Who Speaks in the Work of Samuel Beckett?

Author(s): Simon Critchley

Source: Yale French Studies, No. 93, The Place of Maurice Blanchot (1998), pp. 114-130
Published by: Yale University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3040734
Accessed: 07-08-2015 19:27 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Yale University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Yale French Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SIMON CRITCHLEY

Who Speaks in the Workof

Samuel Beckett?
Wehave to talk,whetherwe havesomething
to sayornot;andthe
less we wantto sayandwantto hearthemorewillfully
we talkand
aresubjectedto talk.How didPascalputit? "All theevilin theworld
comesfromourinabilityto sit quietlyin a room."To keepstill.
-Stanley Cavell

STORYTIME, TIME OF DEATH

(MOLLOY, MALONE DIES)

1thereis a relentlesspursuit,acrossandbymeans
In Beckett'sTrilogy,
ofnarrative,
ofthatwhichnarrationcannotcapture,namelytheradical unrepresentability
of death.Yet-and this is the paradoxupon
theentirety
ofBeckett'sfictionturns-to conveythis
which,arguably,
radicalunrepresentability,
theTrilogy
theunrepresentmustrepresent
able. That is to say,it must constructa seriesof representations,
a
"a galleryofmoribunds"(T,126),
litanyofvoices,names,andfigures,
thatrevolveor"wheel"(T.270)arounda narrative
voiceorprotagonist,
passingin succession.These wheelingfigures,these "delegates"(T,
272),havenamesthathavelongbecomefamiliar:Molloy(butalso Dan
JacquesMoran,2Malone,
Mahood
[T,181,MelloseandMollose(T,1031),
and
(butalso "Basil andhis gang"[T,278; 2831,thebilly-in-the-bowl),
Worm.But,in theTrilogy
we also findearlierdelegatesrecalled:Murphy(T,268) and the pseudo-coupleMercier-Camier
(T,272),a minia seriesof "M" names (forgetlibraryofAnglo-Gallo-Hiberno-nyms,
1. Throughout,
I use theabbreviation
T to referto SamuelBeckett,The Beckett
Trilogy
(Molloy;MaloneDies; The Unnamable)(London:Picador,1979).
2. Andhowdoesonepronounce
thesenames?Aretheytobe spokena la fran~aise,
in BritishEnglish,or IrishEnglish?To take the exampleofMoran,is thisto be proonthesecondsyllable,as
nouncedwiththestressonthefirst
syllable,as inIrishEnglish,
in BritishEnglish,orwithequal stresson bothsyllables,as in French?
YFS 93, ThePlace ofMauriceBlanchot,ed.ThomasPepper,?) 1998byYaleUniversity.

114

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SIMON

CRITCHLEY

115

tingWattfora moment)whichis completedby a "W," an inverted

"M," whereWorm"is thefirstofhis kind"(T1310).3
The dramatictensionofthe Trilogy,to mymind,is foundin the
disjunctionthatopensup betweenthetimeofnarrative,
thechainof
increasingly
untellableand untenablestories,and the nonnarratable
timeofthenarrative
voice,whichI haveelsewheredescribedin detail
as the time ofdying.4In Blanchot'stermsthisis the disjunctionbetweentheimpossibletemporality
ofle mourirandla mort,thetimeof
thepossible.The doublebindwithinwhichthe Trilogywriggles,and
out ofwhichit is written,is thatbetweentheimpossibility
ofnarrationorrepresentation,
and itsnecessity.The development
oftheTrilin a quasi-teleologicalvocabulary,
is one
ogy,to speak provisionally
wherethe experienceofdisjunctionbetweenthesetwo temporalordersbecomesincreasingly
acute,wheretheorderofthework(narraand storytelling)
breaksdownor opensinto the
tive,representation,
experienceofdesoeuvrement,a worklessness
thatshouldnotbe confusedwithformlessness.
Blanchotsummarizeshis readingoftheTrilogyas follows:
wearenotinthe
sentiments
areoutofplacehere.Perhaps
Aesthetic
ofa bookbutperhaps
presence
it is a questionofmuchmorethana
book:thepureapproach
ofa movement
from
whenceall bookscome,
from
thisoriginal
pointwheredoubtless
theworkislost,whichalways
inthework,
ruinsthework,
whichrestores
endlessworklessness
but
on
withwhichanevermoreprimal
relationship
hastobemaintained,
painofbeingnothing.5
This disjunctionbetweenthe time of narrativeand the time of
dyingcan be tracedin Molloy by consideringthe symmetriesand
at least,the
betweenthetwopartsofthenovel.Initially,
disymmetries
figuresof Molloy and Moran-the latterbeingthe agentgiventhe
an encounterwhich nevertakes
assignmentof findingthe former,
place-seem tobe completelyopposed.Moran,withhis authoritarian
his dutiis namedJacques,
tohis son who,likehis father,
relationship
ofFatherAmfulrelationto God,whetherthroughtheintermediary
see thefollowing
passagefromthebeauti3. On "M" and"W" as namesinBeckett,
ful late prosepiece Company:"Is thereanythingto add to this esquisse?His unas so farcreated.W?
namability.
EvenM mustgo.So W remindshimselfofhis creature
37).
NohowOn [London:Calder,1992J,
ButW too is a creature.Figment"(Beckett,
4. I givea fullerdiscussionof Blanchot'sand Beckett'sworkin VeryLittle...
AlmostNothing(London:Routledge,1996).
5. MauriceBlanchot,Le livrea venir(Paris:Gallimard,collection"Id6es",1959),
313; mytranslation

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

116

Yale FrenchStudies

broseortheagencyofGaber(all too obviouslythearchangelGabriel),

and his possessiverelationto selfand to nature,is sharplydistinct
fromMolloy,"thepantinganti-self,"6
withhis expropriative
relation
to nature.To employa psychoanalytic
whichmuch in the
register,
novelseemsto encourageandwhich,I think,mustbe refusedbecause
it is so encouraged(foran exampleofa psychoanalytic
redherring,
see
Moran'sanagrammaticgiftto Freudianreaders,where"the Libido"
becomes,somewhatclumsily,"the Obidil": "Andwithregardto the
fromspeakinguntilnow,andwhomI
Obidil,ofwhomI haverefrained
so longedto see faceto face . . . " [T. 1491),thehappilyOedipalMoran
can be playedoffagainstthepre-OedipalMolloy,withhis failedquest
foridentification
withhis motherand his consequentabjection.
and deepeningsymmetry
However,thereis a progressive
between
thetwopartsofthenovel,where,ifyoulike,theauthoritarian
Oedipal
subjectbecomesthe pre-Oedipalabjectself,what Moran calls "the
Moranloseshis faith,tellingFatherAmofthefather."
disintegration
brose"notto counton me anymore"(7T.161),andthevirilebourgeois
frenzied
subjectundergoes"a crumbling,
collapsing"(T,137),through
a syntaxofweakness,througha poeticsofincreasingimpotence:"I
grewgraduallyweakerand weakerand moreand morecontent"(T,
150); "on me so changedfromwhatI was" (T,136).On a morecareful
reading,
thenovelrevealswhatMolloycallshis "maniaforsymmetry"
betweenMolloy
(T,78),7wherea chainofcumulatingcorrespondences
and Moran can be detected:bothheara gong(T, 82; 106),bothride
bicyclesand endup on crutches(T.60; 161)becauseoftheirpainfully
voiceoffering
succor(T,84) orgiving
stiffening
legs,bothheara strange
orders(T,121; 156; 162),andbothattaina pointofstasis,withMolloy
in his ditch("Molloycouldstay,wherehe happenedto be" [T,841),and
Moranin his shelterpriorto therealorhallucinatedarrivalofGaber
("I was all rightwhereI was" [T,1511).
the symmetry
residesin thenarrative
However,moreprofoundly,
formofbothpartsofthenovel,whereeachprotagonist
writesfroma
positionoutsidetheeventsdescribedin thenarrative.
Molloywritesat
thebehestofa manwhogiveshimmoneyin exchangeforhis pages(T,
9),Moranwriteshis "report"undertheordersofYoudi(T,84-85; 161).
6. See Declan Kiberd,"Beckettand the Life to Come," in Beckettin Dublin
82.
(Dublin:LiliputPress,1992),75-84; particularly
in Beckett,see J.M. Coetzee's "The Manuscript
7. On the figureof symmetry
ed. David
RevisionsofBeckett'sWatt,"in DoublingthePoint.Essaysand Interviews,
Press,1992),39-42.
Attwell(Cambridge:
HarvardUniversity

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SIMON

CRITCHLEY

117

Indeed,theybothseemtobe writing
fortheagentGaber,Moranexplicitly,Molloyimplicitlyinsofaras "thequeerone" who takeshispages,
likeGaber,visitson Sundayandis alwaysthirsty,
usuallyforbeer(7T.9;
86; 161).
What underpinsthe symmetry
is the disinterestedness
and disaffection
oftherelationeachoftheprotagonists
maintainstohiswriting,and it is herethatthe disjunctionbetweenthe timeofnarrative
and thetimeofdyingcan mostclearlybe seen.Molloy,finallyin his
mother'sroom,wantsnothingmorethanto be leftalone,to "finish
dying"(T, 9),but "theydo notwantthat."He is thusunderan obligationor "remnantsofa pensum"(T,31) to writestories,althoughthe
originof this obligationis unknownand the storiesare incredible:
"WhatI neednowis stories,it tookme a longtimeto knowthat,and
I'm not certainofit" (T,14).This situationproducesa characteristicformulation
ofBeckett'swriterly
credo:
allyoxymoronic
nottoknowwhatyouwanttosay,
nottobeabletosay
Nottowanttosay,
tostopsaying,
orhardly
whatyouthink
youwanttosay,andnever
ever,
evenintheheatofcomposition.
thatisthething
tokeepinmind,
[T,27]
Itis onlywhenthisis keptinmindthat"thepagesfillwithtrueciphers
at last" (T,60).Moranexpressesa similarlydisaffected
attitudetoward
thewritingofhis "report,"callingit "paltryscrivening"
(T. 121),and
end
"it
not
this
late
of
notingtowardthe
that is
at
stage myrelation
thatI intendto givewayto literature"(T. 139):
ofmoribunds.
Whata rabbleinmyhead,whata gallery
Murphy,
Watt,
havebelieved
Yerk,
Mercier
andalltheothers.
I wouldnever
that-yes,
I havenotbeenabletotellthem.I
I believeitwillingly.
stories.
Stories,
shallnotbeabletotellthisone.[T.126]
Morantellsuntellablestoriesbecausehe is following
orders,although
he admitsthathe is writingnot out of fear,but ratherout of the
deadeningforceof habit,a habit whose implacablenarrativedrive
voicecannot
ofthatwhichthenarrative
opensontotheimpossibility
giveitself,namelydeath.
aboutdeath,when
In contradistinction
toMoran'sinitialcertainty
he visitshis little"plotin perpetuity"
withits gravestone
alreadyin
place (T, 124),Molloywrites:
tomysatisfacbeenabletoconceive
Deathis a condition
I havenever
ofwealandwoe.
cannot
tionandwhichtherefore
godownintheledger
[T,63]

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

118

Yale FrenchStudies

ofdeathis exploredat lengthin Malone Dies,

This inconceivability
wherethe space of narrativeis reducedfromMolloy'slandscapeof
forest,
seashore,andtown-Turdy,Turdyba,
Turdybaba,
Bally,Ballyba,
a
BallybabaandHole8-to bedin a roomwherea figure,
calledMalone
(whonotes,withoutconviction,"sincethisis whatI am callednow"
[T.2041,justas Morannoted,"Thisis thenameI am knownby"[T,881)
lies dying.He is immobileexceptfora handholdinga pencil(a "Venus,"whichis laterassociatedwith"Cythera"[T. 192; 2171:morning
thatglidesoverthepageofa child's
star,eveningstar,sourceofvenery)9
exercisebook.The thirdpersonpresentindicativeofthebook'stitleMalone meurt-at theveryleastleavesit openas to whetherMalone
Ricks rightly
dies or not,as Christopher
pointsout: "Malone Dies:
doeshe?In a firstpersonnarrative,
youcanneverbe sure." 10In Heidegofdeathas possibility
gerianterms,thevoicegivesitselfthepossibility
on thefirstpageofthetext- "I coulddie today,ifI wished,merelyby
makinga littleeffort"-onlyto denythispossibility:"Butit is justas
well to let myselfdie, quietly,withoutrushingthings. .. I shall be
neutralandinert... I shalldie tepid,withoutenthusiasm"(T,165).A
littlelater,thevoice runsthroughthesame patternsofassertionand
thewholegravity
ofthebody,thefactofbeing
negation,articulating
rivetedto oneself:
MarthaNussbaumclaims (swallowingBeckett'spsy8. On thisnomenclature,
redherrings
wholeandwithsomesauce)thatMoran'sfailuretogettoBally
choanalytic
ortoHole "maysuggestthathe (i.e.Moran)is impotent
as wellas guilty."See "Narrative
Emotions:Beckett'sGenealogyofLove,"in Love'sKnowledge(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1990),301. Despitetheundoubtedfelicitiesoffered
bya psychoanalytic
ofMolloy,I findNussbaum'suse ofKleiniancategoriesa littletoo easy
interpretation
andfluent(theobjectofguiltis "parentalsexualact"[2981,
theobjectofdisgustis "above
all thefemalebody"[2991).Whatdoesitmeanto employsuchinterpretative
categories
inrelationtoa literary
textofsuchtheoretical
self-consciousness
as Beckett's?
Thereis,
I feel,the dangerof a hermeneuticliteralismhere,which is also revealedwhen
Nussbaumclaims,mysteriously,
thatBeckettidentifies
Moranas thewriterofall the
novelsintheTrilogy
("he[i.e.Moran]identifies
himself
as theauthorofthisentirenovel
and ofBeckett'sothernovels"[303;theclaimis repeatedon 3081l;a claimthatcan be
I needn'tsay,Murphy,
toT,299,"I amneither,
norWatt,nor-no, I
refuted
withreference
can't evenbringmyselfto name them."Fora moreextendedcritiqueofNussbaum's
readingofBeckett,see LectureThreein VeryLittle. .. AlmostNothing,
9. Thismightbe connectedwiththeopeninglinesofthelateprosepieceIll Seen
Ill Said: "Fromwhereshelies sheseesVenusrise"(NohowOn, 7).A possiblesourcefor
thereference
toCytheramightbeBaudelaire's
visionin "Unvoyagea Cythdre,"
dystopic
in Les fleursdu mal in (Euvrescompletes, vol. 1 (Paris:Gallimard,1975),117-19.
10. Christopher
Ricks,Beckett'sDyingWords(Oxford:OxfordUniversity
Press,
1993),115.

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SIMON

CRITCHLEY

119

IfI hadtheuse ofmybodyI wouldthrow

it outofthewindow.
But
itis theknowledge
perhaps
ofmyimpotence
thatemboldens
metothat
thought.
Allhangstogether,
I aminchains.[7T201]
ThusMalone Dies takesplacein theimpossibletimeofdying,anditis
into thisungraspabletemporalstretchthatthevoice givesitselfthe
possibilityoftellingstories:"whilewaitingI shalltellmyselfstories,
ifI can" (T,115).Thus,Malone is an identityminimallyheldtogether
by a seriesof stories-of Saposcator Sapo, the Lamberts,Macmann,
Moll, HairyMac, SuckyMoll, Quin, Lemuel and Lady Pedal-but
thesestoriesare no longercredible.The tales are like the teller,"almostlifeless,""all mystoriesarein vain" (T1214).Each ofthestories
breaksdownintotedium- "thisis awful"(T,175),"whattedium"(T,
174; 198;201).The readeris continually
referred
backfromthetimeof
narrative
tothetimeofmortality,
to "mortaltedium"(T,200),thetime
ofdying.The timeofnarrative
andpossibility,
wherethevoiceis able
tolayholdoftimeandinvent,continuallybreaksdownintoan unnarratableimpossibility,
a patterntypified
byBeckett'ssyntaxofweakness thatcan be foundin a wholeseriesofself-undoing
phrasesin the
Trilogy:"Live and invent.I havetried,Invent.It is nottheword.Neitheris live. No matter.I havetried"(T,179).
A similardisjunctionbetweenthetimeofnarrative
andthetimeof
dyingcan be illustratedwith a couple of examplesfromEndgame.
First,Naggis unabletotelltheratherhackneyed
Jewish
jokeaboutthe
Englishman,the tailor,and a pair of trousers,and this inabilityis
whereNaggmoves
markedtextuallywitha seriesofstagedirections,
andhis
thetailor,theraconteur,
betweenthevoicesoftheEnglishman,
normalvoice: "I nevertoldit worse.(Pause. Gloomy.) I tell thisstory
worseand worse."11However,thisdisjunctioncan be seen evenmore
soliloclearlyin the centralspeechofEndgame, Hamm'sham-fisted
came
he
tries
tell
the
of
how
into
Hamm's
to
Clov
quy where
story
aria withoutmuservice,whatAdornoneatlycalls "an interpolated
sic."112Once again,Beckettmarksthedisjunctionin stagedirections
tone" and "normaltone":
bycallingfora shiftbetween"narrative
wherewasI? (Pause.Narrativetone.)
Enoughofthat,it'sstorytime,
Themancamecrawling
towards
me,on hisbelly.Pale,wonderfully
paleandthin,he seemedonthepointof-(Pause. Normaltone.)No,
11. Beckett,Endgame(London:Faber,1958),21.
toUnderstand
Endgame,"trans.S. W.Nicholsen,
12. TheodorW.Adorno,"Trying
Press,1991),267.
in Notesto Literature,
vol. 1 (NewYork:ColumbiaUniversity

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

120

Yale FrenchStudies

I'vedonethatbit.(Pause.Narrativetone.)I calmly
filled
mypipe-the
litit with... letus saya vesta,drewa fewpuffs.
Aah!
meerschaum,
(Pause.)Well,whatis it youwant?(Pause.)[Endgame,35]
Blanchotasks,"Whythesevainstories?"andrespondsthatit is in
orderto people the emptinessof deathinto whichMalone and the
wholegalleryofmoribundsfeeltheyarefalling,"throughanxietyfor
thisemptytimethatis goingtobecometheinfinite
timeofdeath"(Le
livrea venir,310). Storiesbothtryto concealthefailureofnarrative
intosome sortofunitywhile,at
identitybydrawingtheselftogether
the same time, Malone's transcendentsarcasm (For example: "A
streamat longintervalsbestrid-buttohellwithall thisfuckingscento disengagethetimeofnarraery"[T,2541)is directedtowardtrying
tivefromthetimeofdying.Malone triesto silencetheemptinessby
tellingstoriesbutonlysucceedsin lettingtheemptinessspeakas the
storiesbreakdownintomortaltedium.Thus,storiesarea deception,
buta necessarydeception:we cannotfacetheemptinessofdeathwith
themor withoutthem.They returnus insistentlyto the passivity,
and impossibility
ofourdying:"withpracticeI might
ungraspability,
be abletoproducea groanbeforeI die" (T,232).Beckettis oftengivento
thephrase"come andgo,"and it providedthetitlefora 1965dramaticule.13Malone writes:"Because in ordernot to die you mustcome
andgo,comeandgo" (T,213).Storiesenableone to comeandgo,come
andgo,"incessantcomingsandgoings"(T,268),untilonediesand"the
othersgo on, as ifnothinghad happened"(T,214). On.
MY OLD APORETICS: THE SYNTAX OF WEAKNESS
(THE UNNAMABLE)
This experienceofdisjunctionbetweenthetimeofnarrativeand the
in The Unnamable,a bookAdorno
timeofdyingis pushedevenfurther
describesas Beckett's"wahrhaft
ungeheuerlicher
Roman"(trulymonstrousor genuinelycolossalnovel),14
in comparisonto which,and in
the"official
worksofcommitted
oppositiontobothSartreandLukaics,
artlook likechildren'sgames."The openingpagesofThe Unnamable
arethemethodologically
mostself-conscious
where
partoftheTrilogy,
13. In Beckett'sTheCompleteDramaticWorks(London:Faber,1986),351-57, the
phrasecanbefoundon T,168; 170; 176; 178;201; 231; 214; 218; 226; 229; 254; 268;353.
14. Notes to Literature,
vol. 2 (New York:ColumbiaUniversity
Press,1992),90.

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SIMON

CRITCHLEY

121

the narrativevoice givesthefaintestsketchofthe methodto be followedin thetext:an aporetics.15

Whatam I to do,whatshallI do,whatshouldI do,inmysituation,how
proceed?Byaporiapureand simple?Or byaffirmations
andnegations
invalidatedas uttered,or sooneror later.Generallyspeaking.There
mustbe othershifts.Otherwiseit wouldbe quitehopeless.But it is
thatI say
quitehopeless.I shouldmentionwithoutgoinganyfurther
aporiawithoutknowingwhatitmeans.Can onebe ephecticotherwise
thanunawares?I don'tknow.[T,267]
This echoes a line fromearlyin Malone Dies: "There I am back at my
old aporetics. Is that the word? I don't know" (T, 166).
Of course, these phrases are performativeenactments of the very
method being described.They are aporetic descriptionsof aporia, suspensions of judgment (hence "ephectic") on the possibility of a selfconscious suspension of judgment: "I don't know." We proceed by
aporia, that is, the path to be followedis a pathless path,which means
that we do not proceed, but stay on the same spot, even if we are not
quite at a standstill, although this is the voice's desire: "the bliss of
coma" (T1298); "the rapture,thelettinggo,thefall,the gulf,the relapse
to darkness" (T, 179). As a consequence, we wheel about as ifwith one
footnailed to the floor.
Although The Unnamable is hardly a discourse on method, the
word "aporia" reappears at several key moments in the text,16and
Beckett's aporetics are a performativeand quasi-methodological expression of what we saw above as the impossibilityand necessity of
narration:we have to go on and yetwe can't go on (and yetwe can't not
go on). This technique-and it is a question of technique here, of a
quite rigorous rhetorical procedure at work in Beckett's writingmight be characterized in terms of what Adorno rightlycalls, with
referenceto Endgame, a technique of reversal:
Wheretheycomeclosesttothetruth,
theysense,withdoublecomedy,
thattheirconsciousnessis false:thatis how a situationthatcan no
is reflected.
Butthewholeplayis conlongerbe reachedbyreflection
vol. 1,274]
structedbythistechniqueofreversal.[Notesto Literature,
15. On thefigure
ofaporiainBeckett,
see LeslieHill,Beckett'sFiction(Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversity
Press,1990),63-64.
16. T, 274; 278; 318; 321; 334; 338.

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

122

Yale French Studies

It is in terms of this technique of reversal that I would understand

Beckett's remark,cited above, about "affirmationsand negations invalidated as uttered."As Stanley Cavell points out, this can be seen as
an almost spiritualexercisein logic, where statementsare made, inferences derived,negations of inferencesproduced, and these negations
are,in turn,negated.17The language ofThe Unnamable is an endlessly
elaborating series of antitheses, of imploding oxymorons,paradoxes,
and contradictions,a "frenzyof utterance" (T, 275), where a coherent
and perhaps even formalizabletechnique of repetitionis employed to
givethe appearance ofrandomnessand chaos. 18 Some examples: "I, say
I. Unbelieving.... It, say it, not knowingwhat.... So I have no cause
foranxiety.And yet I am anxious.... Perhapsit's springtime,violets,
no, that's autumn.... Perhapsit's all a dream,all a dream,thatwould
surpriseme" (T, 267; 276; 376; 381). Or a longerpassage:
orarenotyet,or
These thingsI say,andshallsay,ifI can,areno longer,
neverwere,orneverwill be,oriftheywere,iftheyare,iftheywill be,
werenothere,arenothere,will notbe here,butelsewhere.ButI am
here.So I am obligedto add this.I who am here,who cannotspeak,
cannotthink,andwhomustspeak,andtherefore
perhapsthinka little,
cannotin relationonlytome whoamhere,toherewhereI am,butcan
a little,sufficiently,
I don'tknowhow,unimportant,
in relationto me
whoshallbe elsewhere,
andto thoseplaceswhenI
whowas elsewhere,
was,whereI shallbe. [T,276]
It is a question here ofan uneasy and solitaryinhabitationofthe aporia
between the inabilityto speak and the inabilityto be silent (T,365). We
cannot speak ofthatwhich we would like to speak-in my reading,the
unrepresentabilityof death-and yet we cannot not speak, blissful
though this might seem: "you must go on, I can't go on, I'll go on."
There is only this voice, this meaningless voice "which preventsyou
17. StanleyCavell,MustWeMean WhatWeSay?(Cambridge:
Cambridge
UniversityPress,1976),126.
18. On repetitionin the Trilogy,
see the wonderfully
detailedessay by Rubin
in
Rabinowitz,"Repetitionand Underlying
Meaningsin Samuel Beckett'sTrilogy,"
Rethinking
Beckett,ed. L. St. JohnButlerand R. J.Davis (London:Macmillan,1990),
31-67. See also Rabinowitz'sThe DevelopmentofSamuelBeckett'sFiction(Chicago:
ofIllinoisPress,1984);StevenConnor,SamuelBeckett:Repetition,
University
Theory,
and Text(Oxford:Blackwell,1988);Becketts'Fiction,66-68. Repetitionis obviously
ina textlikeLessness(1969),whichcontains1538
also centraltoBeckett's
laterfictions,
words1-769.On precisely
words,wherewords770-1538repeat,ina different
variation,
thispoint,see Coetzee's"SamuelBeckettandtheTemptation
ofStyle," inDoublingthe
Point.Essaysand Interviews,
45; 49.

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SIMON

CRITCHLEY

123

frombeingnothing"(T,341),andall ithas arewords"andnotmanyof

them"(T,381).AndevenwhenMalonewrites,"I am lost,nota word"
(T. 241) or Krapp-a later delegate-says "Nothingto say,not a
squeak,"19 thisis notyetsilence,it is yeta word,yeta squeak.
To returnto my epigraphfromCavell, Beckett'sworkand perhaps-to generalizesuddenlyandratherviolently-literature
as such
is a longsin againstsilence(T,345) thatarisesfromourinabilitytosit
quietlyin a room.The originofthesin beingunknown,we stillsitin
ourthousandfurnished
roomsto readand evenwritebooks,'which,of
course,onlyproducesinconstancy,
boredom,anxiety,and the desire
formovement-to come and go,to come and go.
The radicalityofThe Unnamablewithrespectto theearlierparts
oftheTrilogy
is thatthedisjunctionbetweenthetimeofnarrative
and
the time of dyingtakesplace withinthe unitof the sentenceitself,
whereeach seriesof wordsseems to offerand deny"the resortsof
fable"(T,283).Ofcourse,therearefablesin The Unnamable,thequite
hilariousstoryofBasil,arbitrarily
renamedMahood(T,283),thebillyin-the-bowl,
who completesthe dwindlingphysicalityof the "M"
names,andWorm.Whatis one to sayofWorm?Firstofhiskind,"who
hasn'tthewitto makehimselfplain" (T,310).Wormis unborn,unperceiving,unspeaking,uncreated,"nothingbut a shapelessheap" (T,
328),a "tinyblurin thedepthsofthepit" (T,329).Andin thisheap,a
wild and equine eye crieswithoutceasing.He makesno noise apart
froma whining,thenoiseoflife"trying
togetin" (7T.335)-a terrifying
remark.Withthislast in theseriesof"bran-dips"(T,359),thestakes
havebeenraisedonce again:forifMahood,likeMalone,cravedwhat
he could not give himself,i.e. death,thenWormis not even born:
"Come intotheworldunborn,abidingthereunliving,withno hopeof
death"(T,318).Wormis thatwhichsomehowremains,he is a remainder,whatBlanchotcalls "une survivance"(Le livrea venir,312),outside oflifeand thepossibilityofdeath.Althoughhe is thefirstofhis
to imaginehow this seriesmightcontinueand
kind,it is difficult
perhapsWormis theendoftheline.20
19. Beckett,Krapp's Last Tape (London: Faber,1959), 18.

20. Perhaps.For nothingis the end of the line in Beckett,the line of writing
oninterminably-pour
stretches
finirencore.On thisquestionofendingandbeginning,
one wouldneedto readThe Unnamabletogether
withBeckett'sfinalnovel,Comment
c'est(Paris:Gallimard,1961),a titlewhich,inFrench,
is atleasta possiblequadruplepun
(commentc'est [how it isi, and the infinitive[commencer],
the imperative[commencez!I,andpastparticiple[commenc6I)
oftheverb"tobegin."Thus,evenat theend
ofThe Unnamable,one re-commences
witha further
formin
dissolutionofnarrative

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

124

Yale FrenchStudies

However, despite such fables, which have to be tempered with

familiarcomments on the inadequacy of narrative-"this hell of stories" (T,349)21- The Unnamable is made up ofan endlesslyproliferating and self-undoingseries and sayingsand unsayings,Beckett'ssyntax
of weakness.22 Some examples:
I shallhaveto speakofthings,ofwhichI cannotspeak,butalso,which
butalso thatI, whichis ifpossibleevenmore
is evenmoreinteresting,
no matter.[T,267]
interesting,
thatI shallhaveto,I forget,
And again,
Butmygood-willat certainmomentsis such,andmylongingto have
howeverfeebly,in the greatlife torrent
floundered
howeverbriefly,
fromtheearliestprotozoato theverylatesthumans,thatI,
streaming
I'll beginagain.My family.[T,295]
unfinished.
no,parenthesis
And again,
withoutanychangein the structure
ofthe
Andwouldit not suffice,
thingas it now stands,as it alwaysstood,withouta mouthbeing
openedat the place whichevenpain could neverline,would it not
here'sanother.[T7353]
suffice
to,towhat,thethreadis lost,no matter,
And again,
I resume,so longas, so longas, letme see,so longas one,so longas he,
ah fuckall that,so longas this,thenthat,agreed,that'sgoodenough,I
nearlygotstuck.[T. 367]
As Ricks rightlypoints out, thisis a syntaxofweakness not because the
syntaxis weak, but ratherbecause it presses on, "unable to relinquish
its perseveranceand to arriveat severance" (Beckett'sDying Words,83).
Beckett's sentences are a series ofweak intensities and double inabilities: unable to go on and unable not to go on. It is this double inability
thepunctuationless
proseblocksofCommentcest, wherea crouchedfiguremurmurs
in themud,its tonguelollingout.
in The Unnamable,see T. 299; 354; 374;
21. Forotherremarkson storytelling

381-82.

22. Althoughto qualifytheimpliedteleologyofmyreadingofBecketthere,I am

notclaimingthatthesyntaxofweaknessis absentfromotherpartsoftheTrilogy,only
in The Unnamablein a moreextreme
fashion.Indeed,ifonerereads
thatitis presented
ofaporetics,
it becomes
theopeningpagesofofMolloyin thelightofthequasi-method
difficult
tosustaina simpleteleologicalreadingoftheTrilogy.
Forexample,
increasingly
ofMolloycontainsfouruses of "perhaps,"fiveuses of "appartheopeningparagraph
ently,"andsix uses of"I don'tknow"!

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SIMON

CRITCHLEY

125

thatdescribes,I think,the weaknessofour relationto finitude,the

articulationof a physicalfeebleness,a dwindling,stiffening
corporality,
whichis a recipenotfordespairbutfora kindofrapture:"There
is rapture,or thereshouldbe, in themotioncrutchesgive"(T,60).
WHO SPEAKS? NOT I
Who speaksin theworkofSamuelBeckett?Whois theindefatigable
"I" whoalwaysseemstosaythesamething?Itis withtheseseemingly
innocentquestionsthatBlanchotbeginsbothofhis pieces on Beckett.23Yetwiththisquestionwe brushagainstan (perhapsthe)enigma.
The obviousresponseto thequestion,"who speaks?"is to tie the
"I" to thenarrative
voiceofthetextandtoidentify
thatvoicewiththe
oftheauthor.Whospeaks?SamuelBeckett
controlling
intentionality
speaks.Well,yes,thisis doubtlesscorrect,
thereexisteda writerwhose
namewas SamuelBarclayBeckett,whowrotethebookswe haveread,
playedfirstclass cricketforTrinityCollegeDublin,receivedtheCroix
de Guerrein 1945 and the Nobel Prize forliteraturein 1969, had
terrible
boilson his neck("bristling
withboilseversinceI was a brat"
existentialresiduumof
[T,75]),etc.,etc.,etc. Thereis an irreducible
authorialexperiencein the creationof any textthatwe mightcall
But,to ascribethe voice thatspeaksin the workto the
"literary."24
nameSamuelBeckett,ortoidentify
thenarrative
voicewitha controllingconsciousnessthatlooksdownuponthedramaofBeckett'swork
likea transcendent
is tofailtoacknowledge
thestrangeness
spectator,
of the workunderconsiderationand to readthe workas an oblique
confessionor,worsestill,a seriesofcase studiesin a reductivepsychoAfterremarking,
"For if I am Mahood, I am Wormtoo,
biography.
plop,"25thevoicein The Unnamablecontinues:
23. "Oil maintenant?
Qui maintenant?,"
essentiallya reviewofthe Trilogy,
first
in Le livre
appearedin La nouvelle revue francaise 10 (1953):678-86,andwasreprinted
)i venir,308-13, withsome significant
butminorchanges,mainlydeletions."Les paroles doiventcheminerlongtemps,"an entretien on Beckett'sCommentc'est,first
appearedunderthetitle"Notre6popee,"inLa nouvelle revuefrancaise 100(1961):690withveryminoralterations
inL'entretien
98,andwasreprinted
infini(Paris:Gallimard,
as TheInfiniteConversation,
trans.Susan
1969),478-86. L'entretieninfiniis translated
Hanson(Minneapolis:University
ofMinnesotaPress,1993).
in Beckett'scase,thisresiduumhas beendecisively
24. Obviously,
documented
by
DeirdreBairin SamuelBeckett:A Biography
(London:Jonathan
Cape, 1978).
25. On thepossiblesignificance
oftermssuchas "plop"and"ping"in Beckett,see
Coetzee's"SamuelBeckettandtheTemptations
ofStyle,"43-49. Coetzeereadsthese
termsas an "editorialmetalanguage. . . thatrepeatedly
the surfaceof the
fractures
fiction,"andthathas "evacuateditselfoflexicalcontent"(45).This partiallyconfirms

