LEADER 03740nam 2200685 450 001 9910806876203321 005 20220526150521.0 010 $a0-8232-8620-7 010 $a0-8232-8235-X 010 $a0-8232-8236-8 024 7 $a10.1515/9780823282364 035 $a(CKB)4100000007132978 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC5584098 035 $a(StDuBDS)EDZ0002092129 035 $a(OCoLC)1062418750 035 $a(MdBmJHUP)muse68824 035 $a(DE-B1597)554932 035 $a(DE-B1597)9780823282364 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL5584098 035 $a(EXLCZ)994100000007132978 100 $a20220526d2019 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurcnu|||||||| 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aPoetics of history $eRousseau and the theater of originary mimesis /$fPhilippe Lacoue-Labarthe ; translated by Jeff Fort 205 $aFirst edition. 210 1$aNew York, New York :$cFordham University Press,$d[2019] 210 4$dİ2019 215 $a1 online resource (169 pages) 225 1 $aFordham scholarship online 300 $aThis edition also issued in print: 2019. 311 0 $a0-8232-8234-1 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references. 327 $tFront matter --$tCONTENTS --$tNotes 330 $aRousseau?s opposition to the theater is well known: Far from purging the passions, it serves only to exacerbate them, and to render them hypocritical. But is it possible that Rousseau?s texts reveal a different conception of theatrical imitation, a more originary form of mimesis? Over and against Heidegger?s dismissal of Rousseau in the 1930s, and in the wake of classic readings by Jacques Derrida and Jean Starobinski, Lacoue-Labarthe asserts the deeply philosophical importance of Rousseau as a thinker who, without formalizing it as such, established a dialectical logic that would determine the future of philosophy: an originary theatricality arising from a dialectic between ?nature? and its supplements. Beginning with a reading of Rousseau?s Discourse on Inequality, Lacoue-Labarthe brings out this dialectic in properly philosophical terms, revealing nothing less than a transcendental thinking of origins. For Rousseau, the origin has the form of a ?scene??that is, of theater. On this basis, Rousseau?s texts on the theater, especially the Letter to d?Alembert, emerge as an incisive interrogation of Aristotle?s Poetics. This can be read not in the false and conventional interpretation of this text that Rousseau had inherited, but rather in relation to its fundamental concepts, mimesis and katharsis, and in Rousseau?s interpretation of Greek theater itself. If for Rousseau mimesis is originary, a transcendental structure, katharsis is in turn the basis of a dialectical movement, an Aufhebung that will translate the word itself (for, as Lacoue-Labarthe reminds us, Aufheben translates katharein). By reversing the facilities of the Platonic critique, Rousseau inaugurates what we could call the philosophical theater of the future. 410 0$aFordham scholarship online. 606 $aPhilosophy 606 $aImitation 610 $aAristotle, Poetics. 610 $aAufhebung. 610 $aRousseau. 610 $acatharsis. 610 $adialectics. 610 $amimesis. 610 $apurgation. 610 $atheater. 615 0$aPhilosophy. 615 0$aImitation. 676 $a194 700 $aLacoue-Labarthe$b Philippe$0161196 702 $aFort$b Jeff 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910806876203321 996 $aPoetics of history$94023433 997 $aUNINA