a more intense and precise way than Artaud, Bataille forces representation by brutally
ending the concept of imitation, or rather of meta-imitation of art. Once
again we could say. Maybe. Unless we consider he ends it three
times. First of all, Bataille recalls that art, until today, has never
represented reality. Art always added a « created part » actively disseminating
and contaminating elements supposedly « representative » in
art. Secondly he demonstrates this irreducible « created part » is a
"cursed part ", submitted to censorship. Third by practicing
this experience: under certain conditions (History for example), to avoid a
general offensive, a great night of evil, this part should stop being that, a
part, a limited expense, supplement soul supplement and
a complement of being, to reach the magnitude of all, a major challenge of life.
What are the forms of [that] break? This is like asking which
constraint should be free to identify what is or what's left to break. Bataille
is radical, there is nothing. No transgression, and finally, no possible
subversion. We can’t exceed emptiness neither by the top nor by the
bottom. The art, the desire that it requires, can’t express, sacrifice nor
rape anything that occur, coming from outside. Nothing, nothing,
recognizes Bataille, which "is undoubtedly sacred." If he wants
to live, however, art must have the strength to be the priest and the victim,
"to reach the sacred moment by its own resources" to "create
itself", on and into space, away from "any past or present
reality," his "own reality".
The issue contained in any such answers, we can estimate it in terms of
performances, for the mere reason that at this time and in such circumstances
there is nothing to re-present but everything to present, a world to
rise. The issue must be evaluated in terms of creation, tear and rupture,
in other words sacrifice. 1 "
The sacrifice is a selfless act, absolutely free. If there is a form
of interest in the sacrificial act, the very notion of sacrifice
vanishes. It’s the uncertainty in risk taking that defines the value of
sacrifice. If any sacrifice were necessarily followed to effect the
exchange would be homogeneous and continuous. It is the rupture induced by
the uncertainty that makes the symbolic force. Not everything is
preordained. The world in this operation is malleable and fluid.
This is because after the gesture of sacrifice nothing is certain, that man
can reach, at least symbolically, "top" level of effective power in the
world. Because "at that point : until the likelihood of the
world dispels 2."
1 HEIMONET Jean Michel, Le mal a l’oeuvre, Georges bataille et l’écriture du sacrifice. Marseille, Parenthèses, 1986, p 113.
2 BATAILLE Georges, L’expérience intérieure, Paris, Gallimard, 2008, p 177.