Ethnographic Publication Site

english version

After Ethnomethodology

by Abdel Hernández San Juan

 

2- Restitution of Voice.

 

Within the theory of knowledge the concept of performativity has been related to the position of the literal subject. If the subject of knowledge is defined by being in movement and the object of knowledge by the effects of such movements --been performed from the position of knowledge--, then the concept of performativity should be seen through the different positions by which knowledge and the objects of knowledge interact with themselves. While a way can be taken from research problems, another one is possible by defining issues and themes, asking questions, etc, knowledge and the objects interact themselves by different ways according to the position of the subject. On the other hand, the concept of performativity should be seen as related with rhetoric’s, the media of the discourses and the variability of the meanings which becomes performed according to the media of its presentation and representation, parole, oral speech act, writing, printed materials, slides, video projections, etc, the same text presented within such different medias can be a completely different text, modified by the performativity of the effects and the rhetorics of the media.

Also, beyond the variability of the meanings according to the media of its presentations, performativity and rhetorics relates themselves by presentational modes of genres, a poem can be read on a very serious form, a very serious lecture can be read as a poem, a paper lecture written as a letter, and its is not the same to said something on the same by the first person of the singular, than by the third person of the plural on something out there.

By the way the concept of performativity should be defined according to the genres of discourses, a relationship subject-object which become performed given to the generic triggers of the voice, articulatory forms of the voice. As the concept of performativity results of relevance to the theory of knowledge, it is, however, only one between many other concepts and performance itself is not necessarily something that we should do as additional to the performance that was already there, on the every day life of the quotidian. The concept of performativity and the concept of relation are, in fact, very different one to the other; they are not the same thing. A relation suppose to be a kind of interaction defined by compenetration, introspection, reciprocity and the mutuality of communication, mutual given ness, performativity, instead, is defined by been unexpected, sorpresive, interpelative and usually works out of the principles of compenetration, mutual
understandings and agreements which characterize the composivedness of relations.

A clear example of the principles of performativity can be the idea of someone who creates a response to something that has been said on the auditorium by the lecturer and/or by some other one from the public, some unexpected speech. The performative phrase is always integrated by a response to the meanings of someone another phrase which becomes the object of the performantive effect, something from here and there should be priorized according to the performative purposivedness and attitude as to create a kind of interpelative unexpected response. Within performativity subjects are not in the position of communication but of interpellation and sometime, the performative act can moves outside of our ethical principles.

We should then define a move beyond performativity which I will like to call and define as Restitution of the Voice as the voice brings us beyond the redundancy of performance and performativity. If performance was already there, performativity can be not more than just a redundancy of the same. To go out and beyond the performative redundancy we need something as non repetitive. As the redundancy of performance and performativity suppose to be a kind of repetition of the identity of the represented within representation, it usually work as a redundancy of identity, a kind of identitary redundancy, the usual idea of the speaker and/or the writer who should mention his country of origin and his original cultural background every time when is taking the word.

While performance and performantivy are redundancies of identity, instead of identification, relations suppose to be defined by identification. If we have a relation with basis on compenetration and on the mutuality of communication them we have a kind of identification between the people who are in relation, related themselves. To the redundancy of performance and performantivity identification is not sufficiently, they need something more than just identification, they need the concept of identity and the concept of identity is a redundancy. Within performativity and performance the subject is talking about something, but making redundant his own identity, I am from, I come from and I am saying this or that because, etc, etc, redundant references to identity, something which redound as in the name of who, even when speaking in its own name his name should be a redundancy of some other represented "cultural identity".

The identitary redundancy which evolves the concept of - in the name of who - makes the act of speaking in his own name a redundancy on the identity of the whose name is speaking from, on and/or about. Representation then, as concept, become a redundancy of the performative redundancy evolved within the two concepts of representation, the representational and psychological one–with regard on how well represented is the woman on the painting, a matter of reference and reflex, for example—and representation as the representer, the idea of someone who represent some other one as a delegated.

They are all of them examples of the redundancy of identity by the redundancy of performantivity. If you are original from certain country you should need to said that only one time, to say something, to express yourself you can said it at the very beginning, I am originally from and/or I born, etc, one time and them you can said anything on anything as anybody from everywhere. If representation suppose to be different to the represented and by the way a principle of difference should work without repetition and redundancy to makes difference productive and productivity possible. The concept of difference has been, however, also exposed to the same performatic redundancy of identity. Only the restitution of the voice even within writing can restitute the productive and non repetitive principle of difference. From the relation between performance and parole—Austin and Searle–, to the Wittgenstein one on the common sense, including the concept of performance at the linguistic competence theory – transformational linguistic of learning – and the body art performance proceeded from the painting of gestures, performance is something that was already there.
To be creative and to practice critical conscience – even in unity with himself according to the ontology of the been--, the subject need difference, something that suppose to be related with some empty space between the given and the productive activity. Moving then the relation subject-object considering even the mobility of objectivity – is something similar and perceived among childrens interactivity when making clicks on any computer element, forms and color the openness of combinatory possibilities opens the relations subject-object to a free playing, the same can be exposed to different positions and perspectives impossible to be captured as objective from only one position, objectification then, should be priorized over the idea of objectivity.

As soon as assumed the mobility of objectivity the concept of textual nomadities comes to as primer matter, textual nomadities as the flux, fluctuation and refluxtuation of information as well as the regarding of any effects of contexts to parameters by which the variability of the effects of contexts flux’s and change according to the media of the presentation of text and images and according to the relation between texts and images among such population of textual nomadities, somehting that can be clearly seen between internet flux’s of texts, clicking of texts and images, the nomadism of constant texts variations and the constant inclusiveness of performativity as the inevitable position by which the subject can opt and click, stop and goes, makes responses to the unexpected when the surprises becomes from the flux’s of clicking and reclining both intentional acts of purposivedness and automata’s of responses, creative navigations and automatic accommodations of textual flux’s, individual itineraries and tendencies of the cyberspace.

The concept of can be seen as literal voice, but also as the what can be read as voice on the printed writing material, reading the voice on the printed writing on paper, books, literary works as when writing been even stylistically writing mantains its relation with the alives enuntiated and also as the texturated grane which from writing one can perceived the legibility of the text as something always susceptible to be read on the printed material as the speechnees of the analitical author voice. The voice can be, in fact, the only figure to restitute the truly texture of the individual expressive speaker among such described situation of the current and today performance, performative and performed subject-object relations.