Spectacles, Political Education, and Democracy: Re-reading Rousseau’s Letter to M. D’Alembert

IF 1 4区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE Polity Pub Date : 2023-05-17 DOI:10.1086/725189
Çiğdem Çıdam
{"title":"Spectacles, Political Education, and Democracy: Re-reading Rousseau’s Letter to M. D’Alembert","authors":"Çiğdem Çıdam","doi":"10.1086/725189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In his writings on aesthetics, Jacques Rancière argues that Rousseau’s criticism of the theater in The Letter to M. D’Alembert on the Theater is significant because it calls into question the possibility of the uniform transmission of the artist’s knowledge to the spectator. Despite this important point, Rancière largely adopts the commonly accepted reading of the Letter that Rousseau finds the theater politically pernicious because it separates and isolates audience members, turning them into passive spectators. According to this reading, Rousseau proposes to replace the theater with the ethical immediacy of the festival. Situating the Letter in its historical context and reading it with Rancière to argue against his own reading, I challenge this interpretation. I argue that for Rousseau the theater is problematic because as a spectacle that calls attention to its difference from what it represents, it invites the spectators to actively engage with the performance, preventing the uniform transmission of the artist’s ideas to the spectators. For Rousseau, this democratic potential of the theatrical spectacle transforms it from a possible means of moral instruction to a risk to the existing social order, which relies on a distinction between those who should instruct and those who should be instructed. Insofar as the spectators refuse to act as passive recipients of knowledge and do something they are not supposed to do, including taking part in the idle pleasures of the rich and judging the quality of the plays, they reconfigure the distribution of the sensible. Rousseau’s alternatives to the theater, the marriage ball and the public festival, seek to close off this possibility by carefully concealing their representational status. By presenting the representations of an “ideal” community as the immediate expressions of the community’s truth, these spectacles achieve, or so Rousseau hopes, what the theater fails to do, the effective delivery of moral instruction.","PeriodicalId":46912,"journal":{"name":"Polity","volume":"55 1","pages":"568 - 598"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polity","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725189","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In his writings on aesthetics, Jacques Rancière argues that Rousseau’s criticism of the theater in The Letter to M. D’Alembert on the Theater is significant because it calls into question the possibility of the uniform transmission of the artist’s knowledge to the spectator. Despite this important point, Rancière largely adopts the commonly accepted reading of the Letter that Rousseau finds the theater politically pernicious because it separates and isolates audience members, turning them into passive spectators. According to this reading, Rousseau proposes to replace the theater with the ethical immediacy of the festival. Situating the Letter in its historical context and reading it with Rancière to argue against his own reading, I challenge this interpretation. I argue that for Rousseau the theater is problematic because as a spectacle that calls attention to its difference from what it represents, it invites the spectators to actively engage with the performance, preventing the uniform transmission of the artist’s ideas to the spectators. For Rousseau, this democratic potential of the theatrical spectacle transforms it from a possible means of moral instruction to a risk to the existing social order, which relies on a distinction between those who should instruct and those who should be instructed. Insofar as the spectators refuse to act as passive recipients of knowledge and do something they are not supposed to do, including taking part in the idle pleasures of the rich and judging the quality of the plays, they reconfigure the distribution of the sensible. Rousseau’s alternatives to the theater, the marriage ball and the public festival, seek to close off this possibility by carefully concealing their representational status. By presenting the representations of an “ideal” community as the immediate expressions of the community’s truth, these spectacles achieve, or so Rousseau hopes, what the theater fails to do, the effective delivery of moral instruction.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
眼镜、政治教育与民主:重读卢梭给达朗贝尔先生的信
在他关于美学的著作中,雅克·朗西雷认为卢梭在《致达朗贝尔先生关于戏剧的信》中对戏剧的批评是重要的,因为它质疑了艺术家的知识向观众统一传播的可能性。尽管有这一点很重要,朗西雷在很大程度上采纳了人们普遍接受的对《信》的解读,即卢梭认为戏剧在政治上是有害的,因为它将观众分离和孤立,使他们成为被动的观众。根据这种解读,卢梭建议用节日的伦理直接性来取代戏剧。将这封信置于其历史背景中,并与ranci一起阅读,以反驳他自己的解读,我对这种解释提出质疑。我认为,对于卢梭来说,戏剧是有问题的,因为作为一种奇观,它让人们注意到它与它所代表的东西的区别,它邀请观众积极地参与表演,阻止了艺术家的思想向观众的统一传播。对卢梭来说,戏剧奇观的这种民主潜力将其从一种可能的道德指导手段转变为对现有社会秩序的风险,而现有社会秩序依赖于应该指导的人和应该被指导的人之间的区别。只要观众拒绝充当知识的被动接受者,拒绝做一些他们不应该做的事情,包括参与富人的无聊娱乐和评判戏剧的质量,他们就会重新配置理智的分配。卢梭对戏剧的替代,婚礼舞会和公共节日,试图通过小心地隐藏它们的代表性地位来关闭这种可能性。通过将“理想”共同体的表象呈现为共同体真理的直接表达,这些景观实现了,或者卢梭希望的,戏剧未能做到的,有效地传递道德教诲。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Polity
Polity POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
61
期刊介绍: Since its inception in 1968, Polity has been committed to the publication of scholarship reflecting the full variety of approaches to the study of politics. As journals have become more specialized and less accessible to many within the discipline of political science, Polity has remained ecumenical. The editor and editorial board welcome articles intended to be of interest to an entire field (e.g., political theory or international politics) within political science, to the discipline as a whole, and to scholars in related disciplines in the social sciences and the humanities. Scholarship of this type promises to be highly "productive" - that is, to stimulate other scholars to ask fresh questions and reconsider conventional assumptions.
期刊最新文献
Ask a Political Scientist: A Conversation with Nicholas Xenos about Critical Theory, Democratic Politics, and the Problems with Patriotism Conceptual Contestation: An Empirical Approach Trajectories Vegans and “Green-Collared Criminals”: the Depoliticization of Animal Advocacy in Public Discourse Democracy and the Unconscious
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1