Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust by Paul de Man (PDF)

Description

This important theoretical work by Paul de Man sets forth a mode of reading and interpretation based on exemplary texts by Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust. The readings start from unresolved difficulties in the critical traditions engendered by these authors, and they return to the places in the text where those difficulties are most apparent or most incisively reflected upon. The close reading leads to the elaboration of a more general model of textual understanding, in which de Man shows that the thematic aspects of the texts―their assertions of truth or falsehood as well as their assertions of values―are linked to specific modes of figuration that can be identified and described. The description of synchronic figures of substitution leads, by an inner logic embedded in the structure of all tropes, to extended, narrative figures or allegories. De Man poses the question whether such self-generating systems of figuration can account fully for the intricacies of meaning and of signification they produce. Throughout the book, issues in contemporary criticism are addressed analytically rather than polemically. Traditional oppositions are put in question by a rhetorical analysis which demonstrates why literary texts are such powerful sources of meaning yet epistemologically so unreliable. Since the structure which underlies this tension belongs to language in general and is not confined to literary texts, the book, starting out as practical and historical criticism or as the demonstration of a theory of literary reading, leads into larger questions pertaining to the philosophy of language. “Through elaborate and elegant close readings of poems by Rilke, Proust’s Remembrance, Nietzsche’s philosophical writings and the major works of Rousseau, de Man concludes that all writing concerns itself with its own activity as language, and language, he says, is always unreliable, slippery, impossible….Literary narrative, because it must rely on language, tells the story of its own inability to tell a story….De Man demonstrates, beautifully and convincingly, that language turns back on itself, that rhetoric is untrustworthy.”―Julia Epstein, Washington Post Book World”The study follows out of the thinking of Nietzsche and Genette (among others), yet moves in strikingly new directions….De Man’s text, almost certain to be endlessly provocative, is worthy of repeated re-reading.”―Ralph Flores, Library Journal”Paul de Man continues his work in the tradition of ‘deconstructionist criticism,’… [which] begins with the observation that all language is constructed; therefore the task of criticism is to deconstruct it and reveal what lies behind. The title of his new work reflects de Man’s preoccupation with the unreliability of language. … The contributions that the book makes, both in the initial theoretical chapters and in the detailed analyses (or deconstructions) of particular texts are undeniable.”―Caroline D. Eckhardt, World Literature Today

User’s Reviews

Editorial Reviews: From the Back Cover ‘Through elaborate and elegant close readings of poems by Rilke, Proust’s Remembrance, Nietzsche’s philosophical writings and the major works of Rousseau, de Man concludes that all writing concerns itself with its own activity as language, and language, he says is always unreliable, slippery, impossible….Literary narrative, because it must rely on language, tells the story of its own inability to tell a story….De Man demonstrates, beautifully and convincingly, that language turns back on itself, that rhetoric is untrustworthy.’ Julia Epstein, Washington Post Book World

Reviews from Amazon users which were colected at the time this book was published on the website:

⭐”Allegories of Reading” sets a standard for literary analysis that has yet to be surpassed. Despite his death thirty years ago, De Man’s influence still remains palpable everywhere in the literary scene. This is not, however, a book for beginners (try Cleanth Brooks, “The Well Wrought Urn”), and remains a challenge even to the most sophisticated critics in the field of literary studies today. “Allegories” is a hard read.The commentator on De Man’s fascism (“Fascism 101”)should check the facts. It is well known that de Man was open about his collaborationist past (he was around 20 at the time) and informed the relevant administrators at both Harvard and Yale. Check out Wlad Godzich’s essays on de Man’s fascism.

⭐An important book.

⭐I have been reading Nietzsche for 42 years, since The Will To Power was translated into English by Walter Kaufmann and Hollingdale. The issues that concerned me then are central to the discussion by Paul de Man in Allegories of Reading on fictitious truths. Chapter 6 allows Nietzsche to suggest that Aristotle’s law of contradiction about A that opposite attributes cannot be ascribed to A merely applies to the apparent or assumed state for a logic that allows us to arrange a world that should be true for us. “In fact, logic (like geometry and arithmetic) applies only to fictitious truths.” (p. 121, section 516 of Der Wille zur Macht by Nietzsche).Thinking is considered a fiction, too. Having an artificial arrangement for the purpose of intelligibility falls apart when “Considered as persuasion, rhetoric is performative but when considered as a system of tropes, it deconstructs its own performance. Rhetoric is a text in that it allows for two incompatible, mutually self-destructive points of view, and therefore puts an insurmountable obstacle in the way of any reading or understanding.” (p. 131). The aporia both generates and paralyzes rhetoric.

⭐De Man manages to combine complicated thought with crystalline clarity in what I regard as the benchmark of literary criticism. Is any other piece if writing as beautiful as his chapter about Rousseau’s Confessions? Only if it’s his chapter about Yeats’s “Among School Children,” featuring a special appearance by Archie (de) Bunker.

⭐This is to serve as a rebutal to the earlier so- called review. De Man’s war time involvement with the Dutch fascists was indeed unfortunate, as was Heideggar’s espousal of nazism, as well Eliade’s support of the Romanian fascists. This does not however take away from the beauty of their literary and philisophical works. Something that as a Jew I have had to grapple with. Derrida is an Algerian Jew, and was Paul de Man’s close friend. His approach to reading is principly an ethical one. Perhaps you should turn your attention to his book on de Man. And perhaps also, you should reread the above book, or first read some other books on deconstruction, as your characterization of it was terribly off base. Deconstruction in it’s Derridean form is extremely subtle, requiring a mental agility to grasp the closeness of it’s readings. You would be doing yourself a service by reapproaching it more with an attentive honestness not exhibited in the above review. As to the book in question, I have always enjoyed Paul de Man’s work, however if you are not familiar with continental philosophy it may not be the best opening into that world-Derrida, Delueze, Cixous and later Hedeggar may prove more stimulating and enjoyable.

⭐I agree with Aaron C Sparenberg, and for further support suggest a reading of Dr. James Paxson’s article “Historicizing Paul de Man’s Master Trope Prosopopeia: Belgium’s Trauma of 1940, the Nazi Volkskörper, and Versions of the Allegorical Body Politic,” published in Historicizing Theory. Being at all familiar with de Man’s work, one inevitably would understand how complex such issues can be, and would refrain from making such rash generalizations, particularly when the evidence at hand is printed materials — as is quoted at the opening of The Allegories of Reading, “Quand on lit trop vite ou trop doucement on n’entend rien.” The book itself is, as has been noted before, complex and filled with intense close readings of challenging texts. But these readings are truly rewarding when you reach a full understanding. (The end of each chapter tends to ignite a triumphant climax in which you at once understand how the intricacies of close readings reflect a grander picture of literature and the act of reading as we know it.) The Allegories of Reading deserves not one reading, but many close rereadings for full comprehension.

⭐For those who are familiar with Roland Barthes ‘Death of the Author’ – we realise that it is the text and the reader, not the author’s life that is important. Since Paul de Man’s death, evidence has emerged to suggest de Man had links with anti-semitic and facist groups. What is apparent, is that this historical information has been used as not only an excuse to attack the work of de Man, but also to make spurious and sweeping claims about deconstruction. In the words of another reviewer:”In the person of Paul De Man the politically correct are forced to confront the true nature of their inhuman philosophy. […] Deconstructionism became the intellectual shield behind which hides the totalitarian urge.”The obvious response to this is to point out that deconstruction is not a set of methods, or theory that can be ‘applied’. ‘Deconstionism’ does not exist, all ‘isms’ are contrary to deconstructive ideas. The right attack deconstruction on the grounds of moral relativism being opposed to tradition, with tradition being given priviledge. This of course harks back to a ‘golden age’ (who’s or what golden age?). A golden age where everything was in its right place. Ideas being static, certain people sitting on the right part of the bus. Every generation claims that the generation that came before it was less degenerate, this mythologized utopian past, of course only exists in people’s minds.As for deconstruction being an “intellectual shield behind which hides the totalitarian urge”, this is of course ridiculous. Deconstruction opens up and realises the flaws of all partisan politics, whether left, right, centre. Being apolitical does not equate to being right-wing.Regardless of de Man’s past, this book is amazing, and after close reading on numerous occassions, I would argue that there is not hint of facist or totalitarian tendencies within his work.I can’t explain why de Man chose to hide his past, perhaps he was ashamed and new if he revealed it he wouldn’t be employed within universities.I urge you to buy this book if you are involved in reading any form of cultural production (literature, philosophy, visual arts, cultural studies, music, etc.) I would also advise purchasing de Man’s ‘Resistance to Theory’ and Derrida’s ‘Margins of Philosophy’, Martin McQuillan’s ‘Deconstruction: A Reader’ is also excellent.

⭐I remember having trouble getting or even being able to read this book, important for my doctoral studies in literature, so I am happy Amazon afforded me the opportunity. This is Paul de Man’s most influential book, rather brilliant.

Keywords

Free Download Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust in PDF format
Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust PDF Free Download
Download Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust 1982 PDF Free
Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust 1982 PDF Free Download
Download Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust PDF
Free Download Ebook Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust