Album: Unpublished Correspondence and Texts
Page 12
You’re seeing a certain collection of my daily thoughts that revolve around the immediate and practical future. Another subject of sometimes more distressing thoughts is my thesis itself. I’ve organized all my notes into the form of a very detailed plan, or even a draft that can serve as a general and quite necessary way to focus after the irregular work of these last years. Now, so far the work developed along these lines would hardly be worth an essay. It’s the entire academic—and thus historic, literary—dimension that must still be added; and for that I have no books. So I risk getting stuck very quickly. But that’s not all; at this point in my work, the relationship itself between the historical method and the structural method is the issue. For me, there’s no question of conceiving the structural criticism (which corresponds to the present part of my work) as anything other than a necessary but not sufficient introduction to the historical criticism; conjoining the two in a single work, in a single sweep, takes an immense effort that I don’t think I can make, at least not quickly enough. And the academics will never accept a thesis that’s only a vast explanation of the texts in an opus; and what use is a thesis to me if it doesn’t give me hope of someday, somehow, teaching at the university level in France? I’m not going spend my whole life wandering from one fascist country to another without the means for a critical work that corresponds to that life—already well advanced. You see the connection between the theoretical and the practical. A young Lithuanian, a professor here, Greimas, who has a doctorate, insists that I can convert my thesis—without difficulty, he says—into lexicological work.3 That way, I could do all the research I want, but it would take me longer to secure a position in France since the philological disciplines have considerably fewer candidates.4 On a deeper level, this would be to finally find a framework for constructive research, a nonhypothetical way to do sociology through language.…
Old nostalgia. I talk with him a lot about all this. This crisis takes on a critical aspect in light of my age. But will my work ever stop being a path? And toward what? For two weeks I have been strangely drawn to Cartesianism. Maybe I have to accept working for truths that, if not partial, are at least singular.… We may be finding ourselves at a similar point but on different paths. I need an answer from you. Be careful of the censors. Better to write through Maman.
Your friend,
R.
* * *
Paris, Thursday, May 15, 19525
My dear Philippe,
I have a brief break and I’m taking advantage of it to write you this note. I have much to do here right now and not a minute for my own work. Thus I am surer than ever of my decision to find a position when school begins. I still don’t know what; nothing will be perfect, but at least I’ll be able to recover a zone of quiet, of absolutely essential freedom, because the lack of time amounts to an actual wasting away for me that affects everything: my own work, culture (I no longer read), intelligence (I no longer have ideas), faith (I have no system, method, or even interest anymore), friendships (I neglect everyone), music, ethics (I do not even have that kind of Gideian fervor and freedom that made me love Paris, for example, or be happy taking some little stroll). The picture is very bleak. Not only am I always worried, tense—and at the same time exhausted—but also my ability to “plan,” which has always been so indestructible, suffers finally; I have no more confidence, I condemn myself for being indecisive, and I am afraid of making any decisions whatsoever about my future, as though that were necessary. Having poured all my humanism into intellectual research, and not being able to practice it, I feel myself becoming truly “inhuman.” And in moments, in flashes, I feel the deepest part of myself to be affected, the part that, exposed or ravaged, makes a man into an unrecognizable being.
This time with Cultural Relations is a fundamentally disappointing experience; I am creating nothing here. For me, who sustains myself only on principle, it’s the one place on earth where the word culture lacks all meaning. And how disappointing Baillon, for example, turns out to be as well; never is a general idea passed along to give you the least motivation to understand and execute it well. In reality, his endless scrambling only hides endless evasion, a total lack of interest in his colleagues. I don’t think he’s capable of doing a basic favor or understanding the basic situation of anyone he works with. And this amid what is called “the greatest kindness.” And I’m not speaking of that unwritten, unstated but unquestioned taboo that determines rank according to academic degrees and that makes it absolutely impossible for me to have any sort of real future, here or abroad. And since I lack the health for adventure (there was an Opportunity with Basic Education),6 I come back to that idea, that need for a thesis, even while I’m now afraid of succumbing under the burden of the enterprise, and of having a very difficult time accomplishing it abroad. At least I’ve decided to try again. I am really struggling anxiously with all these thoughts, and increasingly so. Sometimes I berate myself for being so susceptible to worry, even though I went through the ordeal of a disease, so much more terrible than anything else. But that is easily explained, because what is finally undermined by this Cultural Relations detour, these two years in Paris, is the very meaning of the life that I risk watching collapse, all in trying to sustain it unfulfilled and in a void—and that produces this vertigo.
Nothing is lost since, in any case, I will leave here this summer. Finding a little time, catching up a bit on reading, allowing myself to be lazy, and a job I like will let me regain that mental strength without which my present—but temporary—life is so anguished and sad.
Do not hold this too-lucid “point” against me, and most of all, do not worry about me. For now and until soon.
Your friend,
Roland
* * *
[Paris,] December 9, 1956
My dear Philippe,
Even so we have been a little worried about you and your note is reassuring. But what sinister buffoonery all that is!7 You must be very annoyed, it’s appalling.
Here, obviously, especially in the leftist circles where I move, it’s Hungary that was the big event.8
That was an enormous shake-up and it’s not over. How many heartbroken, disoriented friends! I have always thought that Stalinism was a sinister deviation from socialism with which socialism itself must compromise only under very specific conditions, so this has only confirmed my pessimism. I believe socialism is very ill and I don’t see how it can survive between those two massive capitalisms, the State and the American-West, that surround it. There are colonial wars everywhere now. What’s happening in Poland only gives the image of a last revolutionary correction.9 I have a hard time working with all this going on. I am getting started again now; I’m finally making headway in my sociology of clothing, and it’s not boring, quite soothing in fact.
Nothing much new besides that. Paris weighs on me more and more, but, without gasoline, we can no longer look for a house. What a mess France is! You can believe that my patriotism is deteriorating. Basically, what I cannot forgive France for is not how it’s so clearly leaning to the right, but its damned stupidity.
Have you no news for me? Write, if only just a note.
With all my affection, my dear Philippe.
Roland
2. Author of Le Degré zéro de l’écriture
Roland Barthes with Éditions Gallimard, Raymond Queneau, Jean Paulhan, and Marcel Arland
This group of letters with Queneau, Paulhan, and Arland offers a good summary of the Barthes’s relations with Gallimard. First, there is Gallimard’s rejection of Le Degré zéro de l’écriture, despite the support of Raymond Queneau (1903–76). Then comes Seuil’s publication of that book thanks to the support of Albert Béguin and Jean Cayrol.10 Successive solicitations follow from Jean Paulhan (1884–1968) and Marcel Arland (1899–1986), codirectors of La NRF from the time it reappeared in 1953.11 They tried to persuade Barthes to publish in the review and he systematically refused. We have included letters dating well beyond the publicat
ion of Degré zéro because even in 1972 Barthes continued to turn down requests from Gallimard. It took the intercession of Les Cahiers du cinema to convince Barthes to publish La Chambre claire with Gallimard in 1980, copublished with Seuil.
Raymond Queneau to Roland Barthes
November 9, 1950
Dear Sir,
I see, according to the “lead” in your article, that your research is only represented here in a schematic fashion.12 Have you ever considered proposing a more extensive account (quantitatively of course) to a publisher? “Established” as I am with Gallimard (see the Billet doux return address), I would be very happy to promote your cause in the publishing house.
I look forward to the rest of your articles. Could you send me the complete manuscript?
Please accept, dear sir, my best wishes.
Queneau
Lit. 28.91
* * *
February 8, 1952
Dear Sir,
Purely from the publishing perspective, there is little chance of publishing such a short work here. Distribution is difficult (bookstores have no interest). However, I would like (nevertheless) to bring it up here and pursue that “little chance.” Would you be so good as to send me your manuscript?
In any case, this will not prevent you from publishing the unpublished part of it in Les Temps modernes.
Please accept, dear sir, the expression of my best wishes.
Queneau
* * *
March 28, 1952
Dear Sir,
I am dismayed. I realize that your manuscript is stuck here under a pile of other ones.13 I read it more than a month ago and I would like to discuss it further with you. In short (because I am leaving tomorrow for a month and a half), I find it extremely important, and personal. I gave it a very favorable reading. But the same objection remains: the length (or rather, the opposite). It would have to be published in the Essais series, and even “inflated,” it would still need a few more pages.
I would like to reread the text and discuss it with you, but I have a thousand things to take care of before I leave.
During my absence, you could telephone Robert Gallimard regarding the fate of this book.
Again, I am so sorry, do forgive me, I follow everything you write with the greatest interest.
Very cordially,
Queneau
* * *
October 30, 1952
Dear Sir
Permit me to tell you how excellent I found your article “Le Monde où l’on catche.”14
I repeat: excellent.
Very cordially,
Queneau
* * *
March 4, 1955
Dear Sir,
I would be very happy to meet you one of these days. I have an honest proposition to make you (honest and encyclopedic).15 Could you come by Rue Sébastien-Bottin one of these days? I am there every afternoon but sometimes I am not.… The best thing would be to arrange a meeting. In any case, Tuesday between 2:30 and 4:30, you can certainly get hold of me (Lit. 28.91).
Please accept, dear sir, the expression of my best wishes.
Queneau
* * *
November 4, 1955
Dear Sir,
How is Tuesday at 4? If not, can you telephone me now so we can arrange another meeting time?
Very cordially,
Queneau
Jean Paulhan to Roland Barthes
July 12, [1953]
Dear Sir,
The news that I hear from Marcel Arland gives me great pleasure.16 Would you really accept 2000 francs per page? That would come to (approximately) 10,000 francs for each column, and 500 francs for each note that you would submit to us in the same way each month.
