Abstract
What I want to call the “Myth of Performativity” is a theoretical conception, mistakenly attributed to Aristotle, about what distinguishes praxis in the strict sense (i.e., morally and politically relevant actions) from other kinds of human activities. According to the Myth, actions constitute pure performances—i.e., a sheer display of ethical virtue—and do not leave behind themselves concrete traces in the world—i.e., any traces significant for appraising their goodness. If that is what performativity would amount to, it can only be mythical. So how can the Myth be a pitfall? The reason is that the Myth takes inspiration from a correct understanding of actions: to differentiate actions from other kinds of human activities—for instance, from productions (poiêsis)—it is useful to ascribe a sort of performativity to the former. The Myth becomes, however, a real risk once one distorts the performativity proper to actions and, instead, celebrates pure performativity. And the Myth of Performativity in this latter form becomes an irresistible temptation for those who hold inappropriate views about the political realm and the role assumed therein by certain Promethean activities which are supposed to be performative in a paradigmatic way. In this paper I mean to show that, throughout his work, Taminiaux’s concern remains one and the same: to alert us to the dangerous attractions of the Myth of Performativity. I will expound the above claims in two steps; first, by showing—pace Arendt and Taminiaux—that Aristotle himself had militated against the Myth and, second, by demonstrating that the phenomenology of action casts doubt on the legitimacy of the Myth.
An exclusively performative conception of action is sometimes attributed to Hannah Arendt and, as a consequence, her reflection on the constitutive traits of the political is accused of grecomania. […] Because of the need to distinguish action properly said from any form of production […], she allegedly reduced action to pure spontaneism […] A grecomania would follow such that it would make Arendt seem to be—malgré elle—akin to Heidegger […]. But on closer inspection we rapidly see that, in Arendt, the analysis of action is not at all reduced to the celebration of pure performativity […]. On the contrary, performativity is the defect as much as the grace of action.(Taminiaux (2002a), 91–92. Τranslations of Taminiaux’s works are mine)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Taminiaux is also in dialogue with Hobbes, Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, and the whole phenomenological tradition from Husserl to Derrida. Within the confines of this paper, however, it would be frivolous to present all the ramifications of his work.
- 2.
- 3.
Heidegger (1992), 49–50.
- 4.
Heidegger (1992), 56.
- 5.
Arendt (1958), 206; my italics.
- 6.
Arendt (1968a), 151.
- 7.
Arendt (1968a), 152.
- 8.
Ibid.
- 9.
- 10.
See: Arendt (1958), 136–144.
- 11.
In The Human Condition, these include, among others, the lapsus of treating pure activities as ateleis and an incorrect interpretation of beneficence; see: Arent (1958), 206, 196. The analysis of Aristotelian prohairesis in Arendt (1978), II 55–63, gives a much more reliable picture of Aristotle’s concepts.
- 12.
- 13.
For a defense of Aristotle’s legislation and “rule of law” as political practices—against Arendt’s objections, although with no reference to Arendt—see Yack (1993), 175–208.
- 14.
Pol. III 1, 1274b36–37; V 9, 1309b35–36; VII 2, 1324b26; VII 4, 1326a4.
- 15.
Respectively: NE I 13, 1102a8; Pol. IV 1, 1288b27.
- 16.
- 17.
Its productive aspect is indisputably confirmed by the nouns denoting the activity of the legislator: he is a producer or maker, that is, a “dêmiourgos” and “kataskeuastês.” The Politics abounds with similar formulations: Pol. II 8, 1267b30; II 9, 1271a14–15; IV 12, 1273b32–33; VII 13, 1332a29.
- 18.
By contrast, in Arendt (1978), II 14, she nicely translates prakta as “what is brought into being by action.”
- 19.
For further discussion of prakton and the solidity and visibility Aristotle confers on it, see: Kontos (2011), 9–53.
- 20.
Notably, the 448 B.C. decree I have in mind (IGI2 24) was in reality much more detailed and even included a reference to the priestess to be appointed or the very materials (bronze, etc.) to be used.
- 21.
Arendt (1968a), 128.
- 22.
This is the most common attitude of commentators; see, for instance, Villa (1996), 37–49. The previous section has shown why that view is untenable.
- 23.
See, for instance, Beiner (2014), 1–24, according to whom Arendt’s notion of performativity “is a radical view, and it seems hard to square with our common experience of politics” (12), “[it] falls well short of being a plausible view” (14), and “seems of questionable coherence” (18). For reasons that will be analysed below, Beiner’s reading conflicts with Arendt’s argument.
- 24.
See, respectively: Arendt (1978), I 75 and 199.
- 25.
- 26.
It is beyond the scope of this paper to appraise Taminiaux’s reading of Heidegger.
- 27.
Taminiaux exploits an idea present in Arendt (1958), 152, 167, 204.
- 28.
- 29.
Arendt (1958), 52.
- 30.
This stage, both in its pre-political and its strictly political form, can “find its proper location almost any time and anywhere” (Arendt (1958), 198).
- 31.
Arendt (1958), 144.
- 32.
- 33.
Arendt (1968b), 465.
- 34.
Arendt (1968b), 475.
- 35.
Taminiaux (2005), 75–100.
- 36.
Arendt (1968a), 163, 151.
- 37.
- 38.
Arendt (1968a), 162–163.
- 39.
See: Tamianiaux’s reading of Ricoeur’s Soi-même comme un autre in Taminiaux (2009), 303–325.
- 40.
“Preservation” of the polis also represents a prominent political end in Aristotle’s Politics IV-V. It is based on the assumption that even the worst constitution is better than no constitution at all.
- 41.
- 42.
Arendt (1958), 204–205; my italics.
- 43.
Arendt (1958), 191; my italics.
- 44.
Arendt (1968a), 145.
- 45.
It is this same power that Arendt ascribes to promises as elements constituting the foundation of the body politic: “Binding and promising, combining and covenanting are the means by which power is kept in existence” (Arendt (1963), 166). Accordingly, political performances should also entail the sources of its being augmented and increased. The very model of a political performance, namely the establishment of Rome, witnesses that “the act of foundation inevitably develops its own stability and permanence” (Arendt (1963), 194).
- 46.
- 47.
See: Arendt (1958), 186, 192.
- 48.
Arendt (1978), 93.
- 49.
- 50.
- 51.
Arendt (1992), 63.
- 52.
As to political actors who harbor in themselves a spectator, see my analysis of promisors in: Kontos (2011), 145–154.
- 53.
Arendt (1978), I 167, 169.
- 54.
Arendt (1978), I 178.
- 55.
Arendt (1990), 91.
- 56.
Husserl (1954), 366 (D. Carr’s translation).
- 57.
Arendt (1968a), 44.
- 58.
- 59.
See: Arendt (1978), I 85, 206 and II 12–13.
- 60.
See: Arendt (1978), II 174, 184–185.
- 61.
Tamianiaux (2002a), 130.
- 62.
References
Arendt, Hannah. 1958. The human condition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
———. 1963. On revolution. New York: New York Penguin Books.
———. 1968a. Between past and future. New York: Viking Press.
———. 1968b. The origins of totalitarianism. San Diego/New York/London: Harcourt.
———. 1978. The life of the mind. San Diego/New York/London: Harcourt Brace & Company.
———. 1990. Philosophy and politics. Social Research 57 (1): 73–103.
———. 1992. In Lectures on Kant’s political philosophy, ed. R. Beiner. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
———. 1993. In Was ist Politik? ed. U. Ludz. München/Zürich: Piper.
Beiner, Ronald. 1992. Hannah Arendt on judging. In Lectures on Kant’s political philosophy, 89–156. Chicago: Univesity of Chicago Press.
———. 2014. Political philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bernstein, Richard. 1986. Philosophical Profiles. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bodéüs, Richard. 1993. The political dimensions of Aristotle’s ethics. Albany: SUNY.
Heidegger, Martin. 1986. Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
———. 1992. Platon: Sophistes (Ga19). Frankfurt a. M.: V. Klostermann. English edition: Heidegger, M. 1997. Plato: Sophistes (trans:Rojcewicz, R. and Schuwer, A.). Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
Husserl, Edmund. 1954. Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie, Husserliana VI. Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
Keyt, David. 1999. Aristotle Politics. Books V and VI. Clarendon Press: Oxford.
Kontos, Pavlos. 2011. Aristotle’s moral realism reconsidered. New York/London: Routledge.
Kraut, Richard. 1997. Aristotle: Politics. Books VII and VIII. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Miller, F.D. 1991. Aristotle on natural law and justice. In A companion to Aristotle’s Politics, ed. D. Keyt and F.D. Miller, 279–306. Oxford/Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Newman, W. L. 1887–1902. The Politics of Aristotle (4 volumes). Clarendon Press: Oxford.
Reeve, C. D. C. 2014. Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics (translated with Introduction and Notes). Indianapolis: Hackett.
———. 2017. Aristotle. Politics (translated with Introduction and Notes). Indianapolis: Hackett.
Schütrumpf, Eckart. 1991–1996. Aristoteles. Politik (4 volumes). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Taminiaux, Jacques. 1992. La fille de Thrace et le penseur professionnel. Paris: Payot.
———. 1997. The Thracian maid and the professional thinker. Trans. and ed. M. Gendre. Albany: SUNY Press.
———. 2002a. Sillages Phénoménologiques. Bruxelles: Ousia.
———. 2002b. The philosophical stakes in Arendt’s genealogy of totalitarianism. Social Research 69 (2): 423–446.
———. 2005. Art et événement. Paris: Belin.
———. 2009. Maillons herméneutiques. Paris: PUF.
———. 2014. Chroniques d’anthropologie politique. Paris: Hermann.
Villa, Dana. 1996. Arendt and Heidegger: The fate of the political. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Yack, Bernard. 1993. Problems of a political animal. Berkley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to Fabio Ciaramelli, Véronique Fóti, and Vassiliki Vergouli for their insightful comments on a penultimate version of the paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kontos, P. (2017). The Myth of Performativity: From Aristotle to Arendt and Taminiaux. In: Fóti, V., Kontos, P. (eds) Phenomenology and the Primacy of the Political. Contributions To Phenomenology, vol 89. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56160-8_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56160-8_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-56159-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-56160-8
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)