AN INTERVIEW WITH JULIA KRISTEVA
Julia Kristeva is a world famous semiotician,
feminist theorist, psychoanalyst and at the
same time an interesting creative writer.
She was born in Bulgaria in 1941, but came
to Paris in 1965 where she became immersed
in Parisian intellectual life. Her acclaimed
novel "Les Samouïs" (1990) analyzes
the Parisian intellectual avant-garde to
which she has belonged ever since.
BY NINA ZIVANCEVICI
Nina Zivancevic is a prominent Serbian poet, scholar, and translator.
|
|
An Interview with Julia Kristeva
The interview was conducted in Paris, March-April
2001 by Nina Zivancevici
Parisian intellectual avant-garde to which
she has belonged ever since. And though psychoanalysis
remains one of the major orienting and formativedimensions
of her work, especially as regards her reflections
upon the nature of the feminine, she has
also continued her research on the nature
of language and examined the processes leading
to the emergence of the work of art. As the
theorist John Lechte points out,
" because of the intimate link between
art and the formation of subjectivity, Kristeva
has always found art to be a particularly
fruitful basis for analysis. "
Since the 1960s, she has been a leading force
in the critique of representation and her
most recent book is a critical study of Colette's
work and life, that is to say, one of the
numerous projects that she has been energetically
working on.
Q: When did you start getting interested
in the notion of the "feminine"?
Was it with the exploration of the notion
of 'chora' or the female voice in linguistics
and semiology? Or rather, from that point
on how have you arrived at the so-called
feminist studies and writing understood in
terms of their sociological and/or aesthetic
significance?
J. Kristeva: It is very difficult to trace
back my interest in the "feminine".
I suppose that at the very moment in which
I started asking questions about myself the
question of the 'feminine' had already been
formulated in my mind, so one could say perhaps
it started in the period of my adolescence
when I became interested in literature which
necessarily asks questions about the sexual
differences. But, you are right, in my theoretical
work, this question is raised in a more succinct
manner, perhaps also more discreet one, but
which was nevertheless very intense
It must be said that this question is related
to the notion of "chora" which
directs us back to the archaic state of language
. This state is known to a child who is in
a state of osmosis with his/her mother during
which language manifests itself as co-lalia
, a melodic alliteration that precedes the
introduction of signs within a syntactic
order. The period during which I started
developing this notion was that of the writing
of my Ph. D on the avant-garde of the 19th
century (Mallarmè and Lautreeamont) and I
had understood how much of that, what we
call hermiticism in literature, is connected
to the rehabilitation, more or less conscious,
of that archaic language. By the way, I was
also at that time undergoing an analysis
myself, and so became convinced that what
we have discussed was really true.
Q: Is it difficult to "abandon"
or at least to set aside one's mother tongue
and write in another language ?
Kristeva: No, I haven't had the impression
that I had abandoned my mother tongue by
coming to France because I had learnt French
when I was four or five and had been bilingual.
It is true though that the transition from
one mother tongue to the other is a real
matricide particularly when one ends up expressing
himself only in this second language and
one's rapport to the first one remains extremely
limited, which is my case, but it didn't
happen with me in that era (of coming to
France). It was quite a gradual change.
Q: Given the fact that you have written a
lot about the importance of the so-called
"sick" states of mind, could you
tell us whether they are related in any way
to Art ? Would you see Art as the means of
healing them or do you see it as an independent
entity? Is Art a sort of "love"
for you (the way Freud would have it) and
a sort of human cure?
Kristeva: It has always shocked commentators
when I affirm my agreement with the ancient
Greeks who viewed art as catharsis or purification
and I would add that it is a sort of sublimation
for the "borderline" states, in
the broadest sense of the term, that is,
it comprises those characterized by fragility.
If we analyze contemporary art, we get the
impression that two types of fragility are
examined by contemporary artists. On one
hand, we have perversion, that is, all sorts
of sexual transgressions. To this effect,
it is enough to just browse through contemporary
books or simply look at the "culture"
pages of "Libèration" which review
exhibitions to see that the form and the
content of the experience serve as means
of overcoming these states. They testify
to the existence of these states, as well
as that of a certain desire to make them
public, or even share them with others, that
is, to take them out of their closet which
is a soothing action after all despite its
commercial aspect since one turns a "shameful
thing" into something positive. So you
see, here we have something that transcends
the notion of "cure" and is at
times something gratifying.
Some think that these works are scandal-oriented,
others think that they rejoice in ugliness
, yes, certainly there are elements of such
orientations in them, but, on the other hand,
the existence of these works is also a research
-- often in a very specific manner -- on
the anticipation of difficulty of living.
Q: Does contemporary art have to do with
Voyeurism, as is the case with the most recent
literature nowadays which purports to describe
the most intimate states of the body and
the soul ?
Kristeva: Absolutely! This is ever the case
with literature and when it does not try
to treat perversion, it is deals with psychotic
states, that is, the states of identity loss,
the loss of language, the borderline cases
which cohabit and coexist with delirium and
violence, but all of this does not have to
bear the imprint of something negative. Some
think that these works are scandal-oriented,
others think that they rejoice in ugliness
, yes, certainly there are elements of such
orientations in them, but, on the other hand,
the existence of these works is also a research
-- often in a very specific manner -- on
the anticipation of difficulty of living.
And Art can play an important role here since
it can contribute to a certain creative assumption
of such a difficulty. Nevertheless, I personally
remain a bit skeptical of a certain drift
or tendency of contemporary art to content
itself with such, so I believe, feeble appropriations
of these traumatic states. We remain here
at the level of the statement of the clinical
cases with an almost documentary style photography
of these cases wherein the investment and
the effort made in the exploration of new
forms or new thoughts remains less visible.
So, it is something regrettable which every
so often leaves me with the impression that
when I visit museums or read certain art
books, I am looking into psychoanalytic or
even psychiatric archives. But, perhaps this
is an indispensable experience.
Q: But you haven't always felt this way-
we remember the time when you wrote about
Bellinié
Kristeva: That's right, I haven't always
felt this way -- this is a very particular
moment in art history which deepened and
probed a certain aspect of a widespread existential
malaise and discontent while neglecting the
possibility of its overcoming.
Q: Well, along this line, you wrote in "Tales
of Love" that "the psychoanalytic
couch is the only place where the social
contract authorizes explicitly psychoanalytic
investigation, but "leaves Love out
of it." However, we find this type of
investigation in literature and art as well.
You have recently analyzed the "investigation"
of the writer Colette whose work deals extensively
with love and emotions. Why Colette ?
Kristeva: Why Colette? Because in my trilogy
on the feminine genius I tried to analyze
the works of two dramatic women who represent
the tragic aspect of our (20th) century,
Hanna Arendt's on "Totalitarianism"
and Melanie Klein's on psychosis, especially
children's psychosis, and it seemed to me
important (not only to me personally but
also for the sake of objectivity) to pay
homage to the other aspect of our civilization
which is notably our century's source of
joy, that is, the feminist liberation and
"joie de vivre". And Colette excels
in that appropriation of the national language
in which she delights and leads to paroxysms
of beauty that trace a path which goes beyond
the scandal of a woman who asserts her liberty
and authority. So, for me, she has become
indispensable.
Q: In your novel The Samurai you have shown
a great literary talent and a certain sense
of humor which is certainly lacking in your
analytic work. Why have you stopped your
literary production, that is to say, writing
of novels ?
Kristeva: Oh, I haven't stopped it for after
"The Samurai" I wrote "The
old man the wolves," then "Possesions,"
and now I am going to write yet another thriller
which will be called, as it seems now, "Our
Byzantium". IÕd like to continue writing
in this polar style and with a certain political
motivation. It will be concerned with the
possibility -- or the impossibility -- of
unifying Eastern Europe with Western Europe.
It will deal with the Crusades and in it
the modern characters would reveal their
ancestors who had been in the Crusades, a
catastrophic enterprise which eventually
failed as you know, but which has been in
its essence an attempt at unifying Europe,
an unhappy attempt though. So, I am going
to ask a question about the tragedy of this
Europe which is now divided, and also this
would be a way for me to visit my orthodox
origins where I'd also attempt to revive
some of my childhood souvenirs.
Q: That's right, the area of Eastern or Central
Europe really belongs to "Byzantium".
Kristeva: Yes, we are Byzantium, that is,
the Balkans, and I am very proud of the fact
that I come from that region. And that's
something which is unknown to the West. While
it is true that what has survived of Byzantium
is in a state of cultural decadence and terrible
economic poverty with nothing in it that
could seduce the Westerners, it is indisputably
the treasure of our rich historical memory
that is reflected, as far as I can see, in
the dignified sensitivity of people who don't
ask for anything but the minimum allowing
them to continue living as the well-educated
and highly intelligent men and women who
should be less exposed to mentally exhausting
pangs of melancholy and the socially debilitating
impact of the economic predominance of the
mafia that is the case nowadays.
Q: In your novel "Possesions" you
started something quite interesting, something
that you stopped pursuing after having written
the first chapter though, and that particular
thing is the psychoanalysis of art which
also includes that of the artists and their
respective works. Would it be possible to
pursue research in this particular field,
namely, an analysis of the history of art
by following different works of art from
different epochs?
Kristeva: I have really enjoyed myself writing
about these different works of art, notably,
on representations of decapitation, and I
believe that the novel as genre, especially
thriller which is an open genre and completely
renewable allows for this type of digression
in writing. But they have severely criticized
me for it and told me that the book was too
intellectual, very brainy and that the reader
who wanted to know how the crime was being
developed and the murder had to suffer by
having had to wait. That was the malevolent
reaction of those who have known me as an
intellectual and who did not like the fact
that I was going to write novels. So, there
is a certain tendency in France, or perhaps
elsewhere too, to put labels on people- if
you are a teacher, remain a teacher, and
if you are a writer, remain a writer, but
the two of them at the same time- that you
cannot be! So, perhaps I will continue in
that direction , that of novel writing, I
don't know. I have just finished the book
about Colette, and my new thriller is still
in notes and scratches, it is not articulated
yet, but I am not sure that the fragments
which deal with the so-called esthetic problems
are excluded from it. It is true we cannot
insert a dissertation in a novel, but perhaps
we could set a basis there for it.
Q: I believe that one could read your book
"The Intimate Revolt" in the light
of your dialogue with Hannah Arendt. In fact,
she was the one who has spoken of the misery
of human beings who are not allowed to have
"contemplative" ( read creative)
life and who are thus condemned to lead an
"active" life, that is, to have
a miserable job. Is it the problem of our
times that there exist such individuals who
revolt against the fact that they cannot
realize themselves? That is, who are angst-ridden
and end up revolting against themselves?
Kristeva: I believe that you were right to
make such assumptions about my eventual dialogue
with Hannah Arendt -- I have been reading
her work for quite a while and I'd say, in
all modesty, that a lot of my writing, consciously
or unconsciously, is tied to her thought
. The idea of "revolt" was an effort
to put myself in relationship with what we
hear as "her own thinking" which,
following Heidegger's, opposes and relativizes
calculative reasoning. As she was very attentive
to the work of Heidegger, she conceived of
thinking as an inquiry, as an interrogatory
process and opposed herself to the calculative
framework which structures and characterizes
contemporary behavior. My work has found
itself a bit within this horizon but I also
derived my experience from the psychoanalytical
approach which relativizes everyone's identity
as well as his/her past. Moreover, I derived
my experience from literary works, such as
Proust's "Recherche de temps perdu;"
for instance, from his flexing of language,
metaphors and the syntax. I tried to rethink
the mental disposition which helps us carry
on, the one which is not a mere repetition
of a cliche, something which is like an act
of rebirth, that is, rebirth which our thinking
re-examines together with our interior life
as well as the very opening of the inquiry.
This is what I take "revolt" to
be. So, it is neither an expression of simple
existential anguish nor contesting a socio-political
order, but re-establishment of things which
we start again. And, in this sense, revolt
which engulfs the psychic space is a form
of life, be it the state of being in love,
or an act of aesthetic creation or a project
that could imply a very modest activity but
which allows you to re-examine your past,
that is, to interrogate it and renew it.
And I believe that we have very few occasions
in our daily lives which are quite standardized
and banalized to work in that direction.
The work that we do implies usually a repetition,
the accomplishment of a given task. The type
of mental functioning which I call "revolt"
is something that we lack and it is very
dangerous because if it is lacking, we risk
confronting two prospective pitfalls: one
of them is 'somatization' when the psychic
space closes itself off and the conflict
manifests itself as bodily illness or, in
the other situation, we get into violence,
vandalism and wars. So, Vive la Rèvolte !
|