Yours very cordially,
Jean Paulhan
This is just between us, please.
* * *
November 29, 1953
It has been a long time, dear sir, and I owe you thanks for Degré zéro (although Maurice Blanchot had meant to thank you for all of us) and would like to ask you for an article and notes for La NRF. Alain Robbe-Grillet assures me that you will be coming to see us on Wednesday, and I am delighted.
Yours,
Jean Paulhan
* * *
December 20, 1953
Dear Sir,
Would you give us the study on Marcel Jouhandeau that I have been told you just completed?17 We would very much like to have it.
Is it too early to make New Year wishes? My wish is for your name to appear often in the coming year in La NRF briefs.
Yours very cordially,
Jean Paulhan
Roland Barthes to Marcel Arland (BLJD)
December 28, 1953
Dear Sir,
I am very touched by your kindness toward me and I thank you with all my heart. But, as you know, I have a grant from the CNRS and I must provide an annual report on my thesis work.18 And the time is approaching when I must present that report this year. So I must devote myself entirely to it, especially since I usually work very slowly and with much difficulty.
Please do not hold it against me that, for the moment, I must decline your request for work—I know the cost. And please accept my deep and humble gratitude.
R. Barthes
* * *
Hendaye, September 4, 1954
Dear Sir,
I have not forgotten your kind offer to make me a regular contributor to La Nouvelle NRF through a column of my own. I had told you I was moved by this offer and I would have liked to accept, but my answer had to wait until my situation at the CNRS became clear. I thought that would all be settled this autumn. Unfortunately it is not, and I must wait until spring 1955 to find out if I can be part of the Sociology division.19 At that time I must present a sufficient quantity of convincing work and, alas, it would be unrealistic to add a new obligation to this essential task, given how anxious I would be to achieve a level of perfection in fulfilling it, which would not leave me free to write the columns for Esprit and L’Observateur that I rashly promised them some time ago. May I ask for your patience for a few months longer?
I know how irritating my procrastination may seem, but it is because I am putting my desire to tackle a true sociological study before all other tasks and all other satisfactions, and for that I need the support of the CNRS. I cannot feel truly free until I have done everything possible to obtain it.
I do not presume to ask for a response, but I would nevertheless be very relieved if I knew that you understood my reasons and did not hold it against me too much. You know how much importance I attach to your esteem and support.
Please accept, dear sir, the assurance of my respectful and deep admiration.
Roland Barthes
Marcel Arland to Roland Barthes
September 10, 1954
Dear Sir,
Of course we are disappointed, Paulhan and me, not to be able to publish at present the columns we had discussed. But since those columns would hamper the work you must do, let us wait until spring.… Unless, between now and then, you write some article that you would like to give us.
Please accept, dear sir, my very deep and cordial respect.
Marcel Arland
Roland Barthes to Marcel Arland (BLJD)
September 24, 1954
Dear Sir,
I am sincerely moved by your understanding of my unintentional procrastination. I was concerned about annoying you. I promise to give you an essay for the Revue this year, while you await a more regular column.20
Please accept my feelings of deep and respectful friendship.
R. Barthes
11, rue Servandoni, Paris VIe
* * *
Paris, November 17, 1966
Dear Marcel Arland,
Forgive me for taking so long to answer your letter in which you asked me to contribute to the issue of La Nouvelle Revue française on Breton. I was in the USA and only discovered your letter when I returned.21 I am very sympathetic t
o your idea but sadly, for purely practical reasons, I will not be able to be part of this issue. I have an enormous backlog of work and I am not able or willing to take on a single new commitment. Please do not hold it against me; I am very touched by your faith in me and thank you for it.
Please accept, dear Marcel Arland, my warm regards.
Roland Barthes
* * *
January 9, 1972
Dear Marcel Arland,
I was very touched by your note (forgive me for taking so long to respond). I would like very much to give something to La NRF, the prestigious fulfillment of an adolescent dream! And I thank you for the invitation, but I am overloaded with professional (teaching) work, I have nothing ready, and I must wait for my life to slow down to fit in a bit of my own writing.
Thank you in any case,
With all my heart,
Warmly and faithfully,
Roland Barthes
Roland Barthes with Éditions du Seuil, Albert Béguin, and Jean Cayrol
Albert Béguin (1901–57), originally from Switzerland, was an intellectual and author of L’me romantique and Le Rêve, which so influenced Michel Foucault. He was undoubtedly Barthes’s first great reader and editor, along with Jean Cayrol and Maurice Nadeau. He became the editor of Esprit in 1950, the review where Barthes published his first piece on Michelet in April 1951. With Claude-Edmonde Magny, he directed the “Pierres vives” series at Seuil, in which Barthes’s works appeared, until the publication of Sur Racine in 1963.
Albert Béguin to Roland Barthes