Unit or difference: between the derridian body and blanchotian poetry

Abstract

The present paper explores the interpretative divergence between the readings of Jacques Derrida and Maurice Blanchot in regards to the work of Antonin Artaud. Artaud’s work shows the problematic about the writing proccess as a place of absence, that is, the relationship traced between the thought and it’s representation on the spoken and written language. For Blanchot, the question about the impower, inherent to the writing proccess, is experienced by Artaud as the coming of the literary/poetical work, such as the works of other authors. In this sense, besides making your work the speaking place about the emptiness of language itself, Artaud, for Blanchot, also bases his search for the representative totality as a essentially poetic problem. In contrast, Derrida points that Artaud’s blanchotian comprehension, in order to theorize the being of writing, reduces the singularity and the oneness of the artaudian work by comparing it with the work of other authors. In this sense, it creates a paradox in regards to Artaud’s work: Derrida affirms the singularity of the artaudian work and the theater as the foundation to a metaphysical resignification of language; Blanchot defends that Artaud’s problem is a poetical/literary problem, insofar that the search for a total expression extends in every moment of the artaudian work, including, the theatrical.