Mazarine Pingeot is a philosopher and novelist. She is the author of
Living Without. A philosophy of lack
(Flammarion).
LE FIGARO. - In your work, you point out the fact that the market economy has succeeded in giving a positive value to the word "without", which we find on products certified "without added sugars", "without sulphites", etc. How did she achieve this?
Mazarine PINGEOT. -
The exponential use of the word “without”, which consists of transforming absence into a supernumerary presence through linguistic sleight of hand, is remarkably intelligent. Not only from a monetary point of view, since these products are worth more. But above all symbolically, because buying “without” means giving the impression of doing useful work by committing ethically. This transformation of absence into financial and moral value is none other than a way of eradicating absence itself, this very distressing horizon for commercial society, embodied in decline. Rather than living “without consuming”, the market economy moved the preposition after the verb to finally “consume without”, therefore still consuming, but in illusion.
Rather than living “without consuming”, the market economy has moved the preposition after the verb to finally “consume without”, therefore still consuming, but in illusion
Mazarine Pingeot
You call this commodification “soft totalitarianism.” What do you mean ?
We should obviously not confuse totalitarianism as it applied under the Third Reich or under Stalin with the one I am talking about. The use of this terminology actually has to do with its etymology, which comes from "total." It is closely linked to the dialectic of the market, the objective of which is to fill the gap and transform everything that could be negative into positive. This system has a totalitarian claim to the extent that it does not only want to interfere in our purchasing actions, but in spheres supposed not to fall under this consumerist logic. The most obvious is that of romantic relationships, which has become a vast market with the proliferation of dating sites, whereas we can consider that it is because the lack is never filled that love is maintained. This consumerist logic permeates everywhere, it becomes very difficult to resist it.
What are the effects of this phenomenon on language, knowing that it is the lack that allows us to enter into culture and language?
As Klemperer said, language is the most powerful weapon of propaganda: we think through it and we are thought by it. But part of it is secret because we don't necessarily realize it. Language is normative, so it cannot be neutral. And since it is through it that we exchange - inventing a private language would not make sense - it always conveys an ideology. The fact that marketing has taken over language produces new standards for it. We see this through the use of everyday expressions in which “without” abounds – “without problem”, etc. -, making it rhyme with “with”.
“Positivity as the only horizon.”
These are the words you use in
Malaise dans la langue française
, a work edited by Sami Biasoni, about inclusive writing. Should we see this as another object of denial of lack?
There is now a tendency to liberalize language in the sense that what is symbolic must today resemble reality as much as possible. Now, language is not a thing, but that which designates things. Behind inclusive writing lies a noble cause aimed at restoring equality between men and women. However, in addition to failing in its vocation, this writing, wishing to integrate into language a sign of reality - here the mark of the feminine -, contravenes the very essence of language. Since this is generic, conceptual, the more we try to literalize it, the less it is able to say. And above all, the less it can serve as a tool for the artist, writer or poet. We are therefore wrong to deprive ourselves of this “symbolicity” by thinking of language as a thing, the horizon of positivity.
There is now a tendency to liberalize language in the sense that what is symbolic must today resemble reality as much as possible. Now, language is not a thing, but that which designates things
Mazarine Pingeot
Will we go so far as to no longer tolerate lack to the point of no longer wanting to name it?
We already tolerate lack only on the condition that it allows desire to be resuscitated, particularly consumerist desire. In reality, this lack hides another, more structural one: that of our condition, the one that pushes us to surpass ourselves through the creation, the quest and the production of meaning, of relationships... In short, everything that we could not do if everything was full. In short, what awaits us. It is therefore essential to return to the first condition of man, which does not seek to transform the lack into something positive - this is the transhumanist promise for example -, but into something symbolic which does not evacuate the questioning.
Because the instructions cannot be invented without being aware of the problem, let's start by being attentive to the signs and not letting ourselves be drawn into commercial logic, itself conveyed by language
Mazarine Pingeot
Finally, how can we escape from this tyranny of fullness?
There is no miracle recipe, but the solution lies in maintaining critical thinking. Rather than looking away from consumption, filling the gap in an unsatisfactory way, we must have the courage to look it in the face. From a more political point of view, there are also battles to be fought, surely, but it is very difficult to respond to them through a positive program. And because the instructions cannot be invented without being aware of the problem, let's start by being attentive to the signs and not letting ourselves be drawn into commercial logic, itself conveyed by language. Observe, decipher, criticize, this is ultimately the work of the philosopher.