(ISSN 1466-4615)
Vol. 4 No. 17, July 2000
Marty Fairbairn
Reawakening Imagination
Richard Kearney
_Poetics of Imagining: Modern to Post-modern_
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1998
ISBN: 0 7486 1053 7
260 pp.
'Better to appreciate what it means to imagine is . . . better to
appreciate what it means to be' (1).
Why should we care about a *theory of the imagination*? Didn't the study of
'the faculties of the mind' go out with high-button shoes, like the study
of the bumps on the head, phrenology? Richard Kearney's answer would be
'no'. Now perhaps more than ever we need to understand imagination. We
post-moderns are surrounded by images, trapped in a hall of mirrors.
Indeed, as Roland Barthes's resonant phrase has it, ours is a Civilization
of the Image. For Kearney, the post-modern proliferation and endless
repetition of images is symptomatic of an underlying crisis in three
fundamental areas of philosophy; epistemology, ontology, and ethics. The
post-modern subject has been dethroned as the centre of unambiguous
meaning, just as God, the 'author of the world', was dethroned in the 19th
century, and just as more recently the human author was dethroned as the
source/origin of the meaning of the text, courtesy of Barthes among others.
In short, the post-modern self has had the epistemological/metaphysical rug
pulled out from under it. We no longer know exactly who we are, or better,
it is increasingly *up to us* who we are. In this era of what Kearney calls
'trauma and transition suspended between the extremes of instrumental
rationalism and apocalyptic irrationalism' (8), re-invigorating the notion
of imagination is not only timely but from a humanist standpoint crucial.
As Kearney puts it, we need a 'critical poetics transcending both the
empire of reason and the asylum of un-reason' (9). But before we can
resuscitate imagination, and wrestle the keys to the asylum back from the
inmates, we have to understand how we got here in the first place. What has
led us into this conceptual cul de sac?
Kearney goes a long way toward answering this question in the new edition
of his _Poetics of Imagining: From Husserl to Lyotard_ (1991), retitled
_Poetics of Imagining: Modern to Post-modern_ (1998). Just as in the
earlier edition, this expanded edition focuses on the 'phenomenological
project' (4), offering a richly-detailed, exhaustively annotated account of
the modern, (Continental) philosophical development of the notion of
'imagination', from Kant's 'Transcendental Idealism', which sees
imagination as the 'common root of all our knowledge' (4), to Husserl's
'eidetic phenomenology', which sees imagination as both *sui generis* --
that is, its own beast, distinct from perception -- and necessary for the
intuiting of 'essential truths', through Heidegger's hermeneutic
phenomenology, which locates imagination at the centre of the phenomenon of
time and thus necessary to human being (Dasein) as it gathers up its past
and projects itself into the future, to Sartre's existential phenomenology,
with its emphasis on concrete, lived experience, or Being-in-the-world, to
Maurice Merleau-Ponty's 'dialectical' view of imagination, the link between
the visible and the invisible, which rescues imagination from the
alienated, perceptual-world-negating status accorded it by Sartre, to Paul
Ricoeur's 'semantic' view which emphasizes the linguistic, specifically the
poetic functioning of imagination, and, finally, to the post-modern
ridiculing of all *origins* as mere traces of traces, undermining the whole
notion of imagination by questioning the difference between it and the
'real world', as we see, for example, in the writings of Jacques Derrida
and Jean-Francois Lyotard. A lively and lucid sequel to Kearney's
well-received _The Wake of Imagination_, [1] which explored 'the
genealogical development of the various concepts of 'imagining' . . . from
the classical and medieval philosophies through to the modern and
post-modern critiques' (10, n. 3), _Poetics of Imagining_ supplements his
previous, more general explorations with 'a more concentrated study of new
hermeneutic approaches to our contemporary understanding of the imaginative
activity itself' (10, n. 3).
After a short but provocative introduction which ranges from Plato and
Aristotle, through Adam and Eve to Andy Warhol, Kearney sets to work in
Chapter 1 filling in the phenomenological background which led to the
impasse with which we are confronted today. Notwithstanding the fact that
Husserl was able to at least partially overcome Kant's Transcendental
Idealism, although its remnants remained, his solution to the problem of
subjectivity left us at an impasse. While imagination after Husserl could
justifiably be thought of as both *sui generis* and ontologically distinct
from perception, the problem was now just what kind of thing was it; what
kind of being does the imagination possess, if not the being of reality?
(35)
In a chapter added to this edition, Kearney describes Heidegger's taking up
of the problem of the ontological status of the imagination in his _Kant
and the Problem of Metaphysics_ (1929). [2] Heidegger credits Kant with the
discovery of the transcendental role of imagination in the intuition of
being in terms of time. As Kearney puts it, 'no *Sein* without Dasein; no
Dasein without time; and no time without imagination' (54). Kearney even
goes so far as to claim that, 'thus understood, imagination becomes another
name for *Dasein* in that its aesthetic function of time, as the formal *a
priori* condition of all experience, makes it essentially receptive to
experience, and therefore temporally situated' (54). And again later, even
more provocatively he writes, '*Dasein*, like its pseudonym, imagination,
is a poetics of the possible. It is the very origin of the creativity of
being.' (54) But surely the two are not interchangeable. We have to
interpret this particular phrasing as a provocative, rhetorical flourish.
For while Heidegger's notion of Dasein may include imagination, it is not
limited to it, at least the way I read Heidegger. Kearney himself says as
much just prior to this controversial claim, where he writes, 'at the most
fundamental level of being, 'imagination', 'transcendental self', and
'primordial time' are inextricable allies' (54). If Dasein and imagination
are truly interchangeable, then the latter cannot be said to be the
'forerunner' of the former nor the 'ally' of it, nor merely 'like' it. At
the very least, much more needs to be said for these concepts to be
adequately unpacked. While Kearney convincingly demonstrates the intimate
relationship between Dasein, in its temporalizing function, and the
productive power of the imagination, he falls far short of demonstrating
that the two are one and the same thing. But their interchangeability is
not necessary to Kearney's account anyway, so perhaps this is nothing more
than a quibble.
Kearney goes on to explain, in Chapter 3, 'The Existential Imagination',
how Sartre further develops 'Husserl's basic insight that perception and
imagination differ by virtue of their intentional structure', separating
out four basic 'modes' in which imagination posits its objects (58). But in
so doing, Sartre drives a wedge between perception and imagination: 'the
object of perception overflows consciousness constantly; the object of the
image is never more than the consciousness one has; it is limited by that
consciousness; nothing can be learned from an image that is not already
there'. [3] Hence, imagination was, for Sartre, a negation of reality: 'to
posit the imaginary is *ipso facto* to negate the real' (62). For Kearney,
this will not do. Imagination is too important both aesthetically and
ethically for it to suffer the fate of absurdity. Imagination for Kearney
is a negation of the real, but one that holds open the possible as possible.
Kearney next moves into a discussion, in Chapter 4, 'The Poetical
Imagination', of Gaston Bachelard's contribution to the continuing
development of the notion of imagination, which he sees as wrapped up in
the *logos* of 'poetical interaction between the imaginative consciousness
and the images themselves' (111). As Kearney explains, for Bachelard, 'the
being of the human subject, as a being who innovates, is not a fixed point
but an endless spiral of movement. The origin of poetic imagination is
neither a transcendental ego [Husserl] nor a negating *pour soi* [Sartre]
-- it is a becoming of language which demands perpetual birth.' (111)
It is not until we get to Merleau-Ponty's philosophy of embodiment that we
begin to discern a solution to the 'epistemological puzzle' which plagued
both Husserl's and Sartre's theories of the imagination. Merleau-Ponty,
according to Kearney, 'brings imagination back to life' by proving that it
never really left in the first place (135). Even the most ordinary act of
perception relies on it. As Kearney puts it: 'The world is full with the
imaginary. Not, as Sartre maintained, because the imaginary is its
negation, but because it is its expression.' (136) For Merleau-Ponty,
imagination is a vital process of communication, 'whereby we pass beyond
ourselves towards what is *other* than ourselves' (136). In this way,
Merleau-Ponty is able to ground both art and politics in a dialectical
phenomenology.
Merleau-Ponty's dialectical phenomenology lays the groundwork for Paul
Ricoeur's hermeneutics. Ricoeur laid the groundwork for Kearney's project
of a poetics of imagination by 'conjoining the virtues of an ontological
hermeneutics a la Heidegger/Gadamer and a critical hermeneutic of ideology
a la Habermas' (169). For Kearney: 'Ricoeur's analyses of the symbolizing
and narrating imagination, and its attendant expressions in the 'social
poetry' of ideology and utopia, demand consideration in any serious
discussion of a radical hermeneutics of imagining.' (169)
Chapters 7 and 8 deal with the post-modern imagination. Chapter 7 describes
the ways in which various post-modern thinkers have dealt with imagination,
thinkers as diverse as Jean-Francois Lyotard, Gianni Vattimo and Julia
Kristeva, Jacques Derrida, Jacques Lacan, Michel Foucault, Jean Baudrillard
and Roland Barthes. Dealing mainly with Lacan, Foucault, Derrida, Kristeva
and Lyotard, Kearney traces the post-modern development of the notion of
imagination as it appears in each of their philosophies. In Chapter 8,
'Vive l'imagination!', Kearney responds to the problem of confronting the
'other', writhing about in the debris left over after post-modernity has
wreaked havoc on the stability of the self. For Kearney, the lesson of
these thinkers is clear: they are 'gesturing towards an ethics of alterity
by re-inscribing ways of imagining which elude both the prison-house of
mirrors and the cheerless conformity of Grand Theory' (218). There is both
a 'bad post-modernity' and a 'good post-modernity': 'Where 'bad'
post-modernity refers to modernity in its terminal condition of amnesia,
paralysis and conformity, 'good' post-modernity refers to the on-going
struggle to reanimate what is nascent in modernity by re-inscribing its
betrayed promises.' (223)
Kearney's reflections demonstrate not only that the idea of imagination is
a useful way to understand the modern development of (continental)
philosophy, but that imagination is the hub around which that development
revolves. Kearney is a philosopher of hope, affirmation, and construction
in an era of dissolution, negation, and deconstruction, and as such his
work is a breath of fresh air. While his views may presuppose a
progressivist interpretation of the modern history of philosophical
reflection on imagination, this 'whiggishness' is not nearly so repugnant
as his post-modern interlocutors' obscurantist, self-parodying negativity.
Guelph, Canada
Footnotes
1. Richard Kearney, _The Wake of Imagination: Toward a Postmodern Culture_
(New York: Routledge, 1988).
2. Martin Heidegger, _Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics_ trans. J.
Churchill (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1962).
3. Jean-Paul Sartre, _The Psychology of the Imagination_ n.t. (New York:
Citadel Press, 1948), p. 12, as quoted in Kearney, p. 60.
Copyright © Film-Philosophy 2000
Marty Fairbairn, 'Reawakening Imagination',
_Film-Philosophy_, vol. 4 no. 17, July 2000
<http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol4-2000/n17fairbairn>.
Save as Plain Text Document...Print...Read...Recycle
Join the Film-Philosophy salon,
and receive the journal articles via email as they are published. here
Film-Philosophy (ISSN 1466-4615)
PO Box 26161, London SW8 4WD, England
Contact: editor@film-philosophy.com
Back to the Film-Philosophy homepage