,butitshouldalsowork(341).Indeed,itshouldhave
somethinginitthatenlightenssomethinginitthatopensthedoorandpointstheway.
Somethinginitthatsuggestswhattheconflictsare,whattheproblemsare.But,she
adds,itneednotsolvethoseproblemsbecauseitisnotacasestudy,itisnotarecipe
(342).ForMorrison,artshouldthusnotbeprescriptive,butilluminating.Also,inorder
tobeinvitingtothecommunitythatitaddresses,itshouldinvolvespecificartistic
elementstowhichthecommunitycanrelate.Assuch,shemakesitapointtoincorporate
inherfictionwhatshelabelsBlackart.ByBlackart,shemeans,forinstance,aform
ofliteraturethatinvolvesthecombinationofbothprintandoralelementsofliterature
(341).Thesearemeaningfultotheextentthatthestoriescanbereadinsilence,of
course.But,forMorrison,oneshouldalsobeabletohearthemaswell(33941).

29

Thesetwoelementsarecrucialbecausetheyenableaformofliteraturethathasgreat
testimonialvalue.
Ourapproachtoaliteratureofdisaster,producedinanaftermathofslaveryorthe
Holocaust,andinlightofthecriticalbearingsofMcGee,ChambersandMorrisononthe
dutyofartposesanotherquestion.Itrelatestotheparticularmodesofrepresentationthat
aculturecansafeguardordiscouragewhenitmakesstatementsaboutitsreality.In
searchofmodesofrepresentationinthecontextoftraumatichistories,asexperiencedin
slaveryortheHolocaust,thenecessitytofindasuitableandeloquentmodeof
transmissionmaybeharrowing.Itschallengeisencapsulatedinthefollowingstatement
byEzrahi.Itiscloselyrelatedtowhatshecoinsthewidespreadifunarticulatedsenseof
theproprietyofthesymboliclanguagethatfacesAuschwitz(TheGraveintheAir
260).
TheaptnessoflanguagetodealwithHolocaustexperienceshasbeendiscussed
extensively.Twoaccountsbytwodifferentcampsurvivorsareparticularlyrevealing
here.OneisbyJorgeSemprun.TheotherisbyAharonAppelfeld,achildsurvivorof
theHolocaustwhoturnedpoet,critic,andwriter.ThecommentbyImreKertsz,also
Holocaustsurvivorandwriter,canserveasanintroductoryremark.Theexcerpts
proposedaregroundedinaspecificreflectiononlanguage.Allexplorethepossibilities
butalsodifficultiesandconflictsthatartistsfaceinordertomakelanguagesignify
pertinentlyinthecontextofaliteratureofatrocity.
Somenarratives,writtenintroubledhistorictimes,riskcomingundersuspicion.
InJaredStarkscontention,narrativesthattaketheformofmemoirsarethosemore
specificallyunderattack.Theskepticismtowardsthem,accordingtoStark,grounds

30

itselfinthefollowingobjection.Thesenarrativesmayappearunabletotacklethewhole
picture.Inhiswords,theymaylackthespontaneityoforaltestimony,ontheonehand.
Ontheotherhand,theymaylacktheverifiabilitydemandedofhistoricevidence.Asa
result,somesurvivormemoirshaveaddressedthesesuspicionsbyadoptingvarious
literarystances.Someauthors,Starkcontends,haverespondedtothesechargesof
deficiencybyshowingorsuggestingthattheremaybenolanguageorformcapableof
representingthefulltruthoftheHolocaust(BrokenRecords199).Thispointis
challengedbyHungarianwriterandHolocaustsurvivor(andrecentNobelwinner)Imre
Kertsz.Indeed,inImreKertszscontention,iftherewerealanguageinwhichthe
Holocaustcouldfindahome,wouldntthislanguagehavetobesoterrifying,so
lugubrious,thatitwoulddestroythosewhospeakit?(TheFreedomofSelfDefinition
39).
JorgeSemprunhasaddressedthequestionofanecessarylackofequivalence
betweenartandexperienceinaliteratureofatrocitybydiscussingtheappropriatenessof
language,alongwiththemeaningfulnessofwriting,inregardstohisdevastating
experienceinBuchenwald.Afterhisencounterwithdeath,orratherwithwhathelabels
hiscrossingthroughdeathinBuchenwald,Semprunsearchedforwaystoreattachto
life(LiteratureorLife 15).Writingofferedanexceptionalmeanstodoso.Assuch,
literaturebecameforSemprunapowerfulvehicletocomebacktothecommunityofthe
living.ItalsoactivatedcontradictoryemotionsinSemprun,ashestruggledtoreturntoa
moreordinarylifeafterBuchenwald.Indeed,Semprunsactsofwriting,whilethey
broughthimbackintolife,alsoforcedhimtoconfrontthedifficultquestionoftackling
realitythroughaliteraturethatbroughthimbacktodeath.

31

ThefollowingpassagebySemprunisremarkableintheharrowingdilemmahis
writingposes.Withit,Semprunstruggleswiththeproblematicofengagingintoactsof
reminiscingandwritingaboutanexperiencethatwashorrificandthataskedtobe
simultaneouslyforgotten.Semprunspredicamenthadhimthusfaceapowerfulforceof
languagethatcouldbeameanstolife.Butitalsohadhimconcurrentlyaccountfor
languageasavehiclethatsignifieddeath. Semprunsreflectionreadsasfollows. Il
avaitraison,[Csar]Vallejo.Jenepossderiendautrequemamort,monexpriencede
lamort,pourdiremavie,lexprimer,laporterenavant. Ashereflectsontheurgency
ofwritingtofindanewmeaningforlife,hecontends,Ilfautquejefabriquedelavie
avectoutecettemort. Etlameilleurefaondyparvenir,cestlcriture. Thehealing
qualityofSemprunscommitmenttowritingwhatheexperiencedis,however,clouded
bytheburdenofdeath. Hedeclares,Or,[lcriture]meramnelamort,myenferme,
myasphyxie. Ashepondersonhowlifeanddeathinextricablypermeateeachother,
eveninlifeafterBuchenwald,likewise,Semprunkeepsreflectingextensivelyonthe
followingcontradictory,yetunsolvablerealityofnarratinghisstory.Writingand
reminiscingabouthisexperiencesmayindeedkeephimliving,buttheyalsobringhim
backtotherealmofdeathandthedying.Choosingtowriteandbeclosetodeath,or
remainingsilentinanattempttoforgetdeadlyencountersbroughtSempruntohis
harrowingimpasse. Itisencapsulatedinthefollowingquote. Hedeclares,Voilo
jensuis:jenepuisvivrequenassumantcettemortparlcriture,maislcriture
minterditlittralementdevivre(Lcritureoulavie215).
Semprunsreflectionsonwritingasanactofsurvivalafteralifeindeathclosely
relatestothetestimonybyAharonAppelfeld.LikeSemprun,Appelfeldfirstreflectson

32

theinextricabilityoflifeanddeathasheactuallyexperiencedthem,andonthewaythey
shapedhiswritingatfirst.In BeyondDespair,Appelfeldwrites,Overtheyearswe
learnedtolivewithdeathaswithafamiliaracquaintance(11).Also,forAppelfeld,the
sightsoftheHolocaustweresoterribleandenormous,thattheyseemedunabletobeput
intowords.AswereadAppelfeldswords,thesightsweredreadfulandimmense,and
wordsarefrailandimpotent.Also,Appelfeldwasforcedtoadmitthathisinteriorwas
lockedaway(x).Assuch,hisdeepestandmostdelicatefeelingswerehesitanttostand
naked(xi).Foryears,hefeltthatLifeaftertheHolocaustseemedanuntimely
resurrection,anewnightmare.Nooneknewwhetherthiswasrescueorpunishment.
Thememoryofhisexperience,andreflectingaboutitbecamehismostdreadedand
dreadfulenemies(x).Alsohecontends,Memoryseemedtobethemostnecessary
contentofmyexperience.Tobefaithfultowhathadhappenedwasanimperativefrom
whichonewasnottodeviate.ButwhatwasItodo?Formemoryitselfprovedtobethe
enemyofmywriting.Inafeelingofdespair,Appelfeldclaimsthat,Ittookmeyears
tounderstandthattheinnerenemy[mymemory]wasimpedingmywriting.Heclaims
thatcompulsivememorytookovermywriting.InAppelfeldsterms,compulsive
memoryimprisonedhimbecauseitallowedfornopossibledeviationfromarecollection
ofexperiencethathewantedexact.Thisoppressivememorydeniedhimaccessto
anyothercreativeelement(xi).Aturningpointcame,forAppelfeld,whenherealized
thefollowing.Aftercontendingthat, Therecanbenoliteraturewithoutmemory,he
cametoanewunderstandingofboth.Hecametoperceivehowmemorycanbeused
differentlyandmorepertinently,besidesasforkeepingrecordofmerefacts(xii).He
positsthisideainthefollowingstatement.Heclaimsthatmemoryisnotonlyfactand

33

visionandthecourseplottedforthem,butalsoawarmemotion(xii).Memory,as
doubtlesstheessenceofcreation,thusturnedforAppelfeldfromcompulsiveto
creative(x).Assuch,forAppelfeld,thepowerofthecreativeimaginationliesnotin
intensityandexaggerationbutingivinganewordertofacts.Assuch,itdoesnot
resideininventingnewfacts,butintheircorrectorder(xiii).Asheconcludes,Life
intheHolocaustdoesnotdemandtheinventionofnewfactsandsights.Thatlifewasso
richonecouldchokeonit.Theliteraryproblemisnottopilefactuponfact,butrather
tochoosethemostnecessaryones,theonesthattouchtheheartoftheexperienceandnot
itsedges(xiii).
NotonlydidAppelfeldandSemprunreflectonwritingasameans,however
problematic,toreattachtolife.Theyalsoclaimedthatliteratureandlanguagewere
powerfulvehiclestoassessandexpressexperience,includingexperiencesoftheextreme.
Notdoubtingthecapacitiesoflanguagetobeabletoexpresseverything,tocontain
everything,Sempruninsistsonthepowerofwords(LiteratureorLife13). Hecontends,
Onpeuttoujourstoutdire,ensomme. Insistingonthetremendouscapacitiesof
language,herepeatshisstatementandelaboratesonit. Heclaims,Onpeuttoujourstout
dire,lelangagecontienttout.Onpeutdirelamourleplusfou,laplusterriblecruaut.
Onpeutnommerlemal,songotdepavot,sesbonheursdltres.OnpeutdireDieuet
cenestpaspeudire. Hecontinuestoenumerateonlyafewamongalltheemotions,
feelings,thoughts,orobjectsthatareexpressibleinandthroughlanguage. Hedeclares,
Onpeutdirelaroseetlarose,lespacedunmatin.Onpeutdirelatendresse,locan
tutlairedelabont.Onpeutdirelavenir,lespotessyaventurentlesyeuxferms,la
bouchefertile(Lcritureoulavie26). NotoncedoesSemprundoubtlanguageasa

34

mediumforknowingorexpressingtherealityofaworldthat,howevercomplex,is
familiar.Doubts,ontheotherhand,assailhim,whenitcomestotellthestory
(Literatureorlife 13). Heasserts,Pourtant,undoutemevientsurlapossibilitde
raconter.Nonpasquelexpriencevcuesoitindicible.Elleatinvivable,cequiest
toutautrechose. Questioningthecontentofthatexperience,ratherthantheformof
thenarrativethatrelatestothatlivedreality,hecontinueswith,Autrechosequine
concernepaslaformedunrcitpossible,maissasubstance. Nonpassonarticulation,
maissadensit(Lcritureoulavie25). Ashereflectsontheurgencyoftheworkof
arttoappropriatelyrevealarealitythatwasunbearable,hepursueswiththefollowing.
Neparviendrontcettesubstance,cettedensittransparentequeceuxquisaurontfaire
deleurtmoignageunobjetartistique,unespacedecration.Oudercration.Seul
lartificedunrcitmatrisparviendratransmettrepartiellementlavritdu
tmoignage.Heconcludesbystatingthat,Maiscecinariendexceptionnel:ilen
arriveainsidetouteslesgrandesexprienceshistoriques(26).
InaddressingourresponsibilitytowardsaneventsuchasAuschwitz,Jean
FranoisLyotard,hasalsoraisedquestionsabouttheproprietyofthesymbolic
languagethatsurroundsAuschwitz.Moreprecisely,hehasquestionedthepropriety,
notoflanguageassuch,butofdiscoursearoundAuschwitz.Hispointofinquiry
actuallyrevolvesaroundthevalidityofthegenreofdiscoursethatlinksonto
Auschwitz(TheDifferend88).Lyotardsearlyquestioningofthelimitsof
traditionallywellseparateddiscursivegenreshasdonealotininitiatingrhetorical
inquiriesfortheorists. Inourcase,hispositionenablesustoaddressformsofdiscourses
thatappear,toagreaterorlesserextent,appropriate,ornot,toarticulateexperiencesof

35

theextreme.Inotherwords,aretheretypesofdiscoursethatfallshortofthetaskof
articulatingarealitythatwashorrific?Ifso,howaretheylacking?
AninquiryintothegenresofdiscourseallowsforexploringwhatLyotardsfriend
andcriticDavidCarrollcalls,inhisMemorialfortheDiffrend,theobligationofa
postmodern politicstorespondtoinjustice.Italsoenablesustoinquireintosome
possibleformsofdiscursiveresponsestoinjustice.
Lyotardclaimsthatvariousapproachesorresponsestotheproblemsofinjustice
arenecessarilydifficultorevencontradictory.Itissobecauseofthewayormannerin
whichsomeoftheproblemshavebeenposed.Lyotardarguesthatcontradictory
effectsareindeedfacedbyallformsofpoliticalactionintheirattemptedformsof
justice.Moreimportantly,hepointsatinherentcontradictionsandexclusionsthatsome
formsofdiscoursemayperform.Notonlydoeshemakethesediscursivecontradictions
andexclusionsappearclearlybuthealsoquestionsthelimitedcharacterofthemeansthat
someofthesediscoursesemploy.Asaresult,Lyotardcallsfordiscoursestoreach
outsideandbeyondtheirmoretraditionalorrestrictiveboundaries.
InthecaseofAuschwitz,Lyotardaddressesaformofflagrantanddevastating
politicalinjusticethathelinkstoafundamentalproblemofhistoricalknowledge.More
specifically,hedrawsattentiontoAuschwitzbyposingaquestionaboutthehistorical
knowledgeorhistoricaltruththatsurroundsAuschwitz.Hispointistoquestionthe
validityofresponsesregardingthetruthofasituationifitisframedexclusively
accordingtothestrict,univocalrulesofonediscourse.Here,itisthehistoricaldiscourse
anditsmodesofinquiryintotruththathedoubts.Hephrasestheproblematicinthe
followingterms:accordingtostricthistoricalrules,howisitthatwecanactually

36

knowifasituationeverreallyexistedorifeventsoccurrediftherewerenosurviving
witnessestotheevents?Hefurtherasks,whatcanorwillbeinferredfromAuschwitz
ifthelimitednumberofwitnessestothesituationandeventsdonotorcannotreport
themadequatelyorcompletely?Also,heasks,whathappensifthesewitnesses
contradictoneanother?Andthen,whatcanwemakeofthesituationifthese
witnessesdescribeonlylimitedaspectsofthesituationandnotthesituationasa
whole?Howisitpossible,Lyotardthusasks,evertodetermineconclusively,or
accordingtostricthistoricalrulesthatwhatthesewitnessesdospeakaboutinthecase
ofAuschwitzisinfactarepresentativepartofthegeneralsituation?Howisit
possibletoknowthatitisnotanaberrationfromageneralsituation,orevenapartof
thegeneralsituation?Andifthesituationissuchthatanoverwhelmingnumberof
potentialwitnesseshavealreadydied,thenhowcanasurvivorspeakofandtothat
loss,sinceheorshedidnotdieandcannotspeakfororasthosewhodid?(20).
InLyotardsthinking,questionsofhistoricalcredibilitydirectlyrelatetothe
possibleformsofrepresentationthateventscantakeorthatwitnessescanmake.Asthey
openLyotardsdiscussionofthedifferend ofAuschwitz,thesequestionsofhistorical
attemptattruthbasedsolelyononemodeofinquiryserveacrucialpurpose. Theyhave
Lyotarddenouncethereductivecharacterofgroundingdiscourseinonespecific,
exclusive,limitingformofpoliticalactionordiscourse.Thiscondemningofhistorical
supremacyinrepresentingeventshadalreadybeenprefiguredbyLyotardswithdrawal
fromengagedpoliticalpracticealtogether.Indeed,theconfrontationwithwhathecoins
theirresolvabledilemmaordoublebindthatattachestoadiscoursethatclaims
universaltrutheventuallyhadhimdisassociatehimselffromhisearlyMarxistposition.

37

IteventuallyhadhimleavethemoreradicaldissidentformofMarxismandthejournal
SocialismeouBarbarieaswell.Fromthenon,Lyotardsdiscontentwiththelimitations
imposedbyoneformofdiscoursekeptgrowing.
ForLyotard,restrictingoneselftooneformofdiscourseisindeedboundtolead
topoliticalordiscursiveassumptionsthatacceptonemeaningonly.ForLyotard,this
onemeaningorthisonemodeofrepresentationcannotsuffice.Onemodeisnot
acceptable,becauseforLyotard,onemeaningmayequalanonmeaning(14).Besides,
modesofthinkingordiscoursesthatacceptonedefinitiononlyarenotinapositionto
sustainorevenframecontradictions(15).Moreprecisely,theycannotallowfor
contradictionsatall.Thisissobecausetheyhavenoplacefordissentingvoiceswithin
theirowndiscourse.Theyinherentlyexcludethosevoices.Ontheotherhand,ifthose
opposingviewsareexpressedoutsideofthatparticulardiscourse,theyareintrinsically
outsideofthatdiscourse.Thisgivesrisetothedoublebindorirresolvabledilemma
thatLyotarddenounces(14).Bynotallowingforcontradictions,aunivocaldiscourse
thusreducesitselftoablatantcontradiction.Tomakethispointclear,heturnstothe
instanceofafictitiouscommunistmilitantwhoisadissidentcommunist.Callingthis
dissidentcommunisttheIvanianwitness,Lyotardarguesthefollowing.Forthe
Ivanianwitness,Lyotardclaims,itisimpossibletoexpresscontestanddissidence
withintheidiombeingcontested.Itissobecausetheverylanguageofthedissident
communistisruledoutfromthestart.Assuch,thedissidentsrightorauthorityto
phraserealityinawaythatisdifferentfromthewaythePartyandtheStatephrase
realityisdeniedtohim.Asaresult,inLyotardscontention,thedissentingcommunist
canonlybetreatedaseitherinsane,orasanenemyofthepeople,orboth.Optingfor

38

analternatechoice,thedissidentcommunistcandecidetoconfessandadmithiscrime.
Butthen,inLyotardscontention,herunstheriskofbeingexcluded,andheceasestobe
regardedasacommunist.Inthatcase,heisdamned(15).Bothchoices,becausethey
aregroundedineitherinclusiveorexclusiveterms,areunacceptable.TheIvanian
witnesscanonlyfacetheLyotardiandoublebind.Inframingthedilemmaintermsof
discourse,wecanconcludewiththefollowing.Ifthedissentingcommunistdoesnot
confesstohiscrime,heimplicitlyrecognizesthatthecommunistauthoritiesaretheonly
onescompetenttoimplementthecommunistcharacterofthesocietyhewantsto
contest.Yet,hecannotphrasedissentexplicitlyanddiscursivelywithoutbeingexcluded
bythecommunistauthorities.Ineithercase,histestimonyissilencedbeforeitcanbe
made(14).
AccordingtoLyotardscritique,phrasingarighttodissidenceandyet
remainingaMarxistwouldthusseemanappropriatecoursetoadopt.Itwouldatleast
constituteafirstphaseofdissent.Butitis,inactuality,insufficient.Itisinsufficient
becauseitstillacceptsthelanguageofMarxismasuniversal.Thenextphasefor
LyotardisthustophrasetherelativityofMarxistdiscourseitself.Thatphaserequiresto
phraseadifferend.Thatdifferend,inLyotardswords,becomesthusa
contentiousness,aplaceforarguments,thatMarxismitselfcannotnegate,overcome,
oreitherincorporateintoitselforexcludefromitself(15).
Lyotardisthusnoteworthy,andactuallycelebrated,forhavingquestionedsome
oftheformallimitationsimposedbydominantwaysofthinking.Asevidencedbyhis
criticismofthediscursivepracticesatworkinmetanarrativesorgrandnarratives,
oneofhismajorcontributionshasalsobeentoquestionthelegitimatingactstheypose

39

(Browning,Lyotard32).Byinterrogatinghownarrativesimposeacertainvisionofa
futurethroughthelegitimatingdiscoursestheysetouttoproduce,Lyotardswork
illuminatesourproject.Itdoessothankstoitsproposeddisplacementofboundaries.
Indeed,indealingwithpostcolonialandpostmoderntexts,thinkingwithin
compartmentalized,rigidlydefinedcategoriesanddisciplinesmaybetooreductiveor
restrictive.Notonlybecausethisconfinementmayhaveimpededthereadingofsome
formsofliterature.Butalsobecauseithasnotallowedustoaddressarealityturned
barbaricinitsfullcomplexity.Inarguingforthenecessityofdisplacing,exploding,and
expandingtheboundariesseparatingcategoriesofdiscourses,Lyotardhasthusenabled
newinsights.Withthem,newspaceshavebeenopenedaswell.Iproposetheyserveas
borderlandsinwhichtoinscribeandprobeexperiencesatthelimit,suchasthepara
experiencethatwasnamedAuschwitz(Differend89).
Lyotardspostmodernworkongrandnarrativescanopenuptheperceptionswe
haveattachedtoslaveryortheHolocaust(Lyotard 32).Discoursesonextremeviolence,
weknow,canalterourunderstandingofit.Thiswideningofperceptionscanbe
prompted,Ipropose,notsomuchbyofferingcounternarratives,however.Thiscritical
stancewouldnotsuffice.InthecaseoftheHolocaustandslavery,itwouldsimplymean
anegativereversalofdiscursivepower.Thisreversalwouldservesolelytolocatethe
discourseofthepersecutedascounternarrative.Acounternarrativeofthattypewould
simplyservetodisprovethedominantstory.Yet,thedominantstoryofthepersecutors
involvedinthetradeofhumanslavesorintheNaziexterminationofEuropeanJewry
shouldnotbedenied,disproved,orsilenced.Onthecontrary,itshouldbeinscribedin
memoryandpubliclyknown.InLyotardswords,Wedefinitelyhavetoexploreclouds

40

ofthoughts.Noindifferenceispossibleor,betteryet,indifferenceassuchisamodeof
answeringtheappeal(Peregrinations12).Ratherthanproposingcounternarrativesthat
wouldmerelydisprovedominantstories,Lyotardscritiqueallowsforsomethingelse:
criticalstancesofbroaderinsights.Hiscritiqueactuallyenablestheinscriptionofa
varietyofdiscoursesfromnondominantforcesthatdonotsilenceadominantstory.
Somediscoursesmaythusopenupourcapacityfortheperceptionofrealities
that,becausetheywereextreme,mayhavebeenleftinthebackground.Butalso,by
havingthesedormantforcessurface,byallowingthemtocometotheforeground,a
pluralityofnewinsightsmayemergeandberegistered.Oneprivilegedmediumforthese
voicestobeheard,asIwillproposelater,isthroughaliteratureoftestimonial,suchas
thatofDelboandMorrison.Ifwefollowthislineofthinking,ourperceptionofhistory
canthusbeexpandedandsupplementedwithtestimoniesofsurvivors.Newperceptions
ofslaveryandtheHolocaustmaythenemerge.Mypointisthusthateventhough
evidenceoftheseforcesofthepastmaynothavebeenultimatelypreservedindominant,
collectivememory,theycanstill,however,belocatedandaccessed.Inourcase,this
evidenceistobefoundinaccountsofindividualexperiencesandinthepersonal
recollectionsoftheseexperiences.Also,attentiontotheseemergingnondominant
forcesmayenableinquiringintonewsetsofcriticalproblems.One,forexample,grounds
itselfinacertainmeaningfulnessthat,forinstance,revolvesaroundthetypesofsilence
thatcanbeencounteredinpersonalaccountsofextremecircumstances.
LyotardhasapproachedtheproblemofsilenceinTheDifferendandelsewhere.
Heclaimsthattherelevanceandproblemofpossiblesilencemayhaveusrethinkour
waysofapproachingdiscoursesofpoliticalinjustice.Assuch,heasksforare

41

examinationofsilence,whetherpersonallyorculturallyselfimposed,thatgravitates
aroundeventsofextremeviolenceespeciallyinpostcolonialandpostmoderndiscourses.
Hefirstassertsthattheirresolvablecharacterofeventsofundecidedsocialorcultural
characterinscribedinthesediscoursesshouldbenogroundforsilenceorindifference
towardsthem.Also,beingunreceptivetoeventsofunjustcharacter,onthepretensethat
itisimpossibletoevergettoafullcognitionofthem,isnotacceptable.Likewise,not
beingreceptivetothembecausetheyforeclosecomparisons,orbecausewecannot
speculateaboutthem,asinthecaseofAuschwitz,fallsshort.ForLyotard,
Auschwitzdoesnotopenontopossiblespeculationbecauseitsoutcomeispastand
donewith.Itdoesnot,orshouldnot,however,andinhiswords,precludetheneedto
talkaboutit(89).Forhim,discussingordisputingwhatisindiscutableor
indisputableisandremainsanecessarypoliticalanddiscursivestance.Indeed,for
him,whatisnotopentoadifferentresultorhistoricaloutcomeshouldnotdeterusof
thecertain,necessarymoralobligationtorespondtoinstancesofinjusticeorexploitation,
pastorpresent.Inhiscontention,eventhoughonecannotspeakofanexperience
withachangedorchangeableresultasinthecaseofAuschwitz,wearestillfaced
witharesponsibilitytowardsAuschwitz(88).
OurliabilitytowardsAuschwitzconcernsthuslearningtobereceptiveandopen
tosilences.WhethertheserefertowhatDavidCarrollcallsahistoricalsenseof
silence,orconcernthedifferenttypesofsilenceofvarioustestimoniesbywitnesses
afterAuschwitzmatterslittle.Morepressingandrelevanttothediscussionisthe
possibilitiesforinterpretativeworkthatmustbedonearoundsilenceandaroundits
possiblemeanings.

42

Asamatteroffact,Lyotardwasnotsolelyinterestedinspecifictypesof
knowledgearoundAuschwitz.Whetherthatknowledgewasgroundedinhistorical,
ethical,orpoliticaldiscoursesisnotthepointhere.Indeed,Lyotardwasmostinterested
alsoinwhatisnotorhasnotbeenverbalizedaboutAuschwitz.Hewasparticularly
engagedandattentivetoitssilencing,thesilence(s)madearoundit.AsDavidCarroll
explains,Lyotardisinterestednotjustinwhatissaidinsuchtestimoniesbutalsoin
whatisnotsaid.Withthesetestimonies,Lyotardisalsoattentivetowhatcannotbe
said,evenwheneverythingissaid.CarrollfurtherexplicatesthatLyoardislikewise
interestedinwhatremainssilentintestimony,notthroughsimpleforgetting,distortion,
ortraumaticrepression.ThisattentivenesstosilencebyLyotardderivesfromthefact
thatthereisalwayssomethingelse,somethingmore(andperhapssomethingless)that
needstobesaid.
Lyotardspoint,weremember,isthatknowledgepurelygroundedinahistorical
context,nomatterhowcomplexorcomplete,isnotsufficient.InCarrollswording,
historicalknowledgedoesnotandcannotsuffice,becausethereissomethingelseat
stake,besideshistoricalknowledge,thatneedstobeacknowledgedbythehistorian.
Thisacknowledgement,Carrollargues,needstobedoneinthenameofbothhistoryand
justice(MemorialfortheDiffrend21).Intreatingsilencesassigns,notfactsof
history,Lyotardthusasksforaneworrenewedtypeofattentionaroundaccountsof
historicaldisaster.
In Peregrinations,Lyotardstressestheimportanceofbeingreceptiveorsensitive
toevents.Itincludesthosethatdonotconformtopoliticalexpectationsorstrategies.
Throughaformofpoliticalmodesty,however,andinLyotardswords,weshouldbe

43

abletoapproacheventsthathaveacharacterofnonsolvabilityornonresolvability,such
asAuschwitz.Thisopennessorsensitivitycanindeedunlockspacesofcriticalthinking
inwhicheventscanbescrutinizedanew,andconfrontedfromdifferentanglesand
sources.Eventhoughresolutionsofproblemsmustalwaysberesisted,andalways
opposed,dialoguesabouttheseproblemsmust,however,continuouslybepursued.These
dialogues,then,shouldremainopenended.Posingproblemsintermsof diffrends,and
openingoursensitivitiestoeventsmay thusrenewattentiontosomeurgentcritical
questions.ManyoftheseareconfrontedbyDelboandMorrison.
Whiletheproblematicpastofsomehistoricalnarratives,suchasslaveryor
extermination,isnotopentospeculation,itcannotopenaroundadifferend.Doesthis
meanthen,thatsomenarrativesaredestinedtoremainunattendedtoorundiscussed?
Theanswerisno.No,eventsshouldnotremainundisclosed,unattendedtoor
undiscussed.Neithershouldtheirdiscourses,inLyotardswords,beofarrogance,
authority,universality,orprescription.Rather,theyshouldbeencouragingustobe
receptive,andsupplementourunderstandingofpainfulrealities(13).Thediscourses
ofDelboandMorrison,aswewillseeinthefollowingchapters,willnotproceedto
authorize,prescribe,orcommandoneoutcomeovertheothers.Rather,theywill
illuminatethemselvesinthewaysinwhichtheyrequestourutmostattentiontotheir
object.Assuch,theintentofthesenarrativesbyDelboandMorrisonisnotsomuchan
attempttodetermineonceandforalltheoutcomeofdiscoursesofpastexclusionor
annihilation.Noristheirobjecttoclosediscussionsaroundthem.Rather,their
textualitieswillbeshowntoilluminateandsupplementacriticalreflectiononthe
aberrationsofhistoriesofpoliticalexploitationandsocialinjustice.Assuch,theywillbe

44

exploredthroughaliteratureoftestimonialsandpersonalreflectionsthatground
themselvesinindividual,yetalso,collectiveapproachesofreality.
Oneofourresponsibilities,then,willhavetodowithdealingwiththeshocks,
dreadfulandimmense,torecount thewordsofAppelfeld,thatslaveryandthe
Holocaustmayhaveusregister(BeyondDespairx).Facingeventsofsuchmagnitude,as
encompassedinslaveryandtheHolocaust,willthencallforacloseexaminationofthe
receptionthattheiroccasionproduced.AsGeoffreyHartmanclaimsinTheBookof
Destruction,ashereferstotheHolocaust,Wewanttosay,Itisinconceivable.Yet,
ashecontinueswithhisclaim,yetweknowitwasconceivedandactedupon
systematically.Inhiswords,andinordertomaintainasenseofsafety,Wecontinueto
harbor,therefore,asenseofimprobability.Thissenseofimprobabilityarisesinus,
however,notbecausethereisanydoubtwhatsoeverabouttheShoahasafact.Doubt
surgesinus,almostasaspontaneousformofresponseorreflex,ratherbecausewhat
waslivedthrough,orwhatwehavelearnedabout,cannotbeapartofus:themindrejects
it,castsitoutoritcastsoutthemind.Ashecontinues,Weareforcedtoadmitthat
somethinginhumanbehaviorisalientous.Similartotheargumentpreviouslymadeby
Chambers,thisadmissiontoanessentialfaultinourhumanbehavioristhatyetit
couldbespeciesrelated(322).
ThediscussionofthenarrativesbyDelboandMorrisonwillbringtolightthat
fault(xviii).Besides,bybeingstoriesgroundedinlossofinnocenceandinthepainful
acquisitionofacertainknowledge,theyenablethefollowing.Bybearingwitnessto
experiencesthatChambersinscribesinculturalobscenity,theywillfacilitateexploring
primaryexperiencesoftrauma.WhileinChambersswords,thistypeofwitnessingis

45

particularlyemphasizedinthecaseofHolocaustwriting,Iwillpositthatitmaybe
foundinaliteraturethatdealswithslaveryalso(UntimelyInterventions68).
Besides,anditisthesecondpointthatIwishtomakehere,Delbosand
Morrisonstextualitiespermitanexplorationofhowwecanbemadeattentivetothe
senseofpoliticalorethicalresponsibilitythatLyotardorDerridacallfor.Exploringa
formofliteraturethatisbasedontestimonials,inwhicheveryvoice,everysilence,and
everymediatingspaceinbetweenismeaningful,isoneway.Butalso,bybeingstories
thatresistauniversalapproachorreading,andthatfocusonsomemutedvoicesaround
historiesofindividualorhistoricaltrauma,theymayhaveusmoveclosertothat
responsibility.

46

Chapter2.TheHauntingofthePast
In Testimony,ShoshanaFelmanclaimsthatliteratureandartcanbeaprecociousmode
ofwitnessingandaccessingreality(xx).Shefurthercontendsthatitisespecially
so,whenallothermodesofknowledgeareprecluded(xx).Inthischapter,Iproposeto
readCharlotteDelbosAucundenousnereviendraandToni MorrisonsBelovedas
narrativeactsofwitnessing.Isuggestthat,throughtheirtestimonialfunction,their
worksenableaccesstoparticularformsofknowledge.Aspartofaliteratureof
testament,theirwritingscaninitiateinussomeunderstandingofhowsomeliterary
workscanbeparticularlyadequatetorevealexperiencesoftheextreme.Thisopenstwo
questions.Oneconcernsexamininghowtraumaticexperiencesoreventsmayaffect
individuals,andtowhatextent.Theotherrelatestohowsomeexperiencedtraumacan
benarrativelyperformedandrevealedthroughtestimonialactsof(hi)storytelling.
Howeverpartialandfragmentedtheknowledgetobeuncoveredis,itis
meaningful.Becauseitistraumaticandbecauseitwasaccountedforin singularways,
thistypeofknowledgeseems,however,particularlycomplexanddifficulttotackle.Itis
sobecauseitisatthecoreofcollectiveandculturalhistoriesbesidesbeinggroundedin
storiesofpersonaltraumas.Itmaybeusefultolookmorecloselyintotheissuesand
difficultiesthatthistypeoftraumaticknowledgepropounds.Also,itismeaningfulto
explorehowthispersonallyorculturallydevastatingknowledgehasnotonlybeen
experiencedbywitnesses,buthowithasbeenconveyedaswell.Inthisregard,the
followingpreliminaryconsiderationwillguideusinourexploration.Itrelatestothe
extenttowhichwritersoftraumaticeventshavehadtostretchthecapacitiesoftheirart
andoftheirimaginationinordertotransmittheshocksoftheirexperience.Lookingat

47

somechallengingobstaclesthatwritersoftraumahavehadtofaceintheirwritingmay
thusbeagoodplacetostart.
InheressayaboutthememorializationofthevictimsoftheHolocaust,Patricia
Gartlanddiscusseswhatcanimpedeawareness,recollectionandtransmissionof
knowledgegroundedintrauma.InThreeHolocaustWritersGartlandcontendsthat
theobstaclesthatHolocaustwritershavehadtoovercomearemanyandhuge.
Inhercontention,writingabouttheHolocausthasnotonlymeanttoinitiallyfaceand
confrontafeltinabilitytocomprehendtheeventfully.Ithasalsoentailedthe
difficultiesoffindingameanstoexpresseloquentlyandeffectivelyexperiencesof
traumaticresonance,whileusingtheconventionsoflanguage.Assuch,craftingthe
languageartisticallyinordertosuccessfullyconveythroughaccessible,simplemeans
thetraumaticobjectofexperiencesothatitmightleadtocognitiveunderstanding,has
beenamajorchallenge.Assheencapsulatesthemanydauntingobstaclesfacedby
Holocaustwriters,Gartlandclaimsthefollowing:
Holocaustwritershavehadtoovercomemanyobstacles.Theyhadfirstto
confronttheprofoundlyunsettlingrealityofatrocityanddealwiththepersonal
trauma,theshockofrecognitioninherentintheirconfrontationwiththeutter
depthofhumanbehavior.Theyhadtodealwiththefactthattheworld
eitherchosenottoknowor,forallpracticalpurposes,didnotcareaboutthefate
oftheJews.Theyhavehadtoengagetheirreadersinaprocessofdiscoverythat
canatbestbedescribedasterriblypainful,andtheyhavehadtoseekvehiclesto
transmitthetenoroftheirmessagethatwouldneitherreducenordistortits
immensity.Thesearehugetasksforpeoplewhohadtraveledonroadsthrough
hell.(46)
DelbosexperienceasaNazicampsurvivoreludes,toacertainextent,traditional
expressioninwordsorrepresentation.Assuch,thenonrepresentationalformofwriting
thatshechoosestoadoptasherartisticproseisadeliberatestylisticchoiceonherpart.It
hashertestimonialpieceposeasaneloquentlyandconvincinglywrittenpieceofartthat

48

hasprofoundethicalimplications.OvercomingthemanyobstaclesfacedbyHolocaust
writersasdescribedbyGartland,Delbosworkisgroundbreaking.Byexplodingsome
formsofconventionalwriting,shehasindeedproducedthemeaningfulnessthatshe
soughtherworktoconvey.Thepotencyofherliteraryworkwritteninthecontextofa
postmoderneraisnotonlybeautifullycraftedaesthetically.Itisalsoprofoundly
significantethically.Besides,thebeautyandrelevanceofDelbosart,despiteaesthetic
andcontextualdifferences,canbereadinconjunctionwiththepostcolonialworkofToni
Morrison.Thefollowingpreliminaryremarksontheapparentdifficulty,yetparadoxical
necessity,toaddressexperiencesperceivedasnotfullycomprehensiblearethusvalidfor
bothDelbosandMorrisonsart.
Delbossearchforexpressiontorevealtheinexplicablecanbeeasilyrelatedto
Morrisonsapproachtotheunspeakable(UnspeakableThingsUnspoken220).
Findingthemostconvincingandeloquentwaystocommunicatethehardlyexplicable
orthespeakablewasoneoftheirmajorliterarychallenges.Thecraftandartistic
virtuositydisplayedbybothartiststotacklethatchallengeis,however,preciselyoneof
theunderlyingconnectionsbetweenthemthatrequestsattention.Inthischapter,Iwill
thusattempttobringthefollowingtolight.Namely,thatbothnarrativesareconstructed
asattemptstoreveal,ratherthanexplain,andsignify,ratherthandescribe,experiences
groundedintrauma.Whethertheexperiencestransmittedwerepersonallyand
immediatelywitnessedmatterslittle.Whatdoesisthattheirpointistosignifywithina
community ofreaders.Assuch,showingthatbothDelbosandMorrisonsartispotent
becauseitmakesanafterAuschwitzexperienceandapostcolonialaftermathvividly
presentforusiscrucial.Itissotosuchanextentthattheirpresence,nowness,or

49

maintenance,inthewordsofDerrida,isresonanttoday(Signature,Event,Context
328).
TheexperiencesoftraumathatDelboandMorrisonartisticallyrenderarealso
actuallyhaunting.Writtensoasnottolaytheghostsoftheconcentrationaryuniverse
orofcolonialism,AucunandBelovedthusbothaim,forChambers,atbecoming
obsessiveandhauntingtotheirreaders.Assuch,thehauntednessofthesenarratives
canactuallybesaidtoperformtheirobjectsbybecominghaunting.Inthisregard,both
pieceshavethusbecome,forChambers,modesofculturalinfiltrationthathavea
profoundethicalmessagetodeliver.
Delbosartattemptstogobeyondmereexplanation.Thesubjectmatterof Aucun
istheunusualandthebaffling.Itactuallydealswiththatwhichcannotbetotally
elucidatedorexplained.TheaimofDelbosnarrativeistodemonstratethat
inexplicability.InthewordsofChambers,thenarrativesburdenofDelbosworkis
thustomanifesttheinextricablecharacterofanexperiencethatwashighlytraumatic
(UntimelyInterventions230).Thisattempttodemonstratethatinexplicability,i.e.to
manifestit,inlieuofexplainingitisverycloselyrelatedto,butgoesbeyond,the
postmodernattitudeofJeanFranoisLyotardinthefaceofart.Specificallyreferringto
artafterAuschwitz,Lyotardcontendsthatwhatartcanactuallydoisspecificallyto
bearwitness,nottothesublime,buttotheaporiaofartandtoitspain.AsLyotard
furtherasserts,artdoesnotsaytheunsayable,butitsaysthatitcannotsayit
(Heideggerandthejews47).Also,forChambers,inorderfortheartistto
demonstratetheunsayableortodisplaytheinexplicable,theartistcanengagein
abstainingfromanyattempttoexplainitaway(UntimelyInterventions230).Thisis

50

exactlytherhetoricalmodethatDelboembracesinAucun,asdoesMorrisonin Beloved.
Itmakestheirpiecesnarrativelyeffectiveaswellasethicallycompelling.
Aucun,accordingtoChambers,isindeedgroundedinadeclamatorymode.For
him,declamationisunderstoodneithertoexplainnordirectlyaddressthosewhowould
requireanexplanation.Rather, Aucunfunctionsasaliterarycryoutthatpresentsthe
strangeasawriterlyperformance.ThisperformancebecomestheobjectofDelbosart
itself,whoseaimbecomestobecapturedandcalledtoattention.ForChambers,the
rhetoricalsignificanceofDelbosartasshegroundsitinapodicticordemonstrative,
ratherthaninexplanatoryform,actuallyliesinitsbeingreadandinterpreted(229).
Interestinglyenough,Morrisonstext,whilegroundedintheunspeakable,ismeantto
produceanidenticaleffect.Likewise,Delboswritingmanifestsaprofoundconcernwith
astateofhauntedness.Thathauntedness,whichcorrespondstoanexperienceof
traumathatneedstobeconveyed,canbe,forChambers,bestrevealedifitis
recognizedashaunting(190).Atbest,thishauntingcanfunctionasanendlessly
pluralspecterthatcantbelaidtorest,butwhom,atleastwecanacknowledgeandto
whomwecanrespond,intheformofourawareness,anxietyandphantompain(207).
Also,asthatwhichfailstoend,butcontinuestorepeatandtoreturn,evenwhenitis
supposedlyover,thishauntingiswhatmakesDelboswork,butalsoMorrisons,so
distinctandcrucial.Theirtextsbecomethepotentvehiclesthatrelayhauntednessasa
haunting(190).
WemayberemindedthatnotonlyhavewritersofHolocausttestimonialsbeen
pressuredtofullycomprehendandregisterwhatwasexperiencedatthetimeofthe
traumaticexperience.Theyalsohavehadtofaceaninitialimprobabilityatbeingableto

51

discloseandexpresstheirexperiencetothefullest.Examiningmorepreciselyhow
Delbosartsuccessfullyinscribesandartisticallybearswitnesstohertraumatic
experienceinAuschwitzisthusanunderlyingconcernofthischapter.Anotheristhe
extenttowhichMorrisonsnarrativecansoconvincinglyinterpellatereadersinorderto
involvethemmoredeeplyintraumaticexperiences.Thesetwoconcerns,however,apply
tobothtexts.
OneofthestylistictechniquesofDelbosartthatmakeitunquestionably
convincingisheruseoffragmentedwritingasitrespondstoherinclinationforeffecting
adisturbingoutcometoourreading.Anotherstylisticdevicewhichhasherartcomeout
astraumatizing,andthusapproachestheinexplicable,includesthesimultaneous
coexistenceofapparentlyopposingframesofreference,suchasthosepresentin
circumstancesofextremeexperiences,andthoselocatedinthemorehabitualspacesof
reality.Thepresencesoftheobsceneintheordinary,ofthefamiliarintheunthinkable,
ofdeathinlife,andviceversaaresomeinstances.Theyrevealatbesthowanobjectof
traumaticknowledgecanbe,ifnottotallyknown,atleastperceivedandacknowledged.
TheshrieksofterrorinthefaceofdeaththatDelboplacesinhertext,forinstance,
eloquentlyspeakforthemselves,especiallywhentheyarefollowedbythefreezing
silenceofdeathitself.Themannerinwhichshemakesthosesilencesandthattraumatic
stillnessmeaningfulisthuscrucialinuncoveringexperiencesoftheoutoftheordinary.
Besides,thefigurallanguageandthevividimagesthatsheplantsinhertexttohelpto
revealthetraumaticnatureofherexperienceareextremelyeffectiveinsituatingthe
traumawithinmorefamiliarmodesofperceivingit.Furthermore,herturningsome
stylisticdevicesintoextremelypotentmotifsinordertoencouragereaderstoengagein

52

relativelyintenseinterpretiveinvolvementiscrucial.Theextenttowhichherartenables
accesstoamoresubjective,almostvisceralratherthancognitivealbeitincomplete,
understandingoftheeventsshecametowitnessinAuschwitzBirkenau,Raisko,and
Ravensbrck,aremajorpointstoexamineinthischapter.
InaninterviewwithNellieMcKay,ToniMorrisonhassuggestedmorethanonce
thatwhenthereadingofherbooksisdone,oneisactuallynotthrough.Iproposethat,
indeed,oneisactuallynotthroughafterreadinganyliteraryworkoftraumatic
significancelikehers.Itissonotonlybecausethethemesthatareuncoveredor
unveiledinherliterarypiecesarehaunting.Itisalsorelatedtothemannerinwhich
herdiscourseiscrafted.Howitleadstoahauntingeffectonthereaderisthuscrucialin
understandingtheobjectofMorrisonsartisticpractice(AnInterviewwithToni
Morrison403).BothMorrisons,butalsoDelbostexts,arethusfertilegroundsfor
exploringformsofartthatrelatetowhatChamberstermsaliteratureoftheaftermath.
Withthistypeofliterature,thenarrativestowhichahauntedsubjectreturnsaftera
traumaticexperiencecanthushaveusperceiveDelbosandMorrisonstextsasmeantto
signalnotacessationofpainbutratherasareturnofthatpain(Untimely
Interventions212).
Sincebothauthorsartfunctionstorevealinnerandouter,yetindelible,formsof
trauma,itisinterestingtoopenaplacetoengagethemindialogue.Assuch,theweighty
memoryofaninjusticedonetoawholerace,arecurringandpotentmotifinMorrisons
text,canbeplacednexttothememoryofaninjusticedonetoawholeethnicgroup,as
witnessedbyDelbo.Likewise,thememoryofutmostviolencedonetimeandagainto
theblackbodyandpsyche,anotherofMorrisonsthemesin Beloved,canbereadinview

53

ofthephysicallydestructiveactsthatwerecommittedinEuropebetween1939and1945
aswitnessedin Aucun.Also,anutmostdifficultyofsurvivingthepsychicandphysical
impactofviolencedonetoawholeraceorethnicgroupcanserveasacrucialcultural
indexofshameandcertaininability toforget.Bothnarrativesneedthustobeprobed
alsoinlightoftheurgentandunresolvedissuesofatraumaticpastthatrefusestopass.
Moreexactly,theyarefertilegroundsforapproachingwhatThomasTrezisecalls,after
thetitleofanarticlebyErnstNolte,APastThatWillNotPass(TheQuestionof
Community868).
AsimilaritybetweenDelbosandMorrisonstextsislocated,asJeanFranois
Lyotardtermsit,atthejuncturewherethepresentisthepast,andthepastisalways
presence(Heideggerandthejews17).Inthisregard,oneindicatorofviolenttraumas
comesthroughthehauntingpresenceofimmaterialandmaterialghoststhatarepresent
andspecifictobothauthorsworks.Also,thecertainmeaningfulnessthatattachesto
silenceasartisticsignofculturaltraumaissoeloquentintheiroeuvresthatitgivesart,in
theircases,aprofoundintensity.InthewordsofLyotard,theirprosecancauseustobe
confrontedwithasilencethatdoesnotmakeitselfheardassilence(12).Thespecific
stylisticdevicesjustmentioned,whichfunctionasliterarysignsofracialandcultural
traumaticpasts,canthusbereadintandemassomepowerfularticulationsofunresolved
violencethatstillprevailinpostmodernandpostcolonialdiscourses.
Byproposingspeechactsthat,inFelmanswordsenablethenarrativesto
performtheirownmeaning,DelbosandMorrisonstestimoniesrevealaspecifictype
ofknowledgethatappealstooursenses,morethantoourunderstanding(Testimony5).
ThispointisintroducedbyJeanFranoisLyotardin ThePostmodernExplained.

54

DrawingonLyotardsargumentin LaParoleSingulire,LaurentJennyclaimsthatsome
typesofknowledgeareindeedsuchthatmakeusfeelratherthanknowanobject.
Thissomaticratherthancognitiveknowledgecanopenawoundinoursensitivity.
Becausetheyarenotgroundedinalineartimeframe,butaretraumaticaccounts,Delbos
andMorrisonstestimoniesopenanewsenseoftemporalityinusaswell.Asaresult,
thetraumaticsenseoftimethattheyencapsulateservestoactlikeawoundthat
impingesonuswithahauntinginsistence(13).
RecallingwhatJeanFranoisLyotardhassaidaboutsomeshortpiecesbyWalter
Benjaminisusefulatthistime.AshecommentsonBenjaminsOneWayStreetandA
BerlinChildhood,andremindsusthatAdornowouldcallthesepiecesmicrologies,
Lyotardmakesacrucialpoint.Namely,Lyotardcontendsthattheseshortpiecesdonot
setouttodescribeeventsbuttocapturethem.Discussingtheabovementioned
piecesintermsofwhattheyperform,ratherthanwhattheystateorclaim,Lyotardinsists
onthefollowing.HewritesthatBenjaminsmicrologies,infact,donotdescribe
eventsfromchildhood.Rather,theycapturethechildhoodoftheeventsandinscribe
whatisuncapturableaboutit.DelbosandMorrisonstestimoniesdonotactually
describetraumaticeventsfromviolenttimes.Rather,theycapturetheviolenceand
thetraumaoftheevents.Meanwhile,theyalsoinscribewhatisuncapturableabout
them(ThePostmodernExplained90).
Lyotardhasalsoproposedthatsomenarratives,similartotheonesbyBenjamin,
haveaninitiatoryvalueaboutthem.Ratherthanpurposelypresentingobjective
descriptionofevents,Lyotardproposes,theseaccountsservetoinstructus.ForLyotard,
theinstructionresides,however,notsomuchintheeventsthemselves.Rather,itis

55

locatedintheeffectandmannerinwhichtheymakethemselvespresentwhenwe
appraisethem.StillinThePostmodernExplained,Lyotardassesseseventasaformof
initiation:
Andwhatmakesanencounterwithaword,odor,place,book,orfaceinto
aneventisnotitsnewnesswhencomparedtootherevents.Itisitsvery
valueasinitiation.Youonlylearnthislater.Itcutsopenawoundinthe
sensibility.Youknowthisbecauseithassincereopenedandwillreopen
again,markingouttherhythmofasecretandperhapsunnoticedtemporality.
Thiswoundusheredyouintoanunknownworld,butwithoutevermakingit
knowntoyou.Suchinitiationinitiatesnothing,itjustbegins.(91)
DelbosandMorrisonstextsputintoeffect,inFelmanswords,whatcannot
beunderstood,transmitted,inthemissionoftransmissionofthewitness.Instead,they
haveinitiatoryvalue.Bothsetouttoactivatewhatneedstobesensitivelyperceived
abouteventsandhistoriesoftrauma.Thisiswhatmakesthemsoinnovative.Also,
whileDelbosandMorrisonstextsrevealtheburdenofthewitnessingthattheysetout
toperform,theyalsorepeatoverandagaintheuniquenessofthewitnessing(Testimony
5).Theydosobyinitiatinginusasenseof injusticeandsuffering.Theycutopena
woundinoursensibilitythatcanusherusintoanunknownworld(ThePostmodern
Explained91).Ratherthanmakingstatementsaboutevents,theirprosecomesto
performandcapturetheviolentcharacteroftheseevents.Astestimonial,theirnarratives
usherusintoaknowledge,whichwouldotherwiseremainlessaccessible.Theeventsthat
theyrevealwouldindeedremaintooremoteorcognitivelydifficulttoapproach.It
wouldbesobecausetheiroccurrenceispastordistant,andbeyondourpresent.Yet,by
workinginatraumatictimeframeandbyopeninganewsenseoftemporalityinus,
DelbosandMorrisonstextsfunctiontoinitiateandrecall thepresenceofthepast
amongus.Theeventsthattheirtextsrevealaremeanttoreachouttous.Theyarealso

56

meanttoactivateinusfeelingsofuneaseandshock.So,morethansimplydescribing
somesingularinstancesofbondageandextermination,DelbosandMorrisonsnarratives
allowustosensitivelyapproachtheseevents.Theirnarrativesrevealandperformthose
violentevents.Yet,andimportantlyso,theyalsoactivateinusfeelingsofpainthat
influenceusfromthatpointforward.Assuch,theviolentimpactoftheseeventshaunts
us.
FelmanhaslabeledthepoetryofPaulCelanahauntingmelody.Drawingon
Celansurgencytoawakenustopotentialculturalthreatsisfruitful.Inthisinstance,the
urgencyofCelanspoemsiscomparableandapplicabletothetextsofDelboand
Morrison.FelmanwritesthatCelansverseisnotonlyacompelling...melody,but
itactuallyreturnslikeahauntingmelody...likeadirectedbeacon,aninsistent
drivingforceinthequesttowardsomethingwhichisnotentirelywithinreach.So
insistentandcompellingishispoetrythat,asaresult,itbecomeshaunting.Itisthis
similarhaunting,thatisrevealedthroughthebearingandtheburdenofthe
testimoniesbyDelboandMorrisonthatIwillexplorenow(Testimony3).
Astestimoniesgroundedintrauma,DelbosandMorrisonstextsshowhow
traumainterfereswith,andactuallyshapes,formsoftestimonialliterature.Felmanhas
discussedextensively,incollaborationwithDoriLaub,thatmaterialityandcentralityof
testimonyoutlinedbyatraumaticcharacter.Felmanpresentsherargumentbyfirst
insistingthattestimonyisandhasbecomeaprivilegedcontemporarymodeof
transmissionandcommunication(6).Questioningtheunderlyingmotivesbehindthe
omnipresenceoftestimonyinourrecentculturalaccountsofourselves,Felmanmakes
thefollowingpoint.Namely,thattestimonyisamodeofbearingwitnessthatis

57

particularlyinkeepingwiththeneedsofourreality.Assheclaims:Ithasbeen
suggestedthattestimonyistheliteraryordiscursivemodeparexcellenceofour
time.Further,sheacknowledgesthatourera,indeed,canpreciselybedefinedasthe
ageoftestimony.ShequotesElieWiesel:IftheGreeksinventedtragedy,theRomans
theepistleandtheRenaissancethesonnet,thenourgenerationinventedanew
literature,thatoftestimony(56).
Themeaningfulnessoftestimonyinourmoderneraisindirectrelationtothe
fabricoftestimonyitself.Testimoniesdrawtheirsubstancefromtheeventswitnessed.
Theyareaprivilegedmodeofrevealingthecharacterofsuchexperiences.Testimonies,
then,aretobediscussedintheirrelationtotheevent.Yet,theyshouldbeplacedin
relationtothewitnessaswell.
ForFelman,atestimonymustfirstofallbeplacedinarelationtoevents.
Especiallyinrelationtotraumaticevents,testimonyseemstobecomposedofbitsand
piecesofamemorythathasbeenoverwhelmedbyoccurrencesthathavenotsettledinto
understandingorremembrance.Further,sheclaimsthattestimony,asgroundedin
scrapsofamemorythathasbeenoverwhelmed,isactuallyanact.Thatact,
however,cannotbeconstructedasknowledgenorassimilatedintofullcognition.As
such,testimonymayreflecteventsinexcessofourframesofreference(5).
Atestimony,inotherwords,isadiscursivepractice,asopposedtoapure
theory.Testimonydirectlypertainsnotonlytothepersontestifyingortotheevent.It
alsoinvolvesthelistenerofthenarrativeaswell.Inotherwords,testimonyinvolvesnot
onlythetraumaticevent.Italsoencompassesthewitnesstotheevent,aswellasthe
listenertothewitnesswhorelatestheevent.Thereexistverycloserelationsbetween

58

thesethreeessentialcomponents.Thepivotalroleofthelistenerinrelationtotheevent
andtothenarratorisfurtherexpoundedbyFelman,butalsobyLaub.Discussingthe
necessaryinterconnectednessbetweenthethreecomponentsinvolvedintheprocessof
testifying,FelmanandLaubclaimthefollowing.NamelythatTotestifytovowto
tell,topromiseandproduceonesownspeechasmaterialevidencefortruthisthusto
accomplishanobligation.Thisobligationtobearwitness,soastoinstatethepotential
receptionofthetestimony,necessarilyrequiresonetobearwitnessnotonlytotheself,
Laubcontends,buttotheotheraswell(AnEventWithoutaWitness81).The
testimonymustthusbeaddressedtosomeone,whethertoanemphaticlistener,reader,or
interviewer.
ThecentralityandomnipresenceoftestimonyisobviousinDelbosand
Morrisonswork.AsFelmanpointsout,testimonyisindeedpervasive,and
implicatedsometimesunexpectedlyinalmosteverykindofwriting(7).Felmans
remarkservesasareminderthatourconcernhereistestimonialaccountsofwritten
narratives.Atthispoint,weneedtounderstandhowthegapsandsilencesinDelbosand
Morrisonsliterarynarrativesfunctionasactivatorsoftraumaticwitnessingand
testimonials.Itentailslookingmorecloselyintomodesofbearingwitnessthathave
beenperformedthroughoraltestimonies,orthroughoraltransmissionrecollectedin
discursivepracticesthatprivilegeacertainoralcharacterof(hi)storytelling.Itisatstake
notonlyinDelboswork,butitispresentinMorrisonsaswell.Itparticularlyshowsin
Morrisonsinclinationfororalityasaveryspecialandveryidentifiablecomponent
ofBlackliteratureasitisseeninherliterarypractice(Rootedness343).DoriLaub
andhiscrucialcontributionsasapsychiatrist,alistener,andaninterviewerfortheproject

59

FortunoffVideoArchiveforHolocaustTestimoniesatYaleUniversitywillopenthis
exploration(AnEventWithoutaWitness85).AnotherinquiryfacilitatedbyLaubwill
alsohaveuslookmorecloselyintohowthetraumaticcharacteroftheexperiencemay
affecttestimony.
ForLaub,massivetraumaprecludesitsregistration.Traumafailstoactually
registerbecausetheobservingandrecordingmechanismsofthehumanmindare
temporarilyknockedout.Asaresult,theseobservingandrecordingmechanisms
malfunction.Assuch,thebeareroftraumaandwitnesstoithastotestifytoan
absence.Indeed,shehastotestifytoaneventthathasnotyetcomeintoexistencein
spiteoftheoverwhelmingandcompellingnatureoftherealityofitsoccurrence.Laub
furtherclaimsthatthetraumaasaknowneventandnotsimplyasanoverwhelming
shockhasnotbeentrulywitnessedyet.Actually,ithasnotbeentakencognizance
of.Theemergenceofthenarrativewhichisbeinglistenedtoandheardis,therefore,
theprocessandtheplacewhereinthecognizance,theknowingoftheeventisgiven
birthto.
Laubkeepsinsistingontheinabilityfortrauma,aseventandasshock,to
registercompletely(BearingWitness57).Healsoproposesthattherealityoftrauma
resistsinscriptionintherealaswell.ForLaub,indeed,inspiteofthefactthatthe
traumarelentlesslyanduncannilyreturnsinactuallife,itsrealitycontinuestoelude
thesubject.Assuch,thesubjecthastoliveinthegripoftrauma.Another
consequenceisthatthesubjectunwittinglyundergoes[thetraumas]ceaseless
repetitionsandreenactments(69).Iwillfurthercontend,andinmoredetaillater,that
theeeriecharacterthatpervadestheproseofDelboandMorrisonisamajor

60

manifestationofthatrealityoftraumathatrefusestosettleinthereal.Itremains,
instead,inaspace,inaborderland,asGloriaAnzaldawouldcontend,betweenthe
realandthenottotallygraspable(Borderlands99).Atthefringeoftheillusiveand
hallucinatory,thescenefeaturingtheyellowsackofawomanattackedbyaNazidog
inDelbosnovelisonlyoneofthenumerousinstancesthatperformstraumabyupsetting
thereal.Likewise,thescenewithSethesmother,whoseextracorporealpresenceislater
assumedbyBelovedwhilebotharefeaturedduringthecrossingontheslaveshipduring
theMiddlePassage,isanotherexample.Iwillcomebacktotheseformsoftraumathat
unhingethereallater.
ThereisindeedanotherpointbyLaubthatneedsattentionbeforewestartthein
depthexplorationoftraumainDelbosandMorrisonsfirstnarrativesofthetrilogies.It
concernsLaubsargumentthatinvestigatesfurtheranddeeperintotheelusivecharacter
oftrauma.ThiselusivenessisnotfarremovedfromwhatImmanuelKantlabelsthe
formlessnessoftheobjectofknowledgeinhisdiscussionofthesublimefeeling.It
relates,infact,towhatKantreferstoastheboundlessnessoftheobject(Critiqueof
Judgment44).Itactually dealswiththelackofreferencetoapreviouslyknownor
perceivedreality.ForKant,thiselusivenesswouldbeatthelocuswhereImagination
andReasonfacetheinadequacyofexpression(59).Thisinadequacy,assuch,iswhat
givesrisetoafeelingofthesublime(47).ForLaub,thatelusivenessorformlessness
oftheobjectdoesnotgiverisetoafeelingofthesublime,however.Rather,itaccounts
forafeelingthathasaqualityofstrangenessorotherness.AsLaubexplicatesin
BearingWitness,
Thetraumaticevent,althoughreal,tookplaceoutsidetheparametersof
normalreality,suchascausality,sequence,placeandtime.Thetrauma

61

isthusaneventthathasnobeginning,noending,nobefore,noduringand
noafter.Thisabsenceofcategoriesthatdefineitlendsitaqualityof
otherness,asalience,atimelessnessandaubiquitythatputsitoutside
therangeofassociativelylinkedexperiences,outsidetherangeof
comprehension,ofrecountingandofmastery.Traumasurvivorslivenot
withmemoriesofthepast,butwithaneventthatcouldnotanddidnot
proceedthroughtoitscompletion,hasnoending,attainednoclosure,and
therefore,asfarasitssurvivorsareconcerned,continuesinthepresentandis
currentineveryrespect.Thesurvivor,indeed,isnottrulyintoucheither
withthecoreofhistraumaticrealityorwiththefatednessofitsreenactments,
andtherebyremainsentrappedinboth.(69)
DelbosandMorrisonstestimonialaccountsareeffectivebecausetheirnarratives
delveintoandperformthetraumaticentrapmentinwhichsurvivorsoftraumaarecaught.
Also,theirprose,pervadedwithafeelingofthesublimethatKantwouldcallthe
terrifyingsublime,servestostirterrorthewaydeeplonelinessdoes(Ofthe
BeautifulandSublime48).Assuch,DelbosandMorrisonsprosesituatesthesurvivor
ortheartistingreatloneliness.Byperformingnotonlythetrappingthat
necessarilycomeswithtrauma,butalsothegreatsolitudeencounteredbythenarrator
oftrauma,theirproseisterrifying.Itis,however,inthewordsofDoriLaub,by
reconstructingahistoryandessentialityof reexternalizingtheevent, thattheprocess
ofconstructinganarrativecantakeplace.AsLaubfurthercontends,thisre
externalizationoftheeventcanoccurandtakeeffectonlywhenonecanarticulateand
transmitthestory,literallytransferittoanotheroutsideoneselfandthentakeitback
again,inside.Assuch,tellingentailsareassertionofthehegemonyofrealityandare
externalizationoftheevilthataffectedandcontaminatedthetraumavictim.Ipropose
tonowlookmorecloselyintohowDelboandMorrisonnotonlyreexternalizethe
event,butalsoconstructtheirnarratives,andreconstructtheirhistories(Bearing
Witness69).

62

InhisTraumaticRealism,MichaelRothbergdescribesDelbosNoneofUsasan
assemblageofmicronarratives.Forhim,thesemicronarratives,intheirisolation,
servetorevealthespatialclosureandrepetitivetemporalityofAuschwitz(175).Inhis
contention,itisthus,bothwithandagainstthisknowledgeoftheuntimelinessof
testimony,thatDelbohaswritten NoneofUsWillReturn(159).PatriciaGartland
describesDelbosoeuvremoreasanimpressionistcollageofimagesandvignettes.
Yet,thesevignettesarealsoaccompaniedbyfairlyrealisticallyrenderedepisodesand
shortlyricdescription.Asaresult,Gartlandclaims,theoveralleffectis,attimes,like
thatofaprosepoemwhosechantkeepspoundingasanobsessivemelody.Also,for
Gartland,Delbostechniqueistowritemainlyinthepresenttense.Itisdesigned,in
hercontention,toshowhowpastexperiencemergeswithpresentmemory(Three
HolocaustWriters54).BoththesestatementsbyRothbergandGartlandactuallysituate
Delbosproseinalargerliterarycontext.
Aucundoesnotattempttorepresentareality,howevertruthful,oftheHolocaust.
Indeed,andinthewordsofLeaFridman,Delbodoesnottakeherreaderbacktoa
historicalaccountofanevent.Rather,shetakesherreaderinallofthefragmentation
andinstabilityoftheexperiencethatshehasoutlivedandvowedtotell.Also,Fridman
contends,Delbomakesperceptiblethatexperienceoffragmentationinitsmostintimate
connectiontothebody,totheouterworld,andtoothers.Inthisway,Delbodepictsa
senseofdissolutionandcollapseinallitslivedandwitnessedprecision.Indeed,
asFridmanfurtherstates,iftheunrealliesattheheartoftheexperienceofextremity,it
isthatunrealthatachievesobjectivestatusinDelbosaccount.AsFridman
concludes,Whatisformidableinherwritingistheprecisionanddetailofthatportrait

63

(WordsandWitness110).Equallyappallingishowtherealityofherexperienceisso
convincinglyportrayedandforcefulastobecomehaunting.
Delbofocusesonpersonalexperiences,herownandhercompanions,ratherthan
onhistoricalevents.Thismakesusperceivethedepthofthesufferinginflictedonthe
Auschwitzinmates.Butthisisnottheonlyeffectproduced.Delbosfocusisalsoto
makeusfeeltheprofoundnessanddestabilizingcharacterofthetraumathatthe
Holocaustexperiencebroughtabout.Onepressinginstancerevolvesaroundher
experiencingthirstatAuschwitz.Theepisoderevealsinacutemannerhowtraumaticthe
deprivationandscarcityofwaterwasinthecamp.Italsoexposesthedepthofthepainit
inflicted,aswellasitsobsessivecharacter.Theepisodeisconstructedsothatweare
madetosomewhatsensethetraumaticimpactofthirstinitsfullforce.Todothisasan
author,andforthereadertoperceivetheeffect,accordingtoChambers,Ineednothave
knowntheHolocaustinthesenseofhavingbeenthere,orinthewaythatahistorian
mightknowit.Instead,Ineedonlytorecognizeitsrealityandrelateittomyself,
whichpresumablyIdoonthebasisofpersonalexperiencesofpainthatIremember.
Chamberskeepsexplainingthatmyresponsetosomethingthatisphrasedformetoread
butnotsaid,isoneofanagnorisisrecognitionasremembering,rememberingasthe
negationofmypreviouslysupposedignorance.Itis,forChambers,an
acknowledgmentthatIdidnotneedforthisthingtobespelledout,althoughIdidneedto
beremindedofit,forittobecomerealtome,...andhauntinglyso(Untimely
Interventions20607).Inthisinstance,wearemadetofeelwhatitmusthavefelt
liketogothirstyfordaysonend.Wearealsomadetoobservethequasimaddening
effectthatintensethirstcanhaveonthehumanbodydeprivedofwater.Theeffect

64

createdbyDelbosproseisallthemoredramaticandtraumatic.Especiallyifwe
rememberthat, inthewordsofLaub,thetraumaticexperiencehasnobeginning,no
ending,nobefore,noduringandnoafter(BearingWitness69).Inherchapter
entitledLasoif,Delbomakesussensethatthirsthasnobeginning,noending,no
before,noduringandnoaftereither.
Delbofirstpondersontheunendingandobsessivecharacterthatbeingthirsty
canimposeonthethirstyindividual.Toconveyherresistancetowaterdeprivation,
Delboupsetsourregulartimeandsensationframes.Asshetransgressestimereferences,
shesucceedsinrevealingunendingsensations.Delboemphasizestheendlessand
persistentcharacterofhersufferingassheclaims,Ilyalasoifdumatinetlasoifdu
soir. Ilyalasoifdujouretlasoifdelanuit(Aucun11415). Thensheinsistsonthe
intensityandvariedqualityofthethirstyfeeling. Shereflects,Maislasoifdumaraisest
plusbrlantequecelledudsert.Lasoifdumaraisduredessemaines.Lesoutresne
viennentjamais.Laraisonchancelle.Laraisonestterrasseparlasoif. Makingusfeel
theacuityandirremediabiltyofthephysicaldeprivationshewasforcedtosuffer,Delbo
writes,Laraisonrsistetout,ellecdelasoif. Danslemarais,pasdemirage,pas
despoirdoasis.Delaboue,delaboue. Delaboueetpasdeau(114). Delboappeals
notonlytooursenses,buttoouremotionsaswell.Shenotonlybringstolightthesheer
obscenityoftheviolencedonetoandfeltbythebodybutalsoactivatesinusan
emotionalresponsethatmakesusgraspthesenselessnessandabsurdityoftheviolence
forcedontheinmates.Themaddeningeffectoftheviolationisallthemorepressing,and
herappealallthemorepoundingasshewrites,
Lesjouescollentauxdents,lalangueestdure,raide,lesmchoiresbloques,et
toujourscetteimpressiondtremorte,dtremorteetdelesavoir.Et

65

lpouvantegranditdanslesyeux.Jesensgrandirlpouvantedansmesyeux
jusquladmence.Toutsombre,toutchappe.Laraisonnexerceplusde
contrle.Lasoif.Estcequejerespire?Jaisoif.Fautilsortirpourlappel?Je
meperdsdanslafoule,jenesaisojevais.Jaisoif.Faitilplusfroidoumoins
froid,jenelesenspas.Jaisoif,soifcrier.Etledoigtquejepassesurmes
gencivesprouvelesecdemabouche.Mavolontseffondre.Resteuneide
fixe:boire. (116)
Delbosproseprovidesanotherstrikingexamplethatfocusesonthetraumatic
experience,ratherthanthetraumaticevent,tomakeusrelatetohersufferingmore
intuitively.Itisanextremelypotentinstancealso.Itconcernsthelivingthrough
deathexperienceoftheinfamousrollcallthatAuschwitzinmatesweremadeto
enduretwicedailyontheicyplain(Aucun105).Thisinstancerevealsanotherparticular
aspectoftrauma.Namely,itenacts,besidesitstimelessness,thelossofclearorstable
connectionstothemateriallygroundedenvironmentinwhichtheexperienceoftraumais
takingplace.Inthefollowingexcerpt,itbecomesparticularlyclearhowincoming
stimulicanbedulledinsomewaysandexacerbatedinothers.Whatismoststriking,
however,istheflagrantperturbationinthesenseofperceptionthatoccursunderextreme
circumstances.Thepartiallossofcontrolonthesurroundingenvironmentandontheself
bytheperceivingsubjectseems,assuch,toproducethedeadeningofthatsubject. The
followingexcerptenacts,alongwithadisruptionofthesenseofself,aprofound
distortion,evendissolution,ofboundaries.Sincetrauma,inthewordsofLaub,takes
placeoutsidetheparametersofnormalreality,itsexperienceassuchseemstotake
placeinaworldthatisother(69).Themanifestationoftimelessnessand
otherness,enactedbythelossoftimeandspacebarriersisverysalientinthispassage.
AsLaubhasacutelyperceivedasachildsurvivor,traumaticknowledgedissolvesall
barriers.Itbreaksallboundariesoftimeandplace.Iteveninvalidatesthebarriersof

66

selfandsubjectivity(BearingWitness58).Inthisparticulartraumaticexperienceof
rollcall,thephysicaldisruptionofself,place,andtimethatoccursisprofoundly
disturbing.Theintensecoldinterfereswiththewaypeoplenormallyexperiencespace,
cold,sound,andlight.ForDelbo,beingcoldbecomesbeingpartofafrozenpieceofice.
Beingimmobilebecomesbeingenclosedinanimmobilityandfixityoftime.AsLea
Fridmanputsit,inthisexcerpt,Delborecordsthewaysthebodyinextremitybeginsto
experienceitselfinitsparts.Asaresult,thewaythatthepartsnolongerseemtobe
partofawholeenactsprofoundconfusion.Also,thewaythatvitalitygiveswayto
numbness,andthemannerinwhichtheminditselfseemstoshutdownaddtothe
temporalandtraumaticconfusionfacingthesurvivor(WordsandWitness119).This
fragmentation,experiencedinanotheryetequallytraumaticcontextbyBabySuggsin
Beloved,epitomizesthecontextofsheertraumaincircumstancesofextremity.
Thefragmentationofthebodyandthedisruptionoftimeandplaceboundaries,
are,inthisinstance,paradoxicallyaccompaniedbytotalintegrationintothedeadlyspell
ofthecamp.If,indeed,forLyotard,Auschwitzwascalledtheexterminationcampit
wasonealsooftotalintegration(TheDifferend56).Delborendersthesimultaneous
senseofprofounddisintegration oftheselfandintegrationintoAuschwitzinitsfull
horror.Inthefollowingexcerpt,shedoessoinaverypoetic,almostpeacefulmanner.
Assuch,shegivestraumaapalpablecharacterthatvergesontheeerie,onthe
hallucinatory.Therupturefromallsenseofreality,andalsotheunusualreconfiguration
oftherealthatsheproposesasshemakesusconnecttoaworldthathasbecomesheer
perceptionisastounding:
Quinzemillefemmestapentdupiedetcelanefaitaucunbruit.Lesilenceest
solidifienfroid.Lalumireestimmobile.Noussommesdansunmilieuole

67

tempsestaboli.Nousnesavonspassinoussommes,seulementlaglace,la
lumire,laneigeaveuglante,etnous,danscetteglace,danscettelumire,dansce
silence.
Nousrestonsimmobiles.Lamatinescouledutempsendehorsdutemps.
Etlaborduredudamiernestplusaussinette.Lesrangssedsagrgent.
Quelquesunesfont
despas,reviennentleurplace.Laneigetincelle,immense,surltendueo
riennefaitombre...
Letempsscoulesansquelalumirechange.Ellerestedure,glace,solide,le
cielaussibleu,aussidur.Laglaceseresserreauxpaules.Ellesalourdit,nous
crase.Nonquenousayonsplusfroid,nousdevenonsdeplusenplusinertes,de
plusenplusinsensibles.Prisesdansunblocdecristalaudelduquel,loindans
lammoire,nousvoyonslesvivants.Vivadit:Jenaimeraipluslessports
dhiver.Bizarrequelaneigepuisseluivoquerautrechosequunlment
mortel,hostile,horsnature,inconnujusquici.
Anospieds,unefemmesassoitdanslaneige,maladroitement.Onseretientde
dire:Pasdanslaneige,tuvasprendrefroid.Cestencoreunrflexedela
mmoireetdesnotionsanciennes. Ellesassoitdanslaneigeetsycreuseune
place.Unsouvenirdelectureenfantine,lesanimauxquifontleurcouchepour
mourir.Lafemmesaffaireavecdesgestesmenusetprcis,sallonge.Laface
danslaneige,ellegeintdoucement.Sesmainssedesserrent.Ellesetait.
Nousavonsregardsanscomprendre.
Lalumireesttoujoursimmobile,blessante,froide.Cestlalumiredunastre
mort.Etlimmensitglace,linfiniblouissante,estduneplantemorte.
Immobilesdanslaglaceonoussommesprises,inertes,insensibles,nousavons
perdutouslessensdelavie. Aucunenedit:Jaifaim.Jaisoif.Jaifroid.
Transportesdunautremonde,noussommesduncoupsoumiseslarespiration
duneautrevie,lamortvivante,danslaglace,danslalumire,danslesilence.
(535455)
WhatmakesDelbosexperiencesocompellinglyconvincingisthatshefocusesin
herprosenotonlyontheextraordinarycharacterofextremity.Sheconcentratesalsoon
actualmodesofrespondingtoastimulusorfeeling.Eventhoughhereverydayresponses
tofeelingsandsensationstookplace,forherandhercompanions,incircumstancesof
extremity,theyarerelevanttous.Notonlydohervignettes,deliberatelyincompleteand
fragmented,leaveroomforreaderstofillinwiththeirowncapacityforfeelingand
respondingtohertestimony.Thevignettesarepowerfulalsoinpointingoutthatthe
worldtobeperceived,eventhoughitactuallytiedintoexperiencesoftheextreme,canbe

68

accessedthroughordinary,everydayperceptionsandemotionsifthesearepushedtoan
extremealso.Delbosexperiencesarecertainlypartbothoftheextremeandofaworld
thatbecamehereverydayone.Theyunquestionablybroughtalong,inthewordsof
ElaineScarry,thedeobjectifyingoftheobjectsandtheunmakingofthemade
throughaprocessthatexternalizedthewayinwhichapersonspaincauses[her]world
todisintegrate(TheBodyinPain41).Yet,byrecollectingAuschwitzsoprofoundly,
Delboenablesustoconnectalsotothatveryfamiliarworldofhersbycallingnotonlyon
ourownemotions,butalsoparadoxically,onachanged,openedupsenseofperception
onourpart.TheaudacityofDelbosprosethusnotonlyencouragesthestretchingand
expandingofourcapacitytofeel.Italsohasusreaders,notimmediatelyandcognitively
knowthecontentofherexperience,orfeelitinitsmostdramaticeffect,butalso
intimatelyconnecttoit.
Delbosproseoperatesby,atfirst,projectingusintoaseeminglyreassuring,
everydayreality.Thenithasuswitnesstheabrupttransformationofthatrealityinto
somethinghorrifying.Thisprocessisextremelydestabilizing.Theartisticprocessof
defamiliarizationthatDelboproducesinherproseismeanttoactasapowerful,
traumaticfractureinourimagination.Thistraumaticfractureisdeliberate.Itisintended
tobeshocking,andtofunctionasthetraumaticshockthatwasexperiencedbythosewho
wereabruptlythrownintotherealityofAuschwitz.
Bydestabilizingtheexpectedenvironmentofherdiscourse,Delbohasusdirectly
experiencetheimpactoftheabsurddestructionthatwasdictatedbytheNazis.The
episodeentitledArrivals,DeparturesthatopensDelbostrilogyworksonthisprocess
ofestrangement.Inthissection,DelbomakestheestrangementofthearrivingJewsfrom

69

themselvesandfromhumanityveryclear.Shesubtlyrevealsitbybringingintofocusthe
contrastbetweenanormaltrainstation,andthefinal,terminalstationthatwill
remainnamelessforthem,towhichtheyaredeportedandwheretheywillbegassedto
death(Aucun12). Delbowrites,Maisilestunegareoceux[celles]quiarriventsont
justementceux[celles]lquipartent.Shefurtherexplicates,unegareoceux[celles]
quiarriventnesontjamaisarriv[e]s,oceux[celles]quisontparti[e]snesontjamais
revenu[e]s. Toinsistontheimmensityofdestruction,sheconcludes,cestlaplus
grandegaredumonde(9).Whileweareconstrainedtofacethetraumaticdestinyand
finaldestinationofthosewhoneverarrived,becausetheyweresentdirectlytothegas
chamber,Delboallowsforthehardlyimaginable,conceivable,orbearabletobe
actuallyimagined,sensed,oremphaticallyconnectedto.
Artisticallyspeaking,sheachievesthistourdeforcewithanextremelyprecise
technique.Itconsistsinlocatingherexperienceofrealityattheconfineswhereshe
herselfexperiencedtheseeventsattheborderbetweenwhatseemsrealandwhatseemed
unreal.Herprosecomestoreexternalizethetraumainaspace,inaborderlandof
trauma,whereexperienceandthenotfullyregisteredcancoincideandbecome
meaningful(Laub,BearingWitness69).Also,ifforFelman,thetraumaticexperience
isessentially,notavailable toitsownspeaker,IproposethatDelbomakesit,thanksto
herawarenessandnarrative,howeveraccessible(Testimony15).Byreconstructingher
experiencethroughhertestimonial,andbyconstructinghernarrative,shealso
contributestoreexternalizethetraumaforothers,namelyherreaders.Hertestimonial
workcanbegiventhevalueofalegacy.ForFranoisBott,andinhiswords,thepower
ofherlegacyisachievedconvincinglythroughandthankstothestrangecharacterofher

70

prose.Itissostriking,hecontends,thatithasaqualityofleavingthereadersinaland
strangetoourselves.DiscussingtheultimateimpactofDelbosworkonreaders,Bott
contends,
Unevoixquichuchote,dchirante.Unchuchotementfleurdevieet
dhorreur.Cettevoixunefoisentenduevousobsde,nevousquitteplus.
JeneconnaispasdoeuvrecomparablecelledeCharlotteDelbo,sinon
Guernica,sinonlefilm NuitetBrouillard,mmepudeur,mmedchirure,
mmeatrocetendresse,chezcettefemme,chezAlainResnais.Cette
douloureuseetbouleversanteincantationestdeceslivresraresquilaissent
soudainlelecteurenpaystrangerluimme. (Aucunbackcover)
ThomasTrezisehasalsodiscussedthenotionofstrangenessthatDelbo
purposefullybringsintoheroeuvresoastodestabilizethereaderslevelsofcomfort.He
hasaddressedthenecessityofanactiveandattentivereadingofDelboswork.InThe
QuestionofCommunityinCharlottesDelbosAuschwitzandAfter, Treziseclaimsthat
theminimalistrestraintofDelbosdescriptionsservesacrucialpurpose.Forhim,
Delbosstyle,makesitclear,howasareader,Imustcollaborateinandbear
responsibilityfortheactofwitnessing(QuestionofCommunity876).AsIhave
previouslyproposed, Aucundoesnotdescribeorexplaintrauma.Itmanifestsitand
performsitbyhavingitsimpactmadereadable.Thisinvitationtothereaderstobring
theirownsenseoffeartothetextiscrucial.Itisalsovitalthatreadersattempttoregister
theshockofthehorrorexperiencedbyDelbobystretchingthecapacityoftheir
imagination.ThistechniqueofreadersparticipationisgroundedinDelbosuseof
fragmentedprose.Assuch,wearemadetofillintheblanksandsensitively
apprehend,ratherthanunderstandherexperience.Beforeweturntothelaststylistic
deviceusedbyDelbotomaketraumavisibleandfelt,butalsohaunting,Ipropose
tolookatthemotivethatguidedDelboinwritingAucunintestimonialform.Itwillhelp

71

illuminatetowhatextentthisformoftestimonialliterature,whichDelbochoseinorder
torevealthetraumaofherexperience,is,initself,deliberateandmeaningful.
InTheTripleCourageofCharlotteDelbo,RosetteLamontdeclaresthatshehas
beenentrustedwiththemessageofCharlotteDelbo.Delbovowedtobringbackthis
messagetothecommunityofthelivingafterputtingittothetestoftime(485).Delbo,
whomRosetteLamontmetasalivingghostinDelbosownwords,sawin Auschwitz
andAfter thetestimonyofawitness,herown.Reflectingonthemotivesbehind
AuschwitzandAfter,Delboconfidedthefollowing:AlthoughIdidnotknowitatonce,I
cametotherealizationthatIwroteitsothatpeoplemightenvisionwhatlunivers
concentrationnairewaslike.Ofcourse,itwasntlikeanythingonehadeverknown.
Itwasprofoundly,utterlyunlike.Delbocontinues:IknewIhadtoraisebeforethe
eyesofafuturereaderthehellishimageofadeathcamp:senselesskillinglabor,pre
dawnrollcallslastingforhours,deathdirected,minutebyminute,programming.As
shefurtherstates,Weweremadetostandforhoursonendinthesnow,onice,envying
thoseofourcompanionswhohaddiedthatnightinthebunkstheysharedwith us.She
alsoclaims,Ihopethatthesetextswillmakethereoccurrenceofthishorrorimpossible.
Thisismydearestwish.DelbofurthersaffirmsthatinwritingAuschwitzandAfter,she
didnotseekrecognition,orhonorsforherself.Rather,shewantedtohonorthedead
whohadentrustedherwithasacredtask.Assuch,shewantedtocarrytheword
andmakeofherworkatestament.Reflectingonthemanuscriptthatsheburiedfor
almosttwentyyearsaftershewroteit,shefeltthat itwas,bynotleavingitaccessibleto
others,likegoingintohiding,thatshewouldrespondtothetaskathand.Shedecided
tobreakherlongliterarysilenceandtoproceedwithit.AsDelbodeclares,Iwanted

72

abovealltohonormycomrades,thosewhodidnotsurvive.Butshealsowantedto
showherreverencetothosewho,havingreturned,weretryingtobuildalife.
Meanwhile,whenshewasinAuschwitz,shehadalreadybecometheirvoice,asher
campmatessuggestedsheshould(Lamont48588).
Rememberingthathercampcompanionsexpectedhertobecomeabearerof
memory,sheproceededtobeone.Thiscontributed,toalargeextent,toDelbosability
tosurvive.RosetteLamonthascommentedonthepossibilitiesofindividualsurvival
groundedinaformofcommunalremembrance.Shehasclaimedthatinordertoemerge
fromthestiflingsilenceoftrauma,onemuststrivetoreshapeacommunity(Lamont
488).OnevalueofDelbosoeuvre,towhichIalreadyhavedrawnattention,isthatit
functionsasaliteraryindexeroftraumaticknowledge.Assuch,itismeanttoactivate,
notonlyonapersonal,butalsooncommunallevel,aformofawareness.Thatawareness
dealswiththedespairingrealizationofahumanorculturalpossibilitytogiveinto
extremelydestructivebehavior,suchasannihilationoffellowhumanbeings.Whether
Delbosworkcansucceedinproducingawakeupcallonindividualorcollectivelevels
remainsopen.Mypoint,though,isthathertestimonyandtestamentareinneedofbeing
read,oratleast,madepubliclyknown.AsLyotardwouldcontend,Delbostestimony
doesnotworksolelytoinform.Rather,itseekstoinitiateinussomething,suchasa
certainresponsiveness.Inthiscase,thepainoftheinitiationherewouldbethatthere
existsahumancapacityfordestruction(ThePostmodernExplained91).Delbos
testimonycertainlyinitiatesinusthatanincredibledamagecanbedone,notonlyto
certainindividuals,peoples,andselectednationalgroupsbutalsotomankindinits
entirety.ItbecomesthereforeallthemoreurgentfortestimonieslikeDelbostobe

73

disclosedandreadastraumatic.Perceivingthistypeoftestimoniesasplausible,realistic,
andtruthfulisthuscritical.AsFelmanwouldconclude,totestify...ismorethansimply
toreportafactoraneventortorelatewhathasbeenlived,recordedandremembered.
Memoryhastobeconjuredhereessentiallyinordertoaddressanother,toimpressupon
alistener,toappeal toacommunity(Testimony204).
Felmanalsoclaimsthataprocessofmentallyrevisitingatraumaticplaceis
necessaryingainingaccesstothetraumaticexperience.Thisrevisitingcanbeinitiated
throughwhatshecallsahistoricalandphilosophicalcrossingandrecrossingofthe
bordersoftrauma.Felmancontendsthatthesecrossingsandrecrossings,however,
shouldnottakeplacesolelyinsideoroutsidethesiteoftrauma.Instead,theyshould
begroundedsimultaneouslyinboththeinsideandtheoutsideofthetraumaticplace,
andinitsconfines.Assuch,Felmanencouragestheartistorwitnesstocreatea
connection.Thatconnection,shecontends,ismeanttosetboth theinsideandthe
outsideinmotionandindialogueswithoneanother.Theactsofcrossingandre
crossingthosethresholds,shecontends,arisethusfromanecessityofrecoveringthe
truth(Testimony231).
Intheirattempttobeplausibleandtruthful,ratherthanhistoricallytrue,
DelbosandMorrisonstextsfindmeaningintheirbeinggroundedintestimonial
literature.InthelinewiththinkingproposedbyMichaelRothberginhisTraumatic
Realism,bothtextscanbeconsideredtraumaticrealisttexts.Assuch,theyboth
pointtotherealratherthanclaimthattheyarethereal.Iproposethatthisiswhat
makesbothDelbosandMorrisonstextsplausible.Itissobecausetheveracityoftheir

74

experience,ratherthanthatoftheevent,iswhatisactuallyrevealedintheirtestimonial
works.
Rothbergdiscussesthevalueoftestimonial,andconnectsittothetruthfulnessat
thecoreoftraumaticrealisttexts(129).Thesetexts,hecontends,areeffectivebecause
oftheplausibilityorveracityofthetestimonythattheyoffer. Assuch,heclaimsthata
testimonialformofliteratureallowsformakingitsobjectrealistic,ratherthanreal.At
thispoint,wemayrecallDelbosremarkregardingtheveracityofhertestimonialwork.
AsanappendixtoNoneofUs,Delboindeeddeclaresthefollowing:Today,Iamnot
surethatwhatIwroteistrue.Yet,shefurtherasserts,Iamcertainitistruthful(1).
Rothberginsistsonilluminatingthetruthfulcharacterofawork,ratherthan
claimingithasvalidityastruth.Hedrawsattentiontotherealisticqualityofa
traumaticrealisttext,ratherthanitsclaimtothereal(TraumaticRealism129).He
contendsalsothatreadingthedetailaspointingto therealinsteadofclaimingtobe the
real(asinBarthessreading)ismeaningful.Thedetailintraumaticrealisttexts
becomesthencrucial.Healsostatesthat,pointingto therealinsteadofclaimingtobe
therealnecessarilyinvolvessigns.Thesesigns,heproposes,maybeakintothetype
ofsignthatCharlesSandersPeircecallsanindex(104).Rothbergclaimsthat,inits
classicalform,anindexisasignthatrelatestoareferentasaneffectrelatestoa
cause.Rothberggives,inthiscase,theclassicexampleoftheweathervanethatpoints
inthedirectionthatthewindisblowing.Rothbergfurtherstatesthattheindexin
traumaticcircumstances,however,functionsdifferentlythanthetraditionalversion.
Assuch,forRothberg,thepointoftheindexisnotinindicatinganobjector
phenomenonthatcaused[theindex]inthefirstplace.Itisnotmeanttomakethe

75

referentpresent.Rather,Rothbergcontends,thetraumaticindexpointstoanecessary
absence.ItisthatabsenceinDelbostextthatInowproposetoexplore(104).It
relatesdirectlytoanexaminationofavoicethatbreaksdownandissimultaneously
relayedbyatraumaticsilence.Thisisournextpoint.
Delbostextmakesusreadanabsence.Itmakesusinterpretsilence,notas
void,butasameaningfulbreakinspeech.Itresultsfromwitnessinganeventthatisso
violentandsooverwhelming,thatitenactsatraumaticcollapse.Itsimpactisrevealedby
amomentofsilencethat,sotospeak,seemstobesuspendedintime.Iproposetocall
thissilenceafiguralmoment,whichiscomparabletoLaurentJennysconceptofthe
figuralevent(Lvnementfigural13).Iwilldevelopthispointlater.Mymore
immediateconcernfornowistoestablishthemeaningfulnessofsilenceinHolocaust
testimonies.Itisalsotoilluminatehowafiguralmomentcanberevealedbythe
presenceofsilenceinatext.
ForSaraHorowitz,silenceinaHolocausttextisasignoftrauma(Voicing
theVoid15253).ThefollowingexcerptfromDelbofunctionsasatraceofprofound
traumathatactuallyattemptstovoicethetrauma,butnotwithwords.Rather,itseeksto
pointattraumabyvoicingitwithatemporarybreachinlanguagethatresultsin
mutednessthatbecomessignificant.Delbossilenceperformsthistraumatictraceof
something,that,inthewordsofJeanFranoisLyotard,willmakeitselfunderstood,
later(Heideggerandthejews13).Also,forSusanSuleiman,discussingGeorges
PerecsWortheMemoryofChildhood,thiskindoftracecanfunctionasthesignof
somethingthatoncewas,butthathasdisappeared(The1.5Generation383).For
her,thattracecanbereadasanassertionofthewriterswitnessingandlife.Yet,that

76

traceorsilenceisalsoareminderofdeath.Asanindexerofatrocity,thiskindof
silenceisalsotheassertionofthetraumaticirreparable(338).Asthesignthatsaysit
cannotbephrasedintheacceptedidiom,asLyotardwouldcontend,silencesuggests
thusinthiscontextanunsayable(TheDifferend 5657,Heideggerandthejews47).
Thatunsayablebecomesmeaningfulassilence,sincesilencesaysthatitcannotsayit
(Heideggerandthejews47).Thissilencealsotestifiestoanabsence,andtoa
disappearance.Butinnoway,forLyotard,doabsenceandsilenceact,actout,enact,
orrepresentavoid(13).
Inordertomakesilenceworkaseloquence,Delboconstructsherepisodeonthe
visualforceandimpactoftheimage.Shecraftsthefollowingepisode,ofanattackofa
womanbyaNazidog,inavisual,ratherthancognitiveregister.Thismakesthescene
moredirectly,materiallyperceptible.Thismodeofperceptionisconvincing,despitethe
restraint,evenabsence,ofwordsatthetimeof theviolentoccurrence.Thesilencesby
theattackingauthority,thewomanattacked,andthewitnessDelboarepotentcarriersof
meaning.ThewaythatDelboplacesinhernarrativemomentsofsilenceparallelsthe
absenceofwordsandreactionsatthetimeoftheepisode.SilenceinDelbostextenacts
thetraumaticcharacteroftheexperienceinamutuallyinteractingmanner.
Delboproducesthedesiredeffectofspeechlessnessbygivingustowitness,
ratherthanunderstand,thedeathofthewomanabouttobekilledintheepisode.As
LawrenceLangerhaspointedoutinhisintroductiontoDelbosAuschwitzandAfter,
Delbosartisintendedtogiveustosee.Delbothusmakesuswitnessesofamore
immediate,direct,visualtype.ClaimingthatDelbosfavoriteexpressionwasIlfaut
donnervoir,thatis,theymustbemadetosee,Langercontendsthat,with Auschwitz

77

andAfter,Delboattemptstomakeusnotonlyfeel,butalsovisuallyperceiveher
experience.Itistherulingprincipleofherart(x).Thefollowingexcerptdrawsonthe
singularityanddifficultyofhavingtobearwitnesstoandexpressthetraumaof
transgressiveactsofviolence.Italsoframesthedeliberateandgratuitousviciousnessof
theseviolentactsastheywerethenrandomlydeterminedandcommittedinthecamp.
TheexcerptillustratesDelbosintentiontomakeussee,andtomakeushear
thesilencethatsurroundsdeath.Byarrangingthevignetteasasilentsequenceof
photographicmemoriesthatpassinrapidsuccession,slowmotion,orfreezeinfrontof
oureyes,Delbocapturesourattention.Sheactuallycapturesourgazeinsuchawaythat
wearemadetoimagine,feel,andsee.Thestayingpoweroftheimage,aspreviously
mentioned,isthusthetechniqueofthefollowingepisode.AsDerridanotesinanother
context,suchatechniquebringsthebodybackinvisiblescenes.Itdoessoby
enablingtheimagetotranscendorreplaceabodythatcannotbelocatedinamore
permanentorphysicalmanner(TheWorkofMourning159).Thevignetteisforceful.It
bringsbackthebodyinitstemporary,visible,livingpresence.Itspells,notthetotal
annihilationthatwasintendedbytheNazis,butthecallordutytorememberit.Aswe
areunabletoavertourgaze,wearealsounabletoavertthenecessityofremembrance.
Delbowrites,
Lafemmesavance.Oncroiraitquelleobit.FaceauSS,ellesarrte.Sondos
estsecoudefrissons,sondosarrondiaveclesomoplatesquisaillentsousle
manteaujaune.LeSStientsonchienenlaisse.Luiatildonnunordre,faitun
signe?Lechienbonditsurlafemmesansrugir,sanssouffler,sansaboyer.Cest
silencieuxcommedansunrve.Lechienbonditsurlafemme,luiplanteses
crocsdanslagorge.Etnousnebougeonspas,engluesdansuneespcede
visqueuxquinousempchedbauchermmeungestecommedansunrve.
Lafemmecrie.Uncriarrach.Unseulcriquidchirelimmobilitdelaplaine.
Nousnesavonspassilecrivientdelleoudenous,desagorgecreveoudela

78

ntre.Jesenslescrocsduchienmagorge.Jecrie.Jehurle.Aucunsonnesort
demoi.Lesilencedurve.
Laplaine.Laneige.Laplaine.
Lafemmesaffaisse.Unsoubressautetcestfini.Quelquechosequicassenet.
Lattedanslabouedeneigenestplusquunmoignon.
Lesyeuxfontdesplaiessales. (Aucun4849)
Delbossentencesarebrief,succinct,preciseandtothepoint.Inthetermsof
Chambers,theyareparatactically disconnected.Delbosconcisewritingisvoidedof
unnecessaryartifice.Itservestosketch,notdescribeinabundantterms,thewomans
gesturesandherbodysurface.Severelyshornofconnectivesastheyare,Delbos
sentencesaremeanttobeabruptandstriking(UntimelyInterventions213).Theyare
intendedtosolicitourinterpretativework.Theyarealsomeanttopromptinusandfrom
usanemotionalresponse.DelbospointistomakeresonantwhatLawrenceLanger
termsthehorrorofmanscreatureliness.Thiscreatureliness,isattained,forLanger,
byemptyingahumanbodyfromitshumancharacter.Ittendstoprevailinformsof
literaturedealingwithanimminenceofphysicaldestructionandatrocity(TheHolocaust
andtheLiteraryImagination 289).Thisisso,Icontend,sothattheimmediacyof
destructionandannihilationisallthemoreevident,evenexacerbated.Itisalsomeantfor
ustofaceagraveresponsibility.Namelythatofhavingtoconfrontourownethicalsense
of justiceinthefaceofmurderousacts.Delbostechniquetosolicitourethicalresponse
isasfollows.
Thefigureofthewoman,aveclesomoplatesquisaillentsouslemanteaujaune
isfirstprojectedintoabundleofpowerlessnessandfragility.Itisalsosurroundedbya
deceivingabsenceofviolencewhoseimmediacy,however,ispowerfullyalludedto,and
abouttosurge.Thesceneismadeupofabrupt,fastandsilentimages.Onceconnected
byourinterpretativework,wegettoexperiencetheepisodeasinalongandsilentdream.

79

Thisfacilitatesourperceivingthewholeeventastraumatic.Itreadsasanalmosteerie
anddreamlikeoccurrence,disconnectedandseveredfromreality.Delbosolicitsour
attention,however,towardstheimminenceofthewomansdeath.Shedoessothrough
heranticipatoryuseofaprolepsisinthesentence:Luiatildonnunordre,faitun
signe? Lechienbonditsurlafemme(Aucun48). Thenowforeseeableeventofthe
womansloomingandabsurddeathleavesnopossibledoubtastotheoutcomeofthe
womansdestiny.Delbosincisivenessofstyle,similartothedogsjawplantedinthe
womans,inDelbos,and,afterallandfinally,inourownthroatopensawoundinour
sensitivity.Itreachesatthephysicalcoreofouranguish.Giventosee,weare
overwhelmedbyasenseofuselessnessofsuffering,immediacyofpain,randomnessof
death,andprecariousnessoflife(AuschwitzandAfterx).ThesecretofhowDelbo
achievesthisislockedinherethical visionandliteraryskills.Eminentatevoking
atrocitybyartisticallyrenderingitthroughalanguagebaretothecore,herpoetryis
strangledatthesametimeasiterupts.Anindicatoroftraumaandpointertoourown
responsibilityaswitnesses,herlanguagemeetswiththehere,thenow,andus,at
thepointofitsrupture.Delboproduces,whatPatriciaGartlandcalls,amorevividand
full[er]meaningthansimpledescriptionoftherealityitself(ThreeHolocaustWriters
47).Itistheresponsewecanbringtoherreality,traumatictothecorethatbringsfull
significancetoDelbosart.
Madetofeelthetrauma,weindeedhavebecomesuspendedinthesilenceand
immobilityofwhatChamberscallstheunmeasuredtimeofAuschwitz. This
unmeasuredtimeofAuschwitzisactuallythetraumaticmoment,thesuspendedtimeof
deathandgenocide,themomentoftheirreparable,thatDelborenderssodelicately

80

(UntimelyInterventions212).Sheisamasteratrevealingatimethatiswithout
measure,groundedinpainandsuffering.Inordertoconnecttothetraumaandfeel
itspresence,asexposedbyDelbo,allwehavetodoisconnecttoDelbosnarrativeand
narrativetime. Thebeforementionedpassagereadsasfollows:Etnousnebougeons
pas,engluesdansuneespcedevisqueuxquinousempchedbauchermmeun
gestecommedansunrve (Aucun48). Beforewecanreturn,however,andafter
Delbosmomentarysilence,intothemeasuredtimeofhernarrative,apauseis
announced.Shehassignifiedapowerfulfractureinourhabitualframesofreferences.
Asshecreatesamomentsuchasthis,we,readers,becomesuspended,unabletomove,in
astateofprofoundimmobilityandstupefaction.DelboisplungingusinwhatIhave
previouslynamedafiguralmoment.Thisfiguralmoment,livedthroughoutan
occurrenceoftraumaticcharacterisforcefultous,asitushersusintoanunknownworld.
Whilethewoundofthefiguralmomentneednotonlybeopened,butreopened,
andreactivatedceaselessly,anewlysharedsensibilitytoitcanrecurasaninsistence
thatdelaysforgetting(LvnementFigural13).Alsonowthat,inLyotardswords,
thelaborofwritingoftheauthor,alliedtoaworkoflove,hasinscribedthetraces
oftheinitiatoryeventinlanguage,weshould,asreaders,continuetofeelcompelledby
thefractureinoursensibilitythathasbeeninitiated(ThePostmodernExplained97). As
LaurentJennycontends,[lefigural]et[lvnementdufigural]dtientlesecretdela
rptitiondunbranlementennous. Jennyfurtherproposesthatthisfiguralmoment
actuallyoperatesonuswithoutouractivedecision.Ashecloseshisargument,he
proposesthatlefigural,whichsecretlyunhingesourperceptionofthereal,andto
whichoursensitivityisexposed,actuallydoesso,whilewearenotfullyawareofit. He

81

writesthatlvnementdufiguraldtientlesecretdelarptitiondunbranlementen
nous,laquellenotrechairmmeestsoumise,maissurlaquellenoussommesaveugles
(LvnementFigural13). Delbosexperiencewillnotletitselfbetotallyknownor
understoodintermsofitshistoricalorpersonalsignificance.Thefiguralcharacterofher
prose,however,shouldkeepusattendingtothefactualityandhorrorofherexperience.
ItshouldalsokeepusattentivetowhatDerridacallsthespirit,theghostofinjustice
thatcomesbycomingback[revenant]aftertheendofhistory.Asthetestimonial
ofoneofthewitnessesofhistory,whofearandhopeforareturn,Aucun enactsthus
thepresenceofthedeadwhocomeback(SpectersofMarx10).Bybeinggroundedin
theghostofhistory,whoseexpectedreturnrepeatsitselfagainandagain,Delbos
sharingofhertraumaticexperiencewithusthroughhertestimonialshouldthusremain
insistent(LvnementFigural13).Thisway,herexperienceshouldnotbe,nor
cometobe,forgotten.Justasnobody,inherclaim,shouldhavereturnedfrom
Auschwitz,soshouldnobodybemadetoforgetorhaveforgottenaboutiteither
(Aucun183).
ToniMorrisonemploysasimilartechniqueoffiguralmomentsinherart.She
alsoplantsnumerousandmeaningfulindexesoftraumainhertext.Thisaccountsfor the
ethicalandaestheticstrategiesthatsheshareswithDelbo.AsIhavepreviously
discussedconcerningAucun,theartisticdeviceofthefiguralismeanttoactivatepain.
Yet,inMorrisonsprose,itisthepainnotofsenselessexterminationbutofinsensible
bondagethatisthepoint.Also,asinDelboswork,thepainsurfacesandpermeatesher
artsoastobecomeaninsistenceaswell(LvnementFigural13).

82

ToniMorrisonusestheghostofBelovedin Beloved tosignifythehorrorsofa

deniedorrepressedpastthatis,however,stillvirtuallypresenttomanyAfrican
Americans.Morrison,however,doesnotattempttofilltheabyssproducedbythe
feelingsofpainthatalonghistoryofslaveryhasproducedwithunivocalorhistorical
formalcontent.Nordoesshefillintheholemadebyintensegriefaroundexperiencesof
bondagewithdeterminedconcepts.Rather,Iproposethat,similarlytoDelbo,Morrison
resortstofiguralwritingandtoaformofhauntologytoreveal,inthiscase,theeffects
ofthehorrorsofslavery.Assuch,andinthewordsofDerrida,shethussetsoutto
ontologizeremainsandmakethempresent.Sheachievesthisendbyidentifying the
bodilyremainsofslaveryandby localizingthedead.Atthispoint,wemayalsorecall
that,forDerrida,allontologization,allsemanticizationphilosophicalhermeneutical,
orpsychoanalyticalfindsitselfcaughtupin[a]workofmourning.Thisworkof
mourning,sinceitdoesnotyetthinkofitselfassuch,necessarilyanticipates,
however,theposingofthequestionofthespecter(SpectersofMarx9).
ThespecterofBelovedisaliterarymeans,forMorrison,toinitiateaworkof
mourningwhiletheghostactivatesthescraps,traces,fragments,andresiduesofvarious
traumaticexperiences.Alongwiththespecter,Morrisonalsousesthefiguralto
captureandreveal,ratherthandescribe,thehorrorsofthetraumasproducedin
bondage(Lyotard,ThePostmodernExplained90).Whileherwritinginscribesitselfina
borderlandoftrauma,inwhichtheunspeakableandtheunpresentableasktobe
activelyread,herartalsofunctionsasareminder,inthewordsofpsychiatristJudith
Herman,thatcertainviolationsofthesocialcompactare tooterribletoutteraloud
(Morrison,UnspeakableThingsUnspoken201).Thisis,inHermansclaim,precisely

83

themeaningoftheword unspeakable.WhileforHerman,theordinaryresponseto
atrocitiesistobanishthemfromconsciousness,itisnotthiscommonplaceresponsethat
Belovedexposes(Herman,TraumaandRecovery1).RecallingLyotardsclaimabout
theroleofpostmodernartandartistsis,atthispoint,instructive.ForLyotard,theartist,
who,indeed,clearlyinventsallusionstowhatisconceivablebutnotpresentable,has
toconstantlyinquireintonewpresentations.Thissearchfornewformsof
presentations,forLyotard,isnotsothattheartistcantakepleasureinthem.Rather,it
isintendedtobetterproducethefeelingthatthereissomethingunpresentableandthat
thatunpresentablemustbemademeaningful(ThePostmodernExplained15).Morrison
makestheunpresentablesignifyinBelovedinthefollowingterms.
Forone,Morrisonmakesusperceiveratherthanunderstandexperiencesof
slavery.Sheactivatesforherreaderssomeofthesignsandtracesthatlivinginbondage
hasenactedandleftbymakingthesesignsvisualandperceptiblethroughthesenses.In
thefollowinginstance,Morrisonmakesphysicallyvisiblethemarksthatslaveryhas
imprintedontheenslavedbodyofSethe.ThesignsoftheviolencethatMorrisongives
ustoreadanddecipherare,however,verydiscreetandsubtle,evenpoetic.Intendedto
encourage,notdiscourage,thereadingof troublesome,evenoutrageous,events,her
techniqueismeanttobeinviting.Morrisonsymbolizes,ormetaphoricallyreveals,the
real,inordertopointatitssenselessnessandbrutality.Butactually,asshecomments
herself,shedoessoinamannerinwhichitcanbedigested(IntheRealmof
Responsibility248).Inthefollowinginstance,sheconstructssymbolicimagesaround
thecrueltyofbeatingsthathadtobeenduredincaptivity.Thenetworkofscarsthat
disfigureSethesbackastheresultoffloggingisasignificantexampleofthistechnique

84

whileitservesasakeysymbolinthenovel.ThenonprovocativereadingofSethes
painthatPaulDproduceswhenhefirstseesthebacksideofSethesbodyhasusperceive
herbackasawroughtironmazethatPaulDexploreslikeagoldminerpawing
throughpaydirt.Butseeninitscrudereality,PaulDcontends,Sethesbackisa
revoltingclumpofscarsthatindexesthecrueltyofthewhiteman(Beloved21).
Morrison,however,symbolicallyandrealisticallyidentifiesSethesbackwitheither
version.SherewritessomeofthetraumaticbeatingsexperiencedbySetheinapoetic
manner.Yet,shealsopointsatthefloggingsenduredduringslaveryfromalessaesthetic
andmoreprovokingperspective.Throughdualimageslikethisone,Morrisoninvitesus
readerstobecomemorepersonallyinvolvedinSethesghastlyexperiences.Wecan
followinPaulDsfootsteps,andbecomemoreattunedtoSethessorrow(17).By
beingmadetofeelthemazeonherback,asPaulDdoesthroughhisgesture,rather
thantheclumpofscars,wearemadetoperceivetheprofoundnessofSethespaininan
invitingway.Butwearealsogivenlessopportunitytoforgetthatitisaseriesof
revoltingbeatingsthatledtoit.
In TheFeminineSublime,BarbaraFreemanmakesapointsimilartotheonejust
made.Indeed,FreemanseesinthemarksonSethesbackanactofaestheticizing
woundsthathavenothingwhatevertodowithbeauty.Freemanproposesthatthisact
ofaestheticizingbyMorrisonisactuallyinkeepingwithanactofsurvival.Freeman
groundsherargumentinthefollowingterms.Amy,thewhitegirlwhohelpsthe
escapingSethe,canfindinSethesscarsandwoundssomethingotherthanthecruelty
ofthewhiteman:shefindstheoutlineofatreeinbloom.AsFreemanproposes,the
mastersmeaning,then,neednotbedominant.InFreemanscontention,thefunction

85

oftheaestheticofreadingin Belovedisthusactuallymeanttodeanesthetizethese
terribleinscriptions.Also,theaestheticofreadingin Belovedismeanttobringdead
feelingsbacktolife.Morrisonspoetics,farfromeradicatingtrauma,thusnonetheless
bearswitnesstoitshorrifyingandineluctablefacticity(TheFeminineSublime131).
Thefiguralandartisticfabricof BelovediswhatenablesMorrisontosucceedin
presentingtheunpresentable(ThePostmodernExplained15).Anotherpotentmotif
thatachievesthisgoalrelatestothe testimonialcharacterof Beloved.WhileMorrisons
prosesuccessfullyrevealstrauma,itdoessothankstoBelovedsnarrativetechnique.This
techniqueisefficientbecauseBelovedactivatesandenactstheindividualstoriesof
traumatizedformerslaves.Thesestories,however,donotlimitthemselvestothoseof
Sethes,PaulDsorBabySuggs.Indeed,Morrisonmakesapointofnotonly
suggestingtraumaamongindividualswhohavebeendirectlyexposedtotheshockand
painofslaveryatthetimesetinthenovel:Cincinnati,1873.Morrisonalsosuggeststhat
Sethe,PaulD,andBabySuggsarecapableofsufferingfromtheremoteworkingsof
slaveryspastaswell.Inthatregard,shehasthesecharactersbecomemediumsin
enactingsomesequelsofthetraumathataffectednotonlythemselves,buttheirancestors
aswell.Byexposingslaveryasanexcessiveeventthatdefiestimeandspace,inthe
wordsofLyotard,Morrisonthussucceedsinrevealingitslonglastingimpact(Heidegger
andthejews16).Thetimelessnessofthetraumaticevent,whichwassocrucialto
ourreadingofDelbo,isthusverypresentinMorrisonsBelovedalso.Morrisonseems
indeedveryintentinrevealingslavery,notonlyinitsqualitativeterms,throughthe
enormouspainitinflicted,butalsoinaquantitativemanner.Thisentailsrevealing

86

slaverybeyondthecontingencyofitspresentwitnessesandsurvivors.ItisthepointI
proposetodevelopnow.
Morrisonactivatesthetraumaofslaverynotexclusivelythroughthosewho
witnesseditintheimmediacyofthenarrativetime.Morrisonisequallyconcernedwith
revealinghowslaveryimpactedprecedinggenerationsaswell.TheSixtyMillionand
more,towhomthenovelisdedicated,areinstancesofthisparticulargroupofslavesfor
whomMorrisonseeksacknowledgement(Beloved 1).Likewise,thosewhodiedduring
theMiddlePassage,eventhoughtheywentunrecognized,were,nonetheless,partof
slaverystraumaticexperience.Amongthosewhodiedduringtransportorincaptivity
beforetheyevenreachedtheNewWorld,someareintentionallymadetosurfacein
Beloved.Morrisondeliberatelyhasthemcomebackasrevenants,orghosts
(SpectersofMarx10).Inthismanner,theirtraumaisalsomadetobeprovokingaswell.
OnemodeinwhichMorrisonpointsatthetraumaticimpactoftheserevenants
isbyfocusingonthedistressinginterminglingwiththelivingofthedeadordying.
Anotherisbydisruptingthephysicalboundariesthatordinarilyseparatethesickfromthe
healthy.InthesceneofthecrossingoftheslaveshipduringtheMiddlePassage,
Morrisonpaintsforherreadersachaoticscenethatbringstogethercorpses,survivors,
sufferers,andenslaved.Thisway,shemakestheircoexistence,notonlyvisible,but
insistentandongoingaswell.Shegroundsthesceneontheshipinsheerconfusionand
profounddislocation.Inordertorenderthesufferingoftheslavesinamorepersonal
manner,andtomakeitpervasive,shebringsinghostsfromdifferentgenerations.She
alsohasthemcomefromdifferentgeographicalplaces.Shebringsinthespectersof
Sethesdaughter,Beloved,andofSethesmother,Maam,inonesinglescene.As

87

Morrisonfocusesonconjuringtheiroutboundquality,shedisplacesthemfromtheir
originaleraandlocation.Asghosts,theycrossandrecrossourexpectedorhabitual
barriersoftime,space,andphysicalbeing.InthecontentionofDeborahHorvitz,for
instance,theghostofSethesmotherindeedcomesfromthegeographicothersideof
theworld,namelyAfrica.Sethesdaughter,ontheotherhand,comesfromthe
physicalothersideoflife,thatisdeath.InthewordsofHorvitz,asghostsand
womenfromtheotherside,bothSethesmotherandSethesdaughterarethus
invulnerabletobarriersoftime,space,andplace(NamelessGhosts157).
Inthesceneontheship,bothwomenarephysicallyabused,raped,dehumanized,
andalmostdiscardedasdead(Beloved210).Bothwomenact,feel,speak,andthink
throughthespiritofBeloved.Bothwomenfreelyassociatetheirthoughtsinthefaceof
theirhorrifyingexperience.Thehorrorofitsurgesinthelanguagethattheyspeak
throughBeloved.IntheinterviewshegavetoMarshaDarling,Morrisonactuallyrefers
tothelanguageofBelovedasatraumatizedlanguage.Assuch,Belovedenactsthe
trauma,inMorrisonswords,notonlyofherownexperience,butofothersaswell
(IntheRealmofResponsibility247).Belovedslanguageisallthemorefragmented,
disarticulated,andfullofconfusion.Thelackofpunctuationandthedirectnessof
associationsthatMorrisonactivatesinthequotationbelowfigurethebreakinphysical,
spatial,andtemporalboundariesofthesceneandforcefullypointatthetraumaofthe
wholeexperience:
AllofitisnowitisalwaysnowtherewillneverbeatimewhenIamnot
crouching...Iamalwayscrouchingthemanonmyfaceisdeadhisfaceis
notminehismouthsmellssweetbuthiseyesarelocked...
themenwithoutskinbringustheirmorningwatertodrinkwehavenone...I
amnotbigsmallratsdonotwaitforustosleepsomeoneistrashingbutthereis
noroomtodoitifwehadmoretodrinkwecouldmaketearswecannotmake

88

sweatormorningwatersothemenwithoutskinbringustheirsonetimethey
bringussweetrockstosuckwearealltryingtoleaveourbodiesbehindthe
manonmyfacehasdoneititishardtomakeyourselfdieforeveryousleep
shortandthenreturninthebeginningwecouldvomitnowwedonot...
someoneistremblingIcanfeelitoverhere
Wearenotcrouchingnowwearestandingbutmylegsarelikemydead
manseyes IcannotfallbecausethereisnoroomtoIamnotdeadthebreadis
seacoloredIamtoohungrytoeatitthesunclosesmyeyesthoseabletodie
areinapile...thelittlehillofdeadpeopleahotthing(Beloved21011)
Withthisscene,Morrisonawakensinusawarenessofunbearablecrueltyandsuffering
thatdefyordinaryexpectations.Yet,shemakesalsopresentinourmindthegrieffeltnot
onlybySethesmotheranddaughterBeloved.Shealsohintsatthesorrowandanguish
of allthosetowhomsherefersastheunburied,oratleastunceremoniouslyburied(A
Conversation209).Theproblematicattheheartofthenovel liesthusinknowinghow
toreadthetracesofapeoplewhosedeathleftnotrace.Yet,byinterpretingMorrisons
indexesoftrauma,whichremindusofthosewhoaredisrememberedandunaccounted
for,wecanapproachwhatMorrisonnamesourresponsibility(Beloved274,A
Conversation209).ThismeansthatweneedtointerpretBelovedbeyonditsaesthetic
character. Belovedassuchinvitesustoremember,throughandthankstothespectral
characteroftheirpresence,thediscarded,theforgotten,thenameless.Assuch,with
Beloved,Morrisontestifiesagainstforgetfulness.InIntheRealmofResponsibility,
Morrisonusesthephrasenobodyknows,torefertothesilencethathasbeenmadeor
keptaroundtheMiddlePassage.Assheattemptstobringthisrealitytoourattention,she
alsoasksforremembranceofthosewhodiedinit.Morrisoncontendsthat,nobody
knowstheirname,andnobodythinksaboutthem(247).Pullingthemoutofthe
anonymouscharacteroftheirdeathisthusthecrucialacttowhich Belovedattends.

89

AsMorrisonexplainstheactoftestimonialthatBelovedperforms,shegroundsit
bothintheethicalandaestheticconsiderationsthatpromptedherliterarydecisions.She
claimsthatthegapbetweenAfricaandAfroAmerica...doesnotexist.Likewise,
thegapbetweenthelivingandthedead,andthegapbetween thepastandthepresent
donoteither.Shefurtherclaimsthatitissuchbecauseitsbridgedforusbyour
assumingresponsibilityforpeoplenooneseverassumedresponsibilityfor.Asshe
referstothosewhoareindangerofremaininganonymousindeath,shecontendsthat
theyarethosethatdiedenroute.Assuch,Morrisonclaims,theyneversurvivedin
thelore(247).Assheputsit,therearenosongsordancesortalesofthesepeople.
Also,asMorrisonconcludes,Thepeoplewhoarrivedthereisloreaboutthem.But
nothingsurvivesabout...thateither(IntheRealmofResponsibility128).Yet,
throughthepresenceoftheghostsin Beloved,Morrisonmakesitadutytobringthem
backandmakethemcomethrough.ThuslieswhatChamberslabelsthedoubleburden
thatattachestoBeloved (UntimelyInterventionsxx).Morrisonmakesither
responsibilitytopickthatburdenupthroughaforcefultestimonialactofliterature.She
doesso,notonlywithhonesty,butwithgraceaswell.Asshecontends,thereexistsa
necessityforrememberingthehorror.Yet,shefurtherclaims,thereisanecessityfor
rememberingit...inamannerinwhichthememoryisnotdestructive.Asshe
concludesherremarkaboutherresponsibilityinwritingBeloved,sheclaimsthat,as
such,theactofwritingthebook,inaway,isawayofconfronting[thehorror]and
makingitpossibletoremember(IntheRealmofResponsibility24748).
Thehorrorofslaveryisnotonlymanifested throughthetraumaticexperiencesof
Beloved,Maam,andthosewhodiedenrouteorincaptivity.Itisalsoactivatedthrough

90

Sethe.BecausethepluralityofthesestoriesbySethe,butalsobyPaulDandBaby
Suggs,ensuresthattheyarepersonalaswellaspersonallyactivated,thesestoriesare
likewiseresonant.Assuch,wearemadetoaccessandperceivethefullsignificanceof
thetraumaofslaverynotonlyonacollective,pluralbasis,butalsoonamoreindividual
andpersonallevel.
SetheenactsthelivedstoryofMargaretGarner,anOhiofugitiveslavewho
murderedherchildratherthanseeitreturnedtobondage.Asitis,Belovedmakesof
Setheoneofslaverysmostdirectwitnesses.Sheisoneofthecharacterswhoappears
mostburdenedandaffectedbytrauma.Notonlybecauseherpastseemspermanently
inscribedinthepresentstateofherlife.Sheistroubledalsobecausethetraumaofthe
pastwhichhauntsherappearssuddenly,andinunexpectedthoughtsandoccurrences.As
JudithHermancontends,traumaticexperiencesbecomeencodedinanabnormaltypeof
memorythatspontaneouslyeruptsintoconsciousnessintheformofflashbacksand
nightmares.Butbecauseevenapparentlyinsignificantreminderscanprovokethese
memories,whatwouldotherwiseseemasafeenvironmentcanendupfeeling
dangeroustosurvivors(Trauma37).ThismayexplainwhyMorrisoncombinesin
Belovedanattimesseeminglyordinaryrealitywithnumerousinstancesandsignsof
traumaspresence.TheactsofthenoncorporealghostofBelovedasababythrowinga
powerfulspellareflagrantindexersofthattypeofrecurringtrauma(Beloved4).The
twotinyhandprintsthatappearincakes,orthemirrorthatshattersbymerely
lookinginitarejusttwootheramongthemanyinstancesofhowrealitygetstobe
perturbedandderangedintheworldof Beloved(3).Eventhoughitisnotaphysical
being,thebabyghosthasspellssopowerfulthatiteventuallycomestosendaway

91

Sethessons,BuglarandHoward.Itsunseenyetdestructivepresenceisfrightfulto
eventhemostresilientperson.Asitcomestobeseeninthepoolofredandundulating
andpulsingredlightthatspreadsattheentranceofSethesandDenvershouse,itis
terrifying.ItshakesPaulDsomuchonhisarrival,thatitmakeshimtrembleasaman
whohadnottrembledsince1856,whenhewaslockedupandchaineddown(8).
Theghostofthebabyenablesthetraumaofthepasttobemadeforcefully
perceptible.Asitactsasapowerful,disruptiveforceinthelivingpresentof Beloveds
protagonists,thebabyghostactuallycomestosignifywhatLyotardcallstheexcess
thatisproducedbythedoubleblowofthetraumaticexperience.Thisexcess,by
defyingchronologicaltimeandlocalizedplace,isnotonlypervasive,but
uncontainableaswell(Heideggerandthejews16).In Beloved,theghostofthe
babycomestosignifythatthisexcessivepresencecan,inthisinstance,neitherbe
containednordiscarded(16).Itkeepsintrudingintothelivesoftheoccupantsofthe
house.Notonlydoesitupsettheirlives,butitalsodisturbstheirmentalprocessesin
tryingtosurvivetheshocksoftheirpasts.Also,asanarrativedevice,theghostofthe
babyexplodesthebarriersthatmayconventionallyencloseanarrativestimesand
places.
Theghostofthebabyplungesprotagonistsandreadersalikeintoana
chronologicaltimethatBelovedmakesinsistentandobsessive.Traumaticthoughtscome
toresurfaceandimpingeonthesuffereroftraumatimeandagain.Whateverhasbeen
individuallyexperiencedbySethe,PaulD,andBabySuggsis,infact,soshattering,that,
atfirst,itmakesthemmutewithlossandpain.Itenclosestheminaprofoundsilence
aboutthepast.Also,itpreventsinthemanythoughtofthepresent.ForBabySuggs,for

92

instance,herpasthadbeenlikeherpresentintolerable(Beloved2).Sheremains
suspendedbetweenthenastinessoflifeandthemeannessof thedead.Unabletoforget
thepainofherpast,BabySuggsletsherselfdieofsorrow.AsMorrisonwrites:Since
sheknewdeathwasanythingbutforgetfulness,[BabySuggs]usedthelittleenergy
leftinherforponderingcolor(3).ForPaulD,theimpossibilityoffacingthepresentis
symbolizedbyhisputtingintoatobaccotinburiedinhischest,thatnothingcouldpry
open,amajorportionofhisheadandheart(72,113).Assuch,workingdough.
Working,workingdough,inPaulDscontention,comestofigureasnothingbetter
thantostartthedaysseriousworkofbeatingbackthepast(73).
PaulDsrefusaltobreakthesilencearoundhistraumaticexperienceisrelatedto
whatShoshanaFelmandescribesastheimpossibilityoftestifyingfrominside
Otherness.PaulDssilenceismorepreciselygroundedintheimpossiblecharacterof
testifyingfrom theabsoluteconstraintofafatalsecret.Infact,PaulDsenclosinghis
heartinaburiedpartofhismemoryhasusviewhisexperienceasafatalsecretfeltto
besobinding,socompellingandsoterriblethatitofteniskeptsecretevenfrom
oneself(Testimony228).Inthatcase,Felmancontends,theinsideisunintelligible,it
isnotpresenttoitself.Assuch,sheclaims,theinsidehasnovoice(231).Withhis
heartandmindenclosedinthetobaccotin,itslidrustedshut,PaulDremainsina
traumaticstateofsecrecy(Beloved72,113).Itisonlylater,promptedbyBeloved,that
hewillbeabletostartlisteningtohisownandSethestraumaticstories.Onlythen,will
hebeabletostarttovoicehisowntrauma.
Sethespastimprisonsherlifetosuchanextentthat,toher,anordinarylifeisnot
evenconceivableatall.Infact,herpresentexistence,inhercontention,isjustamatter

93

ofkeepingthepastatbay.InhermotherlyconcernforDenver,andinregardstothe
traumaofherpastexperiences,allthatmatterstoSetheisactuallykeeping[Denver]
fromthepastthatwasstillwaitingforher(42).
ThepasttobekeptatbayforBabySuggs,PaulD,andSetheareunwanted
memoriesofunspeakableevents(UnspeakableThingsUnspoken201).These
memoriesofunspeakableeventscontinuallysurgeintoSethesconsciousness,soasto
impedeonhereverydayliving.Thesereminiscencesconstantlydisrupt,throughtheir
suddenandunexpectedirruption,Sethescapacityforlivingthepresentmoment.By
beingspontaneousanduncontrollable,SethesmemoriesaresoimprisoningthatSethe
canneitherforgetnorescapetheireffects(Beloved 36).AssuchSethespasterror,her
actofinfanticide,takespossessionofthepresentandrefusestoletgo(256).This
memoryissoimpactingintoSetheslifethat,ineighteenyears...beforeandsince,all
[Sethes]effortwasdirectednotonavoidingpainbutongettingthroughitasquicklyas
possible(38).
ThroughSethesreminiscingherpast,Morrisonbringsbackthehorrorofthe
infanticide.Interestinglyenough,though,Morrisonsucceedsinrevealingthetragic
characterofthemurderousactwithoutinsistingonitsoccurrence.Rather,shehasSethe
experienceandgothroughitseffects.Morrisonachievesthisliterarilybyleavingblank
spacesthatshecreatesin hertextaroundSethesactions.Here,theinfanticideisalluded
tobythesilencethatMorrisonintentionallyplacesaroundit.Leavingagapafterthe
timeprepositionsbeforeandsinceofthepreviouslyquotedsentence,Morrisoninserts
hereapause,afiguralmoment.BynotnamingthereferentinfanticideMorrison
succeedsinspeakingtheunspeakable.Shedoessobymakingthesilence,thepause,

94

thefiguralmomentinscribedaroundthecrimebearthemeaningoftheact.Andyet,
shedoesnotneedtonametheactionforustosensethefullimpactthatthisdeliberateact
ofmurderhashadonSetheandherfamily.
Ourconcernwiththeunspeakableisnotunrelatedorfarremovedfromwhat
GloriaAnzaldaproposeswithherBorderlands/LaFrontera:TheNewMestiza.
Anzalda,however,dealswiththenotionofunspeakabilityorunpresentability,not
inanattempttorevealtheshockofaneventasmassiveasslavery,butrathertoreveal
theunpresentabilityofaculturallycomplexidentity (Morrison,UnspeakableThings
Unspoken201,Lyotard, ThePostmodernExplained15).Anzaldasworkispertinent
atthispointbecauseitenablesthelocationofunpresentabilityinasiteofborder
crossing(Borderlands/LaFrontera100).Inourcase,itisthecrossingbetweenvoice
andsilencethattheborderlandenablestoexplore(101).Inthatspace,asAnzalda
stresses,theselfseekstogrounditsidentity.Yet,thatidentityisunabletobepresented,
Kantwouldcontend,inunityortotality(CritiqueofJudgment55).Likewise,the
borderlandrevealedbyAnzaldaisaplaceinwhichmeanings,events,andcultures
collideandtransformoneanother.Astheseeventsandidentitiescontinuallycomeinto
contactandpermeateeachother,themeaningsthatattachtothemconstantlychange.
Feelingsofambiguityandambivalence,legitimatedinAnzaldasborderland,
comethustoattachtotheseculturallyevolvingidentities(101).Groundedinunresolved
conflicts,thesenewlyformedidentitiesresistorevenprecludecleardefinitionor
presentability(ThePostmodernExplained15).Thisisso,partially,becausesome
issues,andlegitimatelyso,resistthepossibilityofattainingharmonious,total,orabsolute
(howeverillusionary)unityorconsensus.Assuch,theborderlandbecomespotentin

95

thepossibilitiesitofferstosignifytheseunresolvedconflictsaslegitimatelyambiguous
andnottotallypresentable(Borderlands/LaFrontera100,ThePostmodernExplained
15).
Theborderlandasasiteforambivalenceismeaningfulalsoinstressingthe
importanceforreaderstoexperience,byfeeling,ratherthanidentifying,the
unpresentableorunspeakablecharacteroftrauma.Itishowtheborderlandcanbe
exploredhereinconnectionwithMorrisonswork.OneofMorrisonsnarrative
techniquesforenactingtraumain Belovedrelatestotheambiguityofthinkingin
rationaltermsaneventasmassiveasslavery. Inthiscase,theborderlandenablesusto
inquireintowhatMorrisonregardsasanecessitytoreveal,ratherthanvisuallypresent,
slavery.In WomenWritersatWork,Morrisondiscussesherchoiceofdeliberatelysetting
outtorevealwhatitmusthavefeltlike,ratherthanwhatitmusthaveseemedlike,to
liveinatimedictatedbyslavery (357).
Morrisonhasexpressedincriticaltermsthemotivethatisbehindhermaking
feel,ratherthanvisuallypresentthehorrorsofbondage.Intheinterviewshehadwith
ClaudiaBrodskyLacour,Morrisonreviewssomeoftheaestheticdevicesthatsheusesin
Beloved.Shediscussesthesedevicesintermsofhowtomakeslaverymeaningfultoher
readers.Shespecificallydiscussesherdecisiontoapproachslavery,notasahistorical
periodtobedescribed,butasanexperiencetobefelt(WomenWritersatWork357).
Morrisonmakesherpointwiththespecificinstanceofthebit,thatSethesmotherwas
madetowearsomanytimes.In Beloved,thecrueltyandpoignancyoftheexperienceof
theshuttingoftheslavesmouthandthemutingofherspeechisrevealedinvery
sensitiveterms.WecometolearnthatthebitdisfiguredthefaceofSethesmother.

96

Yet,itdidnotdosointhephysicalmannerthatwewouldexpect.Surprisinglyenough,
thebitworkedonMaamsface,soastomakeherfaceconstantlysmile.Thedespair
comesthrough,whenwelearnthatSethehasneverseenhermothersownsmile(203).
Asasignofdisfigurementandseparation,thefigureofthebitisthusmeanttosubtly
revealhowpainfultheestrangementthatslaveryproducedmusthavefelt.Morrisons
techniquehereliesinexposing,throughthenarrativesheconstructsaroundthebit,the
personalrelevanceoftheexperience.In WritersatWork,sheassertsthatthe
dehumanizingprocessofthebitcarriedwithitaverypersonalqualityfortheperson
whomadeit,aswellasforthepersonwhoworeit.AsMorrisonfurthercontends,I
realizedthatdescribing[thebit]wouldneverbehelpful.Rather,asMorrisoncontinues,
Irealizedthatthereaderdidntneedtoseeitsomuchasfeelwhatitwaslike.Assuch,
forMorrison,itbecameimportanttoimaginethebitasanactiveinstrument,ratherthan
simplyasacuriooranhistorical fact(357).
Thefeelingcreatedaroundthebitisverystrongalsointhefollowingscene.It
isgroundedinamemorybySethe,andsensitivelyrevealedthroughaconversation
betweenherandPaulD.AsSethereflectsontheeffectofthebitputonslavesshe
knew,shecanperceiveandfeelPaulDsprofoundpainaroundit.Duringthe
conversationwithPaulD,shethinksandsaysthefollowing,
Hewantstotellme,shethought.Hewantsmetoaskhimaboutwhatitwas
likeforhimabouthowoffendedthetongueis,helddownbyiron,howtheneed
tospitissodeepyoucryforit.Shealreadyknewaboutit,hadseenittimeafter
timeintheplacebeforeSweetHome.Men,boys,littlegirls,women.The
wildnessthatshotupintotheeyethemomentthelipswereyankedback.Days
afteritwastakenout,goosefatwasrubbedonthecornersofthemouthbut
nothingtosoothethetongueortakethewildnessoutoftheeye.
SethelookedupintoPaulDseyestoseeiftherewasanytraceleftinthem.
PeopleIsawasachild,shesaid,whodhadthebitalwayslookedwildafter
that.Whatevertheyuseditonthemfor,itcouldnthaveworked,becauseitputa

97

wildnesswherebeforetherewasntany.WhenIlookatyou,Idontseeit.There
aintnowildnessinyoureyenowhere.(Beloved 71)
Morrisonclosesherdiscussionofhernarrativechoiceandtechniquearoundthe
bitbymakingamoregenericstatementaboutherart.Assheconcludesher
conversation,sheasserts that,AndinthesamewayIwantedtoshowthereadernotonly
whatthebitcoulddotoanindividual,Ialsowantedtoshowingeneralwhatslavery felt
like,ratherthanhowitlooked(WritersatWork357).
AsMorrisongroundsBelovedintheindividual storiesofSethe,PaulD,Baby
Suggs,andothers,shecontendsthatherpointisforherreaderstolisten,participate,
approve,disapprove,andinterjecttheirowntraumaticstories,asmuchasshedoes.
Shewriteshernovels,notasaresolutionof conflicts,butasasitefordiscussingsomeof
theissuesthatpertainorhavedirectlyaffectedtheAfricanAmericancommunity.As
such,sheintendsherartisticproductionstobeopenended.Inherwords,thereis
alwayssomethingmoreinterestingatstakethanaclearresolutioninanovel.Morrison
claimsthatsheislikewiseinterestedinsurvival,asshewantstoseewhosurvivesand
whodoesnot,andwhy.Also,sheclaims,shedoesnotwanttobowoutwitheasy
answerstocomplexquestions.Thisissobecauseitsthecomplexityofhowpeople
behaveunderduressthatisofinteresttoher.Especially,sheclaims,thequalitiesthey
showattheendofaneventwhentheirbacksareupagainstthewalliswhatis
meaningful(AnInterview402).Assuch,shecontends,shewantsfromherreadersa
verystrongvisceralandemotionalresponseaswellasaveryclearintellectualresponse
(40304).Thehaunting,whichMorrisonadmitsshedeliberatelyperformsonher
readersthroughherfiction,istestimonytothateffort(404).Theresponsesinreaders
thatMorrisonattemptstoelicitarethusnotonlyrelatedtoBelovedbeinganactof

98

witnessingthatexposestraumatizingmemories.Theyarealsoconnectedtohowwecan
replytoBelovedasaghostlynarrative.
Aspreviouslyexplored,MorrisongroundsBelovedinanobsessiverecurrenceof
unresolvedconflictsandsilencesthatsheinscribesinindividual,racial,andcultural
borderlands(Borderlands/LaFrontera100). Theseunresolvedconflicts,which
necessarilyneedtoremainunresolved,aremadesubstanceandbecomepresence
amongothers,throughsomememoriesofthepast.Yet,Morrisonalsomakesthe
personallyunresolvedconflictsofslaverysignifythroughdisruptingpresencesof
immateriallifeformsin Beloved.Thisisthepointfornow.
BarbaraFreemandevelopsaninsightfulargumentaroundthepresenceofghosts
inAfricanAmericanliterature,particularlyintheoeuvreofToniMorrison.In
Freemansview,thefeelingofthesublimecanenableonetoreadanapparentabsence
asanactualpresence.Thiscrucialabsence,theresultofsomethingthathasbeen
discardedordismissedwithwhateverpersonal,historical,orculturalintentinmind,is
actuallytheconcretizationofamissingpresence(TheFeminineSublime 116).Asthe
signofwhatistherebynotbeingthere,thesublime,forFreeman,isthuslikea
ghost,inthatitmarkswhathasbeenexcludedfromthemainbodyofthework.
Likewise,itreturnsinanattempttomakeupforitsloss(117).
Freemanmakesherpointbyorganizingitaroundghostswhocomebackto
haunttheliving.ForFreeman,thecomingbackofghostsactuallyoccurstotroublethe
mindofthosewhohavesurvived. Moreprecisely,ghostscomebackifproper
attendancewasrefusedtothemwhiletheywereliving.Tomakeherpoint,Freeman
reviewsthefollowing,commonlyheldbeliefaroundghosts.Namely,thatghostsappear

99

whensomeonesdeparturefromthislifehasnotbeenaccompaniedbytheritesthatit
callsfor.TheunceremoniouslyburiedthatMorrisoncompelsustorememberthrough
Belovedwouldbeamongthosewhowereactuallyrefusedproperattendance(A
Conversation209,TheFeminineSublime116).Itis,amongothers,whatactually
promptsghostlyreturnsin Beloved.
Also,inFreemanswords,ghostscomebacktokeepusintouchwithahistory
wecanneitherremembernorforget.Theyactuallykeepusincontactwithapastthat
refusestodie.Freemanfurtherclaimsthatghostscanonlybelaidtorestonlywhen,
thelaborofmourningbeginstotransmitthesilencetheysignifyintospeech.Soifthe
sublimeappearstomarkatraumathatexceedslanguage,sheclaims,itsimultaneously
motivatessymbolizationwhileitalsoresistsit(TheFeminineSublime116).Inour
case,Morrisonssymbolicattemptatfindingexpressionforunspeakablethings
unspokenisthusgroundednotinwordsassuch(UnspeakableThingsUnspoken201).
Thesearchfortheinexpressibleisrevealedinthehauntingpresenceoftheghoststhat
overwhelm Beloved.
Insteadoffillinginunspeakablethingswithhistoricalformsofdiscourse,
whichToniMorrisonhasobviouslyresisteddoing,sheproposes,instead,tohaunther
charactersandreaders.Also,heruseofanAnzaldanborderlandpermitshertofill
unspeakablethings,notwithspeakablethings,butwithindexersofpainandconfusion.
Morrisonsart,groundedinsilencesandfiguralmoments,servesthentoreveal,and
insistentlyso,notsomuchanobject,butasorrowandatraumadeeplyingrained.This
particularformofghostlypresencespecifictoherartcomestobeamodeofsignifyingin
itself.

100

InShakespearesGhostWriters,MarjorieGarberdevelopsasimilarargument
aroundsilenceinconnectiontoghosts.ShedrawsonDerridatomakeherpoint.She
claimsthataghost,inherinstance,theghostofHamletsfather,islikeasignaturefor
Derrida.Botharesignsthatrequestattention,eveniftheycomeacrossasan
empiricalnonpresence.Asignature,then,asDerridahasshown,issimultaneously
apresentabsenceandanabsentpresence.Itis,infact,somethingthatmustbeiterated
toberecognizable.Thesignaturestandsforitssignatorinthatpersonsabsence
(140).InSignature,Event,Context,Derridacontendsthat,bydefinition,awritten
signatureindeedimpliestheactualorempiricalnonpresenceofthesigner.The
signaturealsomarksandretainshishavingbeenpresent.AsDerridainsists,a
havingbeenpresentinapastnow,isalso,however,onewhichwillremainafuture
now.Withthesignaturethus,ahavingbeenpresentinthepastcanbeinscribedand
evidenced,notonlyinanow,butinafutureaswell.Assuch,thesignatureiteratesa
presenceinwhatDerridacallsatranscendentalformofnowness,ormaintenance
(328).ForGarber,asignature,suchasclaimedbyDerrida,isverylikeaghost
(ShakespearesGhostWriters140).Assuch,bothsignatureandghoststandfor
somethingthatisrecognizable,despitetheempiricalabsenceofthesignatorordeathof
theperson.InMorrisonstext,theghost,asevidenceoftheviolencedonetothemind
andthebodyunderslaverypointsalsoatthenownessormaintenanceofthattrauma
(Signature,Event,Context328).Theghostreiteratesthenthatthepotencyofthe
signifyingtraumaisthereevenifitislocatedinanempiricalnonpresence
(ShakespearesGhostWriters140).

101

Theghostasksnottoforgetwhatmayhavebeenomitted,forgotten,remained
undisclosed,orkeptsecret.AsLyotardcontends,wemustindeedalwaysremember
thatthereistheForgotten(Heideggerandthejews4).Asaculturalmarkerof
absenceandlosstoremindusoftheforgotten,theghostofBelovedalsoservesthe
followingpurpose.Itoperatestoexplorefurtheranddescenddeeplyintothedarkand
noisesomecavernsofthehellofslavery.Thesewords,byHenryBoxBrown,quotedby
MorrisoninTheSiteofMemory,revealanotherfacetofMorrisonspurposeinwriting
Beloved.Throughthesewords,Morrisonalludestothedarkandnoisesomesiteof
slaveryasaplacethatdoesnotletitselfbeforgottennorrevealedexclusivelyinwords,
butinnoiseandindarkness.Heroverallnarrativescalltoattention,then,drawson
thatoftenunarticulated,evendismissedpresence,ofthehellthatslaverywas(90).
ButinMorrisonsBeloved,thisoftendismissedpresenceofslavery,which,inLyotards
words,wouldstandasthatwhichremainsimmemorial,unthoughtandunthinkableas
such,isthusconcretelytakenupbythenarrativealternatingwiththesilencemade
aroundit(Heideggerandthejewsxx).Thefollowingexampleillustrateshow.
InthenumberofthehousethatSethe,Denver,andalsoPaulDinhabit,namely
124BluestoneRoad,wesensethatthethirdtermtheoneforBelovedismissing
(Beloved3).Becausenumber3in124cannotbenameddoesnotmeanthatnumber3
doesnotexist,orthatitcannotmeanorsignify.Itactuallysignifies,andvery
traumaticallyso.Isuggestthatthemissingnumber,thesilencednumber3in124,figures
nottheabsence,butthereturnandpresenceofBeloved.Asthatwhichcannotbe
contained,orsatisfactorilytoldorspoken,number3comestosignifythatitmustnotbe
forgotten,despitethefactthatitisseemstohavebeenerased.InUnspeakableThings

102

Unspoken,MorrisonexplainshertechniqueofopeningBelovedbygivingSethesstreet
andhouseaddress.Shealsodiscussesherpurposeinopeningthenovelthrougha
sentencethatisnotone(228).Asshewritesthefirstlineofhernarrative,she
indicatesthat,124wasspiteful.Fullofababysvenom.Morrisonexplainsthatshe
intentionallymeantthefirsttwolinesof Belovedtobedramaticallyimpacting.Reading
124wasspiteful.Fullofababysvenomisindeedaverypuzzlinganddefamiliarizing
wayofstartinganarration.Forone,howcanababybeassociatedwithvenom,andhow
canitbespiteful?Butthenwequicklycometorealizethatthefirsttwolinesof Beloved
prefigurethepainandthedepthofthetraumathatisenclosingingriefitsinhabitants(3).
InUnspeakableThingsUnspoken,Morrisondescribesincriticaltermshernarrative
choice,theexpectedeffect,andthemeaningofthepuzzlementofheropeninglines:
Whatevertheriskofconfrontingthereaderwithwhatmustbeimmediately
incomprehensibleinthatsimple,declarativeauthoritativesentence,theriskof
unsettlinghimorher,Ideterminedtotake.Becausetheinmediasresopening
thatIamsocommittedtoishereexcessivelydemanding.Itisabrupt,andshould
appearso.Nonativeinformanthere.Thereaderissnatched,yanked,throwninto
anenvironmentcompletelyforeign,andIwantitasthefirststrokeoftheshared
experiencethatmightbepossiblebetweenthereaderandthenovelspopulation.
Snatchedjustastheslaveswerefromoneplacetoanother,fromanyplaceto
another,withoutpreparationandwithoutdefense.Nolobby,nodoor,no
entranceagangplank,perhaps(butaveryshortone).Andthehouseintowhich
thissnatchingthiskidnappingpropelsone,changesfromspitefultoloudto
quiet,asthesoundsinthebodyoftheshipitselfmayhavechanged.Afewwords
havetobereadbeforeitisclearthat124referstoahouse,...andafewmore
havetobereadtodiscoverwhyitisspiteful,orratherthesourceofthespite.By
thenitisclear,ifnotatonce,thatsomethingisbeyondcontrol,butisnotbeyond
understanding,sinceitisnotbeyondaccommodationbyboththewomenand
thechildren.Thefullyrealizedpresenceofthehauntingisbothamajor
incumbentofthenarrativeandsleightofhand.Oneofitspurposesistokeepthe
readerpreoccupiedwiththenatureoftheincrediblespiritworldwhilebeing
suppliedacontrolleddietoftheincrediblepoliticalworld.(22829)

AsMorrisonfurthercontends,

103

Thesubliminal,theundergroundlifeofanovelistheareamostlikelytolinkarms
withthereaderandfacilitatemakingitonesown....HereIwantedthe
compellingconfusionofbeingthereasthey(thecharacters)aresuddenly,
withoutcomfortorsuccorfromtheauthor,withonlyimagination,intelligence,
andnecessityavailableforthejourney.(229)
WhileMorrisoncomparesBelovedtothelesssubliminal,moreexplicitlyarticulated
novelsthatshehaswritten,sheunderlinesthattherawnessandvulnerabilityofthe
languagein Beloved actuallyservetodrawonanaccruedinvolvementofthereaders.
Sheconcludesthat,with Beloved,thereisindeed
Nocompoundofhouses,noneighborhood,nosculpture,nopaint,notime,
especiallynotimebecausememory,prehistoricmemory,hasnotime.Thereis
justalittlemusic,eachotherandtheurgencyofwhatisatstake.Whichisall
theyhad.Forthatwork[Beloved],theworkoflanguageistogetoutoftheway.
Thisnotonlyservestoenactthefullyrealizedpresenceofthehauntingin Beloved,but
itdoessoforcefully(UnspeakableThingsUnspoken229).Also,whileboth
MorrisonsandDelbosprosesenactthefullyrealizedpresenceoftrauma,theyalso
poseasunderlyingquestionthepossibilitiesfortraumatobepotentiallyoreventually
undone(201).ExploringapossibleundoingoftraumaisthemajorpointIpropose
forthecomingchapter.

104

Chapter3.DiscursiveMemory
Chacunesesentmouriretsedcomposeenimagesbrouilles,djmorteellemme,
ellenaplusnipass,niralit,nirien.
Elleestrentrechezelle,ellenestpasrentredanslavie.Lavieaglisssurelle
commeleauduruisseausurlescaillouxquellepolit,lausejourjour.Sonregard
sestterni,savoixsestdcolore,sescheveuxsontdevenusgris.Combiendannes
maintenant?Ellelesacomptesmaislecomptenestpasjuste.Auschwitz,ctaithier.
Cettenuitl,ctaitlanuitdernire.
Depuistoutescesannesl,ellefaitlesmenusgestes,lesmenuspasduquotidien,elle
coutelebruitdelaviequipassectdelle.Ellenentendrienqueleventsurla
plaineglace,lescrisdesgardiennesquisurveillaientlesdtenuesdanslesmaraisgels,
lesaboiementsdeschiens.Ellenesentrienquelodeurducrmatoire.Elleentendles
voixdescamaradesquilontarrachesasurmorte:Viens!Viens!Ilfautaller
lappel,quilontentrane,quilontsoutenuedanslesrangs,quiluiontdit:Pleure,
maisellenapaspupleurer,nicematinl,nidepuis.Fautedelarmes,sonregardsest
terni.
CharlotteDelbo,Lammoireetlesjours
Everydawnshesawthedawn,butneveracknowledgedorremarkeditscolor.There
wassomethingwrongwiththat.Itwasasthoughonedayshesawredbabyblood,
anotherdaythepinkgravestonechips,andthatwasthelastofit.
ToniMorrison,Beloved

With Aucundenousnereviendra,Delboplungesusinatimethat,inthewordsof
Chambers,isatimewithoutmeasure(UntimelyInterventions212).Itisthetraumatic
timeofAuschwitz.A timeofdeathanddestruction,itsdevastatingspellisashardand
solidasthemortalcoldandthefrozenlightofthecamp.Withit,wearetransportedin
atimeoutsideoftime(NoneofUs32).Itsdeadlyforceongoing,thattimelimitsthe
possibilitiesoflifeatthecamp.Likewise,itconstrictsthememoriesoflifeoutsidethe
camp.Asimportantly,asIwillproposeasthefocusofthischapter,thefrozentimeof
Auschwitznotonlypointsatapastthathasdisintegrated.Italsosignals,forsufferersof
trauma,thatthefuturehasbeenimpededaswell.

105

Inhertrilogy AuschwitzandAfter,Delboaddressesthechallengesofa
tormentingandtormentedlifetime. SimilartothetormentperceivedinSetheandother
charactersin Beloved,anongoingandsignificantexistentialanguishiscontinually
sensed,overwhelmingCharlotte.Onceittakespossessionofherlife,itkeepsdominating
it.Itplagueshercontinually.Butactually,itafflictsnotonlyherpresentlife.Itis
reductiveofherpastoneanditisthreateningofherfutureaswell.Thepointofthis
chapteristodemonstratehowlosingtouchwithapresentlifeandgettingdisconnected
fromapastexistencecanaffectandthreatenthefutureinprofoundways.
Aninitialsignofemotionalunsettlementmanifestsitselfearlyin Aucun.Inthe
firstworkofthetrilogy,itcomesacrossasCharlottesentanglementinthepresentandin
thefadingofherpastmemories.In Uneconnaissanceinutile,thesecondvolume,ittakes
theformofanincapacitytoimagineafuturelifedifferentfromtheoneatthecamp.
Bothworks,then,canserveasliterarybasesforexploringtheintricateconnections
betweentraumaticpast,present,andfuturethatsoupsetCharlotteslife.Itisalsothe
aestheticdesignofthetrilogythatrevealshowmuchDelboslifeexpectationshavebeen
reduced.Likewise,itisthrough BelovedandJazz,Morrisonsfirsttwovolumesin
anothertrilogy,thatIwillinquireintohowadislocationoftimein alifenarrativecan
disarticulatetheself.Theseworkswillthusenableexaminationoftowhatextentsome
protagonistsareabletocopewithaderangedtimeframeandadisadjustedselfproduced
byatragicpast.ThecriticalworksofSusanBrison,HenryKrystal,JeanFranois
Lyotard,andJacquesDerridaprovidetheanalyticalbackgroundsforourdiscussion.
DelboobservesthathertormentaboutherexistenceinAuschwitzdoesnotsimply
comefromknowingthatlepassnenoustaitdaucunsecours,daucuneresource.To

106

her,thepastisnotonlyanitem,uselesstopossess.Itslossalsogivesherpresent
experienceanunreal,almostsurrealcharacter. Assheclaims,[lepass]taitdevenu
irrel,incroyable.Asshefurtheradmits,Toutcequiavaittnotreexistencedavant
seffilochait(Uneconnaissanceinutile91).Delbothusimpliesthatthefragmentingof
herlifeismeanttobedevastatinginmorethanoneregard.Itisdestructivenotonlyto
herpastandpresentprospects.But,asitisassumedin Uneconnaissanceinutile,itis
negativelyimpactingtheconditionsofherfutureaswell.
Intuitively,Delboknowsalready,andearlyon,thatlivingafterherreleasefrom
Auschwitzwillnotbeanactualrelease.Lifewillremainchallenging.So,notonlydoes
Delbochoosetorevealhowtheexperienceatthecamphasindeliblymarkedher
imaginarywithadeadlyreality.Shealsoinsistsonhowtainted,contaminated,and
senselesslivingafterAuschwitzhasbecome.AsLawrenceLangerobserves,from
DelbossurvivalfromAuschwitztoherlifelongentrapmentinit,Auschwitzhasclaimed
itstoll.TheremarkthathemakesaboutDelbosstruggleswithherexistenceafter
Auschwitzisveryinsightful.Hedeclares,Delbosendeavorstoleave[Auschwitz]
behindnow proveasfutileasattemptstoescapefromitsrealityintoanimaginedfuture
then(HolocaustTestimonies4).
Beingbereavedofonesfutureismadeveryapparentintheselfdeclared
shatteringofDelbossubjectivesenseofidentity.Asshenoticesquiteoften,thetrauma
ofthecamphaskeptpullingheremotionallifetoanunstable,warfarelikezone.Assuch,
herentireoeuvreisobsessivelychargedwiththepresenceofthecamp.Notonlydoesit
revealhowmuchhersenseofliving,andreality,havebeenobscured.Itisalso
illuminatingofherdoubtsandselfquestioningaboutlivingafterAuschwitz. Asshe

107

claimsin Spectres,mescompagnons,Lenferdojereviensntaitgurefavorableau
rve.Wonderingifhercapacitiestodreamorimaginecanstillfunctionafter
Auschwitz,shealsoasks,taitcerverquerecomposerunmondedelimaginairequi,
parfois,devaitdevenirplusrelquelerelojevivais?
ForDelbo,notonlyistheinteriority ofahumanclearlythreatenedbythe
destructiveforceofaconcentrationcamp.Acapacitytothinkalifeoutsideoftraumais
alsoproblematic.Inthatregard,shehascontended,morethanonce,that,shediedin
Auschwitz,eventhoughnooneknowsit.Yet,atsomepoint,shealsodoubtsan
abilitytoreconstructaninnerworld.Shequestionsbeingabletohaveasenseofselfthat
doesnotinvolveAuschwitz.Besides,herexperiencingAuschwitzhasmadeherengaged
inaworldandaself,inAuschwitzandafter,thatweresomuchunlikehersthateither
seemsnowmorerealthanrealityitself. Assheeventuallycomestoask,taitcerve,.
..cemondedelimaginaire...quisubsisteenmoiaujourdhuitandisquejecommence
douterdelautre,levrai,celuiojtais?Etcetteprisonnireauregardsansespoir,
taitcemoi?Oucettelectreinsensible?Jenesaisplus(7). Asshekeepsondoubting
herownsenseofexistence,sheponders,Jtaisl... L
...Ailleurs,nullepart.Dansunmondeautre.Comment?Jenesaispas.taisjemoi?
taisje
...Quoi?Jtaisl.Shefurtherasks,Combiendetempssuisjeresteainsien
suspensiondexistence? Uncertainoftheanswer,shetentativelyreplies,longtemps.
Enfin,onmaditquemonabsenceaumondeavaitdurlongtemps. Able,however,to
vaguelyrememberthephysicalconditionofherabsencetotheworld,sheclaimsthat,
Moncorpstaitsanspoids,mattesanspoids.... Jeflottaisdansunprsentsans

108

ralit.Ultimately,shealsoexplainsthatshespent,desjours,desjours,sanspenser,
sansexister,toutensachantcependantmaisjenemesouviensplusaujourdhui
commentjelesavais,toutenayantquelquesensation,peinedfinissable,que
jexistais. Assheconcludeshowestrangingherphysicalseparationfromherownself
andfromtheworldhasfelt,shewritesthat,Jeneparvenaispasmerhabituertre,
merhabituermoi. Commentmerhabituerunmoiquistaitsi biendtachqueje
ntaispassrequileutjamaisexist? Asshehintsattheemotionaldestructionofher
previouslife,shealsopointsatthetaintedcolorofherfuture. Sheasks,Mavie
davant?Avaisjeeuunevieavant?Maviedaprs?taisjevivantepouravoirun
aprs? Jeflottaisdansunprsentsansralit(4445).
DelbossurvivalofAuschwitzandherreturntolifeafterherliberationareacts
thatdemandedgreatresilienceandcourage.Thisresilience,however,didnotliberateher
fromhertraumas. Assheclaimsin Mesuredenosjours,Toutestpareil.Cestennous
queriennestpareil.Jesaiscequienmoinestpaspareilcequejtaisavant,cequi
faitquejenesuispaspareilleauxautres.ForDelbo,thisdifferenceliesin,cette
montagnedecadavresentreeuxetmoi(59). SoforDelbo,notonlycantrauma
precludethereleaseoftheimaginationfromdestruction.Traumamaysecludeaperson
alsoinapermanentstateofsenselessnessandsuffering.Also,traumaseemstohave
annihilatedhersenseofreality.Asaresult,ithaspredisposedherpast,herpresentand
herfuturetoanengulfingexistentialvoid.
Auschwitzbutalsotheshedof124BluestoneRoad,SweetHome,andtheshipof
theMiddlePassagedothusnotonlyfunctionasplacesofphysicaloremotionaldeath.
Theymetonymicallystandasplacesoftraumainwhichtheimaginationofafuturehas

109

beensuspended.Withtheseplaces,theprospectsofpastandpresent,butalsofuture,
havedisintegrated,inatimethatisabolished(NoneofUs32).SweetHomeandthe
camphavecontributedtoreducetheselftoastateofmindthatforeclosesemotional
growth.Theyhavespelledatimeofsurvivalthatisnotsomuchcelebratoryoflife.
Rather,theyindicatethatlife,afterall,hasbeendeeplydamaged.
SusanBrisonhasexploredthecentralityofatemporalcomponentinappraising
trauma.InTraumaNarrativesandtheRemakingoftheSelf,shediscussesthecollapse
oftimeasamajorcomponentoftrauma.Sheclaimsthattheundoingoftheselfis
closelyrelatedtoanundoingoftime.Brisonassertsthattheundoingoftimeandself
involvesvariouscomponents.Twoareofspecialinteresttous.Onedealswithaself
thatisfragmented.Theotherpertainstoatimethatissubjectivelyframed.ForBrison,
thesplittingoftheselffirstentailsaseveringofpastfrompresent.Itisatimeelement
thatindeedplaguesandconfusesDelbosandMorrisonsprotagonists.Italsorelatesto
bothprotagonistsprofounddesire,willfulornot,ofseveringtheselffromahurtfulstate
ofexistence.InthecasesofCharlotteandSethe,thenecessityforreleasefromtheirpast
isactuallysuchthatittakescontroloftheirlives. Itshutsoutinthemacapacitytolive
lifetothefullest.Instead,atimelessandobsessivepresenceloomsoverthem.Itisso
strongthatitpartiallyincapacitatesthem.Theirexistences,sodisfiguredandimpaired,
arefrozenintime.Traumahastakencontroloftheirlives.Itcomesasnosurprisethat
CharlottesandSethesexistences,atthesecrisispoints,makeuptheaesthetic
frameworksofDelbosandMorrisonstrilogies.
Alongwithaseveringofpastfrompresent,thereexistsalsoforthetraumatized
individualaninabilitytoenvisionafuture.This,forBrison,alsocontributestoshatter

110

thesenseofselfinthesurvivor.AsBrisonclaims,theabilitytoenvisionafuture,along
withtheabilitytorememberapastiscrucial.Theyenableapersontoselfidentifyas
thesamepersonovertime.But,sheadds,whentheseabilitiesarelost,theabilityto
haveortobeaselfislostaswell.Intrauma,notonlyareonesconnectionswith
memoriesofanearlierlifelost.Alsogoneistheabilitytoenvisionafuture.With
thislosscomesthepossibilitythatonesbasiccognitiveandemotionalcapacitiesare
destroyed.Orintheleast,thecapacitiestothinkorfeelmayberadicallyaltered.For
Brison,thisepistemologicalcrisisleavesthesurvivorwithvirtuallynobearingsto
navigateby.Thesuffereroftraumaexperiencesgreatdifficultyatfeelingathomein
theworld(39).
Signsofashatteredsubjectivityembeddedinatraumatictimeareprevalentin
Delboswork.Likewise,alifenotfreeofemotionaldamageisstronglysuggestedin
Morrisonsoeuvre.Asamatteroffact,Morrisonstrilogydoesnotexactlyrevolve
aroundthedespairofslavery.Itreveals,rather,theformsofdejectionthatkeepsomeof
hercharactersinbondagedespitetheiremancipation.Asamatteroffact,herwork
pointsatformsoftraumatizedexistencethatmainlykeeptheselfimprisonedinquasi
hopelessness.ThisisespeciallyevidentwithBabySuggs,Sethe,andPaulD.Notonly
dotheseprotagonistsstruggletocopewithtrauma.Theyalsostrivetoliveanexistence,
whichtheysimplywishremovedfromdespair.Asaresult,theytrytoloosenthegrips
thatslaveryhasclaimedonthem.Buttheirconfrontationswithtrauma,andtheirpersonal
negotiationsforrelease,pullthemback,overandoveragain,intochallenging
predicaments.

111

With Beloved,MorrisontransportsuswithSethe,theghostsofBeloved,andthe
SixtyMillionandmore,toplacessuchastheshedof124BluestoneRoad,Sweet
Home,oraship.Theseplaces,intheircoldsunlight,appeartodisplace,notonlythe
dark.Theydislocatethefabricoflifeitself.Also,in Beloved,thereispresentnot
onlyasenseoftimeshatteredbecauseoftrauma.Traumadisruptsasenseofplacealso.
Particularplacesaretransgressedandinfusedwithtraumaticmemories,orrememory,
asSethecallsthem,assheexperiencesspontaneousrecurrencesofthepast(36).Yet,
theseplacesaretransgressivealso.Theyareparticularlysoontwolevels.Onedisplays
theintensetormentthatisplacedonthesubjectivityoftheprotagonistswhentheyare
thinkingofthoseplaces.Theotherindexoftransgressionentailstheprotagonists
reducedlifeprospectsbecauseoftheeventsoftheseplaces.Whatismore,notonlyhave
theseplacescometoemotionallyimprisonthecharacterstraumatized.Theyarealso
threateningtoholdinbondagetheseprotagonistswho,atsomepoint,andevenremotely,
comeintocontact,directlyornot,withthoseplaces.IntheinstanceofSethe,theshedin
whichshecommittedheractofinfanticideisamentallydisturbingsite.Itistheplaceof
adeepemotionaldisturbanceresultingfromhermurderingherchild.Yet,notonlydoes
theshedcometosignifythelossoflifeanddeathofSethescrawlingalready?baby
girl(159).ItalsoturnsouttobetheplacewherethegenerationfollowingSethes,inthis
case,Denvers,haslostaphysicalconnectiontoasister.Inturn,IsuggestthatDenvers
losstakesup,in Beloved,theformofarepresseddesireforasibling.Theimpulsive,yet
destructive,connectionthatDenverwilleventuallyformwiththeghostofBeloved
clearlytestifiestothatdesire.Theshedthuscomestostandnotsolelyasaplacewhere

112

lossisungovernable.Itisalsoaplacewherelossistransgenerationallydestructive
aswell(122).
Asreaders,wemayaskourselvesiftheseplacescaneventuallycomeacrossas
safe.Afterbeingsotraumatizing,canthesesitesactuallybeperceivedasless
threatening?Orarethey,ontheotherhand,toremainemotionallydisturbing?Setina
newcontext,suchasSethesemancipation,aretheseplacestokeepretainingthememory
oftheirtraumaticpast?Orcantheygivewaytomorepromisingprospects?Fullofa
babysvenom,as124was,orwherelifewasntsweetanditsurewasnthome,asat
SweetHome,orevenwherelifewasdead,asinAlfred,Georgia,Iproposethatthese
placesnotonlyprefigureadespairingpresent(3,14,109).Theyanticipateadesolate
futureaswell.WhileSetheconfidesinDenveroneday,shemakesthepointparticularly
clear.Assheexplains,
Iwastalkingabouttime.Itssohardformetobelieveinit.Somethingsgo.
Passon.Somethingsjuststay.Iusedtothinkitwasmyrememory.Youknow.
Somethingsyouforget.Otherthingsyouneverdo.Butitsnot.Places,places
arestillthere.Ifahouseburnsdown,itsgone,buttheplacethepictureofit
stays,andnotjustinmyrememory,butoutthere,intheworld.WhatIremember
isapicturefloatingaroundoutthereoutsidemyhead.Imean,evenifIdont
thinkofit,evenifIdie,thepictureofwhatIdid,orknew,orsawisstilloutthere.
Rightintheplacewhereithappened.
Canotherpeopleseeit?askedDenver.
Ohyes.Ohyes,yes,yes.Somedayyoubewalkingdowntheroadandyou
hearsomethingorseesomethinggoingon.Soclear. Andyouthinkitsyou
thinkingitup.Athoughtpicture.Butno.Itswhenyoubumpintoarememory
thatbelongstosomebodyelse.WhereIwasbeforeIcamehere,thatplaceisreal.
Itsnevergoingaway.Evenifthewholefarmeverytreeandgrassbladeofit
dies.Thepictureisstillthereandwhatsmore,ifyougothereyouwhowas
neverthereifyougothereandstandintheplacewhereitwas,itwillhappen
againitwillbethereforyou,waitingforyou.SoDenver,youcantnevergo
there.Never.Becauseeventhoughitsalloveroveranddonewith its
goingtoalwaysbetherewaitingforyou.(36)

113

Atsomepointduring,orafter,atraumatizingexperience,awitnessisinneedof
figuringorreconfiguringasenseofself orasenseofidentity.Thisisthusthe
challengingtaskthatCharlotte,Sethe,andPaulDwerefacingaftertheirreleaseinto
presumedfreedom.(Re)constructingalife,forthem,wastotakeplace,however,in
dramaticallyalteredconditions.Their(re)buildingalifeturnedouttobeanextremely
probingexperience.Itwassobecausetheywereunabletoreturntosupposedlynormal
formsofexistence.Returntolife,forthem,wasinscribedinanaftermath.Besides,not
onlyhadtheirexperiencebeenfracturingtoasenseofself.Ithaddamagedtheir
communityandtheirsenseofbelongingtoitalso.Thatis,iftheyhadfeltasenseof
communalselfinthefirstplace.Infact,(re)insertionwastobemadeinconditionsthat
hadnotonlybeen extremelyshatteringfortheindividual.Itwastobeaccomplishedin
relationtoaprofoundlychangedcommunityalso.CharlottesandSethesreturnswere
thusnotonlypainfulprocessestothemasindividuals.Theirreturnposedasociallyand
communallybasedchallengealso.
Thequestionof(re)constructinganidentityinanaftermathcallsforfirstlooking
deeperintotheshatteredsenseoftime.Thecontextsof AucunandBelovedwillprovide
groundsforthis.Probingthesenarrativesandtheirderangedtimesisfruitful.Notonly
doesitenableacloserexaminationoftimeasafunctionaldeviceoftrauma.Italso
permitsexamininghowtodealwiththememoryofatraumaticevent.Thedilemmathat
thesequestionsposeisasfollows.HowcanbothDelbosandMorrisonsnarrativesgo
aboutrememberingatraumawhichtookplaceinatimewithoutmeasure?(Untimely
Interventions212).Morespecifically,howcanDelbosandMorrisonsnarratives
proceedtorememberandinscribeinmemorywhatwasexperiencedincircumstancesso

114

estrangingandsounfamiliar,thattheexperienceitselfdidnotseemtotakeplaceinthe
real?Thatis,ifitwasevenreminiscedatall.Butalso,howdothesecondnovelsof
DelbosandMorrisonstrilogiesrepeatorescapetheveryfabricoftraumaof Aucunand
Beloved?WhatpossibilitiesofafuturedoDelbosandMorrisonsnarrativesopen?
Finally,howdotheysetaboutreconstructingalifeinanaftermaththroughanecessary
processofmourning?
MarianneHirschhasposedthesequestions,albeitindifferenttermsandabout
othernarratives.Shehasaskedwhethernarratives,suchasDelbosorMorrisons,open
spacesthatfacilitateacomingtotermswithtrauma.Ordotheyratherattempttogain
distancefromatraumaticpast?(MarkedbyMemory74).Posedinthetermsof
DominickLaCapra,gainingdistancefromorcomingtotermswithtraumawould
readasfollows.Namely,doDelbosandMorrisonsnarrativesinvolveanactingout
oftrauma? OrdotheyrathersuggestwhatLaCapratermsaworkingthroughtrauma?
Iftheformeristhecase,howdoesanactingoutenactacompulsive,unhealthy
repetitionoftrauma?Also,howdoDelbosandMorrisonstextsgroundtraumain
repetitivetemporality?Likewise,ifthenarrativesserveasanactingoutoftrauma,
isthepastcompulsivelyrepeatedasifitwerefullypresent?Ifso,whyarethe
resistancesofthetraumatizedsubjectnotconfronted?Arememoryandjudgment
undercut?Or,ontheotherhand,arethenarrativesorganizedaroundaworking
through?Ifso,istherepetitionoftraumaacriticallycontrolledprocess?Ifso,then,
forLaCapra,writingatraumatictextcanbeaprocessofhealing.Itcanpositivelyand
significantlychangealifethatwasoriginallymarkedbytrauma.Itcanmakepossible

115

aselectiveretrievalofthepast.Itcanalsoencourageamodifiedenactmentof
unactualizedpastpossibilities(RepresentingtheHolocaust48,174).
Byposingliteraryactsthataremagnifying,butalsosilencingoftraumatic
ordeals,DelbosandMorrisonstextsseemtosuggest,inthecasesofCharlotteand
Sethe,thattraumakeepsrepeatingitselfwithoutbeingconfronted.Setheclearly
anticipatesthisresistanceandnonconfrontationalstanceinthefaceoftrauma.
Especiallywhensherememoriesheractofinfanticide,andisabletorecallitsolelyby
circling,circling...thesubject...insteadofgettingtothepoint.Thisapproach,
whichiscommonlyseeninsurvivorsandvictimsofextremetraumawhogoabouttheir
somewhatungraspableandhurtfulstoriesofshame,representsforSetheheronlychance
tofacethememoryoftheevent.Assheaptlyputsit,thecirclethatsheismaking
aroundthesubjectwillremainonethatshecannotclosein.Neithercanshepinit
downforanybodywhohadtoask.Shefurthercontendsthat,Iftheydidntgetitright
offshecouldneverexplainittothem(Beloved16263).
Anotherpresumablynonconfrontationalactingoutoftraumaisrevealedthrough
thetechniqueofdetachmentthatisatplayinDelbosandMorrisonsnarrative
techniques.Itbecomesapparentwhenbothauthorspurposelydetachtheirprotagonists
fromtrauma.Inthisregard,bothwriterstestimonialworksnotonlyparallelthe
workingsoftrauma,andpointattheincompletecharacteroftrauma.Theyactuallyseem
tohintatthedifficultiesofcompletelyfacingordealingwith,muchlessaccepting,the
traumaticevent.Morrisonreferstothewhitespaceofhertext.Thedetachmentinthe
faceoftraumathatsheendorsesattimescanbereadasfollows.Bypointingatwhatis
notwritten,Morrisoninsistsontheunfinishedcharacteroftrauma.Shemayalsobe

116

intentlypointingataneverendingandunfinishedprocessofgrievinginthefaceof
trauma.Whetherthisgrievingprocessisataninitialstageofmelancholicsorrow,orina
mourningphase,matterslittleatthispoint.Morrisonopensspacesforreaderstoinfer
whatisleftunsaid.Andassuch,thesespacesaremeanttoinsistontheemotionalpain
ofexperiencingandrelivingtrauma.Morrisonsblanksthusnotonlyindicateacertain
impossibilityofgraspingthecharacteroftraumacompletely.Theyalsosuggestthata
potentialprocessing,muchlesshealing,fromtraumaisaprocessthatnecessarilyremains
incomplete(ToniMorrison:ACriticalCompanion 9).
(Re)actionsbywitnessinthefaceoftraumacanilluminatewaysinwhich
traumaticexperiencescanbeapproached,andpossiblyprocessed.Oneattitude,
prevalentinDelbosandMorrisonsworks,isofinteresthere.Itinvolvesapseudo
indifference,orapurposefuldistancing,fromthetraumaticevent.Itusuallyhappensin
witnesseswhoattempttoremovethemselvesfromthetraumaticoccurrence.Aneedfor
emotionalprotectionismainlytheunderlyingmotivebehindthiswithdrawal.Witnesses
totraumarespondthatwaybecausetraumawouldbetoooverwhelmingiftheykept
facingit.Itsimpactwouldbeextremelydestructive.Thisstanceistheprotective
numbingthatSaulFriedlanderseesinmanysurvivors.Friedlanderarguesthat,likethe
disruptiveemotionthatiscausedbytrauma,theprotectivenumbingisnotentirely
accessibletoconsciousness.Bothdecisions,however,testifytocrucialwaysof
respondingtotrauma.Notonlydotheymakeapparentacertain,thoughnotfully
conscious,capacityoftheselftothink,andevenreact,intraumaticcircumstances
(Trauma,Memory,andTransference261).TheyarealsoveryrevealingofDelbos
andMorrisonsdistinctiveliterarystancesintheirculturaldealingswithtrauma.

117

Theideathatsurvivorsengageinprotectivenumbingdoesnotnecessarilymean
thatthey,afterall,experienceaminimizedimpactofthetraumaticevent.Rather,andit
iscrucialtorememberatthispoint,theystillacutelyperceivetrauma.Also,despite
theirdistancingfromit,traumamaybenolessimpacting.DelbosandMorrisonsworks
reveal thispointwell.Theprotectivenumbing,inwhichbothauthorsengage,ismeant
nottobesilencing.Paradoxicallyenough,itpointsataculturallyactiveandresponsive
formofdealingwithtrauma.
Inthefollowingexcerpts,bothreactionsbyCharlotteandSetheinitiallytestifyto
theresponsibilitythatthewitnessingoftraumaplacesonthem.Atfirst,Charlottesand
Sethesresponsescomeacrossasrefusalsofthatresponsibility.Delbosattempttoavoid
lookingatthewomanclingingtotheslopeofthecampisoneinstanceofthatrefusal.
Delbossenseoftheunbelievable,watchingwitheyesthatcryout,butdonot
believe,isanother(NoneofUs34).Setheseffortatfreezinghermindtothe
rememory,becauseitisendangeringherfuture,isanotherexample.
Refusingtoacknowledgeatraumaticeventcanbeamomentaryactofsurvival.It
isespeciallysowhenittakesplaceindeadlyconditions,notfullygraspableby
consciousness.Thisnonacknowledgement,however,isalsoconnectedtoanother,less
fundamentalandmoreconsciousformofrefusal.ItrelatestowhatHenryKrystaldefines
astherefusaltoacceptorintegratethetraumaticeventintooneslife.Accordingto
Krystal,thisnonintegrationbythewitnesscanbeextremelyproblematic.Itisso,
becauseitgreatlydiminishesthechancesofthesurvivortoworkthroughtrauma.
Actually,thedifficultyofthesurvivortointegratethetraumaticeventalsoparallels
anotherdifficulty:thatofacceptingthetraumaticeventasaneventthatwasnecessary.

118

InKrystalscontention,theresistances,psychologicalorcultural,thatsurgefromnot
acceptingthetraumaticeventasnecessarycanbeextremelydamaging.Theycan
greatlydelaytheprocessofmourning.Thisformofrefusalisthusverycritical.Not
onlydoesitmakeitdifficultforthetraumasufferertomovebeyondthepainand
sufferingoftheexperience.Italsodelaysandhamperstheprocessesinvolvedincoming
totermswithit.Integratingandacceptingthetraumaticaspectofoneslifeisthus
necessaryinstartingaprocessofhealing.Itisespeciallysosinceitlaysout,forthe
survivor,possibilitiesofregainingfeelingsofidentity.Itisthuscrucial,forasurvivor,
tobeableto(re)capture,alongwithasenseofidentityorselfhood,afeelingofself
samenessovertime(TraumaandAging87).ForMorrison,thisprocesswouldbe
significantinenablingcharactersaswellasreaderstolearnhowtosurvivewholeina
worldwhereweareallofus,insomemeasure,victimsof somethingandinnoposition
todoathingaboutit(TheSeamsCantShow40).
ThefollowinginstancepointsatDelborefusingtolookatthedyingwomanon
theslope.Thisrefusalistwofold. Ontheonehand,shewillnotwitnessaparticular
death,thatofthewoman.Ontheother,shewillnotwitnessthegeneralconditionsof
dyinganddeathincircumstancesimposedonallcampprisoners,includingDelbo.
Forcedbyathirdparty,thesecircumstancesofdeathopennoalternativesorchoicesto
thewitnesses.Bothrefusalsalsosuggestanother,correlated,formofrejection.Itisthe
refusal,onDelbospart,tointegratethedyingwoman,andhertraumatizingdeath,into
heremotionalspectrum.NotonlydoesthisexcerptmakeusawareofDelbosemotional
distress.Italsomakesusfaceanothertypeoftraumaticpredicament.Itisthedifficulty
ofhavingtoacceptthedeath,notchosen,ofmillionsofconcentrationcampprisoners,in

119

eventsthatoverwhelmedEuropebetween1939and1945.Inthisscene,thereisthusnot
onlytormentatthethoughtoftheabsurdityofthewomandying.Thereisalsoanguishat
confrontingtheideathatherdeath,avoidableinsomecircumstances,isnotinthecontext
weknow.AsweperceiveDelbosmiseryatwitnessingprevailingdeathanddesolation,
weread,
Jenelaregardeplus.Jeneveuxpluslaregarder.Jevoudraischangerdeplace,
neplusvoir.Neplusvoircestrousaufonddesorbites,cestrousquifixent.Que
veutellefaire?Veutelleatteindrelesbarbelslectriques?Pourquoinousfixe
telle?Nestcepasmoiquelledsigne?Moiquelleimplore?Jetournelatte.
Regarderailleurs.Ailleurs.
Ailleursdevantnouscestlaportedubloc25. (Aucun 44)
Thenextexcerptrevealsanotheremotionallydistressingpredicament.Itisthatof
Sethes.AsintheinstanceofCharlotteslook,Sethesdilemmadealswiththerefusalto
acceptorintegratethetraumaticevent.In thescene,thereis,likewise,asenseofthe
unavoidable,oftheinexorable.ThesceneexposesSetheinadisturbingselfquestioning
aboutthemeaningofherexperienceasamotherunderslavery.Atfirst,Setheistempted
tothinkofhernewemancipatedlifeinpromisingterms.Butshequicklyrejectsthe
initialtrustthatpromptsherfirstencouragingthought.Insteadofattemptingtointegrate
anew,moreaffirmativeapproachtoherlife,Sethekeepsthinkingofthefuturein
hesitantandmistrustingterms:
[Sethe]thoughtalsoofthetemptationstotrustandremember...Woulditbe
allright?Woulditbeallrighttogoaheadandfeel?Goaheadandcounton
something?Shecouldntthinkclearly...Everydawnshesawthedawn,but
neveracknowledgedorremarkeditscolor.Therewassomethingwrongwiththat.
Itwasasthoughonedayshesawredbabyblood,anotherdaythepinkgravestone
chips,andthatwasthelastofit.124wassofullofstrongfeelingperhapsshe
wasoblivioustothelossofanythingatall.(Beloved3839)
AsIproposedinchapter2,thetypesofnarrativesthatactuallyperformtrauma
aremeanttorevealsomeoftheemotionaldamagethatattachestotrauma.Delbosand

120

Morrisonstextsdosoinanurgentmanner.Theirtexts,however,alsoactivateanother
aspectoftrauma.Paradoxicallyenough,andunliketheirprotagonistsattimes,Delbos
andMorrisonsnarrativesofferlittlepossibilityforadistancingfromtrauma.Even
thoughtheprotagonistsoftheworkswillfullyattempttoescapetrauma,thenarratives
seemunabletodoso.Thetextsretaininthewritingtheinexorablesuffocatingof
trauma.Bothnovelistsseemtosuggestthatacceptingorintegratingtraumainthe
continuumoflife,andwithintheself,isextremelychallenging,ifatallpossible.The
narratives,then,revealacontinualandatemporalrelivingandreexperiencingof
trauma.Thisissoevenwhenthenarrativesfailtodiscloseorpurposelysilencesomeof
thesetimesofwitnessedhorrorandemotionalsuffering.Becausethen,withinthese
times,CharlotteandSetheareperceivedtounwillinglyvisit,revisit,andreminisceabout
thetimesandtheplacesthathaveindeliblymarkedthemwithpain.WhetherDelbos
andMorrisonsnarrativesdosoinpatternsthatattempttobeliberatingfromtraumaisa
validquestion.Indeed,theirnarrativessometimesseemtoenacttraumacompulsively,as
arepetitionofitshorror.Inthatcase,DelbosandMorrisonsnarrativespointmore
specificallyattheinescapablecharacteroftrauma.Thisistrueeveniftheirprotagonists
wanttoescapefromitsgrip.Ourquestionthusbecomesthefollowing.DoDelbosand
Morrisonsnarrativesmaketraumaunescapabletosuggestthattraumaanditsworkings
actuallyforeclosehealing?Dotheirnarratives,then,workasaFreudianreturnofthe
repressed?ForKrystal,thisreturnwouldinvolveforthesufferersformsofdenialand
psychicsplittingoftheself,becausethattraumahasnotbeenthoroughlyworked
through.Ifthisisso,onequestionarises.Doesapsychicsplittingoftheselfapplyto,
andassail,CharlotteandSethe?Or,dothepartialsilencing,displacing,andeven

121

euphemizationoftraumainDelbosandMorrisonstexts,ratherpointatanactive,albeit
painfulattemptofintegratingandacceptingtrauma?Ifthisisthecase,dothe
narrativessuggestanacceptanceofthepastbytheprotagonists?AreCharlotteandSethe
inclinedtoaccepttheirtraumatizedself,andtherepresentationofthatself?Are
theywillingtointegratethatsufferingself,alongwiththeotherone,ineventsthatmay
havebeenevitableandunnecessary,withintheirprocessesofreconstruction?
(TraumaandAging85).Oristhedilemma,betweenaninabilitytoforgetandput
behind,andanecessitytorememberandtransmitexperiencesoftrauma,simultaneously
atworkinDelbosandMorrisonstestimonies?Ifso,howdotheirtextssuggestit?
Lyotardhasdiscussedtheprocessingofthetraumaticeventinaveryilluminating
manner.LikeCathyCaruth,hehasdonesobylinkingtraumatothelackofimmediateor
directregistrationbytheperceptivesubject.Hehasactuallydiscussedthisconnection
betweeneffectandeventinthecontextofAuschwitz.Importantlyalso,hehasframed
hisdiscussionoftraumaaroundanideaoftime.
LyotardgroundsthecoreofthetraumaticencounterintheFreudian
Nachtrglichkeit,orbelatedness(Heideggerandthejews5).Hisreadingof
belatednessenablesanindepthinquiryintothespecifictypesofnarrativesthatinterest
ushere,notonlybecauseofthestructuralandtemporalframingoftraumathat
Nachtrglichkeitbringstolight,butalsobecauseNachtrglichkeitenableslookinginto,
andappraising,possibilitiesforclosureinthefaceoftraumatizingevents.Thisnotion,
thus,doesnotonlyfacilitateexploringtimeinthetraumaticrealisttextsofDelboand
Morrison.Itpermitsinquiringintohow,orif,thenarrativesofferawayoutoftheir
traumaticcharacter.Eventually,Nachtrglichkeitalsoallowsexploringpossibilities,if

122

any,outofatimethathasbeendisarticulated.Atthispoint,ourconcerncanbeposedin
thefollowingterms.WhatisinvolvedinengaginginaprocessofFreudianmourning?
Also,whatisatstakeinamelancholiclongingforanunscathedself?
AccordingtoFreud,theaffectsoroccasionsformelancholiaaresimilarto
thoseofmourning.Ineithercase,theaffectsrevealalongingforsomethinglost.In
thecaseofmelancholia,however,Freudinsiststhatthelossislocatedininstinctual
life.Theobjectlossinmelancholiaisanunconsciousone.Thatlossismainly
impactedattheleveloftheunconscious.Freudfurthermakesthefollowingcomment.
Heclaimsthat,inthecaseofmelancholia,onecannotseeclearlywhatitisthathasbeen
lost.Asaresult,thepatient,whenobservedinastateofmelancholia,cannot
consciouslyperceivewhathehaslosteither.This,Freudadds,mightbesoevenifthe
patientisawareofthelosswhichhasgivenrisetomelancholia.Thisawareness,Freud
clarifies,comesonlyfromthesensethat[thepatient]knowswhomhehaslost.Yet,he
doesnotknowwhathehaslostinhim.CharlotteandSetheknowindeedwhothey
havelostintheirtraumaticexperiences.Viva,Alice,Halle,andBelovedareonlyafew
amongtheirlostones.However,neitherCharlottenorSethepreciselyvoiceswhatthey
havelostinthemselves.Wecannevergettolearndirectlyfromthemwhethertheirloss
isthelossofanideal,suchasabasicrelianceononescommunity.Neitherdothey
explicitlystateifthelosswascausedbythedestructionofabasictrustinhumanity.The
questionremainsunanswered.Inanycase,theirlossremainsunspoken.Mypointhere
isthatCharlottesandSethesfeelingsofmelancholiacorroboratethetypeof
melancholiathatFreuddiscusseshere.Itislocatedinanatemporal andunlocalizable
siteoftheunconscious.Atthispoint,Freudianmelancholia,intheformofsevere

123

anxietyappearstopresentuswithachallengingtask.Itconfrontsuswiththe
impossibilityofeverbeingabletolocatetheobjectofmelancholiapreciselyinthe
psychiclifeofthesubject.Italsomakesitdifficulttograspthelossinmorepersonal
terms.Thesufferingsubjecthasdifficultylocatingherpainaftertheexperiencehas
ended.Actually,someoftheachecouldevenoriginatein theunlocalizablecharacterof
thedistress.Itcouldevenderivefrombeingunabletoframe,ordirectlyaddress,
melancholicemotions.Bythesametoken,attemptsatdiscardinganxietywouldbe
problematic.Freudspointimportantlyilluminateshow,eventhoughmelancholiais
actuallygroundedinthehardlylocalizableandatemporalrealmoftheunconscious,itis
perceptible.Itisdetectableandcanbetracedthroughtheaffectsofthesuffering,and
inthehereandnowofthesurvivor(MourningandMelancholia24360).
Lyotardhasinsightfullyexploredmelancholiainthecaseofhumandisasters,
suchasatAuschwitz.Hehasdonesobyrelatingmelancholicaffectstoanideaofa
temporality.Thisnotionenablesustolookbackattraumaticrealistnarrativesinamore
incisiveway.Itpermitsustoinquireintohowtraumacanpossiblybeprocessed.Italso
enablesustoappraiseatraumatictext,whichisnotexclusivelyareenactmentoftrauma.
Likewise,itallowsustoviewitnotsolelyasacontrolledprocess.Rather,Lyotards
argumentencouragesustoapproachtraumainDelbosandMorrisonstextsfromboth
anglesatthesametime.Indeed,Lyotardclaimsthattraumaisnottobeinscribedin
consciouschronologyexclusively.Norisitframedsolelyinimmemorialtime.Rather,
Lyotardtracestraumabacktoadisjoinedtemporalitythatthesuffereroftrauma
experiencesandthatthetextreveals,alongwithothersymptoms.Themannerinwhich

124

LyotardsdisjoinedtemporalitycanbeseenatworkinDelbosandMorrisonstextsis
extremelyrevealing.
ForLyotard, Nachtrglichkeit,intheFreudiansense,hastwocomponents.One
relatestoadoubleblowthatisconstitutivelyasymmetrical.Theotherelementof
Nachtrglichkeitengagesatemporalitythathasnothingtodowithconsciousness.
ForLyotard,boththeasymmetricalblowandthedisjoinedtemporalityareatworkinthe
experiencingoftrauma.Whenactivated,botharepresentinthementalprocessingof
traumaaswell.
Lyotardcontendsthat,withthedoubleblow,thefollowinghappens.Thepsychic
apparatusreceivesafirstblow.Itisthefirstexcitation.Itupsetstheapparatuswith
suchforcethatitisnotregistered.Lyotardcomparesittoawhistlethatis
inaudibletohumans,butnottodogs.Healsoreferstothefirstblowasaforce,an
energy.Thisenergy,heclaims,issimplydepositedthere.Onceputinthepsychic
apparatus,theenergyjuststaysthere.ForLyotard,atthatpoint,itisinunusableform.
Itresiststransformation.Itcannotbebound,composed,orneutralized.InLyotards
contention,neithercanitbefixed,inaccordancewithotherforceswithinthe
apparatus.ForLyotard,then,thedepositleftbehindbythefirstblow,bythe
excessiveexcitation,isnotalocalizableobjectinthetopologyofthesoul.Assuch,
itstrikestheapparatuswithoutobservableinternaleffect.Itdoesnotaffectit.In
Lyotardswords,thefirstblowconstitutesthusashockwithoutaffect.Lyotardfurther
contends,that,withthesecondblow,somethingelsetakesplace.Whathappensisan
affectwithoutashock.Inthisinstance,heexplicitlyreferstoFreudsclassicaccountof
individualtrauma.HedescribesthesceneenactedbyEmmainthecandystore.He

125

elaboratesontheevidence,thatsheiscaughtinasudden,apparentlyinexplicable,crisis
ofanxiety.Heconnectsthesecondblowtothefollowingreaction.Sheclaims,Ibuy
somethinginastore,andanxietycrushesme.Thenshesays,Iflee,butnothinghad
reallyhappened.Atthistime,however,somethinghashappened.Theenergy,sofar
formlesslydispersedinanaffectivecloudbythefirstblow,condenses.Itgets
organized,anditbringsonaction.Itcommandsaflightwithoutarealmotive.As
Lyotardfurtherexplains,thisflight,however,andthefeelingthataccompaniesit,
informconsciousnessofsomethingthathasbeenhappening.ItiswhatLyotards
namesthequod.ForLyotard,thenotionthatthereissomething,thequod,comes
first.Ithappensbeforethequid.Eventhoughconsciousnessremains,however,
unable,totellexactlywhatitisthereis,itknowsthat,thereissomething.
Consciousnessindicatesthequod,butitdoesnotdesignatethequid.Itjustknowsthat,
thisexcitationneednotbeforgotten,repressedaccordingtorepresentational
procedures,northrough actingout.Eventhoughconsciousnessismadeaware,notof
whatthereis,thequid,butofthequod,itknowsofsomethingcruciallydisturbing.Its
excess(ofquantity,ofintensity)exceedstheexcessthatgivesrise(presence,place,
andtime)totheunconsciousandthepreconscious. Itisinexcesslikeairandearth
areinexcessforthelifeofafish(Heideggerand thejews12,1516).
ForDelbo,consciousnessmayhavebeeninformedmoreimmediately,yet
belatedly,ofaquod throughdirectlywitnessingaquid.Perceptionmaynothavebeenas
directinthecaseofMorrison.Actually,themomentormodeofperceptionmatterlittle
inourinstancesIndeed,regardlessoftheaccessibilityofthewitnessing,andofits
immediacydefinedintemporalterms,theshocksandaffectsofdestructionhave,in

126

eithercase,beentremendous.Eventhoughitmaynotevenhaveregisteredatthetimeof
occurrence,traumahas,however,struckinaprofoundmanner.Inbothcases,theshock
ofanincredibleviolenceandviolationoftheself,andoftheother,hascertainlybeen
depositedthere.Lyotardsconstructaroundthetemporalandbelatedcharacterof
traumaisthuscentraltoourargument.ItenablesmetoclaimthatnotonlydoDelboand
Morrisoninscribetheachronologicaltimeofthetraumaticeventofexterminationand
slaveryintothetemporalformoftheirnarratives,butalso,thatthetimeoftheirtraumatic
realisttextsisactuallytobethoughtofasconstitutivelyasymmetrical.Thepossibilities
forthereaderstoperceivethetraumasofthelifestoriesthatthenarrativesexposearenot
limitedtospecifictimes.Thetextsareindeedconstructedinsuchawaythatthe
perceptionofthetraumaticeventsandtheiraffectscanbeachievedindependentlyofthe
timeof occurrence.Littledoesitmatterwhethertheeventsaredistantorremoteinthe
past.
Whatmattersisthattheirmajorimpactisthecontinuedshockanddisturbingof
consciousness.Justasimportant,whatissignificant,inBrooksBousonsterms,isthat
readersalsofeelcompelledandunsettled,ifnotemotionallydistressed,bywhatthey
read.AsBousonimpliesin QuietAsItsKept,ifMorrisonseesherroleasawriterto
bearwitness,ourroleasreaderistobearwitnessaswell.Ourreadingismeanttobe
activeandparticipatory.ForBousondiscussingMorrisonswork,ourreadingshouldbe
notunlikethatoflistenersofreallifeshameandtraumastories.Theselisteners,
indeed,mustnotonlyuncovertheshamefulsecret.Buttheymustalsoreconstructthe
fragmentednarrativeofthetraumasufferer.YetBousonadds,becauseMorrisonis
awarethatsheriskshurtingthatisvicariouslyshamingandtraumatizingherreaders,

127

she,notunlikethetherapistlistener,mustcreateasafeholdingenvironmentforher
readers.WhilebothDelboandMorrisondosothroughthefragmentedaestheticsof
theirnarratives,theirtestimonialactsremaincompelling.Bothauthorsenablereadersto
bothexperienceandprocesstheshameandtraumadrivenstoriesoftheirprotagonists
inaprofoundmanner(20,223).
InLyotardscontention,somenarrativesorganizeorenactachronologizationof
timethatisnotchronological.Itisespeciallytrueoftraumatictexts.ForLyotard,these
narratives,then,areabletoperform,theretrievalofatimethatislost.Itisthetime
aroundthefirstblowthatthesenarrativesattempttoactuallyretrieve.Eventhoughit
doesnothaveaconsciousplaceandtimeinthepsychicapparatus,the traumatictime
can,forLyotard,beprobedforrecovery.Usually,itisthroughtheaffectsoftrauma
thattheprocessisinitiated.Eventhoughtherecoveryofthattimemayonlybepartialor
incomplete,theaffectscirclingthattraumatictimemaynotbewithoutfullimpact.Ithus
suggestthis.WithDelbosandMorrisonstexts,theimmemorialtimeoftransgression
andviolationoftheindividualcannotbecompletelyrecovered,butitcanstillbe
perceived,whileitisincompletelyrevealed.Itsrevelation,somehow,isawayofre
connectingtothemomentsoftrauma.Hence,inMorrisonsandDelbosnarratives,itis
preciselythistimeofloss,orcollapseofidealortrust,thatneedstobe,andisbeing,
reiterated.Itisalsothattimethateithernarrativeseemsreluctanttoputbehind.
DelbosandMorrisonstextsengageinvariousliteraryprocesses.Adistancing
fromtrauma,asuffocatedvoice,andapartialsilencingofthetraumatictimesarejust
someofthem.Paradoxically,theseareintended,sothatthetraumatictimesmaynotbe
putbehindorforgotten.Thesedevicesareindeedmeanttohaveremindingeffects,

128

howeversubtle.Oneofthese,onwhichLyotardinsists,paradoxicallyconsistsin
attemptingtoneutralizeaninitialviolence.Inthatcase,thenarrativeorganization
ofthetraumatictextenablestorepresentapresencewithoutrepresentation.For
Lyotard,itservesanotherpurpose.Itstagestheobscenemorecompellingly.Also,for
him,byliterallydisassociatingthepastfromthepresent,thetextcanbetterattemptto
activatearecollectionofthetraumawitnessed.DelbosandMorrisonstextsdonot
disassociatethepastfromthepresent.Rather,theyengulftheminuncertain,attimes
unreal,andconfusedspansoftraumaticawareness.Yettheirtextsactivatetheunfinished
processingoftheirrespectivetraumas.ForLyotard,thistypeofwritingservesasan
individualorculturalreappropriationofanimproper.Also,thetraumatictextthat
purposelyframesadiachronictimemaydosoinordertoreclaimanachronological
affect.Butinanycaseitsetsoff,forLyotard,fromarealisticdecision.Thisdecision,
madebyauthors,isonethatcanpossiblyopentheideaofaworkingthrough,orclosure.
Theideaofworkingthrough,onamoretheoreticallevel,wouldconsistinliterally
bringingtogetherthetimesofthefirstandsecondblow.Itwouldhavethetextinscribe
thetimeofthetwoblowsinsocalledrealtime. ForLyotard,thisprocessof
narrativizationconstitutesahistoricaldecisioninitself.Thisdecision,forhim,
occultswhatmotivatesit.Butlikewise,itismadeforthisreason.Whatfirst
promptsit,Lyotardcontends,isthediscrepancy betweentime1andtime2.Yeta
narrativemaysetouttobringthesetwotimestogether.Itcaninscribethetimeofthe
traumaticexperience,alongwiththetimeofthenontraumaticone.Whetherthetext
revealsthesetwotimes,andfusesthemonthelineofasingleanduniformhistoryis
thusacrucialdilemmafortheauthor(Heideggerandthejews16).Itposesthe

129

followinginquiryforus:withtheirtexts,doDelboandMorrisonattempttowritethese
twotimesonthelineofasingleanduniformhistory?Ifnot,howarethetextsindicative
ofremainingimprisonedbytrauma?Howtentativearetheyofbeingredemptive?Also,
howcanareinsertionintoanontraumatic,nondiachronictimeengagethewitnessof
traumaintherapeuticprocessesofhealing?
TheliterarymannersinwhichDelboandMorrisonarebringingthefracturedpast,
traumaticpresent,anddisfiguredfutureoftheirprotagonistsintosocalledrealtimeare
crucial.Further,whether,orhow,bothauthorsattempttoaligntheircharactersliveson
asingleanduniformhistorylineismeaningful.OneinstanceinMorrisonsworkis
extremelyrevealinginthisregard.Herpointconcernshowsomeindividualelementsof
hurtandgriefinprotagonistscanhampertherewritingofalifestoryasacontinuum.It
pertainsalsotohowmuchthemergingoftime1andtime2canbemademore
difficult,ifparticularlyafflictingpersonalcircumstancesareatplay.Theinstancesof
Sethe,PaulD,andBabySuggsareveryuseful atthispoint.Theyshedlightonthe
difficultyofmergingtime1andtime2becauseofapersistentlynegativeperception
oftheself.Thislessthanpositiveviewofthemselves,asamatteroffact,hampersthe
pullingtogetheroftheirexistence.Asslaves,Sethe,PaulD,andBabySuggswere
indeedmadetoperceivethemselvesaslessthanhuman.Thiscamemainlythrough
degradingtreatmentandallusionsmadetothembyothers,mainlytheirmasters.Yet,
forKrystal,theprocessofworkingthroughbymakingpeacewithonesselfandones
past,involvesacrucialelement.Itrequiresaspecificsenseofacceptance.Fora
traumatizedsubjecttoengageinprocessesofhealing,therearethussomerequisitestobe
met.Oneistheneedtobeabletoseeoneselfasowninguptoallofoneslivingas

130

[ones]own.Anotherinvolvesanecessityofaccepting,onesobjectrepresentation,
howevernegativelyitmayhavebeenprojected.Inotherwords,ifaninabilityofpositive
(re)claimingof theselfpersists,thesuccessfulcompletionofmourning,and/orthe
successfulintegrationofoneslifebecomes,toacertainextent,impossible.Inthat
case,mourningremainsimpeded.Itcannotproceedtocompletion.Itremainsaprocess
solely experiencedasonethatbringsbackthehelplessnessandtheshameofthepast.
Oritreducesitselftoreexperiencingthefeelingofdespair,lackofcontrol,and
helplessnessthatwasfeltatthetimeofthetrauma.Acceptingthepastasitwas,as
unavoidable,andjustifiedbyitscauses,isthusoneofthemostchallengingtasks
facingSetheandPaulD.Itisthemajorobstaclethathamperstheirattemptstointegrate
theirtraumatictimewithinthecontinuumoftheirlives.SoisitforCharlotte.
Bymaintainingtheirnarrativesinatraumatictime,DelboandMorrison
indicatelittlehopefortheirprotagonistsrecovery.Moreexactly,theypointat
possibilitiesforincompleteandpartialrecoveryonly,ifrecoveryisevenanoption.The
continuedsurgesoftraumainCharlotteandSethekeepthemindeed,andinthewordsof
Krystal,inastateofmisery.ItisapositionthatKrystaldescribesasastateof
impoverishmentoftheareasofonesmind. Itholdstheminaconditioninwhichan
I feelingofdestructiveselfsamenessispredominant.Besides,italsoleavesthem
infrequentandrecurringmomentsinwhichahypertrophiedandalienatedstateof
thenotIisprevailing.Assuch,theysufferfromwhatKrystalcallspseudophobia.It
leavesbothCharlotteandSetheinaposttraumaticdepletionoftheconsciously
recognizedspheresofselfhood.Thisstateofnotbeingabletofeelliketheirownselves
constitutesthemajorimpedimenttotheirworkingthrough.

131

Also,forKrystal,onefeelsanger,guilt,orshameinspecificconditionsof
trauma.Oneinstanceiswhenoneisunable,orunwilling,toacceptthenecessity,and
theinevitabilityofwhathashappened.Bothoeuvres,asIhavesuggested,pointat
theseformsofnonacceptance.Anotherformofdenialcomesacross,eventhoughitis
partiallysilenced.Itisrevealedthrougharecurringfeelingofoffense.Itrelates,inthis
case,notsomuchtotheinevitablecharacteroftheevents.Rather,itsuggeststhatthe
eventsweremadeevenmorepainfulthantheyshouldhavebeen.Throughabsenceof
understandingfromacommunityofoutsiders,theexperiencesofSetheandCharlotte
weremaderadicallyandexcessivelyhurtful.Namely,theirgriefwasexacerbateddueto
thelackofsupportthatCharlottesandSethesrespectivecommunitiesdisplayed.This
letsussuppose,then,thattheconcentrationcamporslaveryexperienceswere,somehow,
notinevitable.Butexperiencingthemcould,atleast,havebeenmoregenerativeof
empathyandcompassion.DelbosandMorrisonsworkssubtlyassumethatCharlottes
andSethesordealswouldhavebeennolessdevastating.Buttheymighthavebeenmore
bearable.Also,thetraumaatstakeactuallymovedbeyondindividualexperienceand
suffering.Thetrauma,bybeingalsointerpersonal,reachedatremendoussocial
dimensionofcatastrophe.Somuchso,thatsomeattemptsatrestoringafeelingof
intimacywiththeworldmayhavebeenfurtherhampered.Potentialhealing,ifany,
was,andthenremained,nourishedbysuspicion.Byproducingafeelingofcounterfeit
nurturance,asenseofdisbeliefinCharlotteandSethewasalsoopened.NeitherSethe
norCharlotewasabletoreintegratewiththeircommunitycompletelyontheirreturn.
Thislackofintegrationandupheldmistrustonlyaddedtotheirprocessofestrangement
(TraumaandAging8385).

132

Asweposedthatthetraumaticexperienceisboundtoafragmentationoftime,
thenextinquiryisthis.DoDelbosandMorrisonsnarrativespresumethattimecan
eventuallybereadjusted?Ifso,doattemptsatreintegratingasupposedly
chronologicallybasedlifeencourageoraffectthetraumatizedsubjectinherprocessof
reconstruction?Problematicasitis,thisquestionleadsustoturnfirsttoDerridaandto
hiscriticalunderstandingoftimeinthecontextofthereadabilityofthelegacyof
trauma(SpectersofMarx16).
InthewordsofHamletprinceofDenmark,atimeofdevastation,thatunhinges
time,isatimethatisoutofjoint(Hamlet1.5).Likewise,forDerrida,atimethat
isoutofjointisatimethatisdisarticulated,dislocated,dislodged.Itisatimeon
therunandrundown.Itisatimethatistraquetdtraqu,besidesbeing
deranged.Itisalsoatime,outoforderandmad.Itistheunmeasuredtimeof
Auschwitz,SweetHome,and124BluestoneRoad.Atimesuchasthis,offitshinges
andoffcourseisatimeofdisruption.For Derrida,itisachallengingtime,becauseit
canresistintegrationintooneslifenarrative.Bybeingatimebesideitself,
disadjusted,itonlyexistsbesidestheself(SpectersofMarx18).
ForDerrida,attemptstobringandmaintaintogetherthatwhichdoesnothold
together,canbetried.Thisstance,however,poseschallenges.Itisextremely
problematicbecauseitimpliesmaintainingthedisparateitself.Inourcase,the
disparateinquestionwouldbemorethantheunmeasuredtimeofannihilationanddeath.
Itwouldbethetimelivedafterthetrauma.Itwouldthusbeatimethatinvolves
experiencingtraumaseffects.Itis,assuch,notonlyatimeoftroublesomeconfrontation
foraselfreturnedtolifeinanaftermath.Itisalsoatimeforpainfulreinscriptionofan

133

existenceinacontinuouslifenarrativeorinaliteraryone,orboth.Derridaclaimsthat
themaintenanceofthedisparateshouldbethoughtinthefollowingterms.First,itis
tobegraspednotinthecontextofthepresent.Butitshouldbegraspedinthedis
locatedtimeofthepresent.Besides,Derridaposesacrucialquestionaroundthe
disparate,astoprobeifitcanjoin.Healsoasksifitcanbedialectically
transformed(17).Also,canthatwhichdoesnotholdtogethereventuallyjoin?Since
thedisparateinourcaseismadeupofseparateandcompletelydisjoinedcomponents,
ourinquirybecomesthis:cantheelementsofthedisparatemeetononesinglelifeline?
Cantheypossiblyconnect?RelatingthequestiontoDelbosandMorrisons
understandingofmemoryasindividualandculturalcomponentsofthedisparateisuseful
atthispoint.
FormsofmemoryatworkinDelbosandMorrisonstrilogiesareveryrevealing
ofvariouswaysofremembering.Onefacetofmemoryentailsamemoryofpersonalbut
alsocollectiveexperiencesofdeathandsuffering.Itistheformofmemorythathas
attachedtotraumatichistoriesofexterminationandslavery.Anotherformof
remembrance,locatedattheotherendofthespectrum,isalsorelativetomemory.That
formofrecollection,however,isconnectedtoalongstandingculturalmemory.That
memoryhasnotbeeninformedbyapastnecessarilytraumatic.Thismemoryis
groundedinvarioushistoriesoflongstandingcommunalexperiences.Whetheroralor
written,officialorunofficial,someofits(hi)storiesareingrainedinthecollective,but
alsoindividualmind.Actually,thesestorieshavesomewhatdefinedtheselvesovertime,
throughaspecificorparticularsenseofbelonging.Thememoriesofthiscollective
heritagemayevenhavebroughtindividualstogether.Theymayhavestrengthenedtheir

134

senseofselves.Thisculturalmemoryis,however,atrisk,sometimes.Itisespeciallyso
whenitisthreatenedwithcrashingintoatraumaticone.
Storiesofexterminationandexclusionunhingetheculturalmemoryof
individuals.Morethanlikely,theyaffecttheculturalmemoryofentirecommunitiesas
well.Becausetheyresistbeingfullyconfronted,traumatichistoriesofindividualsor
communitiesneedtobethoughtintermsofspectralpresence.InDelbosand
Morrisonsworks,thisspectralpresencerevealswhatDerridalabels,thedislocated
timeofthepresent.Withit,thememoryofdeathcomestosurfaceintheradicallydis
jointedtimerenderedbythenarrative.Thisresurfacingthustakesplace,forDerridas,
inatimewithoutcertainconjunction.Hefurtherassertsthat,withtheideaofadis
jointedtime,hedoesnotrefertoatimewhosejoiningissimplynegated.Whentime
isdisjointed,then,itisnotsolelybroken,mistreated,dysfunctional.Timeisnot
disadjusted,either,inDerridaswords,accordingtoadysofnegativeopposition.
Neitherisitdisjointedthroughadialecticaldisjunction.Rather,heargues,theoutof
jointcharacteroftimereferstoatimewithoutcertainjoiningordeterminable
conjunction.
Derridaclaimsthat,whatissaidhereaboutthetimeisalsovalid,consequently
andbythesametoken,forhistory.Forhim,historythen,whenitisoutofjoint,isa
history,withoutcertainjoining(SpectersofMarx18).Itisalsowithoutdeterminable
conjunction.WemaythenaskiftimesandformsofmemoryinDelbosandMorrisons
worksexistwithoutcertainjoining?Aretheydisjointed?Also,cansome
memoriesofthetraumaticpastbeleftoutanddisposedof?Eventually,canleftbehind

135

traumaticfragmentsbejoinedtoothermemories,andbeinscribedinahistorylinemade
atlastbearable?
Anabsenceofjoiningbetweentraumatichistoriesandculturalhistoriesis
suggestedinbothDelbosandMorrisonsoeuvres.Thisabsenceofjoiningiswhat
actuallyreducesthetraumatizedsubjectivitiesoftheprotagoniststoacontinuedstateof
despair.Itmakesthemcontinuallyexistinalifethatremainsgroundedina
hauntology,ratherthaninanontologyofbeing.Also,thetraumatizedsubjectivities
ofCharlotteandSethearedestinedtoliveinamentalstateofundecidedness.Theyexist
attheconfinesbetweenlifeanddeath,neitherherenorthereexclusively,but
presentinbothtimesandplacessimultaneously.Bymentallyoccupyingthesetimesand
placeschaotically,theyareunabletoembracelifetoafullextent(SpectersofMarx
xviii).
Historiesofexterminationandslaverythusremainhaunting.Notonlysolely
becauseofthetraumatictracesthatthefirstblowleft.Thesehistoriesremainhaunting
also,becauseofthecontinuedactivationoftrauma,andtheongoingexistenceofthe
disparate.Onceinscribed,thetraumatictracescannotbeassimilated,absorbed,or
dialecticallyresolved.ForDerrida,thisisimpossibleandnecessarilyso.Also,the
excessthatthesetraumaticencountershaveproducedcannot,inthewordsofLyotard,
bedetachedbycutting.Norcantheybeexcised.Assuch,theyaretoremainas
nonassimilated,andtheyarenonassimilable.Atthispoint,Iproposethatthecontinued
tormentingrevealedinDelbosandMorrisonsworksismeanttobereadassuch.Itis
thesignoftheunassimilablecharacteroftrauma.ItisthatpainthatCharlotteandSethe
areunabletodigest.

136

Lyotardcontendsthatthetimeoftheunconsciousaffect,withthefirstblow,is
investedwithtraumatictracesandfragments.Hefurtherobservesthatthetimeof
trauma,bybeingthere,willremainthere(Heideggerandthejews17).Itcertainly
doessointhecasesofCharlotteandSethe.SimilartotherememorythatSethe
unsuccessfullyattemptstoescape,thattime,inSetheswords,isgoingtoalwaysbe
there.Sheaddsthat,itwillevenbe,waitingforyou,eventhoughitsalloverover
anddonewith.AsSethefurthercomments,ThatshowcomeIhadtogetallmy
childrenout.Nomatterwhat(Beloved 36).
Thetimeoftheunconsciousaffectremainswithintheindividual.Itbecomes
aninescapableandirremediablecomponentofheremotionallifetotheextentthatit
continuestoexistasabitmonstrous,unformed,confusing,confounding,besidesbeing
ungraspablebyconsciousness.Asaresult,Lyotardcontends,thesoulisexceeded.
Itisdispossessed,passedbeyond,excisedthroughbythissomething.AsLyotard
concludes,thisistheconstitutiveinfirmityofthesoul,itsinfancyanditsmisery
(Heideggerandthejews1617).
Derridahasinquiredintothisinfirmityofthesoulinviewofappeasingthe
traumaofitsmisery.Forhim,historycan,however,alsoconsistinrepairing,with
effectsofconjuncture,thetemporaldisjoining.ForDerrida,thisrepairingwouldbe
operatedandenactedthroughwhathenamestheworld.DelbosUneconnaissance
inutileandMorrisonsJazzcan,atthispoint,beappraisedwiththefollowingconcernin
mind:how,forDelboandMorrison,canthetemporaldisjoiningthatwasenacted
throughthetraumaticcharacterof AucunandBelovedcometoberepairedwith
effectsofconjuncture?Aquestion,underlyingtheconcernjustformulated,wouldbe,

137

ifsuchrepairoftemporaldisjoiningisevenpossibleatall(SpectersofMarx18).
Probingfurtherintothequestionofmemorywillproveuseful.
In Lammoireetlesjours,Delbomakesacrucial distinctionbetweentwotypes
ofmemory.Onememoryshecalls,lammoireprofonde.Itisthememorythat
LawrenceLangerdiscussesasdeepmemory.Itisthememorythattriestorecallthe
Auschwitzselfasitwasthen.Delbodistinguishesitfromlammoireordinaire,a
formofcommonmemory(Lammoireetlesjours13). Commonmemoryhasadual
function.AsLangerhasit,itattemptstorestoretheselftoitsnormalpreandpost
camproutines.Italsooffersdetachedportraits,fromthevantagepointoftoday,of
whatitmusthavebeenlikethen.Assuch,forLanger,deepmemorysuspectsand
dependsoncommonmemory.Itknowswhatcommonmemorycannotknowbuttries
nonethelesstoexpress(HolocaustTestimonies56).Thesetwokindsofmemory
intrudeoneachother.TheyconstantlydisrupttheflowofCharlottesexperiencesof
livingandnarrating.Thedistinctionbetweenthesetwowaysofrememberingisclosely
relatedtothememoryframeworkthatMorrisonsworkalsosuggests.Anargumentby
SamDurrant,inhisappraisingtheworkofmourninginthepostcolonialnovel,makes
thisparticularlyclear.Hispointisextremelyrevealing.Itrevolvesaroundmemoryand
waysofremembranceaswell.ItalsoleadstoaquestionthatIwillposehere.Namely,
cantraumaticmemoryandnontraumaticmemorysomehowjoin?Cantheybeinscribed
inasinglelineofhistory?Ifso,cantherepossiblybepointsofjunctureinpersonal
narratives?EventhoughtheargumentthatDurrantmakesconcernsMorrisonswork
morespecifically,itisofrelevancetoDelbosprojectalso.Bothtexts,indeed,testifyto
personalstoriesthatseemtoremainunintegrated.Theyalsorevealacomplexinterplay

138

betweenformsofmemoryunabletoleavethepainofthepasttothepast.Bothtexts,
however,contemplateeventualitiesforatleastconfrontingtraumainamannerthatdoes
notcompletelyexcludeattemptstogrowoutofit.
ForSamDurrant,Morrisonsnovelsfunctionattwolevels.Ononelevel,
MorrisonsnovelsengageinwhathelabelsthenarrativizationofAfricanAmerican
experience.DurrantrelatesthisnarrativizationofAfricanAmericanculturalhistoryto
whathecoinsaculturalmemory.Forhim,thisculturalmemorycanbeintegratedand
assimilatedintotheindividualconsciousness.Itusuallyactsasacomplementtothe
individualssenseofidentity.Itisahealthymodeofremembrance.Itsuggestsa
formofcommemorationthatismainlyselfcentered.Itinformsanddevelops,butalso
reinforces,asenseofindividualandsocialsubjectivity.Italignstheidentityoftheself
withamutualsenseofcommunalbelonging.ForDurrant,thisformofcultural
memoryisnotonlycriticalfortheself.Itisalsocrucialforthecommunity.It
comprises,inallitsforms,theverbalaccountsofacommunityshistory.
Ontheotherhand,Durrantclaims,Morrisonsnovelsencompassanotherformof
memory.ItdealswiththerealityofwhathelabelstheracialmemoryoftheAfrican
Americanexperience.Thatracialmemory,accordingtoDurrant,remains
nonverbalizedeventhoughitpassesitselfonfromgenerationtogenerationasifit
weresecretlyencryptedwithintheculturaltext.Indeed,forDurrant,theweightofthe
wholeracecannotactuallybeaccommodatedwithinconsciousness.Butthepresence
andtracesofthatracialmemorycan,however,bemadeperceptible.
MorrisonsracialmemoryandDelbosdeepmemoryareverycloselyrelated.
Theyarelinkedtothetraumaticmemorythatwehavetracedintheirtexts.Itisa

139

memorythatpassesitselffromgenerationtogenerationasasymptomoraffect.It
crossesbarriersoftimesandplaces.Also,forDurrant,ittransmitsitselfthroughthe
memoryofthebody.Itis,infact,thememoryoftheviolenceinflictedonaracially
markedbody.So,inDurrantsclaim,aracialmemoryisabodilymemory.Bybodily
memory,Durrantmeansthatitisamemorythattakesonabodilyform.Itdoesso
preciselybecauseofthis.Namely,forDurrant,itexceedsboththeindividualsand
thecommunityscapacityforverbalizationandmourning.Assuch,itfunctions,inthe
wordsofKrystal,assomeoftheundifferentiated,mostlysomatic,unverbalizedaffect
responsesthatcanadverselyaffectbothindividualsandcommunities(Traumaand
Aging87).ForDurrant,allsubjectsareinpossessionofaculturalmemory.Onlythe
raciallymarkedaretrulyinpossessionofaracialmemory.Tohim,thisracialmemory
amountsthentoaninheritedmemoryofcollectivenegation(PostcolonialNarrative
80).
Thetheoreticalorcriticalwaysinwhichreconfigurationsorconfigurationsof
identitycantakeplaceforsufferersoftraumahavenourishedsomeofthediscussionso
far.SohavetheliterarymannersinwhichDelbosAucunandMorrisonsBeloved
anticipatethedesolationofthefuture.InowproposetolookintoUneconnaissance
inutileandJazztoinquireintohowbothauthorsprojectthepossibilitiesofalifetobe
(re)builtinthecircumstancesofanaftermath.Itimpliesexaminingiforhowtheir
secondvolumesnotonlyinscribe,butalsotranscend,intheformsofacollectiveand
culturalmemory,theirsubjectivelytraumatizedones.
Theformsofmemoryatstakehere,ifwefollowDerridasargument,suggestthat
bothdeepmemoryandracialmemoryareingrainedinatimethatcanhaveno

140

joining(SpectersofMarx18).DelbosdeepmemoryandMorrisonsracialmemorydo
indeedrelatetoformsofamoregenerallyspeakingtraumaticmemory.Thequestion
abouttheirrealityconcernswhetherracialordeepmemorycanbeunregistered
anddysinscribed,touseDerridaswordplay.Canatemporaldisjoining,afterall,
leadtoajoiningorrejoining?Ormoreprecisely,canracialordeepmemorybere
inscribedinculturalorordinarymemorywitheffectofconjuncture?(SpectersofMarx
18).
In Uneconnaissanceinutile,Delbodiscussesafearoflosinghermemory.More
specifically,sheexpressesananxietyatlosingthememorythatweearlierpositedasher
commonorordinarymemory(HolocaustTestimonies5).Thisfearisactually
embeddedinanotherdreadfulpresumption.Itisgroundedintheeventualityoflosing
connection,orjoining,withanordinaryreality,orwhatDerridacallstheworld. Une
connaissanceinutileinsistsatfirstonthechallengesfacingcampinmatesintryingto
retainamemoryofalmosterasedformsofexistence.Italsopointsatthespectacular
endeavorsthatsomeprisonersdidtakeuponthemselvestokeepasenseofconnectionto
theirhistories.Delbowasoneofthem.Shetriedtocontainandpushbackahideous
specter,thatofannihilation.Itledhertokeepaliveacommonmemoryandasenseof
realityofwhichshewouldnotletgo,norseelost,ordisconnected.ForDerrida,Delbos
effortsservedtomaintainandkeeptogethersomethingcrucial.Somethingthatwas
meanttobedestroyedwithoutleavingtraces.(SpectersofMarx18).
Afearoflosingonesmemoryisalsogroundedinafearoflosingasenseofself.
Itisusefultorememberherethat,forSusanBrison,traumacanbringalonganundoing
oftheself.Itdoessobybreakingtheongoingnarrativeofthetraumatizedperson.

141

ForBrison,byseveringtheconnectionsamongrememberedpast,livedpresent,and
anticipatedfuture,traumashattersonessenseofpersonhood.Also,asBrison
claims,theabilitytoformaplanoflife,then,andafter,isconsideredbysometobe
essentialtopersonhood.Butitislostwhenonelosesasenseofonestemporalbeing.
Besides,italsoshattersonesfundamentalassumptionsabouttheworld.Trauma,by
fracturingonessenseofsafetyintheworld,alsoshattersonessenseofexistingin
thatworld(TraumaNarratives4041).Besides,forJudithHerman,whenthehuman
systemofselfdefensebecomesoverwhelmedanddisorganized,asinthecaseof
trauma,neitherresistancenorescapebecomespossible.Traumaticevents,then,
confronthumanbeingswiththeextremitiesofhelplessnessandterror.Theyalso
evokeresponsesofcatastrophe.Andbecausetheyaretraumatic,theseevents
overwhelmtheordinaryhumanadaptationstolife(TraumaandRecovery34).The
threatsofannihilation,continuallyposedtoDelboatthecamp,were,indeed,
overwhelming.Theyinduced,however,achainofresponsesthatwereactuallyactsof
resistance.
Inthefollowingexcerpt,Delboexplainshowactsofsurvivalcantaketheformof
mentallyexercisinghermemory.Bysustainingformsofcommonmemory,Delbowas
capableofremainingpartiallyconnectedtoasenseofselfthatwasnottotally
dehumanized. Delboremembersthethoughtprocessesthatkepthergoing:
DepuisAuschwitz,javaispeurdeperdrelammoire.Perdrelammoire,cestse
perdresoimme,cestntreplussoi.Etjavaisinventtoutessortesdexercices
pourfairetravaillermammoire:merappelertouslesnumrosdetlphoneque
javaissus,touteslesstationsdunelignedemtro,touteslesboutiquesdelarue
Caumartin.Javaisrussi,auprixdeffortsinfinis,merappelercinquantesept
pomes.Javaistellementpeurdelesvoirschapperquejemelesrcitaistous
chaquejour,touslunaprslautre,pendantlappel.Javaiseutantdepeineles

142

retrouver!Ilmavaitfalluparfoisdesjourspourunseulvers,pourunseulmot,
quirefusaientderevenir.(Uneconnaissanceinutile12425)
Aslongasshecontinuedtoremainattunedtoanordinarysenseofself,she
retainedasenseofpersonhood.Assuch,notonlydidDelbocometothinkupofmental
devicestoremainattachedtotheworld.Notonlydidsheapplymnemotechnical
stratagemstopreventerasureofanontraumaticemotionallife,suchastheonesheused
toknowinFrance.Shealsosucceededinpreservingcommonformsofmemory,from
which,forLyotard,theSSdideverythingpossibletoremovealltraces(Heideggerand
thejews25).
ThesurvivalactsinwhichDelboengagedarewhatChamberscallsmovementsof
relay.Thesemovements,vitalinincreasingCharlotteschancesofreturn,becameher
ownwayofremainingattachedtoasenseofthereal.Theserelaysoccurredataplace
wheredeathandlifearelikewisenotseparate.Theyvergedalongtheborderswhere
deathandlifeareactuallycloselyjoined.Theserelays,however,enabledherto
maintainconnectiontotheworldoftheliving.Delbocourageouslyperformedheractsof
survivalaroundthelivinginthecamp,whowerelivingonsuchintimatetermswiththe
deadthattheyactuallyfelttheywereinhabitingthespaceofdeathalready.Shekept
goingbackandforthbetweenthedisparateplaces,selves,andmemoriesofthecamp
(UntimelyInterventions215).Bytakingplacebetweenacommonmemoryanda
traumaticone,therelaysthusservedthefollowingpurpose.Theyenabledpointsof
conjuncturebetweenDelbosself,anordinaryorcommonone,andhertraumatizedone.
TherelayingmovementsthatDelbonarrativelyexposesandperformedat
Auschwitz,RaiskoLaboratory,andRavensbrck,arenumerous.Oneparticularinstance
involvesthecarryingofthedeadbodiesofDelboscompanions,BertheandAnneMarie,

143

backtotheconcentrationcamp.Inthisepisode,Delbobringstogetheraheritageof
ordinarywaysofbeingwithtraumaticones.Bycojoiningtheworldofthedeadwith
thatoftheliving,sheemotionallysucceedsinbridgingthegapbetweenthesetwo.
Indeed,sheinitiallyacknowledgesthatdabord,cestBertheetAnneMariequenous
portons.Butthen,sheforciblyhastoadmitthatthemovementsofrelaynecessarily
involve,atsomepoint,aonewaypassagetotheworldofthedead.Assuch,thispassage
eventuallycomestoexcludetheinitialjoiningtotheworldoftheliving.Shecontends
thatsoon,itisnotBertheandAnneMariethatwearecarrying(AuschwitzandAfter
80). Shewritesthat,Bienttcenesontplusquedesfardeauxtroplourds,quinous
chappentchaquemouvement(Aucun 129). Atthispoint,Delboactually
contaminatestheworldofthelivingwiththatofthedead.Shenarrativelybringsthe
livingintothespaceswherethedeadforcetheircoexistencewiththemandconfuse
them.Inthisinstance,therelayconcomitantlyoperatesonanotherlevel.It
metaphoricallyprefiguresanewformofknowledge.Thisknowledge,likewise,is
confusingandcontaminatingtotheliving.Assuch,theknowledgethatDelboandher
companionsgatheredinthefaceofdeathascarriersofthedeadactuallyturnsoutto
be,notinstructiveordidactic,asonemightexpect.Rather,itturnsouttobehopelessly
useless.Thisknowledge,whoseuselessnessDelborevealsthroughthetitleofher
secondworkinthetrilogy,isdespairinglyso(Uneconnaissanceinutile185).Inthe
instancediscussed,itleavesthefouractualcarriersofthedeadBertheandAnneMarie
astoundedwithhelplessnessanddespair.Generallyormetaphoricallyspeaking,itpoints
alsoatleavinganycarrierorrelayerofdeathconfoundedwithhopelessnessalso.

144

Brisoncontendsthatanundoingoftheselfbytraumacanactuallyberemade
throughactsofmemory.Inthatperspective,theselfcan beprojectedina
narrative,withabeginning,middle,andend.Assuch,forBrison,thesurvivor
becomes,atthesametimeandonceagain,asecondperson.Mostimportantly,the
survivor/narratorisalso,however,dependentonthelistenerinordertoreturnto
personhood.Tellingonesnarrativecanthuscontributetorecovery.Significantly
enough,though,thesurvivorstestimoniesmustthusbeheard,ifrecoveryfromtrauma
istobepossible(TraumaNarratives4149).
Delboclaimsthattheknowledgeshegatheredatthecampwasnotonlyuseless.
Itwasalsoineffectualandtonoavail(Uneconnaissanceinutile185).Asshewritesin
AuschwitzandAfter,
Icamebackfromthedead
andbelieved
thisgavemetheright
tospeaktoothers
butwhenIfoundmyselffacetofacewiththem
Ihadnothingtosay
because
Ilearned
overthere
thatyoucannotspeaktoothers.
(228)
Themannerinwhichherownandotherprisonerstestimonieswerereceivedafter
liberationdictated,toacertainextent,thesuccessorfailureoftheirprocessofrecovery.
ThetitleofDelbossecondwork,aswellasthewordsjustquoted,letusassumethatthe
receptiontohertestimonyatthetimewas,ifnotindifference,atleastincomprehension.
Movedbyadesiretoforgetassoonaspossiblethewarera,postwaraudiencesrevealed
themselvesinattentiveorinhospitabletotheprisonersstories.Yet,asBrisoncontends,

145

inordertoenteranexperienceof unlearningof trauma,thesurvivorstestimoniesmust

beheard(TraumaNarratives41).Inthiscase,theinattentivenessonthepartofthe
livingactuallyinfringedonthesurvivorsprocessesofrecovery.
AsDelbofurtherwrites,Leslarmescoulentdefatigueetdimpuissance.Et
noussouffronsdanscettechairmortecommesielletaitvivante. Alongwiththe
expressionoftheuselessnessofknowledgethatDelboexpressesin AuschwitzandAfter,
shealsoskillfullyinitiatesamovementofreversal.Thatreversalfigurativelyreturnsthe
twodeadbodiestotheworldoftheliving.Herpointhereistoinsistontheabsurdityof
thewholeexperience.Indeed,andstrangelyenough,Delboliterallyreinscribesthe
corpsesintheworldofsurvivors.Shedoessoeventhoughhercompanions,atthetime,
arealreadydead. Delbowrites,Laplanchesouslescuisseslescorche,lescoupe.
Berthe.AnneMarie(Aucun129). Insistingonthesufferingofcorpsesontowhichshe
projectshumanqualities,Delbofacilitatesthemovementofrelaytobeactuallyreckoned
asuseless.Itissobecausetheworldoftheliving,tosomeextent,ismetaphoricallydead
anddeaftoherplea.Inthispassage,Delbothusacts,inthewordsofMichaelRothberg,
asthebearerofanuncannydoubleheritage(TraumaticRealism153).Assuch,the
knowledgeshebringstousthroughrelayisassomberandasuselessasthedevastation
thatsustainedit. Asshewritesin Uneconnaissanceinutile,
Lammoiremestrevenue
etavecelleunesouffrance
quimafaitmenretourner
lapatriedelinconnu
Ctaitencoreunepatrieterrestre
etriendemoinepeutfuir
jemepossdetoute
etcetteconnaissance
acquiseaufonddudsespoir

146

Alorsvoussaurez
quil nefautpasparleraveclamort
cestuneconnaissanceinutile.
Dansunmonde
onesontpasvivants
ceuxquicroientltre
touteconnaissancedevientinutile
quipossdelautre
etpourvivre
ilvautmieuxneriensavoir
neriensavoirduprixdelavie
unjeunehommequivamourir
Jaiparlaveclamort
alors
jesais
commetropdechosesapprisestaientvaines
maisjelaisuauprixdesouffrance
sigrande
quejemedemande
silvalaitlapeine
(18485)
Anothermovementoftraumaticrelay,inthewordsofRothbergthatcontaminates
thereceiverofknowledgethatisuselessisenactedinthefollowingexample
(TraumaticRealism153).ItconcernsanexchangeofgiftsthattakesplaceattheRaisko
LaboratoryduringaChristmasparty.Atthatpoint,Delbointerrogateshowtospend
Christmasatadeathcamp.Shealsobringstolightthechasmthatseparatesthecommon
Christianactofrejoicingatabirth,thatofChrist,andthetraumaticrealityofhavingto
witnesstheexterminationofmillionsofhumanbeings. Atthispoint,Delboasks,
CommentpassaitonNolaucampdelamort. Inthisinstance,thedeathprocessedby
anextraordinarygenocideisrelayedthroughadoll,ateddybear.Theteddybeararrived
atAuschwitzdanslesbrasdunepetitefille.Itwasthenleftintheantechamberof
death.Theteddybearisfirstpicturednexttothelittlegirlsclothing,whichshehas
neatlyfolded.Sheputittherewhileshewasgettingreadyforthedeadlyshower. Itis,as

147

such,depictedwithsesvtementsbienplislentredeladouche.Inthisinstance,
thebearrelaystheknowledgeofacriminaldeathatatimeofcelebrationoflifeandbirth.
RecoveredbyaprisoneroftheSondercommandoworkingatthecrematorium,thebear
eventuallycomestobegiven asagiftattheChristmasparty. AsDelbowrites,Aubout
delatable,unejeunefillecaressaitunpetitoursquelleavaitreu.Unoursdepeluche
roseavecunefaveuraucou. HailedbyMadeleine,oneofhercompanions,Delbo
writes,Regarde,meditMadeleine,regarde! Cestunnounours!Unnounours
denfant.AsDelboandhergrouprememberedthearrivalofthegroupofJewsandthe
littlegirlthatmorning,gassedtodeathontheirarrival,shewrites,Etsavoixsaltra. Je
regardailoursdepeluche.Ctaitterrible(Aucun8687).
Twootherexamplesofrelayareworthexamining.Theybothfocusoninstances
inwhichlifeanddeatharecojoined,andalsoresultinfruitlessandhopelessknowledge.
Theseinstances,however,donotsolelyfocusontheuselessnessofknowingand
witnessingdeath.TheypointatthevitalityofDelbosmemory.Yet,thetwoexcerpts
alsopointouttheextenttowhichDelbosordinarymemoryrisksbeingdestroyedand
overwhelmedbyhertraumaticone.
OneexampleinscribesitselfaroundLeMaladeimaginaire,aplaybyMolire.It
istheplaythatformertheatreassistantDelboandhercompanionsdecidedtorewrite
frommemory,andsetupforperformance.ItindicatestheforceofmemorythatDelbo
andhercompanionsusedasatoolofsurvival.Theplay,performedatRaiskoonthe
SundayafterChristmasin1943,was,inthewordsofCharlotte,magnificentinthe
humangenerositythatitcaptured.Itsrehearsalsrequired,however,sucheffortsof
memoryonthepartofitsproducersandactorsastobeastounding.EventhoughDelbos

148

conditionsoflivinghadslightlyimprovedbythen,thewholeundertakingremained
amazinglypainstaking. Assheremembers,
Onabeauavoirunepicebienentte,en voiretenentendrelespersonnages,
cestunetchedifficilequirelvedutyphus,estconstammenthabitparla
faim.Cellesquipouvaientaidaient.Unerpliquetaitsouventlavictoiredune
journe.(Uneconnaissanceinutile91)
Thesecondinstanceofhergoingbackandforthbetweenanordinary
representationoftheworldandatraumaticonetookplace,onaneverydaybasis,atroll
call.ItincitedDelbotodailyreciteMoliresMisanthrope,soastokeepherordinary
memoryalive.Bothinstancespointtothefollowingquestion:howdoesordidDelbos
ordinarymemorysucceedinmaintainingtogether,witheffectsofconjuncture,that
whichhadbeendisjoined? (SpectersofMarx18). AsDelboremembers,
JaiapprisLeMisanthropeparcoeur,unfragmentchaquesoir,quejemerptais
lappeldulendemainmatin.Bienttjaisutoutelapice,quiduraitpresque
toutlappel.Etjusquaudpart,jaigardlabrochuredansmagorge.(Une
connaissanceinutile
12425)
Delbosattemptatmaintainingconnectionswithanoutsideworldisgrounded,in
bothcases,inanordinarymemorythatwantstoliveon.ForMichaelRothberg,this
consciousundertakingbyDelboandhercompanionsatremainingconnectedwereactsof
thewilltosurvive.Theseacts,hecontends,representedthedesiretopreservetheself
throughthecommunity.Actually,theyweresustainedthroughconnectionstoasenseof
therealthroughcommunalefforts.ForRothberg,theseconsciousactsofsurvivalwere
alsomainlygroundedinthepreservationofsomemodicumof continuitybetweenthe
everydayandtheextreme.Inhiswords,itispreciselythisrelativepreservationofa
senseofcontinuityandsolidaritywithinacommunityestablishedinextreme

149

circumstancethatactuallyresultedinanexceptional,uniquesurvivalrateforthe
womenofDelbosgroup(TraumaticRealism150).
InanotherinstanceofDelbosinscribinganexperienceofnormalityattheheart
ofextremity,theexperiencedoesnotmakeacognitiveorverbalstatement.Butit
appealstothememoryofinstinctualorlearnedgesturesusedinordinarylifethat,Delbo
confesses,shehadtorelearninextremecircumstances.Theepisodehasherreconnect
toordinarygesturesthatatraumaticmemoryhasthreatenedtodestroy.Thisepisode,set
sixtysevendaysafterherarrivalinAuschwitz,hasDelbodosomesimplegesturesthat
shehasforgottenbecauseofthelivingconditionsatthecamp.ItalsohasDelbosavor,
foranextremelyshortmoment,areprievefromcamplife.Inthisepisode,Delbo
describesheropportunityofcleaningherbody.Itmakesherrealizehowdreadfully
meagerandfilthyithasbecome.Delborecallsthebathingsessionsheexperiencedinthe
coldwateroftheriverbythedeathcampinthemonthofApril.Hermemoryinsistson
theextraordinarycorporalchangesthathaveoccurredsinceshehasarrived.Italso
expressesfeelingsofastonishmentatthinkingofhowsimplegesturesoflifecanbeeasily
forgotteninchangedcircumstances.Delboperformsthemwithasenseofrediscovery.
Shewrites,
Aprsavoirrangchaussures,jaquetteetfoulard,jaienlevmesbas.Jeneles
avaispasenlevsdepuislarrive,depuissoixanteseptjours.Jelesairetirsen
lesretournant.Alapointedupied,jaisentiunersistance.Lesbastaient
colls.Jaitirunpeufortetlesbassontvenuslenvers,avecundrlede
dessinaubout...Jairegardmespieds.Ilstaientnoirsdecrasse,et,aubout,
dunnoirparticulier,pluttviolet,avecdespaisseursschesauxorteilsetmes
orteilstaientbizarrementdguisssauflesdeuxgros,ilsavaientperduleur
ongle.Etctaientlesonglesqui,dtachsetcollsauxbas,yfaisaientce
curieuxdessin. Aprs,jaicomprisquemesorteilsavaientdgeler...Voirses
onglesdepiedincrustsdanssesbas,jevousassurequecesttonnant.

150

Cestmystrieux,lodorat.Ilyavaitlongtempsquejtaisrentre,etjeprenais
alorsaumoinsdeuxbainschaquejourunevraiemanieenmefrottantavecun
bonsavon,ilyavaitdessemainesquejtaisrentre,quejesentaistoujourssur
moilodeurducamp,uneodeurdepurinetdecharogne.Etcejourl,prsdu
ruisseau,jaitmaculotteempeseparladiarrheschesivouscroyezquil
yavaitdupapierouquoiquecesoit,avantquelherberepousseetjenaipas
tcureparlodeur.
Jesuisdescenduedansleau.Elletaitfroideetjenaitsaisie.Ellevenait
peineaudessusdeschevillesetctaitunsurprenantcontact,lecontactdeleau
surlapeau.
Maintenant,jecommenceparo?...jemesuispassdeleausurlafigure.
Daborddoucement,parcequecettesensationdeleausurlevisagetaitsi
nouvelle,simerveilleuse,maisjemesuisvitereprise.Ilnyavaitpasdetemps
perdre.(Uneconnaissanceinutile6061)
DespitetheeffortsthatDelbomadetoremainconnectedtoanordinaryrealityin
thecamp,sheadmits,however,thatshenevertotallysucceededindoingso.Assuch,
shedeclaredthatinthecamp,onecouldneverpretendortakerefugeintheimaginary. In
Lammoireetlesjours,Delbowrites,aucamp,onnepouvaitjamaisfairesemblant,
jamaisserfugierdanslimaginaire. Likewise,herfriendandcompanionYvonne
Picart,inanattempttoalleviateherownsufferingoncewonderedwhyshecouldnot
pictureherselfcarryingherbookstooneofherclassesonboulevardSaintMichel,
insteadofbricksfromthemarsh.Assherepliedtoherself,Lesmainsbleuesdefroid,
leslvresfenduesparlesgerures,sheclaimedthatadistancingfromrealitywasutterly
impossible. Sheremembers,Cestimpossible. Atthecamp,onnepeutsimaginer,
nitreautre,nitreailleurs(12). In HolocaustTestimonies,Langercontendsthat
Endeavorstoleave[thecamp]behindnow proveasfutileasattemptstoescapefromits
realityintoanimaginedfuturethen(4). AsDelboherselfclaimsin Lammoireetles
jours
Quandjercitaisunpome,quandjeracontaisunlivreouunepicedethatre
mescamaradesautourdemoi,toutenbchantlabouedumarais,ctaitpourme
garderenvie,pourgardermammoire,pourdemeurermoimme,menassurer.

151

Celanerussissaitjamaisannuler,mmeuneseconde,lemomentquejevivais.
Ctaitunegrandevictoiresurlhorreurquepenser,sesouvenir,maiscelanen
attnuaitrien.Laralittaitl,mortelle.Impossibledesenabstraire.
AsDelbofurthercontends,
AAuschwitz,laralittaitsicrasante,lasouffrance,lafatigue,lefroidsi
extrmes,quenousnavionsaucunenergiederestepourceteffortde
ddoublement.
Theweightofthetraumaofthepast,indelibleandprofound,eludescoherence
andattachmenttoanordinarylife.Italsoprevents,asinthecaseofDelbo,atotal
reconnectiontotheself,present,andfuture.Uponherreturn,Delbowonderedaboutthe
waysavailabletogetawayorwithdrawfromtherealityofAuschwitz.Sheconfessed,in
fact,anincapacitytogiveasatisfactoryansweronhowtoavoidthecampspresence.
NotonlywereherchancesofescapingAuschwitzlimitedthen.Thepotentialityofa
completereturnfromitarealsolimitedandremainscarcenow. Asshewrites,
Commentaijefaitpourmen dgagerauretour,pourvivreaujourdhui?Une
questionquonmeposesouvent,laquellejechercheunerponse,sansla
trouver. (12)
Shefurtherdeclares,
Auschwitzestsiprofondmentgravdansmammoirequejenenoublieaucun
instant.Alors,vousvivezavecAuschwitz? Non,jevisct.Auschwitzest
l,inaltrable,prcis,maisenveloppdanslapeaudelammoire,peautanche
quilisoledemonmoiactuel.(13)
Tomakeherpointevenclearer,Delbometaphoricallyusestheimageofasnakesskin.
Throughthemetaphorofaskinthatshecannotshed,Delboinsistsontheinalterabilityof
thepresenceofAuschwitzinhermemory.Atfirst,shesetsouttoexplainthataserpent
canrenewitsskin.Itshedstheoldskinbyleavingitbehind.Thatway,itcanstart
afreshasaneworganismfittedandprotectedbyanewbodyenvelope.Unlikethe
serpent,Delboclaimsthatshe,however,wasunabletoshedhertraumaticskin. Neither

152

couldsherenewhermemory. Asshecontends,Aladiffrencedelapeaudeserpent,la
peaudelammoireneserenouvellepas.Eventually,shehopedthattheskinofher
memory,sinceitcouldnotshed,wouldgrowthickerandharder.Sheprayedthatit
wouldalsokeepherseparatefromherexperienceatAuschwitz.Assuch,shebeggedfor
theskinofhermemorytoremainstrongandimpermeable.ShepleadsOh! Quelle
durcisseencore. Fearing,however,thatherdistancingfromAuschwitzwouldonlybe
anillusion,shecomments,Hlas! Jecrainssouventquellesamincisse,quellecraque,
quelecampmerattrape.Ypensermefaittremblerdapprhension(Lammoireetles
jours13).
Whileatthecamp,Delbowasfacedwiththeimpossibilityofescapingthereality
ofAuschwitz.Shecouldnotdistinctlyseparateatraumatizedselffromanordinaryor
commononeeither.WhatLawrenceLangercallsaprotectivemovementofde
doublingoftheselfwasthusimpossibleforDelboatthecamp(HolocaustTestimonies
5).Throughaninterestingmovementof reversal,however,thisdedoublingoftheself
thatDelboclaimswasabsentatAuschwitziswhatactuallymadeherlifetolerableupon
herreturn.Assheasserts,
Cestunegrandechance,sansdoute,quenepasmereconnatredanscemoiqui
taitAuschwitz.Enrevenirtaitsipeuprobable,quilmesemblenytrepas
alle.Aucontrairedeceuxdontlaviesestarrteauseuilduretour,quidepuis
viventensurvie,moi,jailesentimentquecellequitaitaucamp,cenestpas
moi,cenestpaslapersonnequiestl,enfacedevous.Non,cesttrop
incroyable.Ettoutcequiestarrivcetteautre,celledAuschwitz,nemetouche
pas,moi,maintenant,nemeconcernepas,tantsontspareslammoireprofonde
etlammoireordinaire.Jevisdansuntredouble.LedoubledAuschwitzne
megnepas,nesemlepasdemavie.Commesicentaitpasmoidutout.
Sanscettecoupure,jenauraispaspurevivre. (Lammoireetlesjours13)
ThisdedoublingthatDelbodescribesobviouslyinvalidatesthequestionofre
writingalifehistoryinacontinuum.ItalsopreemptsreinscribingthetimethatDelbo

153

experiencedastraumaticinhereverydaylife.Reintegratingcontinuityintime,atime
withconjuncturewasthus,ifnotimpossibleforDelbo,veryunlikely(SpectersofMarx
18).Assuch,theselfthatDelboattempted,inMorrisonswords,toremakeafter
Auschwitzwasnotonlydamaged(Jazz229).Itremainedfragmentedandfragileaswell.
Inhercase,aremakingofselfdistinctfromatraumatizedonecouldnotbedurably
accomplished(TraumaNarratives39). Assheclaims,
LapeaudontsenveloppelammoiredAuschwitzestsolide.Elleclatepourtant
quelquefois,etrestituetoutsoncontenu.Surlerve,lavolontnaaucun
pouvoir.Etdanscesrvesl,jemerevois,moi,oui,moi,tellequejesaisque
jtais:tenantpeinedebout,lagorgedure,lecoeurdontlebattementdbordela
poitrine,transpercedefroid,sale,dcharne,etlasouffranceestsi
insupportable,siexactementlasouffranceendurelbas,quejelaressensdans
toutmoncorpsquidevientunblocdesouffrance,etjesenslamortsagripper
moi,jemesensmourir.Heureusement,dansmonagonie,jecrie.Lecrime
rveilleetjesorsducauchemar,puise.Ilfautdesjourspourquetoutrentre
danslordre,quetoutserefourredanslammoireetquelapeaudelammoirese
ressoude.Jeredeviensmoimme,cellequevousconnaissez,quipeutvous
parlerdAuschwitzsansmarquerniressentirtroubleoumotion. (Lammoireet
lesjours
1314)
Inthisexcerpt,Delboreferstothepossibleruptureoftheskinthatenvelopsherdeep
memory.Shealso,however,pointsattheinalterabilityofthetraumaticfeelingsand
sensationsforevergroundedinher.Thesesensations,leavingherlittlerespite,alwaysact
astracesthatremainindelible. Assheclaims,danscettemmoireprofonde,les
sensationssontintactes(13). Notonlydothesessensationsresisterasurefromher
traumaticmemory.Theyremainirrevocableandunalterable.Shelikewiseadmitsthat
theyhavecontaminatedherordinarymemoryalso. Assheclaims,
Parceque,lorsquejevousparledAuschwitzcenestpasdelammoire
profondequeviennentmesparoles.Lesparolesviennentdelammoireexterne,
sijepuisdire,lammoireintellectuelle,lammoiredelapense.Lammoire
profondegardelessensations,lesempreintesphysiques.Cestlammoiredes
sens.Carcenesontpaslesmotsquisontgonflsdechargemotionnelle.Sinon,

154

quelquunquiattorturparlasoifpendantdessemainesnepourraitplusdire:
Jaisoif.Faisonsunetassedeth.Lemotaussisestddoubl.Soifest
redevenuunmotdusagecourant.Parcontre,sijervedelasoifdontjai
souffertBirkenau,jerevoiscellequejtais,hagarde,perdantlaraison,
titubantejeressensphysiquementcettevraiesoifetcestuncauchemaratroce.
Mais,sivousvoulezquejevousenparle
Cestpourquoijedisaujourdhuique,toutensachanttrsbienquecest
vridique,jenesaisplussicestvrai. (Lammoireetlesjours14)
Delboclosesthesecondvolumeofhertrilogywithalongpoemthatevokesherreturnto
theworld.Thisworldtowhichshereturnedisactuallyours,theonethatwethinkwe
know.Wethinkofitasonethatwepresupposeordinaryinitspresentstateofexistence.
Theexcerptillustrates,however,theconfusionbetweenthetwoworldsthatDelbohas
cometoknow.Thepoemindicatesanimpossiblereturntoaworldexclusivelyordinary.
AsDelbowrites,
Jereviensdunautremonde
danscemonde
quejenavaispasquitt
etjenesais
lequelestvrai
ditesmoisuisjerevenue
delautremonde?
pourmoi
Jesuisencorelbas
etjemeurs
lbas
chaquejourunpeuplus
jeremeurs
lamortdeceuxquisontmorts
etjenesaisplusquelestvrai
dumondel
delautremondelbas
maintenant
jenesaisplus
quandjerve
etquand
jenervepas.
(Uneconnaissanceinutile184)

155

NotonlydoestheexcerptposeanimpossibilityofreturnforDelbo. Une
connaissanceinutileactuallyalsopositstheexistenceofaworldthatisnotleftintact
afterAuschwitz.Delbomakesthisclearinthelastpoemofthebook.Init,sheaddresses
apleatotheliving.Moreprecisely,sheappealstoacommunityofreaders.She
demandstheirattentiononthenecessityofgroundingoneslife,notinauseless
knowledge,butinaworthyone.Whilesheinterpellatesherreaders,Delboinvokesthe
worthofanuncontaminated,ordinary,usefullife.Morespecifically,sheilluminatesthe
potentialvalueofalifethathasbeensparedtheatrocityofherownexperience.Shealso
reinstatestheuselessnessoftheknowledgethatshegatheredatAuschwitzbyinsisting
onitsdevastatingcharacter.Shealsoremindsusofthefutilityofherexperience,
becauseithasleftthelivinginastateofindifferencetowardsthesurvivors. Inthepoem
entitledPrireauxvivantspourleurpardonnerdtrevivants,Delbowrites,
Jevousensupplie
faitesquelquechose
apprenezunpas
unedanse
quelquechosequivousjustifie
quivousdonneledroit
dtrehabillsdevotrepeaudevotrepoil
apprenezmarcheretrire
parcequeceseraittropbte
lafin
quetantsoientmorts
etquevousviviez
sansrienfairedevotrevie
*
Jereviens
daudeldelaconnaissance
ilfautmaintenantdsapprendre
jevoisbienquautrement
jenepourraisplusvivre
*

156

Etpuis
mieuxvautnepasycroire
ceshistoires
derevenants
plusjamaisvousnedormirez
sijamaisvouslescroyez
cesspectresrevenants
cesrevenants
quireviennent
sanspouvoirmme
expliquercomment.
(Uneconnaissanceinutile19091)

InthecontextofAfricanAmericanexperiences,culturalmemory,forDurrant,
canbeassimilatedintotheindividualconsciousnessasacomplementtotheindividuals
senseofidentity.Racialmemory,however,threatenstodestroythissenseofidentity.
Thisformofmemoryisunhealthybecauseitenvelopstheselfinanexperienceof
negation.Also,forDurrant,racialmemoryyieldsalongamelancholicidentification
withthedead.Itconstitutesalifethreatening,othercenteredmodeofbeingclaimed
bythedead.Itmarkstheindividualwithamodeofbeingfordeath.Like
melancholia,Durrantclaims,racialmemoryisawayofidentifyingwiththewayin
whichonesancestorshavebeenforgotten,evenwhiletheywerealive.ForAfrican
Americans,itisamodeofrecognizingoneselfasavictim,namelessand
unacknowledged,oftheMiddlePassageorslavery.Assuch,racialmemoryinvolves
recognizingthatthetheinstitutionofslaverywasfoundedontheforeclosureofthe
slaveshumanity(PostcolonialNarrative80).
Morrisonsnovelsrevealandlaybarethelogicofrepetitionoftrauma,violence,
andnegation.ForDurrant,thiscanconstituteamodeofworkingthrough.Inthatcase,
thetraumatizedselfchoosestotakeactionthatcanaffecttheoutcomeofeventsthatare

157

emotionallydisturbing.Shewantstochangethecourseofherhistory.Yet,Morrisons
novels,includingJazz,alsopointatacertainmodeofactingout.Indeed,inMorrisons
oeuvre,asin Jazz,theresponsestodisturbingeventsdonotactuallyhaveprotagonists
confronttheirdilemmasinaconstructiveway.Rather,theymostlyrepeatalogicof
violencewhosestructureseemsinalterable.TouseDelbosmetaphoroftheserpents
skin,thememoryofanegatedhumanitywhichcannotbeshed,andthe
unacknowledgmentofthepainthatitcausedthreatentokeepintrudingtimeandagain.
Whenitruptures,actsofviolencesurgeinuncontrollednegativity.Thistypeofviolence
comesacrossasextremelydestructive.Thisdestructivebehaviorisnotexclusively
aimedattheself.Itisaimedatothersaswell.
EventhoughtheeventsthatdamageMorrisonscharactersaredifferentfrom
thoseexperiencedbyDelbo,asimilartypeofsplittingoftheselfseemstohavetaken
placeasaresult.Disturbingmemories,suchasthosethatdisconnecttheprotagonists
fromanordinaryperceptionoftheself,areindeedatworkin Jazz.LikeDelbos,
Morrisonssecondvolumeofthetrilogythussuggeststhatlittlecanbedonetopushback
thedespairingmemoriesofthepast,andgetonwithlife.Notonlydoesaprofoundlife
disturbancenegativelyaffectthosecharacterswhohavesurvivedslaveryandviolence.
Moreinsidiously,impairedselvesdisconnectedfromrealityarefoundinthegenerations
followingEmancipationandReconstructionaswell.
InthecaseofViolet,nicknamedviolentbyherpeersin Jazz,thereenactment
ofviolenceisgrounded,amongothers,inalackofconnectionstoasupporting
environment(75).NotonlydoesthisabsenceofgenerationalnurturinginVioletinscribe
itselfinmissingafoundationalfamilyinthefirstplace.ItisalsogroundedinViolets

158

unwillingness,theninability,tostartafamilyofherown.Assheindeedpromised
herselftoneverneverhavechildren,sherealizedthatitwasthemostimportantthing,
thebiggestthingshecoulddo.Whateverhappened,shewouldneverwanttoseea
smalldarkfootrestonanotherwhileahungrymouthwouldsayMama?(102).As
amatteroffact,Violetfeelsnotonlydisconnectedfromapastandfuturehistoryof
familialbenevolence.Sheisdisconnectedfromanemotionallybalancedselfaswell.It
comesasnosurprise,thus,thatshealsofeelsverydistantfromJoe,herunfaithful
husband.Eventhoughtheyarestillacouple,theyarebarelyspeakingtoeachother,
letalonelaughingtogetheroractinglikethegroundisadancehallfloor(36).
Violetsquasiabsencefromtheworldhasonlyaddedtothepsychologicalentrapmentsin
whichshehasconfinedherself.ThesehavenourishedinVioletsomeformsofrestraint,
butalsoofangerandexcess,inthefaceoflife,andinherrelationships.Sheisunableto
dothe thingsworthdoing,andtofeelsupportedbythecoreoftheworld(63).As
previouslymentioned,thislackismainlyrootedinanabsenceofmotherlycareduring
heradolescentyears.Itisalsoduetotheviolentdeathofhermother,whocommitted
suicideafteradegradingdispossessionoftheirmeagerbelongings.Theinternalized
feelingsoftrauma,helplessness,andshamethatVioletfeltthenmadeherwanttothink,
atfirst,ofherlifeindifferent,morepromisingterms.Asshefirstrecallsthesceneof
dispossession,shereflectson
Hermother.Shedidntwanttobelikethat.Ohneverlikethat.Tositatthe
table,aloneinthemoonlight,sippingboiledcoffeefromawhitechinacupaslong
asitwasthere,andpretendingtosipitwhenitwasgonewaitingformorning
whenmencame,talkinglowasthoughnobodywastherebutthemselves,and
pickedaroundinourthings,liftingoutwhattheywantedwhatwastheirs,they
said,althoughwecookedinit,washedsheetsinit,satonit,ateoffofit.That
wasaftertheyhadhauledawaytheplow,thescythe,themule,thesow,thechurn
andthebutterpress.Thentheycameinsidethehouseandallofuschildrenput

159

onefootontheotherandwatched.Whentheygottothetablewhereourmother
satnursinganemptycup,theytookthetableoutfromunderherandthen,while
shesattherealone,andallbyherselflike,cupinhand,theycamebackandtipped
thechairshesatin.Shedidntjumpuprightaway,sotheyshookitabitand
sinceshestillstayedseatedlookingaheadatnobodytheyjusttippedherout
ofitlikethewayyougetthecatoftheseatifyoudontwanttotouchitorpickit
upinyourarms.Youtipitforwardanditlandsonthefloor.Noharmdoneifits
acatbecauseithasfourlegs.Butaperson,awoman,mightfallforwardandjust
staythereaminutelookingatthecup,strongerthansheis,unbrokenatleastand
lyingabitbeyondherhand.Justoutofreach.(9798)
WhatmadeVioletsmotherjumpintoawelltoendherlifemaynothavebeenclear.
Itcanberelated,however,totheoneandfinalthing[RoseDear]hadnotbeenableto
endureorrepeat.Thehumiliationsandnegativeprojections,aswellasdispossession,
thatAfricanAmericansenduredinslaveryandintheReconstructioneramaycertainly
offersomegroundsinuncoveringRoseDearsmotivationtoendherlife.Yet,thereis
presentalso,inthedepictionofthisdrama,theenduringfeelingsofhelplessnessinthe
faceoftraumaandshamethataroseintheaftermathoftheevent.Impactingthe
followinggeneration,includingthatofViolet,theshamethattransmitteditselfthen
throughwhatDurrantcallstheracialmemoryendured(PostcolonialNarrative80).
Inalterableandimpossibletoerase,itdefinitelystayedwithViolet.Itisencryptedin
Morrisonstext,asthenarratorof JazzfurtherspeculatesonRoseDearssuicide.Weare
askedtowonder:
Hadthelastwashingsplittheshirtwaistsobaditcouldnottakeanothermendand
changeditsnametorag?Perhapswordhadreachedheraboutthefourday
hangingsinRockyMount:themenonTuesday,thewomentwodayslater.Or
haditbeenthenewsoftheyoungtenorinthechoirmutilatedandtiedtoalog,his
grandmotherrefusingtogiveuphiswastefilledtrousers,washingthemoverand
overalthoughthestainhaddisappearedatthethirdrinse.Mightithavebeenthe
morningafterthenightwhencraving(whichusedtobehope)gotoutofhand?
Whenlongingsqueezed,thentossedherbeforerunningpromisingtoreturnand
bounceheragainlikeanIndiarubberball?Orwasitthatchairtheytippedher
outof?Didshefallonthefloorandlietheredecidingrightthenthatshewould
doit.Someday.DelayingitforfouryearswhileTrueBellecameandtookover

160

butrememberingthefloorboardsasdoor,closedandlocked.Seeingbleaktruth
inanunbreakablechinacup?Bidinghertimeuntilthemomentreturnedwith
allitsmewinghurtoroverboardrageandshecouldturnawayfromthedoor,
thecuptosteptowardthelimitlessnessbeckoningfromthewell.Whatcouldit
havebeen,Iwonder?(101)
RoseDearssuicidedoesnotonlyhavethenarratorof Jazzrelatethefracturethatit
provokedtoVioletscrazybehavior.ThenarratoralsoimpliesthatVioletstroubled
historyandaffectedpresentareactuallysymptomaticofherperturbedandshameful
familypastingeneral.Yet,thislackofcoherenceinVioletslifedoesnotseemtohave
recededlateroninlife,attimesofimprovedfinancialsituationoraffectiveinvolvement
withherhusband.AsthenarratorcommentsonVioletslackofstabilityandcoherence,
sheposesthequestionastowhetherthechildrenofsuicidearenot,afterall,hardto
pleaseandquicktobelievenoonelovesthem,justbecausetheyarenotreallyhere
(4).
Violetsemotionallife,impairedfirstbythelossofamotherindistress,thenby
withdrawalfromlife,Joe,andevenherself,thusseemsatadeadend.IthasVioletbeing
contenttolivejustinthepresenceofherbirds,especiallywiththeparrotwhosaysI
loveyou(3).
TheprofoundneedforloveandcarethatVioletdidnotreceiveisparalleledby
thestoryofGoldenGray,theillegitimatesonofwealthy MissVeraLouiseandHenry
Lestroy(143).TheyellowcurledchildthatTrueBelle,Violetsgrandmother,helped
raisewasprovidedinabundancewithmotherlycare,servantsloveandmaterial
possession.WhileTrueBelledidtakecareofhimatthecostofherownfamily,she
projectedontothechildamodelofloveandnurturing.Investinghimwiththemost
desirablequalities,GoldenGraybecametheepitomeoftheperfectchildnotonlytoTrue

161

Belle.Hecametorepresent,forVioletalso,amodel ofchildhoodfreedfromracial
consciousness.Yet,asittookGoldenGraysmothereighteenyearstogetaroundtoit
andsaythathisfatherwasablackskinnednigger,ittookaslongtobiracialGolden
Graytodiscoverthetruth,trace,andfindhisfather(143).WhileGoldenGraysabsence
offatherlyconnectionsisverysimilartothemissingofmaternalbondsinViolet,butalso
inJoe,itpointstothedespairandtraumathatoverwhelmchildren,andlateradults,of
parentlessheritage.ThefollowingexcerptrevealshowMorrisonaestheticallydiscloses
theirreparablesufferingsthatfollowedtheexplosionoffamilybondsinthepostbellum
Southduetoslavery,racism,poverty,orviolence.Whilethisformoflosstouches
practicallyeverycharacterin Jazz,itcomesasaracialmemorythatbecomesingrainedin
GoldenGray,Joe,andViolet,withgreatdespair.Inthefollowinginstance,GoldenGray
offersapoignantviewofthedestructiveforcesthathaveresultedfromhisbeingan
orphan:
Onlynow,hethought,nowthatIknowIhaveafather,doIfeelhisabsence:the
placewhereheshouldhavebeenandwasnot.Before,Ithoughteverybodywas
onearmed,likeme.NowIfeelthesurgery.Thecrunchofbonewhenitis
sundered,theslicedfleshandthetubesofbloodcutthrough,shockingthe
bloodrunanddisturbingthenerves.Theydangleandwrithe.Singingpain.
Wakingmewiththesoundofitself,thrummingwhenIsleepsodeeplyit
stranglesmydreamsaway.Thereisnothingforitbuttogoawayfromwherehe
isnottowhereheusedtobeandmightbestill.Letthedangleandthewrithesee
whatitismissingletthepainsingtothedirtwherehesteppedintheplacewhere
heusedtobeandmightbestill.Iamnotgoingtobehealed,ortofindthearm
thatwasremovedfromme.Iamgoingtofreshenthepain,pointit,soweboth
knowwhatitisfor.
Andno,Iamnotangry.Idontneedthearm.ButIdoneedtoknowwhatit
couldhavebeenliketohavehadit.ItsaphantomIhavetobeholdandbeheld
by,inwhatevercrevicesitlies,underwhateverbranch.Ormaybeitstalks
treelessandopenplaces,litwithanoilysun.Thispartofmethatdoesnotknow
me,hasnevertouchedmeorlingeredatmyside.Thisgoneawayhandthatnever
helpedmeoverthestile,orguidedmepastthedragons,pulledmeupfromthe
ditchintowhichIstumbled.Strokedmyhair,fedmefoodtookthefarendofthe
loadtomakeiteasierformetocarry.Thisarmthatneverhelditselfout,

162

extendedfrommybody,togivemebalanceasIwalkedthinrailsorlogs,round
andslipperywithdanger.WhenIfindit,willitwavetome?Gesture,beckonto
metocomealong?OrwillitevenknowwhoorwhatIam?Itdoesntmatter.I
willlocateitsotheseveredpartcanrememberthesnatch,thesliceofits
disfigurement.Perhapsthenthearmwillnolongerbeaphantom,butwilltakeits
ownshape,growitsownmuscleandbone,anditsbloodwillpumpfromtheloud
singingthathasfoundthepurposeofitsserenade.Amen.
AsGoldenGrayfurtherreflectsonthedamagedonetohim,healsowondersifitcan
everbemadeupsomehow.Heasks,
Whowilltakemypart?Soapawaytheshame?Sudsittillitfallsawaymuckat
myfeettobesteppedoutof?Willhe?Redeemmelikeapawnticketworthlittle
onthemarketplace,butpricelessinretrievingrealvalue?WhatdoIcarewhatthe
colorofhisskinis,orhiscontactwithmymother?WhenIseehim,orwhatis
leftofhim,Iwilltellhimallaboutthemissingpartofmeandlistenforhiscrying
shame.Iwillexchangethenlethimhavemineandtakehisasmyownandwe
willbothbefree,armtangledandwhole.(15859)
InthewordsofBesselvanderKolkandOnnovanderHart,memoryisanactive
andconstructiveprocess.Assuch,memoryenablesamentalreexperiencing,orat
leastrethinking,ofpreviousexperiences.Thisrethinkingcanthusopenforthesubject
spacesofmentaloremotionalconfrontations,whichhavebeenleftunexplored.Inthis
regard,thementalreenactingofpreviouslyunsolvedtraumasandlossescanentailsome
formofpositiveconfrontations.Thesecanleadtowardsacceptanceoftheimageofthe
selfinnegatingexperiences.ThisprocessisvisiblyatworkwithGoldenGray,butalso
withJoeandViolet.HerconversationswithAliceManfred,theauntoforphaned
Dorcas,herhusbandslover,testifytothat.AlicesandVioletsemotionalexchangesare
infactanactiverethinkingofreactionstopasteventsandexperiencesthathavebeen
shattering.Theunfinishedbusinessofslaverymarksallof Jazzscharacterswith
absencesoffathers,lossesofmotherstoracialviolence,anddisruptionanddislocationof
thefamilyunit.Yet,forvanderKolkandvanderHart,thisremembering,which

163

operateswithinanorganicresponse,shouldbeadaptive.InMorrisonsJazz,the
organicresponsetoparentalabandonmentandlossofmaritalbondsdoesnot,however,
taketheformofpositivesortingoutofemotions.Rather,Violetsresponsetopain
remainsastatusquoofnegationandwrongdoing.Notonlydoesthisperpetuatingof
violenceremainenduringandpermanent.ItalsohindersVioletsprocessofworking
through(TheIntrusivePast170).
ThesameprocessofnegativerepetitionhashamperedJoeaswell.Ithas
preventedhimfromgrowingoutofhisfeelingsofshame,painandlossforhismother
Wild.Afugitivewomanlivinginacave,powerless,invisible,wastefullydaft.
Everywhereandnowhere,Joesmother,presumablyBeloved,abandonedJoewithouta
trace(Jazz179).Shaminghimbeforeeverybody,sheissobrainblastedthatshe
hasnotdonewhatthemeanestsowmanaged:nursewhatshebirthed(Jazz17879).
MaternalabandonmenthasmarkedJoesodeeplyastocasthiminadeepemotional
unrestthatheseemsunabletoputbehind.
BothVioletandJoe,however,onceexpectedtoeventuallychangethecourseof
theirlives.FirstthroughimprovingtheireconomicsituationbymigratingNorth.They
alsohopedtogrowemotionally,andsocially,bystartingafreshinanewcity,NewYork
City.Asthenarratorof Jazzstates,
Eveniftheroomtheyrentedwassmallerthantheheifersstallanddarkerthana
morningprivy,theystayedtolookattheirnumber,hearthemselvesinan
audience,feelthemselvesmovingdownthestreetamonghundredsofotherswho
movedthewaytheydid,andwho,whentheyspoke,regardlessoftheaccent,
treatedlanguagelikethesameintricate,malleabletoydesignedfortheirplay.
(32)
Yet,forVioletandJoe,partofwhytheyloveditsomuchwasbecauseofthespecter
theyleftbehind(33).Theirneedtorunfromwantandviolencewasonlyexacerbated

164

bytheirdesiretoescapethesadstuff.Thebadstuff.Thethingsnobodycouldhelp
stuff.Thewayeverybodywasthenandthere.Fullofdrivetoleavethepastbehind,
theywereeagertoforgetthatHistoryisover,youall,andeverythingsaheadatlast.
Yet,thepositiveoutcometheyexpectedfromtheirmovefromVesperCounty,
Virginia,totheCity,hasnot,however,fullymaterialized(7).Rather,theintrusionof
theirpainfulpastintothepresenthasactuallybecomeforJoeandVioletamainsourceof
negativeimpulsesandpoorchoices.Thegriefthattheyfeltattheabsenceofparents,due
tolackofeconomicopportunitiesandracistoutbursts,hasnotdepartedfromthem,or
recededovertime.Instead,ithasbecomeevenmoreobsessive.Ithaskeptthem
enclosedinapatternofrepetitionoftransgressivebehavior.AsJoedeclares,
Hehadstruggledalongtimewiththatloss,believedhehadresignedhimselfto
it,hadcometotermswiththefactthatoldagewouldbenotrememberingwhat
thingsfeltlike.Thatyoucouldsay,Iwasscaredtodeath,butyoucouldnot
retrievethefear.Thatyoucouldreplayinthebrainthesceneofecstasy,of
murder,oftenderness,butitwasdrainedofeverythingbutthelanguagetosayit
in.Hethoughthehadcometotermswiththatbuthehadbeenwrong.(29)
ForSamDurrant,JoeandVioletTraceslivesclearlytestifytotheclaimthat
Morrisonsnarrativesareunabletoofferclosure.Hemakeshispointthroughthe
followingassertionthatMorrisonclearly demonstratesin Jazz.Forone,Durrantposits
that,theinjusticesofslaveryanditsaftermathcanactuallyneverbefullyworked
through.Also,Morrisonsoeuvrecannotoffercompletehealingbecause,forDurrant,
racialoppressionremainsacontemporaryreality.Likewise,becausethecycleof
abuseandselfabuseandviolationisstillplayingitselfoutinblackcommunitiesacross
theUnitedStates,thenarrativesarelockedinrepetition,andtheyareunabletobring
closure.ForDurrant,Morrisonsnovels,markedbyracialmemoryastheyare,thus
servetoindicatehowthehistorythattheyinfiltratethreatenstocollapseintoitself.As

165

such,MorrisonsnovelspointathowAfricanAmericanhistorythreatenstoremaina
historyoftrauma,sinceMorrisonsoeuvrerefusestoclosethewoundofAfrican
Americanhistory.Hernovelsactuallytestifytotheimpossibilityofeverfullycoming
totermswiththehistoryofracism.Also,theoriginofthetraumainMorrisonsworkis
not tobelocatedattheconfinesoftheindividualcasehistoryonly.Itpositionsitself
withinacollectivehistoryofracialabuseaswell.Assuch,closureremainsthuseven
morehypothetical.ForDurrant,itissobecauseMorrisonsworkdealswithahistory
thatisnotsomuchahistory.Thehistorythatsherevealsisratherasuspensionof
history.Itismadeofaninfiniterepetitionofanoriginalsceneofmolestationthat
keepsbeingreenacted.ForDurrant,suchahistorycanneverbeproperlyabreacted
oradequatelymourned(PostcolonialNarrative83).
TheunrestthatpermeatesJoeandVioletslifestorieshinderstheirprogression
towardsemotionalliberation.Themusicalplayingofjazzintheirlivesistestimonyto
thedangerousrepetitionofthisturmoil.Infusedwithinsecuritiesandchoicesofbehavior
leadingtolossofcontroloftheself,JoeandVioletgetcaughtinstoriesofselfgenerated
abuseandselfinflictedoffences.Theimprovisatory,jazzlikefeelofthenovelis
especiallyindicativeofthesetransgressionsthatbothcharactersattempt,unsuccessfully,
toresolve.VioletsattackandstabbingofDorcasscorpseattheburialceremonyisonly
oneinstanceofherdeeplyrootedemotionalunstablecharacter.Thislackofgrounding
oftheselfisparticularlymanifestintheprivatecracks,thedarkfissuresthatthe
narratorof JazzperceivesinViolet(22).Premisesofadedoublingofpersonality,these
cracksdistractVioletfromacontinuousattachmenttoreality.Assuch,attimes,she
clearlylacksconnectionsandgroundingtoanurturingculturalhistory.Instead,she

166

attachestoaracialmemorythattestifiestohermissingasolidfoundationintheself.
Violetssurgesofdisconnectednessareparticularlyevidentinthefollowingexcerpt.
LikeCharlottedidafterAuschwitz,Violetexperiencesformsofdissociationfromher
ownself.InthewordsofMarleneSteinberg,thisissimilartothedissociativestateof
alteredconsciousness,fromwhichapersonmaysufferinacaseofdepersonalization.
Inthatstate,theindividualreportsfeelingasenseofunrealityabouttheself.Or,she
feelsthatherrealselfisdistanced.Sometimes,shemayevenfeelthatsheis
observingtheselffromtheoutside(SystematizingDissociations62).Assuch,the
privatecracks,nottheopeningsorbreaks,butthedarkfissuresintheglobelightof
thedaythatVioletdisplaysareveryrevealing(Jazz22).PiercingVioletsframeof
mind,thenarratorobserves,
Shewakesupinthemorningandseeswithperfectclarityastringofsmall,
welllitscenes.Ineachone,somethingspecificisbeingdone:foodthings,work
thingscustomersandacquaintancesareencountered,placesentered.Butshe
doesnotseeherselfdoingthesethings.Sheseesthembeingdone.Theglobe
lightholdsandbatheseachscene,anditcanbeassumedthatatthecurvewhere
thelightstopsisasolidfoundation.Intruth,thereisnofoundationatall,but
alleyways,crevicesonestepsacrossallthetime.Buttheglobelightisimperfect
too.Closelyexamineditshowsseams,illgluedcracksandweakplacesbeyond
whichisanything.Anythingatall.SometimeswhenVioletisntpayingattention
shestumblesontothesecracks,likethetimewhen,insteadofputtingherleftheel
forward,shesteppedbackandfoldedherlegsinordertositinthestreet.(2223)
Violetslackofactiveinvolvementinordinarylifeiscontinuallyunderscoredbyherover
activeinclinationfordestructiveacts.EvenafterJoekillshisloverinamurderousactof
jealousy,Violetfeelstheurgeofvengefullyknifingthecorpse.Assuch,thegirls
memoryremainsasicknessinthehouseeverywhereandnowhere.Whilethereis
nothingforViolettobeatorhit,afterthegirlsdeath,Violetsustainsherdesirefor
revenge.AsMorrisonwrites,andwhenshehasto,justhastostrikeitsomehow,there

167

isnothingleftforViolettoharm.Allthereisleftisstraw, orthesepiaprintofthegirl
staringfromthemantelpiece(28,12).Thismayexplainwhy,backtoherapartment
aftertheburial,Violettookthebirdsfromtheircagesandsetthemoutthewindowsto
freezeorfly.Shealsosenttoanalmostcertaindeathherparrotwhosaid,Iloveyou
(3).
Violetsviolentnature,andherrepressed,yetundyinglongingforachild,once
evenhadViolethalfconsciouslykidnapababyinthestreet.Thisactofpubliccraziness
madeherthetargetoftheshaminggazeandgossipoftheneighborhoodpeople.Even
thoughsheprotestedherinnocenceatthetime,shestillviewsthekidnappingaccusation
asanoutragetohercharacter.DespiteVioletsdenial,sheisunable,however,toput
behindthefeelingssurroundingherpossessingthestolenbaby.Thememoryofthe
light...thathadskippedthroughherveinswhensheheldthelightskinnedchild
occasionallycomesbacktoher.Shethenimaginesabrightnessthatcouldbecarriedin
herarms.Eventually,thatbrightnesscouldbedistributed,ifneedbe,intoplacesdark
asthebottomofawell(22).
WhileJazzindeedemphasizestheneedtoinventnewwaysofunderstanding
experience,thenovelclearlyunderscoresspecificaspectsoftheAfricanAmerican
experiencethatremainclearlyundigested.Theexperiences,ofimprovisinganewlife
setinfreedom,clearlydrawonthemusicalqualitiesofjazzasadistinctandbrilliantart
formwithaclearAfricanheritage(OxfordCompanion397). Notonlydotheyremain
improvisationalandunfinished,butasimportantly,theprocessingofthetraumathey
engenderedremainsimprovisationalandunfinishedaswell.

168

Chapter4. AmbiguousCommunities
IfweassumethatAuschwitzandAfternarratesasinglestory,Delbostraumaticrealist
writingcouldhavethisgeneraloutline:thefirstvolume,Aucundenousnereviendra,
beginswithasceneofarrivalatAuschwitz.ItendswhileDelboisstillinBirkenau,the
Auschwitzcampforfemaleinmates.Thesecondwork,Uneconnaissanceinutile,begins
inBirkenauandendswiththeliberationofRavensbrck.Thethirdtestimonialbook,
Mesuredenosjours,whichtellsinitiallyofrepatriation,consistsmostlyoftestimonies.
TheseareattributedtocertainofDelbosfellowsurvivors,whowerehercompanionsin
thecampsandhercomradesintheaftermath.ForMichaelRothberg,Auschwitzand
Afterworksthusonatleastthreedifferentnarrativemodes,allofwhichcapture
differentaspectsoftheconcentrationaryuniverse.AccordingtoRothberg,thefirst
mode,thatof Aucundenousnereviendra,servestoassembleCharlottestestimonial
micronarratives.Theserevealthespatialclosureandrepetitivetemporalityof
Auschwitz. Uneconnaissanceinutile,ontheotherhand,proposesthenarrativeasa
metonymicchain.Thechainbothtracesandtransgressesthevariousinternaland
externalbordersofthecampuniverse,which Aucundenousnereviendrahadbrought
forward.WhileUneconnaisanceinutileaddsframesofreferencesfromtheeverydayto
thenarrative,theseframesareperceivedtooverlapwiththoseofthecamp.Therealms
oftheordinaryandoftheextremekeepmutuallyinterferingwitheachother.Sonotonly
doesUneconnaisanceinutileevidenceaprofoundunsettlingofspatiotemporal
boundaries.Italsoindicates,andinsistson,aseeminglylastingpsychological
traumatization. Uneconnaisanceinutile revealsthustheinevitableextensionofthe
concentrationaryuniverseintothespaceandtimeofpostwareverydaylife.Asoneof

169

Charlottescampcompanionsnotices,Oncewewerefreeandhadresumedourdaily
liveswemournedaswehadnotdoneoverthere.Asshefurtherconsidersherprocess
ofgrieving,shereflectsthatTheemptyplaceswerenotedmorekeenly,wemissed
intenselythosewelost.ShealsoposesthequestionaboutWhytheirabsencehad
seemedlesscrueloverthere,andsounbearableoncewewerefree?Assheattemptsto
bridgethegapbetweenthethenandthereofthecamp,andthehereandnowof
theeverydaylifethereafter,shetentativelysuggeststhatitisbecauseovertherenothing
seemedreal.Eventhoughthereturnwashardforeveryone,forPoupette,thereturn
waswretched.Wretched,sordid,apileofshabbydetails(AuschwitzandAfter271).
ForMichaelRothberg,thismetonymicchainalsopurportsthefailureofordinary
societytorespondtothemessagebornebysurvivors.AsDelborevealsitin Une
connaissanceinutilethedisappointmentatthefailureofpostwarhistorytoalterits
courseaccordinglyhaskeptnumeroussurvivorsintrauma(TraumaticRealism175,
165).Inherownvoice,andthroughoutMesuredenosjours,thethirdvolumeofher
trilogy,Delbokeepswritingofherfailedattemptstomakenonsurvivorsunderstandthe
differencebetweenourtimethere...whichwasempty,andtimeoverhere...
whichishollow(TheMeasureofOurDays343).Assheexplainsinthethirdvolume
ofhertrilogy,
Jenepeuxpasleurfairecomprendreladiffrenceentreletempsdelbasetle
tempsdici,entreletempsdelbasquitaitvide,etquitaitsilourddetousces
morts,parcequelescadavresavaientbeautretoutlgers,quandilyenades
milliersdecescadavressquelettiques,celafaitlourdetcelavouscrasesousle
poids,entreletempsdelbasquitaitvide,etletempsdiciquiestdutemps
creux.(Mesuredenosjours197)
Therememberingandrecordingofexperiencesafterliberationtakes,however,anew
dimensionin Mesuredenosjours.Moresothanin Aucundenousnereviendraandin

170

Uneconnaissanceinutile,Mesuredenosjoursadvocatesmemoryasacollectiveand
publicperformance.Indeed,inDelbosthirdvolume,memoryisnolongermainlyan
individualandprivateact.SimilarlytoMorrisonsnarrativestrategyofrevealing
AfricanAmericanhistorythroughvarious(hi)storiestoldbyseveralnarrators,Delbos
trilogyoffersthatkindofspacewheretheculturalwork ofrememberingisactivelyand
collectivelyengaged.Through,butalsobeyond,apluralityofindividualvoices,Delbo
attemptstokeeprevealingtheprofoundscarringthatfollowedherandherfriends
internmentexperiences.Assuch,in Mesuredenosjours,Delboconcentrateson
assemblingindividualstorieswrittenbyformercampinmatesunhealedfromtheir
personaltraumas.Eventhougheverytestimonyinsistsonseparateaspectsofpersonalor
collectiveexperiencesbythesurvivor,allstoriesseem toconvergetowardsthesame
incapacityofreadjustingtoeverydaylife.Assuch,Mesuredenosjoursisnotonly
crucialintransmittingcollective,ratherthanindividual,actsoftestimonial.Itisrelevant
alsoinexaminingacollectiveexperienceof readjustingornottolife,andattempting
torebuildafutureafterAuschwitz.
MosttroublesomeformanyAuschwitzsurvivorswastheirfacingthecoexistence
ofthetwotemporalitiesthatwediscussedearlier.Mostofall,theirinabilitytointegrate
theseintotheirliveswaswhatwasmostchallenging.Asaresult,asInotedinChapter3,
theselfsplittingthatthislayeringentailedbecamesoproblematicastodiminish
individualagency.ButMesuredenosjoursshowsthatthisdoubleimageoftheselfis
threateningtoacollectivesenseofidentityalso.Ida,aJewishsurvivor,summarizesit
bestformostsurvivors. Shereports,
Jtaisdoubleetjeneparvenaispasrunirmesdoubles.Ilyavaitunmoietun
spectredemoiquivoulaitcollersondoubleetnyarrivaitjamais.Jelevoyais

171

sapprochercommeuneformemolledanslaquellejemereconnaissaisquandelle
taitprsdemoietquisedfaisaitencharpiequandjytouchais.
...Jaireprismaplacelamaison.Jtaisgurie.
Jemecroyaisguriemaisjeneltaissansdoutepas...Jesuisheureuse.Et
soudain,sanssavoircomment,pourquoitelmomentpluttqutelautre,sans
quejenaielemoindrepressentiment,jesensmontercetteangoissequima
envahiepourlapremirefoisaprslanaissancedeSophie...Cejour,jait
priseduneangoisseinsurmontable.Magorgestranglait,mapoitrinetait
crasedansuncerceaudefer,moncurmtouffait.Jemesuismisecrierde
terreur.Toutcoup ...jesuissansforce.Cestcommesi,toutcoupunressort
secassait.(11921)
Theghost,thespectre,butalsotherevenant,whosenotionRothbergexploreswith
thisexcerpt,hauntsIda,andkeepshauntingher.Itisthesign,forRothberg,ofa
traumathatistemporalintwosenses.Notonlydoestheghostreturnwithout
warning,therebyupsettingthecontinuityofeverydaytime.Butalso,anditismypoint
here,theghostfunctionsinthiscaseinawaysimilartoMorrisonsghostin Beloved.In
theinsidiousnessofitscharacter,itsignals,asitdoesinMorrisons,arupture.Not
onlyinthecontinuityoftime,butoflifesexpectedgenerationalcontinuity(Traumatic
Realism165).InthecaseofIda,thisrupturecomesfromtheacknowledgmentthatIdas
childSophiecannottaketheplaceofalostgeneration,thatofherparents,bothofwhom
IdalostinAuschwitz.Thesplitisfirstrevealed,forIda,aftershehappens,oneday,to
unexpectedlyseeherfatherinthecamp.SpottedbyIdainacolumnofmenmarching
towardsthefactoryatAuschwitz,herfatherdoesnot,however,recognizeher,evenafter
shetriestocatchhisattentionwithPapa! Papa!CestIda!Ida!Theradicalchange
inhim,asIdaremembershimthen,vieux,maigre,enhaillons,while,asatailleur...
iltaittoujourssibienmis,isaninsurmontableshock(Mesuredenosjours117). His
failuretorecognizeIdaandhisturningaroundandthrowingafrightenedlookinher

172

directionishurtfultoIda(AuschwitzandAfter296).Notonlydoesthefatherslackof
acknowledgementpartiallyproduce,andlatermaintain,theruptureofcontinuityinher
everydaytimeafterAuschwitz.Italsopointsatthedestructionthatthelossof
irreplaceableconnectionswithothergenerationshasgenerated.
Mesuredenosjourspresentsthusanattimescontradictorycollectiveof
individualvoicesthatupsetsthetemporalityofbefore/during/afterAuschwitz.Then,not
onlydoesDelbosworkextendtheexperienceandsocialsignificanceofgenocide
beyondtheindividualexperiencingofthedeathworld.Italsogroundsthestoriesofthe
survivorsintopsychologically,historically,andcommunallypersistingmalaisesthat
Rothbergcallsthemaladiesoftimeandspace(TraumaticRealism165).
WhileDelbostrilogymaylenditselftoacertainchronologicalexperience,for
ThomasTrezise,chronologyconstitutesneitheritssolenorevenitsmostimportant
organizingprinciple.Notonlydoesthetrilogyincludepoemswhoseinterconnections
andoverlappingdisruptanyrigorousnarrativecontinuity(TheQuestionofCommunity
859),buttheproseof AuschwitzandAftercontainstemporalembeddings,whicharenot
predominantlylinear.Whatisatstakethenisthusafragmentaryarticulationoftrauma,
survival,andirreversiblepsychologicalandcollectivedamagecausedbyexperiencing
theconcentrationaryuniverse.Delbokeepsproblematizingtheseparadigms,already
probedin AucunandUneconnaissanceinutile,in Mesuredenosjours.Sheraisesinit,
andin ConvoytoAuschwitzandLammoireetlesjours,volumespublishedinthemid
sixtiesandmideightiesrespectively,thefundamentalquestionthatIwishtoaddressin
thischapter:thatof theroleofcommunity.Inproposingatestimonialtrilogythatpushes
backthelimitsofofficialhistoriesandchronology,andalignsindividuallyand

173

collectivelybasedtestimonies,DelbomakestheexaminationofacollectiveFrenchpost
warpublicexperienceevenmorepressing.Thelastpieceofhertrilogywillthusenable
ustoscrutinizehowanotionofcommunitycanassumearelativeintelligibilityof
traumaticexperiencesinanaftermath.
Alongwiththequestionofcommunity,thischapterexploreshowformsof
communallivesshapenotonlypastexperiences,butalsothoseofanaftermath.It
examinestherolesthatcommunitiescantakeordeclinetoadoptwhenitcomesto
writingapieceofhistorythatinscribesitselfinanambivalentfuture.
JustasthecharactersofMorrisonsBelovedandJazzmustlearntonegotiatea
needtoconfronttheirindividualtraumas,andremembertheirpainfulpast,theymustalso
moveforwardwiththeirlives.Whilein Beloveditisambiguouslystatedthatthestoryof
Belovedisnotastorytopasson,MorrisonsproseclearlysuggeststhatBelovedshould
indeedbeanecessarystorytopasson(275).Likewise,whilethenonlineardesignof
Jazzenticesthereadertoengagewiththedifferentnarrativesandstoriesofthenovels
characters,thereisalsointhebook,aninvitationforthereadertoparticipateinthe
constructionofthestoryonhisorherownterms.Astheepilogueof Jazzhasthe
narrator,whoisalsoalistenerandreceiverofthenovelsstories,whetherindividualor
collective,secretorpublic,claim,
ButIcantsaythataloudIcanttellanyonethatIhavebeenwaitingforthisall
mylifeandthatbeingchosentowaitisthereasonIcan.IfIwereableIdsayit.
Saymakeme,remakeme.YouarefreetodoitandIamfreetoletyoubecause
look,look.Lookwhereyourhandsare.Now.(229)
ForNancyPeterson,booksliterallydonotspeaktoreaders.Yet,paradoxically,the
narratorof Jazzmanagestosaywhatshehasjustmentionedsheisnotabletoexpress.
ForPeterson,somewhereinthecourseofthenovel,somethinginthetypicalstory,the

174

typicalhistoryhasgottenofftrack,andthisrequiresaresponseorreaction.Inthis
puzzlinginstanceofinterpellationandneedforpublicrecognitionofAfricanAmerican
livesandstories,liesaninsightthathasrepercussionsforMorrisonsprojectofhistorical
reconstruction.Namely,that(black)historybookshavenolife,nomeaning,unlessthey
engagereadersandcompelthemtomakeandremakethestoryinordertolocate
somethingusefulforlivingtodayandtomorrow.
Morrisonstrilogyasawholeenactsthusthecomplexengagementofrevealing
blackhistorythroughformsofmemory.These,forMorrison,likeforDelbo,should
encompassnotonlyindividualformsofrecollection.Theseshoulddefinitelybe
collectiveaswell.EnablingsurvivorsmemorieslikeSethes,PaulDs,Violetsand
Joestobecomerememoriesthusallowforsuchtestimoniestoplayamajorpartin
Morrisonsdynamicprocessofdisclosure.Butalso,whilenothavingexperiencedthe
traumafirsthand,we,asreaders,shouldalsobepossiblyenabledbythosetestimonies.
Morrisonscommunityofreadersmightwanttoengageinmutualandcollectiveactsof
remembranceaswell.TheywouldpossiblyconnecttoagenuineandusefulAfrican
Americanhistory,whoserestitutionMorrisonasksfor(AgainstAmnesia87).
Morrison,likeDelbo,iscommittedinhertrilogytoexploringthelimitsofofficial
andhistoricaldiscourses.Sheisalsowillingtoprobethelimits,notonlyofindividual,
butalsocollective,memorywhichunderliethosenarrativesAssuch,herwork
specificallyexaminesthreemajorpremiseswhichundergridthewholeofthetrilogy.For
JustineTally,thesethreeunderlying,andachronologicallylayered,themesare
history,memory,andstory.AccordingtoTally,thefocusineachofthenovels,
however,isshifted.WhereasBelovedfocusesontheroleofmemory,Jazziscentered

175

aroundthedevelopmentofstoryandmultiplestorytelling.Yet,forTally,Paradise,the
lastvolumeofthetrilogy,isdevotedtotheculturalproductionofHistory/historyandits
unstablerelationshiptobothmemoryandstory(ParadiseReconsidered14).Assuch,
hertrilogy,andParadiseinparticular,restsontheunderstandingthatisalsoproposedby
ThereseHiggins,that,
Slavery,persecution,ancestryalldeeplyrooted,deeplypsychologicalmatters
arewrestledwithbetweenpeoplewhohaveexperiencedabrutal,painfulpastand
peoplewhoareattemptingtoexperienceamorehopefulandlesspainfulfuture.
(Paradise:TheFinalFrontier125)
Morrisonsnarratives,likeDelbos,restonacircular,ratherthanlinearor
chronologicalorganization.Herwork,likeDelbos,assembles,andisgroundedin,
actualhistoricaldata,whichinspiredthecreationofthecharactersofthetrilogy.Sethe
of Beloved,forinstance,ismodeledonnineteenthcenturyOhiofugitiveslavemother,
MargaretGarner.Hersisthestoryofamotherwhopreferredtokillherchildratherthan
seeitreturnedtobondage.Thefuneralphotographofthebodyofateenagegirlinspired
MorrisontowriteJazz.ThiswasafterMorrisonfirstviewedthephotographbythe
nowfamousHarlemphotographerJamesVanderZeeintheHarlemBookoftheDead
(AgainstAmnesia54).Notsolelybecausetheyounggirlwasshotatapartybyajealous
boyfrienddidthestorycatchMorrisonsattention.Becauseshediedrefusingtoidentify
herassailantsothathecouldgetawaywasMorrisonsinterestpiqued.Thesehistorically
groundedincidentsofAfricanAmericanexperienceundeniablyinspiredMorrison.She,
then,decidedtoexplorethemintherealmsofherimaginationandfiction.Throughthese
events,Morrisonalsocametoofferprofoundinsightsintoasubjectofcriticalconcernto
her.Iteventuallybecamethetitleofherlatestnovel,Love.Thethemeoflove,sodearto
Morrison,centersaroundthenatureofmaternallovein Beloved,andconcernsthe

176

romantictypein Jazz.Yet,itisapproachedinhertrilogyfromanunusuallynegative
perspective.Bothnovelsindeeddelveintohowobsessivekindsoflovecansabotagethe
self.Assuch,Morrisondemonstrateshowlove,whenexcessive,canleadtodestruction.
Morrisonfoundbothrecordsfor BelovedandJazzwhenshewaseditingTheBlackBook,
ananecdotalcollectionofclippingsandsnapshots,publishedwhileshewasaneditor
atRandom House(ParadiseReconsidered15).
With Paradise,Morrisonkeepsdocumentinglessconventional,moredestructive,
kindsoflovepresentinAfricanAmericanexperiences.Thekindofloveweencounterin
Paradiseismoreofacollectivenature,though.Itisessentiallygroundedintheprideof
belongingtoacommunity,albeitonethatrestsonpracticesofinclusionandexclusion.
With Paradise,Morrisonsetsouttoportrayhowformsofcommunallovecanbe
empowering.However,shealsorevealshowtraumaticallydestructiveanexcessivelove
forcommunityanditsidealscanbe,especiallywhenthatloveisdefinedonthepremises
ofexcessivepridethatleadstoeliminationofthosenotdeemedtofitorbelong.This
loveisalsodisastrouswhenitrupturesordinarywaysofrespondingtocommunity
matters,andpushesreactionstoanextreme.Inotherwords,thetypeofexcessiveand
transgressivebehaviorsthatcanemergefromasimulacrumofloveforacommunityis
whatIproposetoexaminefirstinthischapter.AsAlainBadiouwouldputit,iflovehas
younamewhathecallstheinnommable,itcaninduceunMaldsastreux.Nazism,
forinstance,didso,asIdemonstratelater,asdidtheleadersof Paradisewhoengineered
thecollectivemurderof fivehelplesswomen(Ethique76).
Aswasthecasewith BelovedandJazz,thedetailthatsparkedMorrisonsinterest
andimaginationforwritingParadisewasahistoricallygroundedpieceofinformation.

177

Inthisinstance,itwasthefoundingofallblacktownsinOklahoma.Especiallythe
promisesandshortcomingsthatthesetownsheldfortheirnewlyformedcommunities
wasofinteresttoher.TheideaspecificallycametoMorrison,accordingtoNancy
Peterson,fromarecurringheadlineinablacknewspaper.ItappearedintheLangston
CityHeraldthatwaspublishedduringtheyears18911892.Whileallblacktownsof
Oklahomaoftendistributedpamphlets,ranadds,andusedmethodstopromotetheir
town,thelinethatcaughtMorrisonsattentionwasthis.Basedonafinancially
exclusionarypremise,itsaid,ComePreparedorNotatAll(AgainstAmnesia90).
Thesetowns,asamatteroffact,weresupposedtohavebeenhavensforblack
communities,sincetheycouldremovethemselvesfromwhiteracismandlynching.They
werenot,however,alwayssuccessful.Theyindeedalwaysranthedangerofcutting
themselvesofffromlargerpolitical,economical,andcollectivespheres.Morrison
examinesandfictionalizesthispossibilityinthethirdnovelof hertrilogy.
PriortothefoundingofRuby,inwhoseenclosedspaceandrepetitive
temporality,mostof Paradisetakesplace,agroupofexslavefamilieshadlongtraveled
(TraumaticRealism175).TheyfirsthadmovedfromMississippitoLouisiana,and
finallytoOklahoma.There,theyhadexpectedtoturntheirexperienceoutofslaveryinto
alifeofsafetyandfreedom.BeforesettlingRuby,however,theyhadintendedtojoin
otherexslavesintheirnewlyestablishedtownsandlives.Buttheyhadbeenrejected,
humiliated,anddisillusioned.Turneddowneverywhere,thegroupofexslaveshad
finallydecidedtofoundatownoftheirown,whichtheyhadnamedHaven.Asthey
recalltheirpainfuljourney,wereadin Paradise,
theonehundredandfiftyeightfreedmenwereunwelcomeoneachgrainofsoil
fromYazootoFortSmith.TurnedawaybyrichChoctawandpoorwhites,chased

178

byyarddogs,jeeredatbycampprostitutesandtheirchildren,theywere
neverthelessunpreparedfortheaggressivediscouragementtheyreceivedfrom
Negrotownsalreadybuilt.TheheadlineofafeatureintheHerald,Come
PreparedorNotatAll,couldnotmeanthem,couldit?Smart,strong,andeager
toworktheirownland,theybelievedtheyweremorethanpreparedtheywere
destined.Itstungthemtoconfusiontolearntheydidnothaveenoughmoneyto
satisfytherestrictionstheselfsupportingNegroesrequired.Inshort,theywere
toopoor,toobedraggledlookingtoenter,letaloneresidein,thecommunitiesthat
weresolicitingNegrohomesteaders.Thiscontemptuousdismissalbythelucky
changedthetemperatureoftheirbloodtwice.Firsttheyboiledatbeingwritten
upaspeoplewhopreferredsaloonsandcrapgamestohomes,churches,and
schools.Then,rememberingtheirspectacularhistory,theycooled.Whatbegan
asoverheateddeterminationbecamecoldbloodedobsession.Theydontknow
weoraboutwe,saidoneman.Usfreelikethemwasslavelikethem.What
foristhisdifference?(1314)
Asaresultofrepeatedrefusals,theonehundredandfiftyeightfreedmenkeptmoving
west.Theybecamestiffer,prouderwitheachmisfortune.AsMorrisonadds,the
detailsofthisselfproclaimeddisallowancewerenowengravedintothepowerful
memoriesofsomeofthefoundingmembersofRuby,actualdescendantsofthe
foundingfathersofHaven(14).Thefeelingsofshamethathadaccompaniedthe
rejections,fuelingangerandpride,wereindeednow,notonlyremembered,butalso
transmittedtotheyoungergenerations.
Inthenovel,thesestrongfeelingsaremainlyarticulatedthroughthehegemonic
discourseofDeekandStewardMorgan,theallpowerfulfoundersofRuby.Thetwins
aretheones,indeed,who,oneday,tookresponsibilityinassumingtheunilateral
discursiveversionofthehistoryofRuby.Memory,inthiscase,andinthewordsof
JustineTally,hasbecome,then,morethanjustmemory.Itisalocus,inwhichthe
inadvertentpreserverofculturalmemory,ofsocialdifference,andofideological
strugglehavecometogether(TheStoryofJazz13).

179

ThepluralityofvoicesandtestimoniesthatDelboandMorrisonengageintheir
worksdo,however,presentvenuesforcontestingthehegemonicconstructionofhistory
thatwasdesiredbyHitler,andbyDeekandStewardMorgan.Also,thenonlinearand
circularliterarymodesthatDelboandMorrisonbringforwardintheirnarrativesmay
alsoprovideaestheticandethicalspacesforguardingagainstuniquedominantand
controllingformsofdiscourse.ItiswiththislineofreadingthatIexaminetheworksof
DelboandMorrison.
Iproposetodelveintosomeoftheformsofcommunity,andcommunalideals
thatarefoundinthetrilogiesofbothwriters.Assuch,thevaluespromotedbyNational
SocialisminNaziGermany,andbytheempowered8rockpatriarchsofRuby,arethe
onesthatwillcomeunderscrutiny.Inbothinstances,anidealofcommunitarian
substance,andexistence,haveturnedutopicanddeliberateformsofactionintoscenesof
deathanddestruction.AlainBadiousEthics:AnessayontheUnderstandingofEvil,
examinesthisprocessveryclearly.Badiousdiscussion,aroundatheoryofevil,relates,
indeed,toanidealofcommunity,similartothatofNaziGermanyandRuby,thathas
turneditscontentintowarandmassacre.Iproposetolookatitindetailnow.
ForBadiou,theevilfosteredbyNaziideologyisfirstandforemostgroundedin
afidelitytoasimulacrum.Thesimulacrumhereistheposingoftheexistenceofan
Aryanrace,believedtobeleadingtosomekindofnecessarytruth.Thesimulacrumof
Naziideologycanalsoberelatedtothefollowingprocess.Namely,thattheNational
Socialistrevolution,whichsoughtabreakwiththeoldorder,wouldleadtothe
constructionofanew,truthfultypeoforderorevent.Thispseudoprocessoftruth,
comingintobeingwiththeNaziera,was,importantlyenough,rootedinsometypical

180

communityideals.ForBadiou,theseidealsencompassedacharacteristicprideinsoil,
blood,andrace.Thenoveltyofthisbreakwiththepast,groundedinrevolutionary
NationalSocialistideals,providedthusamajorvehicleinconstructingandimplementing
Naziideology.
Badiouexploreshowaprocessoftruthcancomeaboutthroughthenoveltyof
anevent.Yet,forBadiou,alongwiththistruthbuildingprocess,theeventiseventually
todisappearintime.Theeventis,indeed,justakindofflashingsupplementthat
happenstoasituation.Whatultimatelyshouldservetoguidethefidelitytothatevent
lateronisnothingmorethananame,oratrace.Besides,forBadiou,thetruththat
relatestotheparticularityofasituation,shouldthenonlybeattainedthroughthebias
ofitsvoid.Thatway,thevoid,whichBadioudefinesasthemultipleofnothing,
wouldneitherexcludenorconstrainanyone.Itwouldbetheabsoluteneutralityof
being.ForBadiou,thisneutralityofbeingallowsthis.Namely,thatagenuine
fidelitythatoriginatesinanevent,whileitoperatesanimmanentbreakwithina
singularsituation,cannonethelessoccurandbeaddressed.
FortheNazis,however,bothideologyandrevolutionservedtocarryaparticular
community,thatoftheGerman people,nottowardsanecessaryneutralityofbeing.
Rather,ideologyandrevolutionservedtocarrytheirparticularcommunitytowardsits
truedestiny,which,Badiouobserves,wasarbitrarilydefinedasoneofabsoluteand
universaldomination.Thatdestiny,broughtintobeing,thusnamednotthevoidof
theearliersituation.Instead,itcalledforwhatBadioureferstoasitsplenitude.It
conveyednottheuniversalityofthatwhichissustained,precisely,bynoparticular
characteristicorparticularmultiple.Instead,itbroughtforwardtheabsolute

181

particularityoftheNazicommunity,whichworkeddirectlyagainsttruths,asitstaged
thatcommunityasauniversal(73).Therecanbenodoubt,onthisaccount,thatit
broughtterrorandviolence.
Fidelitytoasimulacrum,instancesofwhicharefoundin AuschwitzandAfterand
Paradise,allowsforthefollowingclaim.Namely,thattheclosedparticularityofthe
abstractset,orensemble,oftheNaziGermans,theAryans,orthe8rock
families,givessustenancetotheirparticulargroup.Trulyenough,forBadiou,the
invariableoperationofanyparticularensembleisdirectedtowardstheunending
constructionofitsownset.Theproblem,however,isthat,in ourcases,itenablesno
othermeansofdoingthisconstructionexcepteliminating,orvoiding,whatsurrounds.
Thevoidthusavoided,orchass,bythesimulacrum,returnsthenwithwhat
musthavebeenaccomplished,inorderforthesubstanceoftheeventtoemergeand
be.ForBadiou,itimpliesthat,forthose,arbitrarilydesignated,asthatwhichdidnot
belongtotheGermancommunitariansubstancetheJews,theGypsies,thementallyill,
thehomosexuals,thecommunistsitmeantdeath.AsBadiouadds,ifitwasnot
death,itwasatleastthatdeferredformofdeath,whichisslavery,intheserviceof
theGermansubstance.
Inasmuchasitservedtoorganizetheextermination,thenameJew,forBadiou,
wasapoliticalcreationoftheNazis.Uptothatpoint,accordingtoBadiou,thename
Jewhadindeedbeenwithoutanypreexistingreferent.Hefurtherclaimsthatthename
JewlaterbecameanamewhosemeaningnoonecansharewiththeNazis.Assuch,
itpresumedthesimulacrumandfidelitytothesimulacrum,aswellastheabsolute
singularityofNazismasapoliticalsequence(7475).

182

ThenameJewasaNaziconstruct,anddeathfilledreferent,isatworkinDelbos
writings.ItisimportanttorememberthatDelboenteredthecampuniverseasapolitical
prisoner,andnotasaJew.FromthepointofviewoftheNazis,thisdifferencewas
obviouslyradical.Ithadfundamentalimplicationsforthekindsofhandlingsand
sufferingsthattheNazisimposedontheirvictims.Actually,thesurvivalrateoflessthan
twentyfivepercentofDelbosnonJewishconvoywasstillsignificantlygreaterthanthat
ofdeportedFrenchJews(ConvoytoAuschwitz,backcover).Whileonlyfortynine
FrenchwomenreturnedoutoftheoriginallytwohundredandthirtyofDelbosgroup,the
pointhereisthatDelbosdeadcomrades,andtheJewsmurderedintheNazigenocide,
died,however,atthehandsofthesamesystem.ForMichaelRothberg,bothgroups
mustmakedemandsonourmemoryandconscience(TraumaticRealism149).
ThefollowinginstancemakesclearhowtheNaziconstructofaJewishcategory
impactedtheconditionsofsurvivaloftheprisoners.In ConvoytoAuschwitz,Delbo
discussesthispoint,assheatfirstmakesareferencetoherowngroup.Shewrites,
WewerebynomeanstheonlyFrenchwomenatBirkenau,butweweretheonly
onesundertherubricpolitical.TheotherswereJews.AJewmightbetaken
incombat,guninhand,orinaroundupitmadenodifference.TotheGestapo,
hewasaJew,neverapoliticalprisoner.Jewsnolongerhadanationality.Since
JewsandnonJewswereallatAuschwitz,whatwasthedifference?The
differencewasenormousfromthefirst.Onarrival,theJewishconvoysfaceda
selection.Onlyyoungpeopleabletoworkenteredthecamp.Theotherswere
gassedrightaway.Oftentherewasnoselection:theentireconvoywassenttothe
gaschamber.
AsDelbofurtherexplains,
AtBirkenau,conditionsforJewsandnonJewswerenearlythesame.Nearly.
ButthatslightdifferenceledtoahighermortalityrateamongtheJews.The
blocksofJewishwomenweremoreovercrowdedthantheothers.Noteveryone
couldliedownforthenight.Thosewhodidnotfindaplaceontheplanksofthe
tiersspentthenightstandingintheaisles.TheJewssufferedgeneralpunishments

183

moreoftenthanwedid,doingrollcallontheirkneeswiththeirarmsintheair,
forexample:somethingweneverexperienced.(9)
NotonlyistheNaziprocessofmakingdifferencesinthetreatmentofJewsand
nonJewssuggestedin AuschwitzAndAfter.Itisalsoexploredthroughtheawareness
thatbothgroupshadintentativelyestimatingtheirchancesofsurvival.Delboatteststo
thisprocessinthefollowing,verymoving,passage.Theexcerpt,entitledDialogue,
relatestoaverybriefencounterthatDelbohaswithayoungJewishwomanatthecamp.
Thediscussioncentersaroundthegreaterprobabilityofdying,thattheJewishwoman
sensesinherinstance,basedonherethnicity. Assheinitiatestheconversation,sheasks
Charlotte,
Tuesfranaise?
Oui.
Moiaussi.
EllenapasdFsurlapoitrine.Unetoile.
Do ?
Paris.
Ilyalongtempsquetuesici?
Cinqsemaines.
Moi,seizejours
Cestbeaucoupdj,jesais.
CinqsemainesCommentestcepossible?
Tuvois.
Ettucroisquonpeuttenir?
Ellemendie.
Ilfautessayer.
Vous,vouspouvezesprermaisnous
Ellemontremajaquetterayeetellemontresonmanteau,unmanteautrop
grandtellement,tropsaletellement,tropenloquestellement.
Oh,noschancessontgales,va
Pournous,ilnyapasdespoir.
Etsamainfaitungesteetsongestevoquelafumequimonte.
Ilfautlutterdetoutsoncourage.
PourquoiPourquoilutterpuisquenousdevonstoutes
Legestedesamainachve.Lafumequimonte.
Non.Ilfautlutter.
Commentesprersortirdici.Commentquelquunsortiratiljamaisdici.
Ilvaudraitmieuxsejeterdanslesbarbelstoutdesuite.

184

Queluidire?Elleestpetite,chtive.Etjenaipaslepouvoirdeme
persuader
moimme.Touslesargumentssontinsenss.Jeluttecontretoutemaraison.
On
luttecontretouteraison.
Lacheminefume.Lecielestbas.Lafumetranesurlecampetpseet
nous
enveloppeetcestlodeurdelachairquibrle. (Aucun2627)
Inthesilenceofthegesturebywhichdeathisevoked,thesmokeofthe
crematoriaindicatestheverytensionatthecenteroftheconversation.Accordingto
ThomasTrezise,andhisTheQuestionofCommunityinCharlottesDelbosAuschwitz
andAfter,Dialogue,indeed,focusesonthefollowing,partiallysilenced,
understanding.Namely,thattheusforwhomtheJewishwomanspeaksisatmuch
greateroddsofbeingexcludedfromspeechordialoguethanDelbos.ForTrezise,
thevictimizationoftheJews,andIwouldadd,ofthosedeprivedoftheirnationality,
suchastheGypsies,thementallyill,thehomosexuals,etc.,wasindeedexceptional.It
wasexemplaryinthefollowingregard.ThevictimizationoftheJewsreflectedthe
generalstrategywherebyNazismexploiteddifferencesbothbetweenandwithin
communities,inorderpreciselytobetterdestroythem(862).
TheeradicationofJewishparticularity,whichtheNazispurposelypromotedin
thecampstodiscourageanddemoralizetheirvictimsevenfurther,isveryapparentinthe
followinginstance.Theexcerpt,from Aucun,concentratesonthearrivalofaJewish
convoyinAuschwitz.Withit,Delbomakescleartheprocessofdepersonalizationthat
theNazismadegruesomefortheJews.Inordertorevealtheirbeingdispossessedof
theirmaterialormoral,familialorcommunalsignificance,Delbousesadepersonalized
thirdpersonpluraltorefertothegroup.Notonlydoessheinsistonthesuddenformsof
thoroughdeprivationandconfusionthatwastheirlot.Herchoiceofanimpersonalstyle

185

ofwritingalsodrawsattentiontothebrutallossofapersonalorcommunalvoicethatthe
NazisforcefullyimposedontheirJewishprisoners.ForTrezise,inthisinstance,the
particularityofthefirstpersonisruthlesslyconvertedintotheuniversalityofthethird.
Assuch,itmakesprominent,thedeprivationofspeech,andthegeneral
dispossessionoftheJewishinmates,thatDelbosetsouttoconvey. Asshewitnesses
theirdisorientationontheirarrival,Delbowrites,
Ilsnesaventpasqucettegarelonnarrivepas.
Ilsattendentlepireilsnattendentpaslinconcevable.
Etquandonleurcriedeserangerparcinq,hommesdunct, femmeset
enfantsdelautre,dansunelanguequilsnecomprennentpas,ilscomprennent
auxcoupsdebtonetserangentparcinqpuisquilssattendenttout.
Lesmresgardentlesenfantscontreellesellestremblaientquilsleurfussent
enlevsparcequelesenfantsontfaimetsoifetsontchiffonnsdelinsomnie
traverstantdepays.Enfin,onarrive,ellesvontpouvoirsoccuperdeux.
Etquandonleurcriedelaisserlespaquets,lesdredonsetlessouvenirssurle
quai,ilsleslaissentparcequilsdoiventsattendretoutetneveulentstonner
derien.Ilsdisentonverrabien,ilsontdjtantvuetilssontfatigusdu
voyage.(1011)
Whateversenseofparticularitymaystillbeconveyedinthisdescriptionwithitsspecific
referencestothecategoriesofmen,women,mothers,andchildrenwithinthegroupis,
however,soontobeerased.ForTrezise,particularity,inthefollowinginstance,isin
factelidedbyitsinsertionwithinanendlessseriesofmoreorlessidenticalconvoys
thatwillkeeparrivingatAuschwitz.Theabstractnessofthethirdpersonincludesa
spaceandtimethatactuallyallowsforanevenmoreabstractformofspeech.Itisthe
useoftheonform,thatinsistsontheregularityandindifference,withwhichtheJews
keptbeingdisinherited.Whiledispossessioncanbesaidtoeventranscenddeathitself,
weread,
Onhabilleraunorchestreaveclesjupesplissesdesfillettes.Lecommandant
veutquonjouedesvalsesviennoisesledimanchematin.
...

186

OndistribueraauxAllemandesmaladesdesolivesnoiresetdulokoummais
ellesnaimentpaslesolivesdeCalamatanilesolivesengnral.
Ettoutlejourettoutelanuit
touslesjoursettouteslesnuitslescheminesfumentaveccecombustiblede
touslespaysdEurope
deshommesprsdescheminespassentleursjournespasserlescendrespour
retrouverlorfondudesdentsenor.Ilsonttousdelordanslabouchecesjuifset
ilssonttantquecelafaitdestonnes.
Etauprintempsdeshommesetdesfemmesrpandentlescendressurlesmarais
asschspourlapremirefoislaboursetfertilisentlesolavecduphosphate
humain.(Aucun1718)
ForTrezise,thelossofthedistinguishingfeaturesoftheJewishcommunity
renderedbyDelbo,notonlyproducesanideaofliterallynakeduniformity.Italso
resultsinperceivingtheJewsincompleteisolationfromothercommunities,fromone
another,andfromthemselves.This,Treziseadds,comesfromtheseveranceofa
certainrelationality,thatnormallyprecedesandinformsanacknowledgmentofan
identitythroughanother.Thatcertain relationality,indeed,isalsocrucialin
enablingandmaintainingwhatTrezisecalls,theuniversalasaconditionof
community.Particularity,forTrezise,wouldthuscallforanintricationor
involvementwithalterity.Forhim,itispreciselythisalteritythatwouldgivebirth
totheself,whetheritisanindividualorcollectiveone.Onlyattheconditionof
acknowledgingalterity,cantheselfbeinturnconstruedasatensionbetweenparticular
anduniversal.
AsDelbodemonstrates,itisinfactthattypeof relationality thatNazismsought
todestroyatallcost.Sincethedenialofparticularityseversthedialogicalor
differentialrelationthatisconstitutiveofsociallifeitself,itbecameonetoolof
destructionthattheNazisexploitedwithgreatferocity.Theyconvertedtheuniversal,
orthepossibilitiesofafirstpersonsingularorplural,andswitcheditfromthe

187

possibilityofcommunitytotheactualityofitsannihilation.Thus,notonlydid
Nazismdepriveitsvictimsofanyinterlocutor.Nazismalsovoidedeachandeveryone
ofthosevictimsoftheirpossibilityofhavingaparticularreferent,anI,toreferto
themselves.ForTrezise,
ThetensionbetweenparticularanduniversalwasresolvedbyNazismthrough
thestrategicprohibitionoftheuniversalitselftocertainparticulars. Inthefinal
solutionoftheJewishproblem,...Jewsbecametheindistinguishablethird
personsnamedtheJewsinsofaraseachwasdeniedtheuniversalrighttospeak,
ormoreprecisely,therighttobeheardinthefirstpersonandhencetostate
somethingotherthanhisorhermembershipinthiscollectivelystereotypedOther.
Theposition,inwhichanyspeakercannormallyassumeavoiceinthefirstperson,was
thusradicallyalteredbyNazism.Sowasthedialogicalrelationthatthispositionofthe
subjectpresupposes.Thesevoidedspacescametobeoccupiedonlybythoseconsidered
worthyofhavingaselforcommunityidentity.Thisidea,forTrezise,whichIhave
alreadyintroducedthroughBadiou,impliedthusalsotheevacuationof allthose
others,forwhomaspaceonceexisted,butwasthreatenedtothecore(TheQuestion
ofCommunity88081).
Thelossofanindividualandcollectiveagency,whichtheNazisengineeredby
suffocatingspeechinthosewhoweretherecipientsoftheirhate,isclearlyrendered
throughoutthetrilogy. Mesuredenosjours,andAucundenousnereviendra,tosome
extent,offerhowever,aninterestingcomplementtothesilencingofvoicesthatNazism
soughttoimplement.Indeed,with Mesuredenosjours,Delbocruciallyencouragesa
resurgenceofsomeofthosevoicesthatwerethreatenedbyannihilation.Notonlydoes
Charlottebringforwardherownvoicetobearwitnesstotheattemptedextermination.
Shealsogoesbeyondtheparticularformofnarrationthatsheusedtoarticulateherown
experience.Shepositsinherworkacommunalvoiceaswell.Cruciallyenough,that

188

voiceisonethatactsasanenablerofcollectiveexperiencesandremembrancestobe
broughtforward.Notonlydoesitbringtolight,andreveal,thealmosttotalannihilation
thatDelbowitnessed.Butyet,throughitscommunallygroundedtone,thiscollective
voicesucceedsinreassuming,albeitincompletely,thenecessityandconditionof
community,whichwassothreatenedduringtheNaziera.
In Mesuredenosjours,Delbosvoiceissupplementedbythoseofher
companions,Gilberte,Gaby,Germaine,Louise,andmanymore,allcampsurvivors
themselves,towhomsheremainedattachedintheaftermath.Hertrilogytakes,atthat
point,theformofacollectionofmemoriesandtestimonies.Allinsistontheuselessness
oftheknowledgegatheredatAuschwitz,andontherelativeindifference,andlackof
understanding,withwhichthatknowledgewasreceivedinpostwarFrance.Hertrilogy,
however,alsopresentsapluralityofvoicesthatoffermorethanlamentationanddespair.
Itencompassesthetrialsandtribulationsexperiencedbythesewomen.Butitalso
testifiestothecommunalexchanges,andtheemotionalsupport,thatDelboscompanions
andthewomenofhergroupprovidedtooneanother.Bysolicitingthetestimonyof
othersurvivors,andplayingtheroleofanactivelistener,Delbothussucceedsincarrying
awordthatiscollectiveratherthanindividual.Eventhoughthewordisnot
transmittedassuch,butpassesthroughDelbosliterarytransformations,itsuccessfully
carriesoutthefollowing,formidabletask:thatofreengagingadialogicalrelation,that
Treziseseescriticalinreconstitutingasociallife.Butalso,bythesametoken,Delbo
andhersurvivingcompanionsassumed,withthepassingoftheword,acrucialethical
responsibility.Thatoftransmittingamessagethat,eventhoughitisuseless,is
nonethelessnecessaryfortheworldtohear(TheQuestionofCommunity865).

189

ThedialogicalrelationsthatDelbobringstolightintheaftermathhadalready
beenestablished,andactuallymaintained,atthecamps.Delbomakesthesesocialbonds
andsignsofcommunityexchangesparticularlyvisiblein ConvoytoAuschwitz,a
collectivebiographyofthe230FrenchwomenwhoweredeportedfromCompigneto
AuschwitzonJanuary24,1943(xi).Delbofirstproceedstocontrastgroupinteractions
andabundantexchangesamonghercompanions,withthelackofsupport,andthe
isolation,which,weobservedearlier,overwhelmedtheJewishwomen.Atfirst,Delbo
reiteratesthedifferencesbetweentheJewishinmatesandthewomenofhergroup,in
regardstotheirunequalchancesofsurvival. Butshealsoinsistsonhowmutualcare,
compassion,andsocialcontactsamonghergrouppushedbackthelimitsandimminence
ofdeath.Shewrites,
...TheseJewishwomen,throwntogetherattheeveofdeportation,rarelyformed
cohesive,supportivegroups.TheirblockswereamixtureofJewsfromdifferent
countrieswithoutacommonlanguageormuchbasisforfriendshipandmutual
aid.IfourconvoyhadsomanysurvivorsandforBirkenauin1943,fiftyseven
outoftwohundredandthirtyaftersixmonthswasexceptional,uniqueinthe
historyofthecampthiswasbecausewealreadykneweachother(havingspent
weeks,andsometimesmonths,togetheratRomainville)andhadformedsmall,
tightlyknitunitswithinalarge,homogeneousgroup,helpingeach otherinall
sortsofways,oftenquitesmall:holdingeachothersarmswhilewalking,rubbing
eachothersbacksduringrollcallandofcourse,wecouldtalktoeachother.
Speechwasselfdefense,comfort,hope.Bytalkingaboutwhowewerebefore,
aboutourlives,weperpetuatedthetimebefore,wemaintainedourreality.Each
ofthesurvivorsknowsthatwithouttheothers,shewouldnothavereturned.(9)
Delbofurthersexploresformsofconnectionstoothers,andtheexistenceofavitaland
lifesustainingcommunityinthefollowinginstance.Thistime,shemakesthepoint
throughanegativereversal,whichmakeshertacklethequestionofsurvivalinthefaceof
lonelinessandabandonment.Asherclingingtolife,andhopeforareturn,somehow
dwindleatthethoughtofbeingleftalone,Delbowrites,

190

Jeresteseuleaufonddecefossetjesuisprisededsespoir.Laprsencedes
autres,leursparolesfaisaientpossibleleretour.Ellessenvontetjaipeur.Jene
croispasauretourquandjesuisseule.Avecelles,puisquellessemblentycroire
sifort,jycroisaussi.Dsquellesmequittent,jaipeur.Aucunenecroitplus
auretourquandelleestseule. (Aucun164)
Charlottesenduranceandbeliefinareturnwerethusonlyconceivablebecauseshe
feltsupportedbythewomensharingherordeal.Delboinscribes,andinsists,inthe
trilogy,onthenecessityofrelyingonacommunallifesupportingsystem.Thefollowing
excerptisapowerfulexampleofthissystem.Itshowshowthewomenofhergroup
unitedinjointeffortsofcommunalactsofresistanceandresiliencewhiletheywerein
Auschwitz.Thewomenseemtomakeonebody,onecirculatorysystem,whiletheyare
connected,throughoneanother,toonesustainingwilltosurvive.Setinthecontextof
theinfamousrollcallsonthefrozenplainofAuschwitz,Delbowrites,
Doscontrepoitrine,nousnoustenonsserres,ettoutentablissantainsipour
toutesunemmecirculation,unmmerseausanguin,noussommestoutes
glaces.(103)
AlmostalltestimoniesbyDelboscompanionsmakeclear,aspresumedbyDelbo
in Uneconnaissanceinutile,thatreturningtoasocallednormalself,ortoagenuine
wayofbeingafterAuschwitzwasimpossible.Yet,asDelbostestimonydid,the
womensalsoallbringtolight,in Mesuredenosjours,thecompanionshipandthe
persistingsenseofsolidaritythattheymaintainedwithintheirgroup.Encouragedby
supportingfriendshipandmutualexchanges,many,if notall,alsobelieved,correctly,
thattheirchancesofreturningwereincreasediftheydidnotremainisolatedfromeach
other.
Mado,oneofCharlottescompanions,isoneofthosewhosawcollectivesupport
asameansofsurvivalaswell.Asshereflectsonhertribulations,sheinscribesthem

191

withinthepersonal,butalsooverwhelminglycollectiveandsocialdimensionsofher
experience.Throughaprofoundlyhonest,yetverydisturbingtestimony,welearn,
however,thatthestrengthshederivedfromhercompanionshipatAuschwitzdidnothelp
herreattachtoacommunityatlargeaftershewasreleased.
Madofirstreflectsoncomplexfeelingsofreliefandjoyatherliberationthat,in
hercase,oftengotmixedwithguilt,helplessness,anddespair.Whilemomentsof
discouragementwouldoftenassailheratthecamp,shewould,alreadythen,callon
Charlotteandotherwomenofhergroup,tohelpassuageherdesolationandhopelessness.
Sharingsomuchtogether,ultimately,hadherachieve,thenandlater,adegreeofmutual
understanding,neverexperiencedbefore,withthewomenofhergroup.Asshekeeps
investigating,lateron,intoherbefore,during,andafterAuschwitz,sheclearly
rememberstheburdenofhavingtodecideeveryminutebetweenlivinganddying.
Shealsoacknowledges,atthatpoint,howgenerationalcontinuitywiththepast,and
communalbondingwereinfluentialinthewomensoptingforlife. Asshereflects,
Lbas,nousavionstoutnotrepass,tousnossouvenirs,mmedessouvenirs
lointainsquivenaientdenosparents,nousnoussommesarmesdenotrepass
pournousprotger,nouslavonsdressentrelhorreuretnouspournousgarder
entires,pourgardernotremoivritable,notretre.Nouspuisionsdansnotre
pass,dansnotreenfance,danscequiavaitformnotrepersonnalit,notre
caractre,nosgots,nosides,pournousreconnatreennousmme,pournous
garder,pournepasnouslaisserentamer,pournepasnouslaisseranantir.Nous
noussommescramponnesnousmmes.Chacunaracontsaviemilleetmille
fois,aressuscitsonenfance,letempsdelalibertetdubonheurpoursassurer
quillavaitvcu,quilavaitbientceluiquilracontait. Notrepassnousat
sauvegardeetrassurance.(4950)
Whilesherecallsthattheextensiveandintimatetalkingsessionsthatsheandher
companionsentertainedatthecampencouragedthemtoremainalive,shealso
acknowledgesthefollowing,veryupsettingtruthaboutherself.Namely,thatthebonding

192

andverbalexchanges,howevercrucial,didnotsucceedinmaintainingheremotionally
aliveinherlifeafterAuschwitz.Neitherdidthecompanionshipexperiencedat
Auschwitzreleaseherfromherothercompanions,deadatthecamp,whonowliveinher
mindandinherfutureasghosts. Asshewrites,
Jefaiscequonfaitdanslavie,maisjesaisquecenestpascela,lavie,parceque
jesaisladiffrenceentreavantetaprs....Enrentrant,jaivouluunenfant.
Quandmonfilsestn,jaitbaignedejoie.Jedisbaigneparcequectait
commeuneeaucaressanteettidequimontaitautourdemoi,montaitenmoi,me
portaitetmefaisaitlgre,heureuse,baignedejoie.Cefilsquejavaissouhait,
iltaitl,moi.Unejoiecalmeetbienfaisante.Jenaipaspumelaisserporter
parcettejoie,jenaipaspumyabandonner.Enmmetempsquemontaitautour
demoi,enmoi,cetteeaudouceetenveloppantedelajoie,machambretait
envahieparlesspectresdenoscompagnes.SpectredeMounettequidisait:
Mounetteestmortesansconnatrecettejoie.SpectredeJackiequitendaitdes
mainsinutiles.Spectresdetoutescesjeunesfilles,detoutescesjeunesfemmes
quisontmortessansavoirconnucela,sansavoirtbaignesdecettejoie.Leau
soyeusedemajoiesestchangeenbouegluante,enneigesouille,enmarcage
ftide.(Mesuredenosjours 49,5556)
Aprocessofidentification,oridentificationatadistance,would,forKajaSilverman
beopposedtoatypeofidentificationthatshecallsheteropathicidentification.While
thelatterrecognizestheotherandherexperienceasother,andnotasonesown,the
former,forSilverman,entailspreciselytheoppositestateofaffairstheconditionor
qualityofbeingother(TheThresholdoftheVisibleWorld15).Inasmuchasan
identificationatadistancewouldbeinimicalordetrimentaltoaprocessofworking
through,itisclearthatMadoishelplesslychallengedbyandcaughtinit.Thisbecomes
particularlyclearwhenshediscusseshernewlybornson,whoseimagesheinterchanges
withcorpses.Whileshekeepsinvestingtheworldofthelivingwiththatofthedead,she
writes,
Jerevoyaiscettefemmetutesouviens,cettepaysanne,couchedanslaneige,morte,
avecsonnouveaunmort,gelentresescuisses.Monfilstaitaussicenouveaunl.
JeregardemonfilsetjeluireconnaislesyeuxdeJackie,levertbleudesyeuxdeJackie,

193

uneinflexiondeMounette.Monfilsestleurfilstoutes.Ilestlenfantquellesnauront
paseu.Leurstraitssedessinentpardessuslessiens,parfoissyconfondent.Comment
trevivanteaumilieudecepeupledemortes?(Mesuredenosjours5556)
Inthesamedespairingtone,shekeepsexpandingonhowenormousherlosshasbeenina
retraumatizingpostAuschwitzlife.Sheimpliesthattheuncomprehendingreceptionof
thesignificanceofAuschwitzbyordinarypeoplehasledtoanemptinessinher
postwarlifethatisinsurmountable.Whilesheisfacingthefailureofherattemptsto
constructanutopiathatwouldcountertheconcentrationarydystopia,inRothbergs
terms,she,however,alsoreiteratesanideaofcommunitythatwaspossibleinAuschwitz,
butnotinanaftermath(TraumaticRealism173).Shealsoacknowledgeshow
overwhelmingthedistanceandestrangementhasbeenfromapostAuschwitzFrench
communitythathasfailedher.Asshemournsaseverancefromthatcommunity,and
deploresalackofconnectionwithitsfutureandfuturegenerations,sheclaims,
Etdepuisquejesuisrentre,toutcequejtaisavant,tousmessouvenirsdavant,
toutsestdissout,dfait.Ondiraitquejelaiuslbas.Mavraiesur,cesttoi.
Mavraiefamille,cestvous, ceuxquitaientlbasavecmoi.Aujourdhui,mes
souvenirs,monpass,cestlbas.Mesretoursenarrirenefranchissentjamais
cetteborne.Ilsybutent.Tousleseffortsquenousavonsfaitspourempcher
notredestruction,pourpersvrerdansnotrenous,pourmaintenirnotretre
davant,tousceseffortsnontserviquepourlbas.Auretour,cenoyaudurque
nousavionsforgaucurdenotrecuretquenouscroyionssolideparcequil
nousavaittantcot,cenoyauafondu,sestdissout.Plusrien.Maviea
commenclbas.Avant,ilnyarien.Jenaipluscequejavaislbas,ceque
javaisavant,cequejtaisavant.Toutmatarrach.Quemerestetil ?
Rien,lamort.Quandjedisquejesaisladiffrenceentreavantetaprs,jeveux
direquavantjevivaisetquejaitoutoublidecetteviel,maviedavant.
Maintenant,jenesuisplusvivante.Cettediffrence,jenailexactemesure,la
connaissancesensibleetmaluciditnemaidepas.Riennepeutcomblerlcart
entrelesautresetmoi,entremoietmoi.Riennepeutcomblerladiffrence,rien
lamenuiser.(Mesuredenosjours 495051)
Socialinteractions,verbalexchanges,andphysicalgesturesofcareandcomfort
helpedDelboandhercompanionsmaintainconditionsofalterityandcommunityatthe

194

camp.Thesesamedialogicalordifferentialrelationsorlackthereofalsocontributed
tothereframingoftheiridentityinanaftermath.Eventhough,formostsurvivors,this
identityturnedintostatesofdisassociation,splitpersonalities,andmomentsof
distressingremembranceorerasure,Nazismdidnotsucceed,however,inannihilating
theiridentityaltogether.
Asimilarlydestructive,butnoteradicatingeither,identityshatteringprocesscan
betracedinMorrisonsParadise.Onevariation,however,canbeobservedinthe
authorstrilogies.Delboseemstoinsist,asdoesMorrison,ontheimportanceoflife
sustainingandvibrantcommunities.ForDelboandhercompanions,inanidentity
reconstructingprocess,itismainlyalterityandsocialinteractionamonghumanbeings
orlossthereofthathelpedthemshapeorreshapetheiridentity.ForMorrison,itseems,
sotoo.Yet,forher,itisalsounderthesignificanceofmemorythatthisvitalexchange
takesplace.Eventhougheachauthormaydelveintooneagencymoreintensivelythan
intheother,thetwowritersacknowledgethenecessaryincidenceofinteractionsamong
andbetweenthetwoparadigms.DeborahBarnesmakesthepointoftheprivilegeof
memoryinMorrisonsoeuvreveryclearly.InMovinonup:TheMadnessof
MigrationinToniMorrisonsJazz,sheinsiststhat,
AsinallMorrisonsnovels,memoryisthesavinggrace.Withoutmemoriesofa
historical,cultural,andpersonalfoundation,thesojournerwillhavenoidentity,
nopointoforientation,nowaytoproceedandnowherefromwhichtobegin
anew.Evenanevolvingidentitymustberootedinapast.(293)
In Paradise,then,memoryisnotsimplythepreserverofatortuouspast.Evenif
itwantsitselftobeempoweringandglorifying.Itisalsowhatthedescendantsofthe
survivorsofslavery,inexodusandinsearchofParadise,holdastheirmostprecious
commodity.WhentheysetouttofoundRuby,theirsolepossessionisindeedtheir

195

remembranceofacommunalpast.Instilledinthem,thereisthusaprofoundneedto
preservethattruecommunalspiritofthepastthattheyseektokeepalive.Notonlydo
thefoundersofRubysetouttocreate,orrecreate,thespiritoftheirhistory.Butby
establishinganauthentic,strong,andhardworkingcommunity,theyalsowishtowrite,
andevenrewrite,thestoryofthatcommunity.Meanwhile,theyalsoseetoitthatasense
ofbelonging,groundedinthepast,bemaintained.AndforthenewcommunityofRuby,
andforDeaconMorganinparticular,oneofitsfounders,memoryisanidealizing,yet
powerful,andenduringtoolindeed.Asmemoriesofpastwanderingsoftheancestors,
andofthenewsettlers,forcefullycompelDeekinhisremembranceandreverie,
Morrisonwrites,
Whattheysawwassometimesnothing,sometimessad,andDeekremembered
everything...Evennowtheverbenascentwasclearevennowthesummer
dresses,thecreamy,sunlitskinexcitedhim... Soamongthevividdetailsofthat
journeythesorrow,thestubbornness,thecunning,thewealthDeeksimageof
thenineteensummerladieswasunlikethephotographers.Hisremembrancewas
pastelcoloredandeternal.(Paradise10910)
Atthispoint,Mesuredenosjours,alongwith Paradise,enableustoemphasize
howaframingofculturalconsciousnesscanbeinformed,andapproached,through
variouspointers.Oneofthese,aspreviouslymentioned,isdirectedtowardsmemory.
Anotherismadeupofsocialanddiscursiveinteractions,whoseworkingswehaveseen
atplayinDelboswork.ItisnowappropriatetobringtheseoutinMorrisonsoeuvre.
InhisUpfromBondage: TheLiteraturesofRussianandAfricanAmericanSoul,
DaleE.Petersonbringstolighthowmemoryandsocialinteractionscontributeto
ideologicalandcommunalproductions.Atfirst,heposesthequestionofthestrange
meaningsofbeing...blackinaworldthatmeasuredcivilizationbyasinglestandard
ofliteracy(200). AshedrawsparallelsbetweenRussianandAfricanAmerican

196

experiences,especiallythosethathavebeenpartiallyortotallyleftoutinhistory,he
comestoexploreformsofculturalnationalism.Doingso,heinsistsonaparticularityhe
hasobservedamongmanyAfricanAmericanwriters,namelythatthereisamajoritythat
hasattemptedtogivevisibilityandvoicetoanativeculturethathasbeenhiddenfrom
view,andthathasbeenheldinbondagetonarrowWesternstandardsofcivilityand
literacy(6).
ThisuncoveringofAfricanAmericanexperiencesisdefinitelypartofMorrisons
archeologicalproject.Butonepointthatneedstobemadeveryclearhereisthis.As
Morrisongoesabouthertask,shedoesnotattempttoprivilegeoneformof discourse
overanother.She,asBadiouwouldhaveit,doesnotuseherarttofillavoidwithone
singular,specific,formofplenitude(Ethics73).Rather,likeDelbo,shechoosesto
alignapluralityofvoices,towhichthereaderhastheresponsibilitytorespond.Asa
matteroffact,Paradise,likeMesuredenosjours,statesabeliefin,andoffersan
interpellationfrom,apluralityofexperiences.Assuch,bothworksareinstrumentalin
displayinganecessarydiversityofverbalandcultural interactions.Theyalsopointata
muchneededmultiplicityofsocialandcommunityexchangesthatcanhelpdefyany
singletotalizingmeaning.AsJustineTallyveryaptlyremarksinherdiscussionof Jazz,
relevantforourownargumentaroundParadise,astorymaybeusefulinconstructing
alternativehistory,butthatstilldoesnotraiseittothecategoryofTruth(Paradise
Reconsidered35).Also,asAlessandroPortellicontends,thetruthofthestoryisthe
truthofart.Assuch,itdoesnotvouchforthefactsbuttellsanotherkindoftruth,and
thisiswhyitistold(TheTextandtheVoice11920).

197

Whilebringingtotheforegroundamultitudeofstories,Morrisonthusfacilitatesa
processofverbalexchangesconstitutiveofdialoguesbetweenselfandself,selfand
other,andselfandcommunity.She,then,hasstoriespurposefully,yetpartially,told
fromonepersontoanother.Inturn,theseareretoldinanothersituation,ortoanother
personwithmoreinformation,orevenfromadifferentperspective.Thatway,Morrison
enablessomesortofhistoricalprocess,oratleastcommunalprocess,tocomeabout.For
RafaelPrezTorres,thishistoricalprocess,signaledbyMorrisonsnarrativestrategy,
consistsinbeinggroundedintheirdrawingtogether.Notonlydothestoriesbecomea
meansofarticulatingtheaccumulatedwisdomofcommunalthought,theyalso
enablehearingthedeadthroughthevoicesoftheliving(KnittingandKnottingthe
NarrativeThread104).Besides,asMorrisonherselfcontends,itsimportantnotto
haveatotalizingview.AssheexplainsinherParisReview interview,inAmerican
literaturewe[AfricanAmericans]havebeensototalizedasthoughthereisonlyone
version.Butyet,wearenotoneindistinguishableblockofpeoplewhoalwaysbehave
thesameway.HenceforMorrison,itbecamecrucialtostructurallyorganizeherwork,
andParadise,aroundseveralvoicesspeakingthroughouteachbook(WomenWritersat
Work369).
ThedialogicattributesoflanguageandexperiencethatMikhailBakhtin
postulatesinhisProblemsofDostoevskysPoeticscanshedlightonMorrisonspractice.
EventhoughBakhtinstheoryoflanguage,especiallyheteroglossia,seemsto
concentrateonthelinguisticelementsandtheliteraryaspectsoflanguage,hisworkis
relevantinourcontextbecauseitenablesustoapproach,beyondamerelinguisticlineof
thinking,theideologicalpointsofview,values,andopinionsthatattachtoandare

198

reflectedbylanguage.AsMichaelHolquistphrasesitin Dialogism,thereisanintimate
connectionbetweentheprojectoflanguageandtheprojectofselfhood.Itisthatthey
actuallybothexistinordertomean(23).Also,therelevanceandmodernity of
Bakhtinstheoryoflanguage,forHolquist,notonlyliesinitsbeingapragmatically
orientedtheoryofknowledgethatseekstograsphumanbehaviorthroughtheusehumans
makeoflanguage(15).Italsoenablesustoaccess,inBakhtinsownwords,specific
pointsofviewontheworld.Whileeachoftheseviewpointsischaracterizedbyits
ownobjects,itisalsoguidedbyitsownmeaningsandvalues(TheDialogic
Imagination348).Themultidimensionalcharacterofheteroglossia,thatmaybefound
intheconsciousnessofindividuals,butalsocommunities,canthusenableushereto
examinewhethersomeformsofdiscourseareinvitingornotofdialogicalinteraction.
ForBakhtin,thereisnoselfatallwithoutanother.Itisthroughthisotherthat
theindividualselfcomesintobeing.Thisprocessoffusingthisotherintotheself
takesplacepreciselythroughlanguage,which,forBakhtin,isalwaysopenendedand
dialogic.Itisalwayssocial.Thisdialogic,andthuspolemical,natureoflanguageis
inherentintheindividualsawarenessoftheself,andhisselfaffirmation.Also,whatis
crucialforBakhtinishowthediscourseandconsciousnessoftheothershapes,alters,and
establishestheselfandhisdiscourse. AsBakhtindevelopshisargumentontheword,
heinsiststhatitdoesnotexistwithoutitsintensesidewardglanceatsomeoneelses
word.Whileheinsistsonthenecessarypresenceandexistenceoftheotherinthe
self,andofthelanguageoftheotherintheheros,heassertsthat,
Theherosattitudetowardhimselfisinseparablyboundupwithhisattitude
towardanother,andwiththeattitudeofanothertowardhim.Hisconsciousness
ofselfisconstantlyperceivedagainstthebackgroundoftheothersconsciousness
ofhimIformyselfagainstthebackgroundofIforanother.Thustheheros

199

wordsabouthimselfarestructuredunderthecontinuousinfluenceofsomeone
elseswordsabouthim.(ProblemsofDostoevskysPoetics20307)
Theconcernoftheindividualforthepast,andthecultural,communalvoicingof
it,isprevalentandvitalinToniMorrisonsParadise.SimilartoBakhtinswork,itoffers
acomprehensiveexaminationofhumanactionbasedonattitudesrevolvingaround
language.In Paradise,thereispresent,then,thefundamentalconceptofdialogism,or
doubledvoicedconsciousness.Itismadevisiblethroughapluralityofdiscourses,
recollectionsandexperiences.Yet,thereisalso,revealedin Paradise,alumpofhuman
actionthatisdangerouslygroundedinamonologicalvoice,andinafixed,selfcentered
formofconsciousnessandremembrance.Thisvoiceisbroughtaboutbyamemory
shapedinacommunalexperienceofrejectionanddisgrace.Itisalsoinformedby
denialsofinteractionsfromothercommunities.Itrelates,asamatteroffact,toa
memorythathasgraduallytransformedthewaysofthinkingofmany,evenmost,among
theParadisecommunity,tooneofintolerance. Itcentersaroundan approachorworld
viewthathasbecomenondialogic,dominant,andcontrolling.Withgreataestheticskill,
Morrisonposits,however,thatthereareotherformsofthinkingpossible.The
incidences,andcollisionsofthesedivergingmemoriesanddiscoursesarethoroughlyat
workinthenovel.Notonlydotheseinteractions,orlackthereof,askforethical
perception.Theyalsorequirethereadersactivecontributioninappraisingthenegating
actsofviolencethatthesecollisionshaveproduced.
Inhiswork,Bakhtinproposesarhetoricalcorrelatetohisfamousconceptof
heteroglossia.Itconcernstheconstantstrugglesthatthecentripetalandcentrifugal
forcesoflanguageopposetoeachother.Thecentripetalforcesprovidethecoherencein
languagenecessaryforcommunication.Thecentrifugalforcesoflanguageallowforits

200

constantrenewal.Inourcase,theformerconceptwouldrelatetomodesofthinkingand
graspingrealitiesoftheworldfromamorecentered,establishedmanner.Actingwithin
moreimprovisationalattitudes,andevolvingintherealmofthelesscontainedandmore
imaginativewouldbethestancearoundthelatter.WhileBakhtindiscussesthese
phenomenainlinguistic,ratherthanexistential,termshe,nonetheless,drawsattentionto
theideathatthesespheresofinfluenceshouldinscribethemselvesinacontextthatis
necessarilydialogical.In ProblemsofDostoevskysPoetics, Bakhtinassertsthatthe
authenticlifeofprosediscourse...mustbebasednot...inatextexcisedfrom
dialogicinteraction,butpreciselywithinthesphereofdialogicinteractionitself,thatis,
inthatspherewherediscourselivesanauthenticlife.Hefurtherclaimsthat,
Thewordisnotamaterialthingbutrathertheeternallymobile,eternallyfickle
mediumofdialogicinteraction.Itnevergravitatestowardasingleconsciousness
orasinglevoice.Thelifeofthewordiscontainedinitstransferfromonemouth
totheother,fromonecontexttoanothercontext,fromonesocialcollectiveto
another,fromonegenerationtoanothergeneration.Inthisprocess,theworddoes
notforgetitsownpathandcannotcompletelyfreeitself fromthepowerofthese
concretecontextsintowhichithasentered.(202)
Throughthedialogiccharacterofprosaiclanguage,thedangersofafixed,rigid,and
deadwordcanthusbeilluminated.WhatJustineTallycontendsaboutMorrisonswork
ingeneralandinthecontextof Jazz,isalsoveryappropriatetoParadise:
Itisprecisely thepluralityofexperiences,manifestinlanguage,whichMorrison
hasinsistedisnecessarytocombattheossificationofauthoritariandiscoursethat
is,weverymuch needtheBabelofcompetingnarrativestocombatanoppressive,
dominantsocialmyththatprivilegessomehumanbeingsoverothers.(TheStory
ofJazz61)
In Paradise,tensionsbetweendiverseexperiences,pointsofview,andopinionson
valuesandlifeareconstantlyatplay.Iproposetoexamine,atthispoint,thesedifferent
tensionsastheyemergefrom,andareenactedin,thefollowingconflictingdiscourses.

201

OneoftheseisshapedthroughthelanguageoftheFoundingFamiliesofRuby,also
calledthe8R.Oneofthenumerousnarratorsof Paradise,Patricia,contendsthat8
Risanabbreviationforeightrock.Sheexplainsthatthenamesuggeststhedeep
deeplevelinthecoalmines.ButitalsoreferstotheBlueblackpeople,talland
graceful,whoseclear,wideeyesgavenosignofwhattheyreallyfeltaboutthosewho
werent8rocklikethem,whentheyestablishedthecommunityofRuby(193).As
numerousonesidednarrativesandviolentactsinParadiseindicate,theirsisadiscourse
ofsupremeauthority.Itwantsitselfrighteousandrigid,anditseekstomakepasthistory
coherewithapresentone.Theformsofdiscoursewithwhichitcollidesarethe
communalactionsofthewomeninhabitingtheConvent,andthewordsoftheyoung
peopleofRuby.Boththewomensandtheyouthsdiscoursescomefromalanguageof
changeandchallenge.Itisthelanguageoftheother.Finally,thereexist,amongthese
almoststereotypedformsofdiscourses,apluralityofindividualvoices,situatedwithina
widespectrumofexperiences.Itisthesevoices,asMichikoKakutanistates,withwhich
Morrisonisconstantlyhavinghercharactersspelloutthemeaningofherstory
(Paradise:WorthyWomen,UnredeemableMen2).
Itwouldbeacceptable,Ibelieve,topositToniMorrisonasamasterofdialogism.
Likewise,Paradisecanbereadasaninstanceofdialogicdiscourse. Paradise,indeed,
allowsformeaningstoemergefromdeeplysustainedtensionsrevealedatthecoreofthe
novel.Yet,thediscourseoftheFoundingFathersishighlyproblematical,becauseithas
becomenondialogicandnonrelational.Withit,thegeneralizingcentripetalforcesof
[the]extrapersonalsystemsoftheempowered8rockpatriarchsviolentlyengagewith
thechaoticandparticularcentrifugalforcesofsubjectivityoftheerringfemaleswho

202

havetakenrefugeintheConvent(Holquist,Dialogism28).Animposingmansion,itwas
onceaschoolforNativeAmericangirls.Butitnowservesasahaventofivewomens
uncertainsteps.ItisalsoaplaceofmassacrewherethedeedsoftheRubyFathershave
threatenedtheexistenceoftheothertoitsverycore.
ThediscourseoftheempoweredNewFoundersofRuby,groundedinthestoryof
theoriginalnineoreightorfourteenFoundingFamiliesofRuby,ismostly
articulatedthroughDeaconandStewardMorgan,NathanDuPres,ArnoldFleetwood,and
ReverendPulliam.Theirsisadiscoursethatwantstoallownosidewayglance.Neither
doesitpermitdoubtingorinterpellation.Itisadiscoursesolidifiedbythememoryofa
pastthatseekstoestablishtheactual,presentdaylivingexperiencesofthethoroughly
blackcommunityofRubyinanexclusiveandprescriptivemanner.
ThisresistancetochangeisparticularlyarticulatedbythetwinsStewardand
Deek.Theyaretheoneswhoattempttounequivocallycontrolthediscourse.Their
positionbecomesespeciallyassertivewhenitischallengedforthefirsttimeinthe
controversialrenamingofthegreatOven,whichtheyoungpeopleofRubyhave
requested.Symbolofthepastandconstantreminderofacollectivehistory,thegreat
Ovenhasbecomecentraltothecitizensconceptofthemselves.Yet,whileitlater
becomesthesubjectoftheinternalstrifeofthecommunity,italsostandsasthetopos
wherethewordoftheancient, ofthepast,comesintocollisionwiththewordofthe
young,ofthepresent.
Thejustificationofthepowerofthepastoverthepresentliesintheglorification,
quasisacralization,ofthedeedsoftheOldFathers.Thismatterallows,accordingtothe
twins,fornodialogue.AsDeekdeclares,plainlyandloudlytoallwillingtorenamethe

203

Oven,Nobody,Imeannobody,isgoingtochangetheOvenorcallitsomethingstrange.
Nobodyisgoingtomesswithathingourgrandfathersbuilt(Paradise85).TheOven,
initscapacitytodistinguishthepresentfromthepast,andtoenactthestoryofRuby
basedonitshistory,comestoexemplifythemonologicaspectorprincipleoftheRuby
Fathers.Astheirdiscourseconcentratesaroundonecenter,oneconsciousness,and
subordinatesitselftooneunifiedvoice,theRubyFatherstoleratenoobjection.Aswe
understandfrom Paradise,StewardMorganisthecharacterwhohasthefinalsayinthe
officialversionofthediscourse.Asweread,ascouldhavebeenpredicted,Stewardhad
thelastword.HiswordstoanyonewillingtochallengeandchangetheBewarethe
FurrowofHisBrowinscribedontheOven,intotheBetheFurrowofhisBrow
requestedbytheyoungergeneration,soundsomberandthreatening.Hedeclares:If
you,anyoneofyou,ignore,change,takeaway,oraddtothewordsinthemouthofthat
Oven,Iwillblowyourheadoffjustlikeyouwasahoodeyesnake(87).
Anothermenacingsymptomofthetwinsdiscourseofexclusionrequests
attentionhere.Itdoesnotsomuchconcernexpressingthreatsinthefaceofnecessary
processesofchangeandchallengethattheRubyFathersreadasactsofdefiance.More
insidiously,DeekandStewardMorganarealsoobservedjustifyingthepoweroftheir
individualvoicesinasemblanceofcommunalconsensus.Assuch,theyrelateand
groundtheiractsthroughformsofspeech,andvaluesthat,atonetimeinthepast,were
spelledincommunality.Butthen,theyarejustifyingtheirown,individualstoriesof
humanexperiencebyappropriatingandmanipulatingfortheirown,exclusivevoice,the
storiesoftheseancestors.Theyhavenotonly,questionably,recollectedthepastunder
goingsoftheirforefathers.Theyhaveattemptedtorewrite thepainfulstoryofthe

204

Disallowingoftheircommunityinviewoftheirownpersonalneedforjustificationof
racialexclusion(194).
Thesufferingsandthedeepwoundsthattherepudiationbyotherblackgroups
inflictedontheRubyfamiliesthen,weunderstand,renderedthesubsequentdeedsofthe
ancestorsquasisacred.Theiractsbecamesymbolsofbraveryandvalorinthefaceof
rejection.Butbythesametoken,asthisrejectiondeeplymarkedthehistoryandthe
identityofthecommunity,itencouragedtheMorgantwinsnotonlytoseekprescriptive
controlonRuby.ItalsoledthemtoreadinthewordsoftheOvenencouragementsto
angeredpride,anddeepracialsegregationwithintheirown,allblackcommunity.As
such,thetwinshavenotonlynotcondoned,butappropriated,theunspeakableand
unspokenrulethatblackerisbetterintheseparationbetweenlightskinnedagainst
black(194).Byreadingthepasthistoryoftheircommunityinanonevolvingandnon
dialogicmanner,thetwinshavethussubvertedthehistoricalprocessofthepresent.They
havemadeittofittheirownpurpose.Oncedisallowedbyotherblacks,theyhave,in
theirmonolithicwayofexperiencingcommunallife,becomedisallowersthemselves.As
ReverendRichardMisner,talkingabouttheFathersofRuby,reflects,theythinkthey
haveoutfoxedthewhitemenwheninfacttheyimitatehim.Ashepursueshisreflection,
hestatesthattheythinktheyareprotectingtheirwivesandchildren,wheninfactthey
aremaimingthem.Andwhenthemaimedchildrenaskforhelp,theylookelsewhere
forthecause(306).Notonlyhavetheyinducedatruth,appropriatedaword,and
regulatedadiscoursethattheynotonlywantexclusiveandunivocal.Theyhavealso
decreedthattheirvisionanddeedswouldbeimmutableandprescriptive.AsDeek

205

repeatshisdominantandcontrollingnarrativeasawaytojustifyhisrejectionofa
challengingdiscourse,heinsiststhat,
Nobodyisgoingtomesswithathingourgrandfathersbuilt.Theymadeeach
andeverybrickoneatatimewiththeirownhands....Theydugtheclaynot
you.Theycarriedthehodnotyou....Theymixedthemortar notaoneof
you.Theymadegoodstrongbrickovenwhentheirshelterwassticksandsod. . .
.Andwerespectedwhattheyhadgonethroughtodoit...sounderstandme
whenItellyounobodyisgoingtocomealongsomeeightyyearslaterclaimingto
knowbetterwhatmenwhowentthroughhelltolearnknew.... ThatOven
alreadyhasahistory.Itdoesntneedyoutofixit.(8586)
ByrelatingRubysolelytoitspast,andreducingitshistorytononcontradictory
statements,theRubyFathershave,inthewordsofBadiou,forcedthenamingofthe
unnameable.Yet,thecommunityandthecollective,forBadiouaretheunnameables
ofpoliticaltruthparexcellence.Inordertoremainviable,theyneedtoremain,assuch,
unnameable.BadiousEthicswarnsthusagainstthedangerofarbitrarilyforcinga
certainpoliticaltruthtocomeaboutunderonename.AsBadiouclaims,everyattempt
politicallytonameacommunityinducesadisastrousEvil.Hethengivestheextreme
exampleofNazism,whichwasdiscussedpreviouslyinthecontextofDelboswork.
Yet,BadioualsocitesanothernameaspotentialinstanceofdisastrousEvil.Itconcerns
thereactionaryusageofthewordFrench.With Paradise,thewordthatisforetelling
ofevilisnotFrench,but8Rock.Intheircapacitytomeaninanintransigentmanner,
thewordsFrenchor8Rock,intheirnarrowedandlimitingusage,do,forBadiou,
onlyserveonepurpose.Itistopersecutesomeofthosewholive[here]inFrance
underthearbitraryimputationofbeingforeigners(Ethics86).Intheinstanceof
Paradise,IproposethatthepersecutionwouldbedirectedagainstthoseinRubywhose
skinisofsunlightcomplexion,ofracialtampering,orwhosebloodispresumably
impure(197).

206

Morrisonsconcernfortheresponsibilityoftheindividualtohiscommunity
parallelsBakhtinsinsistencethattheindividualsubject,however,onlyacquiresmeaning
withinthegroup.MichaelHolquist,in AllegoryandRepresentationemphasizesthat
sameconcept,anticipatedbyBakhtin,andrevealedinMorrisons.Holquiststatesthat,
indeed,
Mendefinetheiruniqueplaceinexistencethroughtheresponsibilitytheyenact,
thecaretheyexhibitintheirdeedsforothersandtheworld.Deedisunderstood
asmeaningwordaswellasphysicalact:thedeedishowmeaningcomesintothe
world,howbrutefacticityisgivensignificanceandform,howtheWordbecomes
flesh.(176)
Theproblemwearefacinghereisasfollows.Thememorythatthetwinsaccess
torewriteahistoryofexclusionandrejectionexcludesanyhistoryorgroupthatdoes
notconformtotheirs.Itleavesoutindividualswhoarenotasdarkskinnedastheyare.
Likewise,itrejectsthosewhoarenotreadytoconsolidatethe8rockblood,like
Patriciasfather,whowasthefirsttoviolatethebloodrule(Paradise19495).
Moreover,thesubstancethatgivessustenancetothetwinsselfrighteousnessisnotonly
unreliableandhazy,butitispersonal.Also,itisnotgroundedinsharedbeliefsofhome,
love,truecompanionship,andconnection.SincethememoryoftheNewFoundersin
Paradiseismorethanjustmemory,butatoposofideologicalstruggle,we,readers,are
thenfacedwiththefollowingethicalresponsibility.Namely,wemayask,whatisthe
viabilityoftheconstructionofidentity,collectiveandindividual,basedonmemoriesand
wordsofoneortwoindividualswhowanttoprescribeitforanentirecommunity?
Eventhoughtheprocessofarrivingatthetwinstruthisclearlystatedthrough
Stewardstestimony,weshouldkeepinmindthatitismerelyindicativeofoneversionof
reality,namelyhisreality.AswereadaboutSteward'sinnerthoughts,wecertainlycome

207

toreflectonhowthewordsoftheOvensomehowhelpedshapehisvision.Wealso
understandhowthediscourseofhiseldersimpactedhimandhistwin,astheyheardthe
strongwords,strangeatfirst,priortothefoundingofRuby.Butwealsoreadthatthese
wordsbecamefamiliar,gainingweightandhypnoticbeautythemoretheyheardthem.
Werealize,then,thatthetwinshavemadethosewordsdangerouslytheirown.Also,
theyhavereducedthemeaningofthesetoonlyonepossibleinterpretation(111).Yet,
wemayreasonablyask,howcouldtheconstructionofthissimulacrumoftruthhavebeen
sounequivocallybindingandblinding?
AsemblanceofchoiceamongthepluralityofvoicesaroundthehistoryofRuby
needs,atthispoint,bediscussed.Revealedthroughthenovelsdialogicalnarrative
technique,thereis,in Paradise,notonlyanabundance,butalsoacomplexityand
intricacy,ofversionsandstories.Itisespeciallytruewhenitcomestoexplainthe
historicalpastofRuby.Ipropose,however,thatthetensionsresultingfromthese
contradictorystoriesaboutthepastcanbereadasfalselyimplyingthatthepoliticalor
communalconstructionofRubyhasremainedunnameable,and,assuch,acceptable
(Ethics86).Thefollowingpointrevealsotherwise.
Asweknow,thememoryoftheinscriptionontheOven,BewaretheFurrowof
hisBrow,wasconsecratedbytheoldgenerationofRuby.Itisinterestingtonote,
however,thatitwastransmitted,accordingtoArnoldFleetwood,byEsther,ababygirl.
ItwasbroughtdowntothecommunityofRuby,throughmemory,oraltradition,and
storytelling.ThevalueofthewordofbabyEsther,forthepatriarchsofRuby,
commandsrespect.Itmandatesapprobationthatwantsitselfuncontestedand
unchallenged.WhileReverendMisner,thevoicerepresentingtheyoungpeopleofRuby,

208

suggeststhatEsther,wasababythen,heattemptstomakeclearthatshecouldhave
beenmistaken.Yet,inhisresponsetoMisner,ArnoldFleetwoodleavesnodoubtasto
whowillpreservethememoryoftheeventandcontrolthediscourse.Insistingonthe
veracityandaccuracyoftheoriginalwordsBewaretheFurrowofhisBrow,heretorts
that,EstherwasthereandEsthernevermadeamistakeofthatnatureinherlife.
SheknewalltherewastoknowaboutHavenandRubytoo.Inasimilarepisodeof
denyingthevoiceofanyonenotinagreement,HarperJurysilencesayoungvoiceof
Ruby,whoprofessestheclaimthat,Itsourhistorytoo,sir.Notjustyours.Instead
oflisteningtothewordsoftheyouth,HarperJuryplainlystatesthatThat[Destry]boy
needsastrap.Blasphemy.EventhoughitisnotspecifiedwhattheFurrowmight
causetohappenandtowhom,thereplybyHarperJuryleavesnodoubtthat,Beware
meansLookout.Thepowerismine.Getusedtoit(8687,195).
Itisinterestingtonote,however,thatinthestoryaboutthepowerfulwordsatthe
baseoftheOvensmouth,toldbyanothernarrator(oneofthetwins),inanotherchapter
(inchapterone),itisstillnotclearwherethewordscamefrom.Something[the
possibleauthoroftheinscription]heard,invented,orsomethingwhisperedtohimwhile
hesleptcurledoverhistoolsinawagonbed.Asthenarrativegoeson,we,readers,
comprehendthatHisnamewasMorgan.Wearealsoaskedtoponderonwhetherhe
inventedorstolethehalfdozenorsowordsheforged.Whatbecomesparticularly
clear,however,isthatthosewordsthatseemedatfirsttoblessthemlaterconfounded
them,andfinallyannouncedthattheyhadlost(7).
Thepowerofcontroloverdiscourse,memoryandideologyareexcessively
presentintheMorgantwins,who,bornin1924,heardfortwentyyearswhatthe

209

previousfortyhadbeenlike.Asweread,Theylistenedto,imaginedandremembered
everysinglething,becauseeachdetailwasajoltofpleasure,eroticasadream,out
thrillingandmorepurposefulthaneventhewartheyhadfoughtin(16).Their
reminiscenceoffacts,words,deeds,seemssopowerful,however,thatitkeepsraisingthe
beforementionedandseriousissue,notonlyofthenonreliabilityoftheirmemory,but
ofthenondependabilityoftheironediscourseaswell.Asweread,Thetwinshave
powerfulmemories.Betweenthemtheyrememberthedetailsofeverythingthatever
happenedthingstheywitnessedandthingstheyhavenot(16,13).
Also,theideathattheirpersonalhistory,heretheirparticipationinWorldWarII,
isactuallylessrelevantthan,andsubordinatedto,thehistoryoftheirancestors,is
actuallyverypuzzling.Eventhough Morrisonveryclearlyadvocatesthenecessityof
keepingintouchwiththeancestors,andofnotbeingremovedfromtheirexperience,
shemakesclearthatthisconnectiontotheancestorshouldbepredicatedonthefollowing
significance.Namely,thatthesenurturingrelationsplayabeneficialroleinconnecting
theindividualwithhisorherpastinordertoenhancehisorherpresentandfuture,
notlimitthem.AsshecontendsinMemory,Creation,andWriting,
Ifmyworkistobefunctionaltothegroup(tothevillage,asitwere)thenitmust
bearwitnessandidentifythatwhichisusefulfromthepastandthatwhichought
tobediscardeditmustmakeitpossibletoprepareforthepresentandliveitout,
anditmustdothatnotbyavoidingproblemsandcontradictionsbutbyexamining
themitshouldnotevenattempttosolvesocialproblems,butitshouldcertainly
trytoclarifythem.(389)
AsMorrisonclaimsinRootednesstheancestorsarethusnotjustparents.
Theyaresortoftimelesspeoplewhoserelationshipstothecharactersarebenevolent,
instructive,andprotective.Theyaretheoneswhoprovideacertainkindofwisdom.
Mostoften,itisthepresenceorabsenceofthatcentralfigurethatdeterminesthe

210

successorthehappinessofthecharacter.AsMorrisonhasseenatplayinsome
contemporaryfiction,itisoftentheabsenceofanancestorthatisfrightening,thatis
threatening,and[that]causeshugedestruction.
Morrisoninstructsagainstthedangerof thelossofconnectionswiththeancestors
notsolelyinhercriticalwork,butinherfictionalonetoo.Sheofteninsistsontheidea
thattheprogressionofanindividualwithinthecommunitymaybereallydiminishing
ofhisorherabilitiesiftheancestorisabsentfromhisorherlifeinanourishingway.
Itisthuswhen,orif,wedontkeepintouchwiththeancestorthatweare,infact,
lost.Morrisonproclaims,then,that,whenyoukilltheancestor,youkillyourself
(344).
In Mesuredenosjours,itispreciselythistypeofloss,namelyalossof
connectionswithapastbeforeAuschwitzthatprogressivelydisconnectedMadofrom
herself.Itisalsothebereavementofparentalandintergenerationalbondingthat
producedthesplitinherandkilledherfuture.ForDeekandStewardMorgan,itisnot
onlytheirobsessiveidealizationandfreezingofthewordsoftheancestorsthathave
diminishedthepossibilitiesofanenhancedtomorrow.Theabsenceofintimacywith,and
supportfrom,aliveword,hasbeenequallydetrimental.Assuch,losingtouchwiththe
present,andlivinginasortofivorytower,removedfromthecommunity,has,forDeek
andSteward,turnedveryproblematic.AndforMorrison,ifthereisalossofbalance
betweenpastandpresent,butalso,inherwords,betweenmaleandfemale,the
consequencescanbeutterlydevastating.Inherview,ifthatbalanceisdisturbed,ifitis
notnurtured,andifitisnotcountedonandifitisnotreproduced, wefaceadisability
againstwhichwemustbeonguardforthefuture.

211

DeekandStewardsgrandfather,Morgan,wholedhispeopleinexodustofinally
foundHaven,certainlyappearsasamythical,benevolentfigurewhoseguidance
nourishedtheexslavefamilieswhofollowedhim.But,certainly,Morrisondoesnot
simplycautionagainstlosingtouchwiththeancestor,which,intheinstanceofDeekand
Steward,didnotquitehappen.However,shepointedlyadvisesagainstlossofbalancein
theattachmenttotheancestors.Hersuggestionisparticularlyresonantif,orwhen,these
tiesexcludealiveconnection,orwhenthisexclusionpreventslivingthepresentout.
Morrisondoesnotsolelywarnagainstrigidattitudesinreadingthediscourseofthepast.
Shealsoguardsagainstthedangersofpsychologicalentrapmentresultingfroman
excessiveloveforanidealizedpast.Exclusiverelianceonthepastandontheself,
inducingalossofconsiderationforpresentandcollectiveneedscan,thus,forMorrison,
beasdestructiveasalossofnurturingconnectionwiththeancestors.
Losingtouchwiththepresentmayappeartohavebeendevastatingonlytoa
smallextenttoDeekandSteward.Butithascertainlybeenprofoundlydetrimentaltothe
entirecommunityofRuby,andnotonlyinregardstothewomenoftheConvent,who,by
theway,wereneverconsideredpartofthecommunity.Theywere,rather,justoutcasts
accusedofthreateningthewaysofRuby.Butthedeedsofthetwinshavebeenextremely
damagingtothegroupofpeoplethatsomehowgotbeneficiallyconnectedtothese
women.AsMorrisonclaims,Iwanttopointoutthedangers,[Iwant]toshowthatnice
thingsdontalwayshappentothetotallyselfreliantifthereisnoconscious
historical,or,Iwouldadd,communal,connection(Rootedness34344).
Besides,theauthorityexertedbybothDeekandStewardisnotlimitedtomemory
anddiscourse.Itisalsoinscribedinacontextofsocialandfinancialpoweraswell.As

212

affluentresidentsandownersoftheonlymoneylendinginstitutionofRuby,itcomesas
nosurprise,thatDeekandStewardbecomemoreandmoredefianttowardsReverend
Misnerandhiscommunityorientedattitudes.Thetwinsresentmentisparticularly
strongafterMisnerformsasortofpiggybank,thatoffersnoprofitsmall
emergencyloanstochurchmembersnopenaltypaybackschedules.AsK.D.,nephew
andsoleheirofDeekandSteward,reflectsonReverendMisnersactions,heponderson
themenacethatthesecouldpose.AsK.D.claims,Amanlikethat,willingtothrow
moneyaway,couldgivecustomersideas.Makethemthinktherewasachoiceabout
interestrates(Paradise56).
ReverendMisner,theyoungpeopleofRuby,andthewomenoftheConvent
greatlycontributetorevealingtheheteroglossicnatureof Paradise. Standingforthe
centrifugalforcesoflanguage,anditsideologicaldecentralization,theyposit,indeed,
typesofdiscourseprofoundlydifferentfromthatoftheprominentinhabitantsofRuby.
Belongingtofundamentallydiscordantsocialgroups,theydeconstructthepresumption
ofaunitaryideology,whichtheywillcometoundermine.Amongtheirgroup,each
individualisseenarticulatingandenactingthediscordanceordecentralizationofthat
languagethroughhisorherownmodeofexpression.Misner,asthereverendwhohas
scriptureandthefutureonhisside,forinstance,isopposedtoSeniorPulliam,whohas
scriptureandhistoryonhis(150).Astheformerwelcomestheideologicalmovement
oftheyoungpeoplewhowanttovoiceopinionsaboutthewords,he,assuch,ismade
torevitalizetheunivocaldiscourseoftheeldersincontrol(83).
Likewise,thewomenoftheConventnotonlycometoopposetheFounding
Fathersobsessionwiththepurityoftherace.TheynotonlychallengetheRubyruleof

213

welcominginteractionsexclusivelywithpeopleofdeepdarkskin,ormarryinginsidea
prescribedracialgroup.Thewomenalsocomeinconflictwiththestricturesofaself
sufficientlifethathasshutitselfofffromtheoutsideworldandthefuture.Infact,what
thewomenhavetoopposetothelifestyleofRubyisafecund,anarchic,andvital
enactmentoflife.Thatproductivelivingoutgroundsitselfinresoundingeroticism,
mutualcaring,andacceptanceoftheother.Thisreverenceforlifestandsinsharp
contrastwithRuby,whereaneedforsafetyfromintrusion,andanactiveandvibrant
constructionofthepresentareabsent.AsReverendMisnerpondersRubyandits
inhabitants,hewonders:
Butwhyweretherenostoriestotellofthemselves?Abouttheirownlivesthey
shutup.Hadnothingtosay,passon.Asthoughpastheroismwasenoughofa
futuretoliveby.Asthough,ratherthanchildren,theywantedduplicates.(161)
TheseimpressionsaboutlifeinRUBYPOP.360,adeadandemptytownconstructed
onexclusionandisolation,isalsoindicatedbyMavis,onthedayofherarrivalinRuby:
Mavisimmediateimpressionofthelittletownwashowstillitwas,asthoughnoone
livedthere(45).
ConsolatawasalittlePanamaorphangirlrescuedandbroughttotheConventby
SisterMaryMagnadecadesago.She,however,alsostandsasthesortofancestorfigure
orhealerwhosepresencehasbecomesoindispensableinMorrisonswork.Notonly
doessheinstructafuturebasedonopportunitiesforlivinginthepresentmoment.
Rather,shealsogroundsthepresentintherespectofanother,andincommunalvalues,
which,forMorrison,canspelloutpossibilitiesforasustainablefuture.Consolata,like
Pilatein SongofSolomon,isthustheancestorwhoseroleiscruciallyoutlinedin
Paradise.Hereishowherpresenceandherstoryare,notfrozenandrigid,but

214

significantandvital.Thisisalsohowhertalentforliving,andbeingattentivetothe
other,willbepassedtothemembersofthecommunity.
WhenshearrivedattheConventatagenine,Consolatawasinstructedbythe
Sisters,alongwithafewotherNativegirls. Shesoonbecametheonewhosleptinthe
pantry,scrubbedtile,fedchickens,prayed,peeled,gardened,cannedandlaundered.
Forthirtyyears,sheofferedherbodyandhersoultoGodsSonandHisMotheras
completelyasifshehadtakentheveilherself.ToSisterMaryMagnaandtheVirgin
Mary,ofthebleedingheartandbottomlesslove,sheofferedalifeofpietyand
devotion(225).ButwhenMaryMagnadied,Consolata,whowasfiftyfouryearsoldat
thetimewasorphanedinawayshewasnotasastreetbabyandwasneverasaservant
(247).Yet,whenshebecomestheonlywomanleftinchargeoftheConvent,sheclearly
comestostandasametaphorofacceptanceof,andsharingwith,an other.
JustasDelbowasin AuschwitzandAfter,Consolataisrevealedasacharacter,in
Paradise,whomostnoticeablycontradictsalanguageofsingularitythatwantstobe
voidedofanother.Assuch,Consolataistheonewhocomestoarticulatemostclearly a
communallanguageofloveandcare.InMorrisonsterms,sheisthecriticalvoice
whichupholdstraditionandcommunalvaluesandwhichalsoprovidesoccasionforan
individualtotranscendand/ordefygrouprestrictions(Memory,Creation,andWriting
389).Sheisalsothewomanwhochallengesblacknessasracialpurityinfavorof
humansolidarity(Paradise112).Itiscertainlyhowsheappearstothefourwomen,
Mavis,Gigi,andSeneca,includingthewhitegirlPallas,whosedistressedlivesand
driftingstepshaveledtotheConvent.Tothem,Consolatais,
Thissweet,unthreateningoldladywhoseemedtoloveeachoneofthembest
whonevercriticized,whosharedeverythingbutneededlittleornocarerequired

215

noemotionalinvestmentwholistenedwholockednodoorsandacceptedeachas
shewas.(262)
Atonepointinherlife,however,Consolatahadfoundherselfemptyandblank,
withonlyabsenceatthecenterofherlife.Voidofdefinitionandmeaning,shehadlet
hopelessnessanddespairoverwhelmher,especiallyafterherpassionate,yetillicit,love
affairwithDeekturnedoutfruitless.EventhoughConsolataandDeaconlovedardently
forafewmonthsintheshadeoftwolovingtrees,theirswasalovewithnofuture.
AnnouncingthedesertionofDeek,Morrisonwrites,Nofigseverappearedonthose
treesduringallthetimetheymetthere,buttheyweregratefulfortheshadeofdusty
leavesandtheprotectionoftheagonizedtrunks(231).
Consolatasgiftsoflifeandloveare,however,powerful.Aftermonthsoftrying
todrinkherselftodeathinthedarknessofthecellaroftheConvent,shereclaimsher
self.UrgedbyLoneDuPrestoactagainstthedyingofthesonofthemansheusedto
lovesointensely,shesuccessfullyrevivesDeeksson,ScoutMorgan.Asshereturns
himtolife,shealsobringshimbacktohismotherSoane,wifeofDeek.Eventhoughshe
ishalfexhilaratedbyandhalfashamedofwhatshehasdone,therevivingdeedre
opensthewaytoother,smallerandgreater,actsoflove.Shestarts,forinstance,along
lastingrelationshipoffriendshipwithherrival,thewifeofDeek.Atthatpoint,hergift
ofloveandlifeissoabundant,thatitbecomesparamountinhelpingtheyounglost,
displaced,orabandonedwomenwhostartarrivingattheConvent(245).
NotonlydoesConsolatahelpthewomenreclaimavoicethathasbeenmuted
becauseoftraumatizingexperiences.Sheisinstrumentalalsoinencouragingthewomen
toreconstructalostsenseofself.Bythesametoken,shealsoenablesthemtoface,
possiblyrecover,fromtheirlives,howevershatteredthesehavebeen.Theselives,

216

indeed,havenotonlybeenbrokenbytheirresponsibledeathofinfants,parental
betrayals,andpainofrape.Theyhavebeenfracturedalsoby anguishatabandonment,
lossofromanticideals,andheartbreak.
ThewomenoftheConventreworkandvocalizetheirtraumaticmemoriesand
theirdramaticpast.TheydosobyfirstlisteningtoConsolatasstoriesofloss,
disorientation,andpain.Then,underConsolata/Conniesdirections,theystarttelling
andretellingtheirownstoriestothemselvesandtoeachother.Theystoprelivingtheir
traumatichistoryontheirown.Instead,theystartworkingthroughtheirpainbysharing
it.Thiscollectiveworkofnarration,asNancyPetersonputsit,enablesthewomento
entereachothersseparatepasts.Assuch,thenarrativeexchangesinwhichtheyengage
attheConventallowthewomentorememorytheirterriblepast,sothatthehurtand
traumaareshared(AgainstAmnesia93).Together,theyfacethequietsleepofthe
newlyborntwingirlsthatMavishasaccidentallyleftsuffocatingintheheatofher
husbandsCadillac.Together,theyconfronttheprofoundneedforparentalandromantic
lovethathasbeenrefusedtoGigi,asshewandersinsearchforanidealizedformof
eroticlovesheneverfinds.Together,theyconfrontthepainofmaternalabandonment
andsexualabusethatSenecahasexperienced,asshewandersfromfosterhomestobus
stationscoveredinselfinflictedwoundsandcuts.Together,theyswim,panicstricken,
awayfrommalepursuers,asPallasdid,afterrunningawayfromthetraumaticmemory
ofherloverCarlosbetrayingherwithherownmother.
Ascollectiveenunciationofpainandtraumabegins,itallowsrealhealingto
begin.Assuch,acollectivelouddreaming,painfully,yetbeneficially,takesplace
amongthewomen.Withit,accusationsdirectedtothedeadandlonggoneare

217

undonebymurmursoflove(Paradise264).Also,asthewomeninscribetheirown
sufferings,theysymbolicallydrawtheirbodiesinchalkonthefloor.Theydosoina
spaceexternaltothemselves.Notonlythelouddreaming,buttheritualpaintingonthe
basementfloor,allowthemtotransferthepainandwoundsfromtheirownbodytotheir
tracedimage.Soon,then,theConventwomenwerenolongerhaunted.Asmighthave
beenperceptibletothevisitoroftheConvent,withitslifenowsorealandintense,
thewomenwereindeednomorehaunted,butconnected(266).Aftertelling,sharing,
transposingtheirstories,andarticulatingtheirtrauma,thewomenarenowunableto
leavetheonlyplacetheywerefreetoleave(262).InthehavenoftheConvent,
surroundedbythecomforting,nonjudging,welcomingpresenceofConsolataandthe
otherwomen,theynowfindgroundstoreplytotheirownquestions,
Whatisshetalkingabout,thisidealparent,friend,companioninwhosecompany
theyweresafefromharm?Whatisshethinking,thisperfectlandlordwho
chargednothingandwelcomedanybodythisgrannygoosewhocouldbe
confidedinorignored,liedtoorsubornedthisplaymotherwhocouldbehugged
orwalkedouton,dependingonthewhimofthechild?(262)
Atthatpoint,alongwiththeorderlydiscourseoftheRubyFathersof Paradise,
andcontrastedtoit,comethenarrativesofrenewalofthewomenoftheConvent.With
thisconcurrenceofdiscourses,however,theforeshadowingoftheimplacableactofhate,
themassacreofthewomen,isskillfullyintroduced.ItisLone,thegiftedmidwife,sent
onamissionbyGodtorescuethewomenoftheConvent,whofirstindicatesthat,the
menspokeoftheruinationthatwasuponthem.Informedoftheiranger,shealso
reportsthemexpressinghowRubywaschanginginintolerableways(27375).An
abandonedchildpickedoutofpovertyandneglectbyafeistyFairy,butnotamember
ofthe8rockfamilies,Lonesvoiceisnotonly,inTallyswords,avoicewhichis

218

easilydrownedout(ParadiseReconsidered36).Hersisalsoaninformedandlucid
voicethatexistsadjacenttotheofficialsideofdiscourse.ThroughLone,welearnthat,
forthemenofRuby,thewomenoftheConvent,indeed,thisnewandobscenebreedof
females,hadsomethingtodowiththatchange(Paradise279).Wealsoreadthat[the
men]didnotthinktofixitbyextendingahandinfellowshiporlove.Instead,they
mappeddefense,andhonedevidenceforitsneed.Finally,welearn,stillthrough
Lone,thattheleadershipwastwinned(275).
Syncrisisandanacrisis,twobasicdevicesoftheSocraticdialogueelucidatedby
BakhtininhisProblemsofDostoevsky'sPoetics,areusefulatthispoint.Withthem,we
cangainanotherinsightintothemultipleandcomplementarynarrativesof Paradise.We
canalsopossibly,andresponsively,committo,oratleastaccess,meaningsmore
thoroughly.Syncrisisisunderstoodasthejuxtapositionofvariouspointsofviewona
specificsubject.In Paradise,Morrisonachievessyncrisisbyhavinghernumerous
charactersreminisceandreverberatethoughts,actions,andobjectsofreflectionintheir
ownnarratives.Anacrisis,ontheotherhand,isameansforelicitingandprovokingthe
wordsofonesinterlocutor.Itisusedalsoasadevicetoforcehimtoexpresshis
opinionandexpressitthoroughly.
Agreatmasteratsyncrisis,Morrisonjuxtaposesvariousdiscursiveviewpointson
subjectsascrucialastheshapingofcommunalidentitiesandthedestructionorre
recreationoftheself.Butshealsousessyncrisistodelveintothemesascrucialas
believingornotinaltruism,ortheconstructionofaviablecommunity.
Morrisonisalsoaskilfulexpertofanacrisis.In Paradise,sheknowshowto
forcehercharacterstospeak,andtoclotheindiscoursetheirdimbutstubbornly

219

preconceivedopinions.Sheexpertlyalsosucceedsinilluminating[hercharacters]by
thewordandinthiswayexposetheirfalsenessorincompleteness.Shecertainlyexcels
atdraggingthegoingtruthsoutinthelightofday.Likewise,shethrivesat
extirpatingoutofthenotionofthedialogicnatureoftrutharesponseora
reflectionfromhercharacters(ProblemsofDostoevsky'sPoetics110).
Pat,theteacherwhogainsinsightintothecollectivehistories,psychesandstories
ofthepatriarchsofRuby,isveryinstrumentalintheprocessofanacrisis.Sheisoneof
thefewcharacterswhooffersherownunderstandingsofthemotivesunderlyingthe
massacreattheConvent.Besidesgivingherownreflectiononwhathappened,however,
Patalsomentionstwodivergentstories.Thesearetheonesrenderedbytheperpetrators.
Asthesetwoaccountsstarttoemergeastheofficialstories,wereadfromthefirst
versionthat
ninemenhadgonetotalktoandpersuadetheConventwomentoleaveormend
theirwaystherehadbeenafightthewomentookothershapesanddisappeared
intothinair.Andtwo(theFleetwoodJuryversion),thatfivemenhadgoneto
evictthewomenthatfourotherstheauthorshadgonetorestrainorstop
themthesefourwereattackedbythewomenbuthadsucceededindrivingthem
out,andtheytookoffintheirCadillacbutunfortunately,someofthefivehad
losttheirheadsandkilledtheoldwoman.PatleftRichardtochooseforhimself
whichrenditionhepreferred.(Paradise29697)

220

AsPatleavesRichardMisnertochooseforhimselfwhichrenditionhepreferred,we
sensethatheisdiscerningenough todoubteitherofficialversion.Assuch,headoptsa
usefulengagementwithhistory,whichMorrisonstronglyencourages.Whilehe
scrutinizes,inthewordsofPeterson,thetwotooneatlynarratedofficialstories,
Richardissensitiveenoughtobeawarethatthesetwoversionsareinadequate(Against
Amnesia95).WhilePatresistsdisclosingherownversiontohim,wefeelthatitmaybe
theoneclosesttowhatactuallyhappened.Weread,
Whatshewithheldfrom[Richard]washerown:thatnine8rockmurderedfive
harmlesswomen(a)becausethewomenwereimpure(not8rock)(b)because
thewomenwereunholy(fornicatorsattheleast,abortionistsatmost)and(c)
becausethey couldwhichwaswhatbeingan8rockmeanttothemandwasalso
whatthedealrequired.(Paradise297)
ThroughLonealso,welearnabouthowthestoryofthemassacrewasbeing
retold,andhowpeoplewerechangingittomakethemselveslookgood.Wealsofind
outthateveryoneoftheassaultingmenhadadifferenttale.Also,theirfamiliesand
friends(whohadbeennowhereneartheConvent)supportedthem,enhancing,recasting,
inventingmisinformation(297).
AsweseetheprincipleofanacrisisalsoatworkthroughDovey,Stewardswife,
wearealsomadeawarethateventhoughthemurderousmenattemptedtosilencethe
voicesofthewomen,theymaynothavebeenabletodosocompletely.Besides,the
men,revealedashavingharmedtheirowncommunityveryprofoundly,areexposedas
havingdamagedtheirownselvesaswell.Assuch,theyhavemadetheirwomen
consciousoftheprocessofdestructionthattheyunwittinglydirectedatthemselves,but
perniciouslyatothers.AsDoveypondersonherhusbandswordsanddeeds,sheclaims
thatshehaswatchedherhusband[Steward]destroysomethinginhimselfforthirty

221

years.Also,shereflectsthat,themorehegained,thelesshebecame.Soanemakesa
similarreflectionaboutDeek,who,wefind,istheonewhoshotConsolata.Denyingthe
women,includinghiswife,anecessaryrelationofalterity,Deekhaslethimselfbe
knownmainlytoSoanethroughhisdeeds,perceivedasdetachedandbitteroraggressive
anddestructive.Assherecallstheirintimateconversations,sheclaimsthat,indeed,
andsofar,they hadbeenwordless...orbrandishingones.Afterthemassacre,Deeks
wordsareshowntobeevenmoreangryandintolerant.Hiswordsnowcameoutlike
ingotspulledfromthefirebyanapprenticeblacksmithhot,misshapen,resembling
themselvesonlyintheirglow(287).
Yet,beneficialrememorieswillkeephauntingthelivingin Paradise.Thewomen
ofthenovelmaketheserememories,inthewordsofPeterson,powerfulandvital
enough,astokeepthespiritoftheConventalive.Thewomen andtheirvoiceswill
remain,nomatterhowstrongtheeffortstodenyorforgetthem.Thememoriesand
tracesleftbythemensurethattheirdisruptive,inventive,creativelifeforceswillnotbe
forgottenorerasedentirely.Despitetheviolentattemptsofthefraudulentofficialstory
tosilencethewomenstruths,forPeterson,thatstorywillneverbeentirelysuccessfulin
sanitizingthehistoricalprocessofdenialatworkin Paradise (AgainstAmnesia96
97).Theconstructiveworkingthroughinwhichthewomenengaged,andtheinspiration
arounditwillaccountforthat.They,assuch,makeitpossibletoread,attheendofthe
novel,amessagenotsolelyofdespair,butofexpectationforthefuturealso.Theyenable
toformnotanimageoftotaldestruction,butamelodyofsoothingundertones,tenuously
promisingoflifeand,possibly,renewal.Thesepromisesareheldinavisionofearthly
havenorparadise,andaresunginaballadbyPiedadealongthesea.Correlating

222

Morrisonsownideaofwhatearthlyparadisecouldhavebeen,butfailedtobein
Paradise,weread,
ThereisnothingtobeatthissolacewhichiswhatPiedadessongisabout,
althoughthewordsevokememoriesneitheronehaseverhad:ofreachingagein
thecompanyoftheotherofspeechsharedanddividedbreadsmokingfromthe
firetheunambivalentblissofgoinghometobeathometheeaseofcoming
backtolovebegun.(318)
Anethicsthatcallsonetoaresponsibilityforandtotheotheristhuswhat
Morrisonasksustoconsider.Despitethechallengingrealityofexclusionandpotential
silencingofsomeothers,Morrisonaffirmsthatcommunalactsofsharingandgrowing
togetherare,however,possible. Paradise,asarepositoryofheteroglossia,testifiesto
that.Withthenovel,wemayberemindedoflifespotentials,alongwithitsperils,
especiallyifindifferencetakescontrol,orifethicalvigilanceleavesus.Butastherealist
proseof Paradise,anunquestionablypoliticalandirrevocablybeautifulworkmakes
clear,itispromisingtograpplewithdifferentformsofdiscourses(Rootedness345).
ToquoteBakhtinonemoretime,andconcludethechapterwithhisinsight,wecanbe
remindedthat,
Alllanguagesofheteroglossia...arespecificpointsofviewontheworld,each
characterizedbyitsownobjects,meaningsandvalues.Assuchtheyallmaybe
juxtaposedtooneanother,mutuallysupplementoneanother,contradictone
anotherandbeinterrelateddialogically.Assuchtheyencounteroneanotherand
coexistintheconsciousnessofrealpeoplefirstandforemost,inthecreative
consciousnessofpeoplewhowritenovels.(TheDialogicImagination348)
Itisuptoustoremainattentivetowhateverydiscourseentails,andbeopenenoughto
discernhowreductiveorenhancingofthefuturetheyproposethemselvestobe.

223

Conclusion: SomeKindofFutureCommunity
DelbosAuschwitzandAfterandthetrilogyofMorrisonarecomplex,yetintimate,works
basedinindividualbutalsocollectiveconcerns.Eventhoughtheirtrilogiescanindeed
besaidtobepersonaltestimonialworksbypostmodernandpostcolonialwitnessesand
artists,theyarevitalinmanifestinganunderlying,deeplygroundedpreoccupationfor
formsofcommunity aswell.Also,DelboandMorrisonarethosetypesofartistswhodo
notclaimtheirownvoiceasanauthority,uniqueandabsolute.Theycallforaffective
andparticipatoryrelationshipsbetweenthespeakerandtheaudience(Rootedness
341).Theirworksavoidatypeofmonovocalityasaliterarymodebecauseoftheone
sidednessoftheinsightstheseworksmayproduce.Theyalsodeclineadiscourseof
authorityandtruthinfavorofoneofmultivocalityandtruthfulness.Withtheformer,
thereliesthedanger,indeed,thattheymightbeimpoverishing,limiting,closingdown
thepossiblemeaningsthattheirwritingmightproduce(Lodge, AfterBakhtin145).This
isobviouslynotwhatDelboandMorrisonhadinmindfortheirtrilogies.
ThetaleofthewiseoldstorytellerinMorrisonsParable,BirdintheHand,
deliveredduringherNoblePrizeLecture,markstheresponsibilityofthereaderinavery
evidentmanner.Intheparable,thestorytelleraddressesaquestionposedbytwo
inquiringchildren.Butshegivesthemnodefinitiveanswerastowhetherthebirdthat
theyareholdingintheirhandsisdeadoralive.Instead,sheinvitesthechildren,the
audience,butalsoallreaders,toconsiderandfigureouttheanswerforthemselves.
ThroughCherylLestersMeditationsonaBirdintheHand,welearnthatMorrison
assumesthepositionofthewisestoryteller,andthatthebirdisametaphorforlanguage
anditsvitality.Asweread,

224

Theoldwomanssilenceislong,theyoungpeoplehavetroubleholdingtheir
laughter.Finally,shespeaks,andhervoiceissoftbutstern.Idontknow,she
says.Idontknowwhetherthebirdyouareholdingisdeadoralive,butwhatI
doknowisthatitisinyourhands.Itisinyourhands.(128)
AsDavidLodgestates,itisthenatureoftexts,especiallyfictionalones,but,I
wouldadd,thoseofatestimonialcharacteralso,thattheyhavegapsandindeterminacies
whichmaybefilledinbydifferentreadersindifferentways(AfterBakhtin159).Asthe
oldwomanwantsheraudiencetoknow,vitallanguagedoesnotfixmeaning.Also,it
doesnotevenpointtowardmeaning,rather,shebelieves,itarcstowardtheplaces
wheremeaningmaylie(Meditations132).
Asworksthatembodyacomplexsenseofrealitychargedwithtraumatictracesof
painfulpasthistories,DelbosandMorrisonstrilogiesdonotfixmeaning.Theyalso
resistproposingadefiniteclosure,andnotonlyinthesensethattheprotagonistsofthe
trilogiesareunabletoreachclosureasmostremainobsessedwiththetraumaoftheir
pasts,butalsoinrelationtothereaderswho,confrontingthetragic(hi)storiesofDelbos
andMorrisonscharacters,aredeniedasenseofclosure.Thisinabilitybyboth
protagonistsandreaderstoletgoisnotonlyconstructedthroughtheaestheticandethical
practicesthatDelboandMorrisonassigntotheirworks.Itisalsohintedatintheidea
thatDelbosandMorrisonsnarrativesaremeanttobeopenended.AsGaryMorsonhas
it,inanothercontext,butthatIwillapplyhere,inDelbosandMorrisonsworks,truth
mayberevealed,notbyaproposition,butonlybyanunfinalizableconversation
(ExtractsfromaHeteroglossary258).Willingtobetruthful,ratherthantrue,Delbos
andMorrisonsliteratureoftestimonialsopensthusunfinalizablediscussions,notonly
becausetheyareinscribedinacontinuedneedforworkingthroughstoriesmarkedwith
excessivetrauma,butalsobecauseaconstructiveapproachtohealingmustnecessarily

225

involvesomeformofsocialexchangeandcommunalembrace.Thismayexplainwhy
thetrilogieshave(hi)storiesspelled,notbyoneindividual,butbynumerousauthorsand
witnesses.DelboandMorrisonascribethen,notonlytothemselvesandtheirvital
language,butalsotowitnesses,companions,orfictionalcharactersinvolvedinan
irremediablydisastrouspast,thepowertomeandirectly.Furtheron,Delbos
traumatizedimaginationandMorrisonsdialogicone,morethanfixingmeaning,invite
readerstomovetowardtheplaceswheremeaningmaylie(Meditations132).
Delboraisesinhertrilogythequestionofaparadoxicalquasiimpossibility,yet
obligation,totestifytoatraumaticeventofgenocidaldeath.Inherwork,sheusesa
suffocated,fragmented,andfigurallanguage.Itdoesnotonlyrevealanindispensable
lucidityatrememberingandtransmittingherexperience.Italsoexposesthedilemma
aroundadeeplyfeltnecessitytoremembercoincidentwith aprofounddesiretoforget
theexperiencesthatshe,hercompanions,butalsothousandsofothersforwhomshe
speaks,survivedornot.In Aucun,Delboengagesinactsofretrievingghostlyand
ghastlymemoriesbytransmutingtheirdetailsintotestimonialnarrative.Shealsobrings
tolighttheintensityandincommensurabilityofthedestruction.Notbyunderminingthe
memoryofatragicallyimposeddeprivationoflifeandvoice,butbyinvitingreadersto
explorethenecessarysilencesofhertextandhavingthemrespondtothepartial
mutednessofdestruction,Aucunnotonlyencouragesmemory.Italsoenablesreadersto
sensitivelyconnecttothespacesinwhichDelborevealsthetormentoftheinmates
torturedbycold,thirst,hunger. Aucunlikewisehasusdrawonourownsenses,andour
emphaticperceptions,torecognizetheanguishoftheprisonershavingtowitnessscenes
ofbrutaldeath.Byopeninghernarrativetoherreadersforthemtoidentify,engage,and

226

respondtothisfracturebetweenthefamiliarandtheextreme,lifeanddeath,shealsoasks
themtoethicallyrespondtothenatureofwhatsheexperienced. Uneconnaissance
inutilecertainlyaddressestheuselessnessoftheknowledgeshegathered.Excessive,the
teachingsofthecampundeniablyremainengravedinherdeepmemory,thatofthe
senses.Unabletoshedthememories,shecanrecollectthosesensationsimmediately.
Delbocanfeel,overandoveragain,exactlyhowAuschwitzwas.Shecanacutely
rememberwhatlackofsleeporthirstreallyfeltlike.Butbybeingsoextremeand
intense,willthereaders,whoareaskedtoperceivetheseafflictionsintheirown,familiar
context,bereadytobelieve?Willtheyevencare?EventhoughitisDelbosdeepest
concernandwish,willtheknowledgeshegatheredatsuchpainfulcostbeinstructive?
Whilethemeaningofherexperienceisnottobegiventhroughherwords,but
producedbyaninteractionbetweenthereadersandhertext,thecrucialcharacterofher
andhercompanionstestimoniesisthusthis:willherreaders,people,theworldhearher
plea?Willtheyactuponit?Thecollectivetestimoniesof Mesuredenosjourspresume
thattheworlddidnothear,careoractafterWorldWarIIaboutthefateoftheprisoners.
Mado,then,doesnotonlyremembercettevolontquinoustenaitcommeundlirede
supporter,dendurer,depersister,desortirpourtrelavoixquireviendraitetquidirait.
Shedoesnotonlythinkofthevoicequiferaitlecomptefinal. Sheisawarethatthat
voiceasksalso,inunvideglac:pourquoirevenirsijesuislaseulequirevienne?
Puzzledbythenecessitytoconsider,however,andalongwithCharlotteandothersof
theircompanions,thattheirvoicesmaynotbeheard,shedeclares,Etmevoil,moi,
maismorteaussi. Mavoixseperd.Quilentend?Quisaitlentendre?Ellesaussielles
voulaientrentrerpourdire.Etmoi,jeseraisvivante?Alorsquejenepeuxriendire.

227

Vivante,alorsquemavoixstouffe?Quenoussoyonslpourledireestundmenti
cequenousdisons(48). Astheindifferenceofaworldthatremaineddeaftothehorror
ofthecampsinspiredJeanCayroltowritethefollowingcommentaryafterhisrelease
fromMauthausen,itisalsoimplied,asinDelbos,thatthefollowingquestionbefaced
byus.Namely,thateventhoughthegenerationofthosewhosurvivedthecampswere
indifferenttotheinmatespleas,doesitmeanthatwe,overhalfacenturylater,needto
remaindeafaswell? Theconcludingcommentaryof Nuitetbrouillardhasuswonder,as
weread
Lesdportsregardentsanscomprendre.
Sontilsdlivrs?
Laviequotidiennevatellelesreconnatre?
Jenesuispasresponsable, ditlekapo.
Jenesuispasresponsable, ditlofficier.
Jenesuispasresponsable.
Alorsquiestresponsable?
Aumomentojevousparle,leaufroidedesmaraisetdesruinesreluitsurles
collinesdcharnes,
Uneeaufroideetopaquecommenotremauvaisemmoire.
Laguerresestassoupie,uniltoujoursouvert.
LherbefidleestvenuenouveausurlesAppelplatz,autourdesblocs,dansun
villageabandonnencorepleindemenaces.
Lecrmatoireesthorsdusage.
Lesrusesnaziessontdmodes.
Neufmillionsdemortshantentcepaysage.
Quidenousveilledecettrangeobservatoirepournousavertirdelavenuedes
nouveauxbourreaux ?
Ontilsvraimentunautrevisagequelentre?
Quelquepartparminous,ilrestedeskaposchanceux,deschefsrcuprs,des
dnonciateursinconnus.
Ilyatousceuxquinycroyaientpasouseulementdetempsentemps.
Ilyanousquiregardonssincrementcesruinescommesilevieuxmonstre
concentrationnairetaitmortsouslesdcombres,nousquifeignonsdereprendre
espoirdevantcetteimagequisloigne
commesiongurissaitdelapesteconcentrationnaire,
nousquifeignonsdecroirequetoutcelaestdunseultempsetdunseulpays,
etquinepensonspasregarderautourdenousetquinentendonspas
quoncriesansfin.(NuitetBrouillard)

228

AlongwiththemutualandcollectiveconstructionofthestoriesthatMorrison
proposesin Paradisecomesalsothepossibilityforconstructingalegitimateanduseful
AfricanAmericanstory.Eventhough BelovedandJazzleavelittleroom forthe
reconstructionofalifeandafuturefreedfrompainandtrauma,Paradiseassumes
anothersortofinstruction.Itenablescontestinganddisablinghegemonicnarrativesthat
haveshapedandthreatenedtofixastraumatic,notonlyanindividualmemory,buta
culturaloneaswell.Eventhoughthedislocationsandtraumasofacollectivepastcannot
beundoneforAfricanAmericans,thereisinMorrisonswork,thepossibilityforanew
taskathand.Itgoesbeyondreiteratingthetragediesandthetraumasofhistorythat
BelovedbringstolightandinwhichSetheremainscaptive.Italsoimplieslooking
beyondtheghostlyexistenceofrememoriesthataresoimpedingandthreateningin
Beloved.TherememoriesnotonlyinvolveDenverinthetraumaofanexperienceof
slaverywhichshehasneverdirectlyexperienced,butalsoentangleSetheinacycleof
guilt,similartothatofasurvivor,forwhichthereisnoadequatereparation.Unableto
regainalostinnocence,Setheisthusphysicallyandmentallyconsumedbythe
rememory,notonlyofslavery,butalsoofherkillingofBeloved.Whilerememories
hauntthelivingin Beloved,sodotheyin Jazz. Withthesecondnovelofthetrilogy,
Morrisonlikewisevividlydramatizesthecostofforgetfulnessandhistorylessness.Not
onlydothesecomeaboutbecausestrongandnurturingfamilyconnectionshavebeen
lost.Theyalsoexistinformsoffailedparentalinvolvementorsupport,asVioletandJoe
haveexperienced.Likewise,theycomeacrossthroughtheabsenceofanindividual
senseoflifebeingworthliving.Andmaybealsothroughtoostrongashameorintensea

229

fearofconfrontingtheselfinordertobuildafuturemorepromising.Unhingedby
bereavementandlackofgrounding,VioletsandJoeslivesremainatadeadend.
Attheendof Jazz,Morrisonextends,however,anewkindofinvitation,which
shereiteratesin Paradise.HerpowerfulwordsofSaymakeme,remakemeconfirm
theextentofherproposal(Jazz229).Herrequestistogobeyondtheentanglementof
trauma,howeverprofoundandobsessiveithasbeen.Itasksustoconsiderwhata
dynamicrelationtohistorymightproduceifthereisanengaginginacommunal,
collectiveprojectofreconstruction. Paradise,indeed,offersamoreaffirmativeposition
onrememorythandoesBeloved.Italsopresentsmorepossibilitiesforactivelytaking
chargeofonesownandotherslivesandfuturesthandoesJazz.Rememberingthepast
andretellingthehistoryareonlypartofthesolution,asrevealedin BelovedandJazz.
Theycertainlyarenecessarystepsinopeningpossibilitiesformourning.Butbeyond
that,Morrisonalsoallowsthereaderstoexplorehowamorecommunallyactiveand
immediateengagementwithonesandotherslivesandstoriesmay,afterall,have
potentialforgrowth.BecausethestoriesofthewomenoftheConventarenoterased
easily,theycontinuetohauntthecommunityofRubyandthereaders.Butthese,unlike
in Beloved,aregroundedinaconstructivehaunting.Thedynamic,healingrelationships
andcreativelifeforcesthatthewomenenactedcanresonateinus.Theycanhavea
powerfulandpositiveimpactonourownlives.AsNancyPetersonputsit,asshe
discussesMorrisonstrilogy:
Workingthroughthehistoryofslavery,ofemancipationandReconstruction,of
greatmigrationbothnorthandwest,Morrisonshistoricaltrilogyultimatelyends
notbyreiteratingthetragediesandthetraumasofhistory,butbytryingto
imagineshimmeringpossibilities,anewstoryoflifedownhereinParadise.
(AgainstAmnesia97)

230

WhilenegativeimagesofanupcomingfutureprevailinDelbosandMorrisons,
thereneverthelessisacallintheirworksforupcomingpossibilities.Itrequiresthatwe
remainattentivetobeingconnectedtonotonlyourpasts,histories,ancestors,butalsoto
ourselves,andcommunities. Also,bothDelbosandMorrisonsworksgesturetowards,
ratherthanprescribe,theneedforsomekindoffuturecommunity.Byindicatingwhat
stillremainsexcluded,theirworkssignalthenecessityforafuturemoreresponsibleand
acollectivitymoreinclusive.Butratherthanstipulatingwhatformstheseshouldtake,
bothworksguardagainstthedisastrousconsequencesthatsomeformsofdenialsor
exclusionsmayproduce.Asamatteroffact,bypointing,inthewordsofRichardMisner,
attheLackofwords,...Lackofforgiveness.Lackoflove,thatmayendangerfuture
communities,DelboandMorrisondonotsomuchattempttoofferaresolution(Paradise
330).Nordotheyattempttoprovideadefiniteanswertotheproblemofthefuture,orto
thequestionofthecommunity.Theirvision,inthewordsofSamDurrant,ismorelikea
presentimentorpromise,ratherthanafullyrealizedrepresentationofwhatmust
bedone.Theirworks,assuch,comeacrossasareminderofaneedthathastobe
infinitelyrenewed.AsDurrantclaims,
Likemourning,theattempttoredrawtheboundariesofcommunitymustremain
incomplete,unsuccessfulitssuccessismeasuredpreciselybyitsfailureto
completeitself,itscapacitytoremainperpetuallyopentothedifferenceofthe
other,tothepossibilityofdifferentothersandnotyetimaginedmodesofbeing.
(PostcolonialNarrative111)
InsofarasthepostmodernandpostcolonialtestimonialworksofDelboand
Morrisonareaddressedtocommunitiesofreadersaboutfuturemodesthatarestillin
processesofbecoming,theyarethusmeaningful.Theyareresonantintheinfinite
addressthattheycandirecttowardsthehereandnowpresentgeneration,butalsotothe

231

futureones.Asremindersofhistoriesandpastsstoriesthathaveblatantlyfailed
somewhere,DelbosandMorrisonsworksnotonlymakeusponder,asinthewordsof
RichardMisner,onhowexquisitelyhumanwasthewishforpermanenthappiness,and
howthinimaginationbecametryingtoachieveit(Paradise307).Theirworksalsoask
ustothinkofourselvesintermsofbeingendlesslyyetdefinitely,responsibleforafuture
andacommunitybasednotonanarrowdefinitionofselfinterestedindividualism
groundedinreductiveterms.Buttheycallforbringingforwardafutureanda
communitythatincludetherecognitionofnonexclusionaryformsofsolidarity.This
meansgroundingourselvesandourfutureinvaluesbasedonbeliefssuchasacceptance
oftheother,truecompanionship,andconnection.

232

Bibliography
Adorno,Theodor.Commitment.TheEssentialFrankfurtSchoolReader. Ed.Andrew
AratoandEikeGebhardt.NewYork:Continuum,1982.300318.
.Prisms.Trans.SamuelandShierryWeber. Cambridge:MITPress,1981.
.ResearchProjectonAntiSemitism:IdeaoftheProject.Adorno:TheStarsDown
toEarth. Ed.StephenCrook.NewYork:Routledge,1994.135161.
. Thorieesthtique.Trans.MarcJimenez.Paris:Klincksieck,1974.
Appelfeld,Aharon. BeyondDespair.Trans.JeffreyM.Green.NewYork:Fromm
InternationalPublishingCorporation,1994.
Arendt,Hannah. EichmannJrusalem:Rapportsurlabanalitdumal. Trans.Anne
Gurin. Paris:Gallimard,1966.
Badiou,Alain. Ethics:AnEssayontheUnderstandingofEvil. Trans.PeterHallward.
NewYork:Verso,2001.
Bakerman,Jane.TheSeamsCantShow:AnInterviewwithToniMorrison.
ConversationswithToniMorrison.Ed.DanilleTaylorGuthrie.Jackson:
UniversityPressofMississippi,1994.3042.
Bakhtin,Mikhail.TheDialogicImagination:FourEssays. TheoryoftheNovel: A
HistoricalApproach.Ed.MichaelMcKeon.Baltimore:JohnsHopkins
UniversityPress,2000.32153.
. ProblemsofDostoevskysPoetics. Ed.CarylEmerson.TheoryandHistoryofLit.
8.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress,1984.
Bal,Mieke,JonathanCrewe,andLeoSpitzer,eds. ActsofMemory: CulturalRecallin
thePresent. Hanover:UniversityPressofNewEngland,1999.
Barnes,Deborah.Movinonup:TheMadnessofMigrationinToniMorrisonsJazz.
ToniMorrisonsFiction:ContemporaryCriticism.Ed.DavidMiddleton.New
York:GarlandPublishing,Inc.,1997.
Barthes,Roland.MythToday.Mythologies. Trans.AnnetteLavers. NewYork:Hill
andWang,1972.109159.
.TheRealityEffect. FrenchLiteraryTheoryToday. Ed.TzvetanTodorov.New
York: CambridgeUniversityPress,1982. 1117.

233

Beaulieu,ElizabethAnn,ed.TheToniMorrisonEncyclopedia.Westport:Greenwood
Press,2003.
Benjamin,Jessica.TheFirstBond.TheBondsofLove:Psychoanalysis,Feminism,and
theProblemofDomination. NewYork:PantheonBooks,1988.1150.
Benjamin,Walter.Enfanceberlinoise.Trans.JeanLacoste.Paris:LesLettres
Nouvelles,1978. 29144.
.Sensunique.Trans.JeanLacoste.Paris:LesLettresNouvelles,1978.147243.
.TheStoryteller. Illuminations:EssaysandReflections. Trans.HarryZohn.New
York:SchockenBooks,1969.83109.
.ThesesonthePhilosophyofHistory.Illuminations: EssaysandReflections.
Trans.HarryZohn.NewYork:SchockenBooks,1969.253264.
Bhabha,Homi. TheLocationofCulture. NewYork:Routledge,1994.
BoheemenSaaf,Christinevan. Joyce,Derrida,Lacan,andtheTraumaofHistory:
Reading,NarrativeandPostcolonialism. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press,1999.
Bourdieu,Pierre. lesenspratique.Paris:LesditionsdeMinuit,1980.
Bouson,Brooks. QuietAsItsKept.Albany:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress,2000.
.SpeakingtheUnspeakable:Shame,Trauma,andMorrisonsFiction. Toni
Morrison.Ed.HaroldBloom.Philadelphia:ChelseaHouse,2005.12148.
Brison,Susan.TraumaNarrativesandtheRemakingoftheSelf. ActsofMemory:
CulturalRecallinthePresent.Hanover:UniversityPressofNewEngland,1999.
3954.
Browning,Gary. LyotardandtheEndofGrandNarratives. Cardiff:Universityof
WalesPress,2000.
Brunel,Pierre,ed. ArthurRimbaud. Unesaisonenenfer.Mayenne:LibrairieJos
Corti,1987.
Butler,Judith. ThePsychicLifeofPower:TheoriesinSubjection. Stanford:Stanford
UniversityPress,1997.

234

Carroll,David.MemorialfortheDiffrend:InMemoryofJeanFranoisLyotard.
Parallax.6.4(2000):327.
Caruth,Cathy,ed. Trauma: ExplorationsinMemory. Baltimore:JohnsHopkins
UniversityPress,1995.
. UnclaimedExperience:Trauma,Narrative,andHistory. Baltimore:JohnsHopkins
UniversityPress,1996.
Certeau,Michelde. SpatialPractices. ThePracticeofEverydayLife. Trans.Steven
Rendall.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1984.91130.
Chambers,Ross. UntimelyInterventions: AIDSWriting,Testimonial,andtheRhetoric
ofHaunting. AnnArbor:UniversityofMichiganPress,2004.
Chodorow,Nancy.GenderDifferenceinthePreoedipalPeriod. TheReproductionof
Mothering:PsychoanalysisandtheSociologyofGender.Berkeley:Universityof
CaliforniaPress,1978.92140.
Darling,Marsha.IntheRealmofResponsibility:AConversationwithToniMorrison.
ConversationswithToniMorrison.Ed.DanilleTaylorGuthrie.Jackson:
UniversityPressofMississippi,1994.246254.
Delbo,Charlotte. Aucundenousnereviendra. Paris:LesditionsdeMinuit,1970.
. Uneconnaissanceinutile.Paris:LesditionsdeMinuit,1970.
. Leconvoidu24janvier.Paris:LesditionsdeMinuit,1965.
. ConvoytoAuschwitz. WomenoftheFrenchResistance.Trans.CarolCosman.
Boston:NortheasternUniversityPress,1997.
. Lammoireetlesjours.Paris:BergInternational,1995.
. Mesuredenosjours.Paris:LesditionsdeMinuit,1971.
. Spectres,mescompagnons.Paris:BergInternational,1995.
Derrida,Jacques. Aporias.Trans.ThomasDutoit. Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress,
1993.
.TheGiftofDeath.Trans.DavidWills.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,
1995.
.OfSpirit:HeideggerandtheQuestion.Trans.GeoffreyBenningtonandRachel
Bowlby.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,1989.

235

 .Signature,Event,Context. MarginsofPhilosophy.Trans.AlanBass.Chicago:
UniversityofChicagoPress,1982.307330.
. SpectersofMarx:TheStateoftheDebt,theWorkofMourning,andtheNew
International. Trans.PeggyKamuf. NewYork:Routledge,1994.
. TheWorkofMourning. Ed.PascaleAnneBraultandMichaelNaas.Chicago:
UniversityofChicagoPress,2001.
Diedrich,Maria,CarlPedersen,andJustineTally,eds. MappingAfricanAmerica:
History,NarrativeFormation,andtheProductionofKnowledge. Vol.1.
Hamburg:Lit.FORECAAST,1999.
Durrant,Sam. PostcolonialNarrativeandtheWorkofMourning. Albany:State
UniversityofNewYork,2004.
Ezrahi,SidraDeKoven.ByWordsAlone. TheHolocaustinLiterature.Chicago:
UniversityofChicagoPress,1980.
.TheGraveintheAir:UnboundmetaphorsinPostHolocaustPoetry.Probing
theLimitsofRepresentation:NazismandtheFinalSolution. Ed.Saul
Friedlander.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,1992.259276.
Felman,Shoshana.JacquesLacan:MadnessandtheRisksofTheory.Writingand
Madness. Trans.MarthaNoelEvans.NewYork:CornellUniversityPress,1985.
119140.
,andDoriLaub. Testimony:CrisisofWitnessinginLiterature,Psychoanalysis,and
History. NewYork:Routledge,1992.
FortunoffVideoArchiveforHolocaustTestimonies.12Mar.2002.24May2004<http:
//www.library.yale.edu/testimonies>.
Freeman,Barbara. TheFeminineSublime.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,
1995.
Freud,Sigmund. DraftGMelancholia.PrePsychoAnalyticPublicationsand
UnpublishedDrafts.Ed.JamesStrachey.Vol.1oftheStandardEditionofthe
CompletePsychologicalWorksofSigmundFreud.London:HogarthPress,1966.
24vols.200206.
.MourningandMelancholia.Vol.14oftheStandardEditionoftheComplete
PsychologicalWorksofSigmundFreud.London:HogarthPress,1957.24vols.
237260.

236

Friedlander,Saul.Trauma,Memory,andTransference.HolocaustRemembrance:The
ShapesofMemory.Ed.GeoffreyHartman.Cambridge:Blackwell,1994.252
263.
,ed. ProbingtheLimitsofRepresentation:NazismandtheFinalSolution.
Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,1992.
Furman,Jan. ToniMorrisonsFiction. Columbia:UniversityofSouthCarolinaPress,
1996.
Gilroy,Paul. LivingMemory:AMeetingwithToniMorrison. SmallActs:Thoughts
onthePoliticsofBlackCultures.London:SerpentsTail,1993.175182.
Grewal,Gurleen.CirclesofSorrow,LinesofStruggles:TheNovelsofToniMorrison.
BatonRouge:LouisianaStateUniversityPress,1998.
Hartman,Geoffrey.TheBookofDestruction.ProbingtheLimitsofRepresentation:
NazismandtheFinalSolution. Ed.SaulFriedlander.Cambridge:Harvard
UniversityPress,1992.318334.
,ed. HolocaustRemembrance:TheShapesofMemory.Cambridge:Blackwell
Publishers,1994.
.HolocaustTestimony,Art,andTrauma.TheLongestShadow:IntheAftermathof
theHolocaust.Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress,1996.151172.
Herman,Judith. TraumaandRecovery.NewYork:BasicBooks,1992.
Higgins,Therese. Religiosity,Cosmology,andFolklore. TheAfricanInfluenceinthe
NovelsofToniMorrison.Ed.GrahamRussellHodges.NewYork:Routledge,
2001.
Hirsch,Marianne. FamilyFrames.Photography,Narrative,andPostmemory.
Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,1997.
.MarkedbyMemory:FeministReflectionsonTraumaandTransmission.
Extremities:Trauma,Testimony,andCommunity. Eds.NancyK.Millerand
JasonTougaw. Urbana:UniversityofIllinoisPress,2002.7191.
andIreneKacandes,eds. TeachingtheRepresentationoftheHolocaust.New
York:ModernLanguageAssociationofAmerica,2004.
Holquist,Michael. Dialogism:Bakhtinandhisworld.London:Routledge,1990.
. AllegoryandRepresentation.Ed.StephanGreenblatt.Baltimore:JohnsHopkins
UniversityPress,1981.

237

Horowitz,Sara. VoicingtheVoid:MutenessandMemoryinHolocaustFiction.New
York:StateUniversityofNewYork Press,1997.
Horvitz,Deborah.NamelessGhosts:PossessionandDispossessionin Beloved.
Studies inAmericanFiction17(1989):157167.
Iyasere,SolomonO.,andMarlaW.Iyasere,eds. UnderstandingToniMorrisons
BelovedandSula. NewYork:WhitstonPublishingCompany,2000.
Jenny,Laurent.Lvnementfigural.LaParoleSingulire.Paris:Belin,1990.1341.
.Thestrategyofform.FrenchLiteraryTheoryToday. Ed.TzvetanTodorov.New
York:CambridgeUniversityPress,1982. 3463.
.VariationetMimsis. TheRomanicReview 93.12(2003):6979.
Kacandes,Irene.NarrativeWitnessingasMemoryWork:ReadingGertrudKolmarsA
JewishMother. ActsofMemoryCulturalRecallinthePresent.Hanover:
UniversityPressofNewEngland,1999.5571.
Kakutani,Michiko.Paradise:WorthyWomen,UnredeemableMen. NewYorkTimes
6January1998,lateed.:E8+.
Kant,Immanuel. CritiqueofJudgment.Trans.J.H.Bernard:NewYork:Barnes&
NobleBooks,2005.
. OftheBeautifulandSublime.Trans.JohnGoldthwait.Berkeley:Universityof
CaliforniaPress,1960.
Kella,Elizabeth. BelovedCommunities. Uppsala:UppsalaUniversityLibrary,2000.
Kertsz,Imre.TheFreedomofSelfDefinition.Trans.IvanSanders. Witness
Literature:ProceedingsoftheNobelCentennialSymposium.Ed.Horace
Engdahl.RiverEdge:WorldScientific,2002.3343.
Lacan,Jacques.TheFourFundamentalConceptsofPsychoanalysis. Ed.JacquesAlain
Miller. Trans.AlanSheridan.NewYork:Norton,1981.
.TheFunctionandFieldofSpeechandLanguageinPsychoanalysis. crits.
Trans.AlanSheridan.NewYork:Norton,1977.30113.
LaCapra,Dominick. RepresentingtheHolocaust:History,Theory,Trauma. Ithaca:
CornellUniversityPress,1994.

238

Lamont,RosetteC.TheTripleCourageofCharlotteDelbo. MassachusettsReview
(2001): 48397.
Langer,Lawrence.TheHolocaustandtheLiteraryImagination.NewHaven:Yale
UniversityPress,1975.
.HolocaustTestimonies:TheRuinsofMemory. NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress,
1991.
.TheLiteratureofAuschwitz. AdmittingtheHolocaust. NewYork:Oxford
UniversityPress,1995.89107.
. PreemptingtheHolocaust. NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress,1998.
Laub,Dori.BearingWitnessortheVicissitudesofListening. Testimony:Crisisof
WitnessinginLiterature,Psychoanalysis,andHistory. Eds.ShoshanaFelman
andDoriLaub.NewYork:Routledge,1992.5774.
.AnEventWithoutaWitness:Truth,TestimonyandSurvival. Testimony:Crisis
ofWitnessinginLiterature,Psychoanalysis,andHistory. Eds.ShoshanaFelman
andDoriLaub.NewYork:Routledge,1992.7592.
Lester,Cheryl.MeditationsonaBirdintheHand:EthicsandAestheticsinaParable
ByToniMorrison.TheAestheticsofToniMorrison:SpeakingtheUnspeakable.
Ed.MarcC.Conner.Jackson:UniversityPressofMississippi,2000.125138.
Levi,Primo. ThePeriodicTable.Trans.RaymondRosenthal.NewYork:Schocken
Books,1984.
. Sicestunhomme. Paris:Julliard,1987.
. SurvivalinAuschwitz.TheNaziAssaultonHumanity.NewYork:Touchstone.
Simon&Schuster,1996.
Lodge,David. AfterBakhtin: EssaysonFictionandCriticism. London:Routledge,
1990.
Lyotard,JeanFranois.TheDifferend:PhrasesinDispute. Trans.GeorgesVanDen
Abbeele.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress,1988.
. Heideggerandthejews. Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress,1990.
. Linhumain: Causeriessurletemps. Paris:Galile,1988.
.Peregrinations:Law,Form,Event. NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1988.

239

 .ThePostmodernCondition:AReportonKnowledge. Trans.GeoffBenningtonand
BrianMassumi.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress,1984.
.ThePostmodernExplainedtoChildren.Correspondence19821985.Sydney:
PowerPublications,1992.
Malpas,Simon.SublimeAscesis:Lyotard,ArtandtheEvent. ANGELAKI.7.1(2002):
199208.
McGee,Patrick. IshmaelReedandtheEndsofRace.NewYork:St.MartinsPress,
1997.
. TellingtheOther:TheQuestionofValueinModernandPostcolonialWriting.
Ithaca:CornellUniversityPress,1992.
McKay,Nellie.AnInterviewwithToniMorrison.ToniMorrison:Critical
PerspectivesPastandPresent. Eds.HenryLouisGates,Jr.,andK.A.Appiah.
NewYork:Amistad,1993. 396411.
MerleauPonty,Maurice. PhenomenologyofPerception.Trans.ColinSmith.London:
Routledge,1962.
Miller,NancyK.andJasonTougaw. Extremities: Trauma,Testimony,andCommunity.
Urbana:UniversityofIllinoisPress,2002.
Mobley,MarilynSanders.ADifferentRemembering:Memory,HistoryandMeaningin
ToniMorrisonsBeloved. ToniMorrison.Ed.HaroldBloom.Philadelphia:
ChelseaHouse,2005.6777.
Morrison,Toni.Beloved. NewYork:Plume,1987.
. Jazz. NewYork:Plume,1992.
. Love.NewYork:AlfredKnopp,2003.
.Memory,Creation,andWriting. Thought.235(1984):38590.
. Paradise. NewYork:Plume,1997.
. PlayingintheDark:WhitenessandtheLiteraryImagination. Cambridge:Harvard
UniversityPress,1992.
.Rootedness:TheAncestorasFoundation.BlackWomenWriters:Critical
Evaluation.Ed.MariEvans. NewYork:AnchorBooks,1984.33945.

240

 .TheSiteofMemory.InventingtheTruth: TheArtandCraftofMemoir. Ed.

WilliamZinsser.Boston:HoughtonMifflin,1987.101124.
.UnspeakableThingsUnspoken:TheAfroAmericanPresenceinAmerican
Literature. ModernCriticalViews. ToniMorrison.Ed.HaroldBloom.New
York:ChelseaHousePublishers,1990.201230.
Morson,Gary,andCarylEmerson.ExtractsfromaHeteroglossary. Dialogueand
CriticalDiscourse.MichaelMacovski,ed.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,
1977.256272.
Novick,Peter. TheHolocaustinAmericanLife. Boston:HoughtonMifflin,1999.
NuitetBrouillard.Dir.AlainRenais. CommentarybyJeanCayrol.ArgosFilms,1956.
Naylor,Gloria.AConversation:GloriaNaylorandToniMorrison. Conversationswith
ToniMorrison.Ed.DanilleTaylorGuthrie.Jackson:UniversityPressof
Mississippi,1994.188217.
Page,Philip.DangerousFreedom:FusionandFragmentationinToniMorrisons
Novels.Jackson:UniversityPressofMississippi,1995.
Peach,Linden. ToniMorrison. NewYork:St.MartinsPress,2000.
PrezTorres,Rafael. KnittingandKnottingtheNarrativeThread.ToniMorrison:
CriticalandTheoreticalApproaches.Ed.NancyJ.Peterson. Baltimore:Johns
HopkinsUniversityPress,1997.91109.
Peschel,EnidRhodes. ArthurRimbaud: ASeasoninHell. TheIlluminations.New
York:OxfordUniversityPress,1973.
Peterson,NancyJ. AgainstAmnesia:ContemporaryWomenWritersandtheCrisesof
HistoricalMemory. Philadelphia:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress,2001.
.Saymakeme,remakeme:ToniMorrisonandtheReconstructionofAfrican
AmericanHistory. ToniMorrison:CriticalandTheoreticalApproaches. Ed.
NancyPeterson. Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress,1997.20121.
Plimpton,Georges,ed. WomenWritersatWork:TheParisReviewInterviews.New
York:ModernLibrary,1998.
Portelli,Alessandro. TheTextandtheVoice:Writing,Speaking,andDemocracyin
AmericanLiterature.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1994.
Rimbaud,Arthur.Adieu.Oeuvres.Ed.SuzanneBernardandAndrGuyaux. Paris:
ClassiquesGarnier,2000.23536.

241

 . Alchimieduverbe.Oeuvres.Ed.SuzanneBernardandAndrGuyaux.Paris:
ClassiquesGarnier,2000.22329.
. Matin.Oeuvres.Ed.SuzanneBernardandAndrGuyaux.Paris:Classiques
Garnier,2000.234.
. MauvaisSang.Oeuvres.Ed.SuzanneBernardandAndrGuyaux. Paris:
ClassiquesGarnier,2000.20814.
. ASeasoninHell. TheIlluminations.Trans.EnidRhodesPeschel. NewYork:
OxfordUniversityPress,1973.
Rich,Adrienne.MotherhoodandDaughterhood.OfWomanBorn: Motherhoodas
ExperienceandInstitution.NewYork:Norton,1976.218255.
Rothberg,Michael. TraumaticRealism:TheDemandsofHolocaustRepresentation.
Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress,2000.
Rushdy,AshrafH.A. RememberingGenerations:RaceandFamilyinContemporary
AfricanAmericanFiction.ChapelHill:UniversityofNorthCarolinaPress,2001.
.Rememory:PrimalScenesandConstructionsinToniMorrisonsNovels.Toni
MorrisonsFiction:ContemporaryCriticism.Ed.DavidMiddleton.NewYork:
GarlandPublishing,Inc.,2000.135161.
Said,EdwardW. Beginnings: IntentionandMethod.NewYork:BasicBooks,Inc.,
Publishers,1975.
.Orientalism.NewYork:RandomHouse,1979.
Scarry,Elaine.TheBodyinPain. TheMakingandUnmakingoftheWorld.NewYork:
OxfordUniversity Press,1985.
Semprun,Jorge.Lcritureoulavie.MesnilsurlEstre:ditionsGallimard,1994.
. LiteratureorLife.Trans.LindaCoverdale.NewYork:PenguinBooks,1998.
Shakespeare,William. TheTragedyofHamletPrinceofDenmark. Ed.SylvanBarnet.
NewYork:SignetClassic,1998.
Silverman,Kaja. TheThresholdoftheVisibleWorld. NewYork:Routledge,1996.
Simon,RogerI,SharonRosenberg,andClaudiaEppert. BetweenHopeandDespair:
PedagogyandtheRemembranceofHistoricalTrauma. Boston:Rowan&
LittlefieldPublishers,Inc.,2000.

242

Stark,Jared.BrokenRecords:HolocaustDiaries,Memoirs,andMemorialBooks.
TeachingtheRepresentationoftheHolocaust.Eds.MarianneHirschandIrene
Kacandes.NewYork:ModernLanguageAssociationofAmerica,2004.191
204.
Steinberg,Marlene.SystematizingDissociations:SymptomatologyandDiagnostic
Assessment. Dissociation:Culture,Mind,andBody. Ed.DavidSpiegel.
Washington:AmericanPsychiatric,1994.5988.
Suleiman,Susan.The1.5Generation:GeorgesPerecsWortheMemoryofChildhood.
TeachingtheRepresentationoftheHolocaust.Eds.MarianneHirschandIrene
Kacandes.NewYork:ModernLanguageAssociationofAmerica,2004.372
385.
Tally,Justine. ParadiseReconsidered:ToniMorrisons(Hi)storiesandTruths.Vol.3.
Hamburg:Lit.FORECAAST,1999.
. TheStoryofJazz:ToniMorrisonsDialogicImagination. Vol.7.Hamburg:Lit.
FORECAAST,2001.
Tate,Claudia.ToniMorrison. ConversationswithToniMorrison.Ed.Danille
TaylorGuthrie.Jackson:UniversityPressofMississippi,1994.156170.
Vaidhyanathan,Siva.Jazz. TheOxfordCompaniontoAfricanAmericanLiterature.
Ed.WilliamAndrews,FrancesSmithFoster,andTrudierHarris.NewYork:
OxfordUniversityPress,1997. 395396.
Valry,Paul.CommentairedeCharmes. Oeuvres.Vol.1.Paris:Gallimard,1957.
1510.
VanAlphen,Ernest. SymptomsofDiscursivity:Experience,Memory,andTrauma.
ActsofMemory:Cultural RecallinthePresent. Eds.MiekeBal,Jonathan
Crewe,andLeoSpitzer.Hanover:UniversityPressofNewEngland,1999. 24
38.
VanderKolk,Bessel,andOnnovanderHart. TheIntrusivePast:TheFlexibilityof
MemoryandtheEngravingofTrauma. Trauma:ExplorationsinMemory.Ed.
CathyCaruth.Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress,1995.158182.
Weedon,Chris. FeministPractice& PoststructuralistTheory. 2nd ed.Oxford:
BlackwellPublishers,1997.
Wiegman,Robyn. AmericanAnatomies:TheorizingRaceandGender.Durham:Duke
UniversityPress,1995.

243

Wieviorka,Annette. Lredutmoin. Paris:Plon,1998.

Yaeger,Patricia. DirtandDesire:ReconstructingSouthernWomensWriting1930
1990.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,2000.
Young,Robert. Postcolonialism:AnHistoricalIntroduction.Oxford:Blackwell,2001.
.WhiteMythologies:WritingHistoryandtheWest.London:Routledge,1990.

244

Vita
SylvianeFinckisadoctoralcandidateatLouisianaStateUniversity. SheholdsaMaster
ofArtsdegreeinEnglishfromNorthwesternStateUniversity,Natchitoches,Louisiana.
ShereceivedaBachelorofArtsinGermanicPhilologywithaspecialtyinDutchand
EnglishlanguageandliteratureatCatholicUniversityofLouvain,Belgium.Shetaught
EnglishandDutchinhercountryoforiginbeforemakingLouisianaherhome.An
eagernesstoexploretheUnitedStatesandexpandherteachingexperiencebroughtherto
LouisianafirstasaCodofilteacher.SheiscurrentlyteachingFrenchclassesatBrusly
HighSchoolinWestBatonRougeParish.SheisaLouisianaandNationalBoard
certifiedteacherofWorldLanguageOtherthanEnglish.Sylvianesgeneralareasof
interestareAfricanAmerican,American,andFrancophoneliteratureandculture,critical
theory,culturalstudies,andphilosophy.Morespecifically,herworkfocuseson
postmodernandpostcolonialliteratureandculture.ThedegreeofDoctorofPhilosophy
whichisconferredonhertodayattheFall2006Commencementistheresultofalifelong
commitmenttolearning.Presentintheaudienceareherparentswhocamealltheway
fromBelgiumtohonorherandshareherjoy.ButthestarofthedayisAngelina,
recentlyborntoSylviane.Whereas,forSylviane,receivingadoctorateisamost
rewardingexperience,bringingababytothisworldisthemostexcitingone.Sylviane
currentlyresidesinBatonRouge,Louisiana,wheresheteachesandtakescareofher
daughterwithherhusbandOscar.

245