Abstract
Let me start with the following paradox, one that arises from the very idea of trace: what seems at first exceedingly limited in scope and secondary in status is capable of drawing together the most divergent realms of human experience and theories about that experience. On the one hand, the ordinary notion of trace is that of a mere mark left by an entity or an event of which it is but the finite and fragile reflection. Its nature seems to consist in a self-surpassing operation whereby its meaning or value lies elsewhere — namely, in that of which it is the trace, that which the trace signifies by a self-suspension of its own being or happening. On the other hand, despite this apparent disposability, the concept of trace has proved indispensable in several quite disparate domains: the neurophysiology of memory, the graphematics of writing, and the overcoming of metaphysics. (Indeed, just because the activity of tracing is so critical to all three arenas, we can no longer afford to regard them as so disparate, and we begin to suspect the possibility of a deep alliance between them.) This is not to mention the rather uncanny way in which a concern with the unsuspected importance of traces brings together Heidegger, Derrida, and Levinas with such unlikely bedfellows as Plotinus, Descartes, and Peirce—all six of whom regard traces as strictly unexpungeable and even as having a certain primacy.
What is this original trace, this primordial desolation? Levinas, En découvrant l’existence avec Husserl et Heidegger, p. 208
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
René Descartes, Passions of the Soul, Article XLII.
See, for example, The Pathology of Memory, ed. G.A. Talland and N.C. Waugh (New York: Academic Press, 1969), passim
and Paul Rozin, ‘The Psychobiological Approach to Human Memory’ in Neural Mechanisms of Learning and Memory, ed. M.R. Rosenzweig and E.L. Bennett (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1976), pp. 3–46.
Emmanuel Levinas, En découvrant l’existence avec Husserl et Heidegger (Paris: Vrin, 1949), p. 209. (Hereafter ‘ED.’)
Originally, however, Levinas comes dangerously close to such a compromise: ‘une absence qui est la présence même de l’infini’ (ED, 231).
Levinas, Totality and Infinity, trans. A. Lingis (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1969), p. 56. Cf. also pp. 53–4, 56, 127, 170 (Hereafter ‘TL’)
Levinas, ‘La trace de l’autre,’ Tijdschrift voor Filosofie vol. 25 (1963), p. 605. (Hereafter ‘TO.’ I shall follow the pagination and, for the most part, the translation by D.J. Hoy: ‘On the Trail of the Other,’ Philosophy Today, vol. 10 [1966], pp. 34–47. The above citation is from p. 34 of this translation.)
Levinas, Otherwise than Being or Beyond Essence, trans. A. Lingis (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1981), p. 24.
ED, 231.
Edmund Husserl, Logical Investigations, Inv. I, section 2, trans, by J.N. Findlay (Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press, 1970), I: 270.
See Jacques Derrida, ‘Plato’s Pharmacy’ in Dissemination, trans. B. Johnson (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981), pp. 111–12.
‘Authentic trace’ is mentioned at TO, 44; ‘original trace’ at ED, 207.
ED, 207. The designation of the trace as an enigma occurs at ibid., p. 211.
‘It withdraws as easily as it inserts itself’ (ibid., 208).
Ibid., p. 206.
Ibid., p. 209.
Otherwise than Being or Beyond Essence, p. 35. Cf. the entire discussion at ibid., pp. 31–4.
See Derrida, Speech and Phenomena, trans. D. Allison (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1973), pp. 60–70.
Nevertheless, Levinas does say that ‘the face is in the trace of the Absent’ (TO, 43) and that ‘the Other proceeds from the absolutely Absent’ (ibid.).
Hereafter I will capitalize ‘trace’ when I refer to Levinas’ notion of ‘original trace.’
See Derrida, ‘Différance,’ in Speech and Phenomena, pp. 156ff.
Ibid., p. 156. Derrida does say, however, that ‘the trace has, properly speaking, no place, for effacement belongs to the very structure of the trace’ (ibid.; my italics).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1988 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Casey, E. (1988). Levinas on Memory and the Trace. In: Sallis, J.C., Moneta, G., Taminiaux, J. (eds) The Collegium Phaenomenologicum, The First Ten Years. Phaenomenologica, vol 105. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2805-3_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2805-3_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-7762-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-2805-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive