Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-26T18:23:09.865Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Irigaray and Lyotard: Birth, Infancy, and Metaphysics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Rachel Jones
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper examines the ways in which Luce Irigaray and Jean‐François Lyotard critique western metaphysics by drawing on notions of birth and infancy. It shows how both thinkers position birth as an event of beginning that can be reaffirmed in every act of initiation and recommencement. Irigaray's reading of Diotima's speech from Plato's Symposium is positioned as a key text for this project alongside a number of essays by Lyotard in which he explores the potency of infancy as the condition of philosophy itself. Despite this potency, however, Lyotard suggests that metaphysics is haunted by a melancholia that is inseparable from the limits of thought. I argue that Irigaray is able both to explain why western metaphysics is constitutively melancholic and to offer a shift in perspective that means we are not inevitably condemned to melancholia. The paper concludes that while Lyotard's account of infancy challenges the terms of western metaphysics from within, Irigaray's reassessment of our beginnings in birth offers the possibility of an alternative metaphysical horizon.

Type
Articles
Information
Hypatia , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , Winter 2012 , pp. 139 - 162
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arendt, Hannah. 1958. The human condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Arendt, Hannah. 1978. The life of the mind, volume 1: Thinking. New York and London: Harcourt.Google Scholar
Cavarero, Adriana. 1995. In spite of Plato. Trans. Anderlini‐D'Onofrio, S. and O'Healy, Á.Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Cobb, William S., trans. and ed. 1993. Plato's erotic dialogues. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 2004. Democracy and education. New York: Dover Press.Google Scholar
Dover, Kenneth, ed. 1980. Plato: Symposium. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
DuBois, Page. 1994. The Platonic appropriation of reproduction. In Feminist interpretations of Plato, ed. Tuana, N.University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Evans, Nancy. 2006. Diotima and Demeter as mystagogues in Plato's Symposium. Hypatia 21 (2): 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fynsk, Christopher. 2001. Jean‐François's infancy. In Jean‐François Lyotard: Time and judgment. Yale French Studies 99: 44–61.Google Scholar
Halperin, David H. 1990. Why is Diotima a woman? In One hundred years of homosexuality. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hawthorne, Susan. 1994. Diotima speaks through the body. In Engendering origins: Critical feminist readings in Plato and Aristotle, ed. Bar On, B.‐A.Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Irigaray, Luce. 1984. L'amour sorcier. Lecture de Platon. Le Banquet, “Discours de Diotime.” In Éthique de la différence sexuelle. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar
Irigaray, Luce. 1985. Speculum of the other woman. Trans. Gill, G. C.Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Irigaray, Luce. 1993a. An ethics of sexual difference. Trans. Burke, C. and Gill, G. C.London: Athlone.Google Scholar
Irigaray, Luce. 1993b. Je, tu, nous: Toward a culture of difference. Trans. Martin, A.London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Irigaray, Luce. 1994. Sorcerer love: A reading of Plato's Symposium, Diotima's speech. Trans. E. Kuykendall. In Feminist interpretations of Plato, ed. Tuana, N.University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Irigaray, Luce. 2002. The way of love. Trans. Bostic, H. and Pluháček, S.London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1987. Critique of judgment. Trans. Pluhar, W.Indianapolis, Ind.: Hackett.Google Scholar
Lyotard, Jean‐François. 1984. Answering the question: What is postmodernism? In The postmodern condition. Trans. Bennington, G. and Massumi, B.Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Lyotard, Jean‐François. 1991a. Survivant. In Lectures d'enfance. Paris: Galilée.Google Scholar
Lyotard, Jean‐François. 1991b. The inhuman: Reflections on time. Trans. Bennington, G. and Bowlby, R.Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
Lyotard, Jean‐François. 1993a. The postmodern explained, ed. Pefanis, J. and Thomas, M. Trans. Barry, D. et al. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Lyotard, Jean‐François. 1993b. Toward the postmodern, ed. Harvey, R. and Roberts, M.Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Morrison, J. S. 1964. Four notes on Plato's Symposium. Classical Quarterly, new series 14 (1): 42–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nye, Andrea. 1994. Irigaray and Diotima at Plato's Symposium. In Feminist interpretations of Plato, ed. Tuana, N.University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Pender, E. E. 1992. Spiritual pregnancy in Plato's Symposium. Classical Quarterly, new series 42 (1): 72–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plato. 1950. Le banquet. Trans. Robin, L. In Platon: Oeuvres completes, 1. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Plato. 1987. Theaetetus. Trans. Waterfield, R.Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar
Plato. 1991. The Symposium. Trans. Allen, R. E.New Haven and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Plato. 2002. Apology. In Five dialogues, 2nd ed. Trans. Grube, G.Indianapolis, Ind.: Hackett.Google Scholar
Sandford, Stella. 2010. Plato and sex. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
Tuana, Nancy, ed. 1994. Feminist interpretations of Plato. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar