Translation: Michel de Certeau The Machinery of Representation

Edouard Manet, Déjeuner sur l'herbe, 1863

This is Bora Mici's original translation from French to English of The Machinery of Representation from Michel de Certeau's theoretical work, The Invention of Everyday Life, L'invention du quotidien. In this text Certeau distinguishes strategies from tactics, with strategies belonging to an institutional authoritative and closed framework, while tactics are the unpredictable moves that individuals effect within these prescribed systems, individualizing their experience of them and turning them upside down on their heads. The translated passage discusses how the law and customs write themselves on other bodies only to reproduce themselves and make believe. In seeking a socially acceptable identity, people become signs and sacrifice their bodies to these systems of representation that precede them. I am not yet sure if this discussion is useful in order to describe a reality that is inescapable or if it hints at a system of transmission that we can transcend. The tone of the passage certainly seems critical but it seems to ignore the human aspect of this experience. Stay tuned for Les machines célibataires, a commentary on Marcel Duchamp's The Bride Stripped Bare by Her Bachelors.   

La Machinerie de la Representation, Michel de Certeau by Bora Mici

The Machinery of Representation

Two main operations characterize these interventions. The first one aims at removing from the body a superfluous element, deemed unhealthy or not aesthetic; the other adds to the body what it is missing. Therefore, the instruments in question can be distinguished according to the actions they carry out: cutting, pulling out, extracting, removing, etc. or inserting, placing, attaching, covering, assembling, sewing, articulating, etc.—not to mention those that substitute missing or defective organs, such as valves, pacemakers, limb prosthetics, screws implanted in the femur, artificial irises, bone substitutes, etc.

Either from the outside or from the inside, they correct an excess or a deficit, but compared to what? Just like when we remove leg hair or paint our eyelashes, cut or implant hair, this subtractive or additive activity goes back to a code. It keeps bodies within a norm. In this sense, clothing itself could be considered the instrument thanks to which a social law secures bodies and limbs for itself; it regulates and trains them through changing fashion trends as in military maneuvers. Cars, just like corsets, mold bodies and make them conform to a postural model. These are orthopedic as well as orthopraxic instruments. The foods a cultural tradition chooses to sell in a given society’s markets model just as much as they nourish bodies; they impose a form upon them, a tonality that has the value of an ID card. Glasses, cigarettes, shoes, etc. in their own way reconstitute a physical portrait. Where do we draw the line between the machinery through which a society’s living members represent themselves and when they become its representations? Where does this disciplinary apparatus that displaces and corrects, adds to and removes from malleable bodies, subjected to the instrumentalisation of so many laws, end? In reality, bodies become bodies only when they conform to these codes. Because in what circumstances does a body exist when it is not written upon, reconstituted, cultivated, identified by the instruments of a social symbolic? Perhaps, at the extreme confines of these indefatigable writings, punching holes in them through lapsus, there remains only the cry: it escapes us, it escapes them. From the first to the last cry, something else bursts out, which makes up the other of the body, at times badly brought up and in-fans, which we find intolerable in the child, the possessed person, the madman or the mentally ill—a lack of self-control like the baby’s shouting in Jeanne Dielman or that of the vice-consul in India Song.

This first operation of removing or adding is therefore just the corollary of another, more general one, which consists in making the body say the code. As we have seen, this work “realizes” (in the English sense of the term) a social language; it gives it effectivity. What a great task it is to make bodies spell out an order through “machinization”! The liberal economy is no less efficient than totalitarianism in carrying out this articulation of the law through bodies. It just uses other methods. Instead of oppressing groups in order to better mark them with the hot iron of a single power, first it atomizes them and then multiplies the tight exchange networks which make individual units conform to the rules (or the “trends”) of socio-economic and cultural contracts. We can ask ourselves why this works, whether in one instance or in the other. What desire or what need leads us to make our bodies into the emblems of a law that serves to identify? The hypotheses that respond to this question demonstrate in yet another way the strength of the bonds that tools construct between our childish “natures” and social discourses.

The credibility of a discourse is what makes believers get going. It produces practitioners. Making believe is making do. However, through a curious circularity, the ability to make—to write and mechanize bodies—is precisely what makes believe. Because the law is already applied through and on bodies, “incarnated” in physical practices, it can be approved and make believe that it speaks in the name of the “real”. It becomes believable in saying, “Reality itself dictates this text to you”. We believe what we think is real, but this “real” is assigned to the discourse by a belief that provides it with a body marked by the law. The law constantly needs an “advance” of bodies, a capital of incarnation, in order for it to make believe and be practiced. Therefore, it becomes inscribed because of what has already been inscribed: it’s the witnesses, martyrs or examples that make it believable to others. It imposes itself in this way as the subject of the law, “The ancients have practiced it,” or “others have believed it and done it,” or “you already carry my signature in yourself.”

In other words, the normative discourse does not “work” unless it has already become a narrative, a text articulated upon a reality and speaking in its name, that is to say, a storied and historicized law, told by bodies. Its implementation as a narrative is the necessary presupposition for it to produce other narratives and make believe. And tools ensure the passage from discourse to narrative through interventions that embody the law by making bodies conform to it, and in such a way, accredit it with the ability to be recited by the real itself. From initiation to torture, all social orthodoxy makes use of instruments in order to give itself the form of a history and to produce the credibility attached to a discourse articulated by bodies.

Another dynamic completes the first and becomes entwined with it, that which pushes living beings to become signs, to find in a discourse the means by which to become a unit of meaning, an identity. From this opaque and scattered flesh, from this outstanding and murky life, transitioning finally to the clarity of a word, becoming a fragment of language, a single name, readable to others, citable: this passion lives in the ascetic who is armed with instruments against his flesh, or the philosopher who does the same through language, “losing his body,” as Hegel used to say. But everyone is a witness, thirsty to have or to finally be a name, to remain one who is called, to transform into a saying, even at the cost of his life. This textualization of the body corresponds to the incarnation of the law; it supports it, it even seems to be its foundation, at any rate it serves it. Because the law puts it into play: “Give me your body and I will give you meaning, I will make you the name and the word of my discourse.” The two problems are related, and maybe the law would have no power if it did not rely on the obscure desire to exchange one’s flesh with a glorious body, to be written, even if mortally, and to be transformed into a recognized word. Only the cry, apart or ecstatic, rebellion or inner fire of that part of the body that escapes the law of named things, stands in opposition to this passion for becoming a sign.

Perhaps all experience which is not a cry of joy or pain can be assembled under an institution. All experience which is not displaced or undone by this rapture is captured by the “love of the censor, “ collected and used by the discourse of the law. It is channeled and instrumentalized. It is written by the social system. We ought to also look at cries in order to find that which is not “reconstituted” by the order of the scriptural toolbox.

Translation: Salvatore Quasimodo, Alleyway

Alleyway in Talin, Estonia by Bora Mici

This is Bora Mici's original translation from Italian into English of the 20th-century Italian poet, Salvatore Quasimodo's poem Vicolo, or Alleyway. I chose to translate this poem because of its evocative imagery, which I found to be almost painterly in its choice of descriptive elements. I also enjoyed its simplicity, which is characteristic of Quasimodo. He marries an emotional rendering with a visual one, which all great artworks achieve. The alleyway is both typical and personal in this poem. We can all imagine what it is like to have been there. 

Salvatore Quasimodo, Vicolo by Bora Mici

Alleyway

Sometimes your voice calls me back,
and I don’t know what skies and waters
awaken within me:
the sun’s web that comes apart
on your walls which at evening were
a swinging back and forth of lamps
from the shops open late
full of wind and sadness.

Another time: a canvas cloth flapping in the courtyard
and at night a cry could be heard
of puppies and children.

Alleyway: a cross of houses
that softly call to each other,
and don’t know it is frightening
to be alone in the dark.

Art and Chemistry, A Reflection on Life and Energy

Bora Mici, oil paints palette and turpentine, 2014

This is Bora Mici's original text, written in Italian language, which may or may not contain some minor mistakes, since I am still learning this language. The text itself reflects on a thought my chemistry professor in high school shared with me about how artists are impressive because they create something out of nothing. At the time, I did not think much of it but over the past few days, I have challenged myself to use the subjunctive mood as much as possible, and this reflection on art, chemistry and added value is what emerged. You will follow my line of reasoning as to why we need to come up with a sustainable energy model for a better future. 

Ho una pagina bianca davanti a me e la devo riempire. Direi che si tratta già di una sfida di per sé. Una volta, dopo la lezione, il mio professore di chimica al liceo mi ha fatto un complimento e malgrado le sue parole incoraggianti e meravigliate non ne fossi rimasta convinta. All’epoca io ero molto impegnata negli studi, ed ero una brava studentessa in tutte le materie, anche se la pittura era la mia preferita. E tutti se ne accorgessero tranne di me. Dunque, un giorno, dopo che avessimo terminato le ore di classe, il mio professore di chimica, che era uno di quei tizi che cercavano sempre di star simpatici agli studenti, mi ha confessato che fosse rimasto sbigottito da una realizzazione dirompente. Aveva capito che i chimici non partono mai dal nulla per creare cose nuove, mentre gli artisti sì.

Allora, io direi che abbia ragione e no al contempo. Sebbene gli artisti partano da uno sfondo svuotato e ci mettano tutta la loro creazione sopra, che supponiamo, si inneschi dalla loro più profonda interiorità, non è che non godano di un supporto già esistente. In primis, benché possano essere convinti della loro sola autorevolezza, di essere un sistema autarchico a sé stante, gli artisti, come tutti quanti, si ispirano a un input, suscitato per forza da un fattore esteriore a loro, ad esempio un paesaggio oppure anche un sogno. Anche i sogni e le cose che ci immaginiamo non sono ermeticamente isolati dal mondo che ci circonda. Quindi gli stimoli esteriori si mescolano all'individualità di un'artista per far nascere un'opera d'arte che solo quella persona avrebbe potuto creare. 

Per non confonderci le idee, propongo che ci limitiamo ai pittori, quelli che dipingono un quadro sopra una superficie che consideriamo a prima vista priva di contenuto. E in questo non avrei risposto al mio professore di chimica che non avesse ragione. Però, in quanto chimico, avrebbe dovuto rendersi conto dell'importanza delle attrezzature di cui si servono i pittori per realizzare i loro dipinti. Non si può negare che troviamo tra di loro parecchi materiali creati con l’aiuto della chimica e della scienza e la sperimentazione, tra cui i pennelli con i peli naturali e quegli artificiali, le tele di cotone o lino ricoperte di uno strato di gesso liquido che fa in modo che la tela non assorbisca i colori, e non dimentichiamo i tubi dei colori stessi che vengono confezionati per la massima pigmentazione e perché la pittura possa perdurare attraverso i secoli. Forse il mio professore di chimica mi stava spingendo a riflettere proprio su questa interdipendenza tra artisti e chimici. Sara contento di sapere che ci sia riuscita vent’anni dopo e che la sua incitazione non sia andata sprecata. Quando mi ha condiviso la sua riflessione, per quanto l’avessi considerata con occhio scettico, non mi ero spinta fino alla conclusione dove sono arrivata oggi.

Adesso complichiamo un po' l'argomento, per inoltrarsi nel cuore del problema. Se prendiamo la teoria del valore aggiunto in termini economici, chi tra i chimici e gli artisti creano più di valore partendo da una basi materiale che poi trasformano per ottenere un nuovo prodotto? Sarebbe avventato pensare che non esistano anche artisti che scelgono di sfidare i limiti stessi degli attrezzi che impiegano, oppure quelli che ne inventano di nuovi. Per quanto possiate insistere che i chimici svolgono un lavoro essenziale e a fini pragmatici, perché appunto manipolano le sostanze e i componenti della vita, e forniscono gli ingredienti di altri prodotti più finiti, gli artisti e le persone creative sono i loro clienti più fedeli e non si stancano mai di mettere a frutta e di mostrare il potenziale del lavoro scientifico in ambiti diversi, dalla tecnologia all'uso innovativo di materie prime. 

Finalmente affronteremo un altro problema di tenore economico che in qualsiasi modo mi sembra difficile a dipanare e che ci permetterà una riflessione sulla totalità dell'esistenza umana sul pianeta terra. Mettiamo che il valore aggiunto sia un’invenzione umana molto importante per il nostro equilibrio psicologico che ci aiuti a sentirci valorizzati e ci dia l’impressione di poter crescere questo valore che portiamo anche agli altri, insomma che ci permette di sviluppare le ricchezze e fare progressi. Come facciamo a bilanciare l’equazione che pone da un lato le risorse limitate del pianeta e dall'altro questo valore aggiunto che ci dà l’illusione di poter progredire indefinitamente? Possiamo veramente creare qualcosa dal nulla come ha accennato il mio professore? 

Affinché questo si verifichi dobbiamo essere in grado di arginare a seconda della nostra volontà i poteri immensi della fisica quantica e far sicché una particella subatomica liberi un'energia tremenda che riusciamo a canalizzare, a conservare e a mobilitare a nostro volere. Perciò dobbiamo riuscire a creare più energie di quanto ne usiamo senza sprecarle. Però per quanto ne capisca io, e non sono un'esperta, secondo le leggi della termodinamica, l’energia si può soltanto trasferire, non si può ne produrne di più che ce ne sia già presente nell’universo, ne cancellarne o far sparire una parte. Dunque la realtà è che non possediamo mai niente ma prendiamo in affitto oppure prestiamo al mondo tutto ciò che riceviamo da lui durante la nostra vita per un intervalle limitato. Niente ci appartiene davvero a eccezione del tempo che abbiamo a disposizione. Dobbiamo capire come fare in modo da conservare lo stile di vita che vogliamo sia la norma e che ci possa permettere la convivenza più pacifica possibile come società unita.

Translation: Francis Jammes, It's going to snow

Edvard Munch, New Snow in the Avenue, 1906

This is Bora Mici's original French to English translation of the poem "Il va neiger" or "It's going to snow" by the French 19th- to 20th-century poet Francis Jammes. Even though it is currently the beginning of spring in the Washington, DC area, I was feeling somewhat nostalgic for winter's silence and was drawn to this poem in Georges Pompidou's anthology of French poetry. What I like about this poem is its background of snow falling and the constant and enduring everyday quality of the objects it describes. It evokes a sense of peace and comfort and quiet and eternity, and a reckoning with our innermost strivings to change the world around us by labelling things and thus seeking to possess them and make our imprint on them.  

Francis Jammes, Il va neiger... by Bora Mici

It’s going to snow…

It is going to snow in a few days. I recall
a year ago. I remember my sad thoughts
by the fire pit. If you had asked me though: what is it?
I would have said: let me alone. It’s nothing at all.

I have thought long, last year, in my room, I remember
whilst the heavy snow fell out the door,
My thoughts were naught. Now as before
I am smoking a wooden pipe with an end piece of amber.

My old chest of drawers still smells good of oak,
I was stupid because so many things

could not change and it’s just posing
to want to estrange the things we cannot stoke.

So why do we think and speak? It’s
our tears and kisses, they, don’t speak, [funny thing;
and yet we understand them, and the steps
of a friend are sweeter than sweet words linked.

We have baptized the stars without much thought
and they did not need a name, and the numbers,
which prove that the pretty comets in dark slumbers
will pass, all the same, will not make them change their lot.

And even at this moment, where are my sad fits
from last year? I barely remember them.
I would persevere: Leave me alone, it’s nothing ahem,
if you came into my room to ask me: what is it?