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

126

Yale French Studies

a tertius
Oris onetopostulate
gaudens,
meaning
myself,
responsible
forthedoublefailure?
[i.e.ofMahoodandWorm]
ShallI comeuponmy
atlast,bathing
ina smile?I havethefeeling
I shallbe
truecountenance
thisspectacle.
Atnomoment
doI knowwhatI'mtalking
spared
about,
norofwhom.[77310-11]
Ifone is to be capableoflisteningto thevoicesthatspeakfromthe
thenitis at theveryleastnecessaryto suspendthe
pagesoftheTrilogy,
thenarrative
voiceofBeckett'sworkwiththe
hypothesisidentifying
smilingthirdpartyofa controlling
pureconsciousnessand ascribing
thelatterto SamuelBeckett.As Blanchotwrites-rightly-"in literaturethereis no directspeech"(TheInfiniteConversation,
327).That
is-and thisis Blanchot'shypothesis-inBeckett'sworkwe approach
a literaryexperience,
thatspeaksto us in a voice that
an experience,
an incessant,
can be describedas impersonal,neutral,or indifferent:
andindeterminable
voicethatreverberates
interminable,
outsideofall
intimacy,dispossessingthe "I" and deliveringit overto a nameless
outside.Beckett'sworkdrawsthe readerinto a space-the space of
literature-wherea voice intonesobscurely,
drawnon by a speaking
thatdoes notbeginand does notfinish,thatcannotspeakand cannot
butspeak,thatleads languagetowardwhatBlanchotcalls withreference to Commentc'est "an unqualifiablemurmur,"26
whatI will describepresentlyas a buzzing,the tinnitusofexistence.As Blanchot
writes,thisis "strange,strange"(TheInfiniteConversation,
330).
Blanchot'spointaboutthenarrative
voicecanbe restatedbyfollowing a crucialfeatureofBeckett'sprosein the Trilogy.On threeoccasionsin thesecondpartofMolloy(T, 15; 128; 152),we comeacrossthe
words"Not I," employedin a seemingly
innocentwayduringMoran's
thisphrasecomestopervadeThe Unnamablein
monologue.However,
a numberofcrucialpassages,notall ofwhichcan be cited,andwhich
beginto be repeatedwith ever-increasing
frequency-maniaevenAbouta thirdofthewayintoThe Unnamtowardtheendofthetext.27
able, thevoicewrites:
his otherwisecontestablethesisthat,in Beckett'slaterfictionssuchas PingandLessness,Beckettmarches"witheyesopenintotheprisonofstyle"(49).Butwhyshould
in termsofworklessness,
stylebe a prison?Ifstyleis redescribed
thenmightit not,on
be somestrangekindofliberation,
howeverworkless?
thecontrary,
inthemud"in Commentcest,
26. Although
themainreference
is to "themurmur
to murmuring
can alreadybe foundin The Unnamable,initiallyto describe
references
thevoicelessnoiseemittedbyWorm(T,310; 323; 351; 375; 376; 381).
27. See T7292; 315; 319; 326; 355; 369; 370; 371-72; 373; 374; 375; 380; 381.

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SIMON

CRITCHLEY

127

Butenoughofthiscursedfirstperson,it is reallytoo reda herring,

I'll
getout ofmydepthifI'm not careful.Butwhatthenis the subject?
Mahood?No, notyet.Worm?Evenless. [77315]
Slightlyfurtheron, we read:
I shallnotsayI again,everagain,it'stoofarcical.I shallputin itsplace,
wheneverI hearit,thethirdperson,ifI thinkofit. [T,315]
Unsurprisingly enough, and in accord with the aporetic method
sketched above, the voice does not always "think of it" and persistentlyfalls back into the firstperson. However,the point here is that
the voice is attempting to move from the firstperson to the third
person,from"I" to "s/he/it" (a Beckettesque pun ofquestionable taste
offersitself here, but I will resist). The voice insists that "it's not I
speaking," but another,a more impersonal and neutral voice. In this
way we can begin to make sense ofthe firstline of The Unnamable, "I,
say I. Unbelieving" (T, 267), and the almost mantric phrase that is
repeated obsessively towardthe end of the text,"It's not I, that's all I
know" (T,380). But the crucial passage in this regardis the following;I
quote it in full:
It's alwayshe who speaks,Mercierneverspoke,Moranneverspoke,I
neverspoke,I seem to speak,that'sbecausehe saysI as ifhe wereI, I
nearlybelievedhim,do youhearhim,as ifhe wereI,I amfar,whocan't
move,can'tbe found,butneithercanhe,he canonlytalk,ifthatmuch,
perhapsit's not he, perhapsit's a multitude,one afteranother,what
is ita sin,all hereis a sin,you
someonementionsconfusion,
confusion,
don't know why,you don't know whose, you don't know against
whom,someonesaysyou,it's thefaultof thepronouns,thereis no
name,forme,no pronounforme,all thetroublecomesfromthat,it'sa
kindofpronountoo,it isn'tthateither,
I'm notthateither,letus leave
all that,forget
aboutall that,it'snotdifficult.
[T,371-72]
There is no name for the voice that speaks in The Unnamable.
Whoever speaks in Beckett's work, it is not "I," it is rather"he" (although this is still a pronoun,and that's the trouble),the thirdperson
or the impersonal neutralityof language. The neutral characterof the
thirdpersonis what Blanchot refersto as "the narrativevoice," and, for
him (thinkingof Kafka ratherthan Beckett),28to writeis to pass from
28. Thereis an almostamusingmomentin Blanchot'sobituary
forBeckettin "Oh
toutfinir"(Critique46/519-20[August/September
19901:635-37),whenhe writes,"In
theeulogiesthathave beenrespectfully
deliveredin orderto markhis (i.e. Beckett's)

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

128

Yale FrenchStudies

the"I" tothe"he" (TheInfiniteConversation,

380).In literature-and
forBlanchot-I do notspeak,
thisis thedefining
qualityoftheliterary
it speaks.In relationto Beckett,Blanchotwritesof"a softspecterof
murmurat
331),theunqualifiable
speech"(TheInfiniteConversation,
the back ofour words.The narrativevoice is like some specterthat
ofoureveryday
theperidentity,
disturbing
lingersin thebackground
sistent"I" ofourmonologuesand dialogues,denyingthe "daydream
at nightfall,
gratification
offiction"29
a kindofvoid
and reappearing
thatopens up in the workand into whichthe workevaporatesin a
Thereis an irreducible
logicofspectrality
movementofworklessness.
thenightofghosts,thatdeniesus thesleepofthe
at workin literature,
justin thename ofjustice.This is perhapswhyBlanchotdefinesthe
writeras "theinsomniacoftheday."30
Whospeaks?Not I. On thispointan interesting
connectioncan be
1973 dramatic
made betweenThe Unnamableand theextraordinary
of
pieceNot I, a piece thatI wouldwantto see as a distilledredrafting
The Unnamable,and thatemploysa verysimilar,apparently
manic,
andbreathless
as in thefinalpagesofthe
patternofrepetition
phrasing
On fiveoccasionsin theten-minute
dramaticule,theMouth
latter.31
cries "what? . .. who? . . . no! . .. she!" As Beckett laconically points

out in the onlynote to Not I, theMouthis engagedin a "vehement

refusalto relinquishthirdperson."It shouldbe notedthatthisthird
personis "she" ratherthan"he," (playedin theoriginalproductionby
thesublimeBillieWhitelaw),
anditis herethatonemightwanttoraise
thequestionofgenderand challengetheallegedneutrality
ofthenarrativevoice.
passing,the greatworksofthe age have been evoked,Proust,Joyce,
Musil, and even
Kafka.... ForreadersofBlanchot,this"andevenKafka"is so revealing.
29. Coetzee,"SamuelBeckettandtheTemptations
ofStyle,"49.
du desastre (Paris:Gallimard,1980),185.On thethemesof
30. Blanchot,L'6criture
insomnia,sleep,andthenightinBeckettandBlanchot,
seeDeleuze'sreadingofBeckett;
he writes,"Intheinsomniacdream,itis nota questionofrealizingtheimpossible,
butof
thepossible"("L'6puis6,"in Quad etautrespieces pourla television [Paris:
exhausting
Minuit,1992],100-01).
31. TheCompleteDramaticWorks,
forthetwocharac373-83. Possibleprecursors
tersinthecastofNotI- "Auditor"and"Mouth"-mightbefoundinMaloneDies: "the
raisingofthearmsandgoingdown,withoutfurther
splash,eventhoughitmayannoythe
bathers"(T.254);andin TheUnnarnable:"Evokeatpainfuljunctures,
whendiscourageto raiseitshead,theimageofa vastmouth,red,blubberandslobbering,
mentthreatens
in solitaryconfinement,
witha noise ofwetkissesthewashextruding
indefatigably,
ingin a tub,thewordsthatobstruct
it" (T7359).On theconnectionbetweenNot I and
The Unnamable,see JamesKnowlsonandJohnPilling,FrescoesoftheSkull(London:
Calder,1979),197.

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SIMON

CRITCHLEY

129

On several occasions, the Mouth speaks of a buzzing in the ears:

"forshe could still hear the buzzing . .. so-called. . in the ears. .. the
buzzing? ... yes ... all the time the buzzing ... so-called. in the ears."
This buzzing is described as "a dull roarin the skull . .. dull roarlike
falls,"which can be linked both to what was said above about murmur32 For example,
ing and to referencesto "the noise" in the Trilogy
Malone notes:
WhatI meanis possiblythis,thatthenoisesoftheworld,so variousin
themselvesandwhichI usedtobe so cleverat distinguishing
fromone
hadbeendinningatmeforso long,alwaysthesameoldnoises,
another,
as graduallyto havemergedintoa singlenoise,so thatall I heardwas
one vastcontinuousbuzzing.[77190]
Who speaks in the work of Samuel Beckett?It is not the "I" of the
author or a controllingconsciousness, but ratherthe "Not I" of the
insomniac narrativevoice that opens like a void in the experience of
literature,as the experience that literatureapproaches: le neutre, le
dehors,desastre,lespace litte'raire[theneutral,the outside, the disaster,the literaryspace]. Beckett's work leaves us "open to the void" (T,
377), and this void is not the ultramarineblue of Yves Klein or Derek
Jarman,but a more sombre monochrome; not the Mediterranean,but
the Black Sea:
These creatureshaveneverbeen,onlyI and thisblackvoidhave ever
been.Andthesounds?No, all is silent.Andthelights,on whichI had
set such store,musttheytoo go out?Yes,out withthem,thereis no
blackis whatI shouldhavesaid.Nothingthenbut
light.No greyeither,
andthisblack,ofwhichI knownothing
me,ofwhichI knownothing,
exceptthatit is blackand empty.That thenis what,since I have to
speak,I shall speakof,untilI needspeakno more.[77278]
The narrativevoice approaches a void that speaks as one vast, continuous buzzing, a dull roar in the skull like falls, an unqualifiable
murmur,an impersonal whining, the vibration of the tympanum (T,
352). This is what I mean by the tinnitus of existence. It is, I believe,
this condition that the voice in Beckett'sworkis tryingto approach.It
is this truthwith which Beckett's frenzyof utteranceis concerned (T,
275). Of course, there is only the approach,because the voice cannot
grant itself the possibility of its own disappearance into the voiddeath is impossible. Thus, we resortto fables: "To tell the truth-no,
32. See T 189; 190;325; 332; 345; 357.

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

130

Yale FrenchStudies

firstthestory"(1T300).Thatis justhowit is. Andthatis howI reada

phraseneartheendofthe1981textIll SeenIll Said: "Absencesupreme
forBeckett's
goodandyet."33 It is this"andyet"thatis so determinate
ofthe
art,thisholdingbackfromtheblissofabsence,thisqualification
raptureofannihilationin a syntaxofweakness.

33. Ill SeenIll Said,in NohowOn, 58.

This content downloaded from 131.252.96.28 on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:27:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions