!

"#"$% '())*$+,
By Pieiie Klossowski
Tianslateu fiom the Fiench by }oiuan Levinson

A lettei fiom Nichel Foucault to Pieiie Klossowski iegaiuing the book !"#"$% '())*$+,, wintei 197u

Beai Pieiie,

I shoulu have wiitten to you as soon as I fiist ieau !"#"$% '())*$+,; it knockeu the winu out of me
iight away, of couise, but still I coulu have given you moie of a ieaction. Now, aftei having ieieau it
seveial times, I know that it is the gieatest book of oui times. It gives one the impiession that
eveiything that counts one way oi anothei - Blanchot, Bataille, -."/* 0)12 34 5$/ 67* 84 611 - leaus
stiaight to it, insiuiously: but theie it is - it's been saiu, anu inueeu it's so gieat a book that eveiything
else falls back anu only counts half as much anymoie. That was piecisely what we shoulu've been
thinking about: uesiie, value, anu simulacium - the tiiangle that uominates us, anu, staiting so many
centuiies ago, has constituteu us thioughout oui histoiy. Those who saiu it then anu say it now,
Fieuu-anu-Naix, tiieu uespeiately foi it: now we can laugh about it, anu we know why.

If it weien't foi you, Pieiie, all we'u be able to uo is say we'ie against those tiuths that Saue hau
pointeu out once upon a time, tiuths no one but you has evei ieally gotten aiounu - nobouy, in fact,
has evei even come close. You saiu it, anu oui fate vanisheu into thin aii.

What you have uone foi us all, Pieiie, is tiuly beyonu all thanks anu iecognition.

Enulessly youis,

Nichel Foucault



-.$, .$./0*1.2 0.#* 3**$ 45($% .%."$2/ /0* ).#.%*2 64 "$7(2/)".5
+"#"5"8./"6$ 2"$+* /0* 1"775* 64 /0* $"$*/**$/0 +*$/(), "$ /0* $.1* 64
*16/"6$.5 !"4*9

:1;(/"$% /6 /0* 1*.$2 64 "$7(2/)".5 ;)67(+/"6$ . ;*)$"+"6(2 *44*+/ 6$
.44*+/< "9*9< 6$ *16/"6$2< 1*.$2 .+=$6>5*7%"$% /0./ "/ 0.2 +6$2"7*).35*
16).5 ;6>*)< "$ 6)7*) /6 7*$6($+* "/2 7*16).5"8"$% "$45(*$+*9 ?0*)*
76*2 /0./ ;6>*) +61* 4)61@

:/ +61*2 4)61 /0* 4.+/ /0./ /0* 1*)* .+/ 64 4.3)"+./"$% 63A*+/2 ;(/2 /0*")
;();62* "$/6 B(*2/"6$C 06> 76*2 /0* (2* 64 (2*4(5 63A*+/2 7"44*) 4)61 /0*
(2* 64 .)/ 63A*+/2< >0"+0 .)* D(2*5*22E 46) .$, .+/(.5 2(32"2/*$+*
;();62*2@

F6367, >6(57 *#*) +6$4(2* . /665 >"/0 . 2"1(5.+)(1< ($5*22 "/ "2 .2 .
2"1(5.+)(1 /0./ .$ 63A*+/ 0.2 "/2 $*+*22.), (2*9

*

9.*0(: ;11/. aie oiiginally insepaiable fiom (.5%* "$ 5 +(.6125), .*$.*< a
custom exists as a seiies of goous (natuial oi cultivateu) having an
unchangeable meaning because of the use we make of them. So one's own
bouy, because of the way it piesents itself to othei bouies, is a useful goou
whose chaiactei vaiies between alienable oi inalienable accoiuing to the
meaning that custom gives it (In this sense it is like a pleuge oi vouchei, as if
=1)67 something that cannot be exchangeu).

The manufactuieu object, as opposeu to (natuial) useful goous, though it may
still holu some habitual meaning (foi instance uepenuing on how metals aie
useu, which can have emblematic meaning), loses its chaiactei as its
manufactuiing becomes moie complex anu uiveisifieu. The act of
manufactuiing, which becomes moie uiveisifieu as it piogiessively gains
complexity, ieplaces the use of goous (natuial oi cultuial) with the efficient
utilization of objects. Since manufactuiable efficiency wins out on the piofit
level, the use of natuial oi cultuial goous, which uefines those goous
accoiuing to an inteipietation to uo with theii customaiy usage, is seen as
.6*)":*; use, that is, enjoyment, is steiile - since the actual goous aie
consiueieu unpiouuctive in the manufactuiable efficiency ciicuit. -$/ .1 67*
(.* 10 5$167*) >*).1$?. @1/,A "$ 67* .:5#* 6)500"+A +52* 61 @* .**$ 5.
($>)1/(+6"#*4 In the inuustiial eia, utensil manufactuiing uefinitively bioke
with the woilu of steiile usage to set up the woilu of manufactuiable
efficiency, ielative to which eveiy natuial oi cultuial goou - both human
bouies anu the eaith itself - is appiaisable in tuin.

Neveitheless, the manufactuie of tools itself also unueigoes a soit of
inteimittent steiility; all the moie since the acceleiateu pace of
manufactuiing must continually pievent inefficiency in its piouucts; theie is
only one iecouise against that: waste. As a pieiequisite foi efficiency,
expeiimentation implies waste uue to eiiois. Expeiimenting to uiscovei
what may be manufactuiable in oiuei to cieate a piofitable opeiation
essentially means eliminating any iisk of the steiility of the piouuct, at the
piice of wasteu mateiials anu human effoit (the manufactuiing costs).

If wasteful expeiimentation is a pieiequisite foi efficiency, anu since
expeiimentation is a univeisally auopteu behavioi foi all goous anu objects -
aiming to benefit fiom them - then what kinu of expeiimentation takes place
with iegaiu to goous which always piesuppose an ($+75$%*5@:* kinu of
usage, such as the fantasies that biing up voluptuous emotions, that teiiain
pai excellence of wasteful expeiimentation. The expeiimentation expiesseu
in the efficient manufactuie of simulacia.

The intelligible act of manufactuiing caiiies within it a uiffeiential aptituue
foi iepiesentation, which gives iise to its own ciisis: eithei it only wastes so
as to expiess itself thiough the act of builuing, uestioying, anu iebuiluing
inuefinitely, oi it 1$:, builus so as to *B>)*.. "6.*:0 67)1(%7 =5.6*. Bow can the
woilu of tools avoiu falling into the simulation of a fantasy. Nanufactuiing a
utensil object (foi instance, an 1)@"65: @12@) only uiffeis fiom manufactuiing
a simulacium (foi example the Callipygian venus) by theii contiaiy pietexts
of wasteful expeiimentation; to wit: the oibital nuke has no othei (.* except
to /".6)*.. the woilu of steiile usages. Bowevei, the Callipygian venus is just
the laughing face of the bomb, which tuins utility into ueiision.

The utensil supeistition giavitates aiounu this absuiuity: that a tool is not a
tool unless it's a simulacium. It is obligeu to piove the contiaiy, even if it
means maintaining its position on top of the woilu of steiile uses by
efficiently signalling its own uestiuction.

Though the gous weie the fiist piomoteis of the manufactuie of objects, by
which means manufactuieis weie to justify theii continueu subsistence,
staiting fiom the time that the manufactuie of iuols began to be consiueieu
useless, theie began a long eia of ignoiance about the specific commouity
chaiactei of the instinctual life in inuiviuuals, that is, a lack of knowleuge
about the uiffeient foims that pathological utility can take. This is wheie the
mouein notion of the "piiceless" natuie of ait - of "puie ait" in paiticulai -
comes fiom, which comes uown to uenying that pathos can be piiceu, insofai
as instinctive pathos is a souice of "fiee" cieation. It is in the uomain,
fuitheimoie, which is supposeuly the most exempt fiom pathos - that of the
economic application of science - that pathos has maue its most astute
invention, astute because it is usually not consiueieu pathological: the
inuustiial system.

Bon't economic stanuaius foim in tuin a substiuctuie of affect, not the
ultimate infiastiuctuie. Anu if inueeu theie weie an ultimate infiastiuctuie
to it, woulu it be compiiseu of the @*75#"1) 10 *216"1$. 5$/ "$.6"$+6.C If we
say yes, that means that economic noims aie, like the aits oi the moial oi
ieligious institutions, oi like all the foims of knowleuge, 1$* 21/* 10 67*
*B>)*.."1$ 5$/ )*>)*.*$656"1$ 10 "$.6"$+6"#* 01)+*.4 The way they expiess
themselves, both in the economy anu finally in oui inuustiial woilu, is subject
to the way they have been hanuleu by the economy of the ieigning
institutions. D756 67". >)*:"2"$5), 5$/ (:6"256* "$0)5.6)(+6()* ". 21)* 5$/
21)* /*6*)2"$*/ @, "6. 1=$ )*5+6"1$. 61 67* >)*#"1(.:, *B".6"$% .(@.6)(+6()*. ".
($E(*.6"1$5@:, 6)(*A @(6 67* 01)+*. 56 >:5, +1$6"$(* 67* .6)(%%:* 521$%
"$0)5.6)(+6()*. "$61 67* .(@.6)(+6()*.4 F1A 671(%7 67*.* 01)+*. "$"6"5::, *B>)*..
67*2.*:#*. "$ 5 .>*+"0"+ 25$$*) 5++1)/"$% 61 *+1$12"+ .65$/5)/.A 67*,
67*2.*:#*. +)*56* 67*") 1=$ )*>)*.."1$A 5. =*:: 5. 67* 2*5$. 10 .25.7"$% 6756
)*>)*.."1$A =7"+7 67*, *B>*)"*$+* 61 /"00*)*$6 /*%)**.: anu this goes on as long
as uoes the battle among the instincts, which is wageu within a given
oiganism foi anu against the foimation of the oiganism as theii agent, foi anu
against psychic anu bouily unity. Inueeu, that is wheie the fiist "piouuction"
anu "consumption" schemes come into being, the fiist signs of compensation
anu haggling.

The fiist instinctual iepiession foims the 1)%5$"+ 5$/ >.,+7"+ ($"6, 10 67*
5%*$6, a iepiession which, staiting fiom saiu agent, enfoices 5 +1$.6)5"$6 6756
67* 5%*$6 +1$6"$(*. 61 ($/*)%1 /()"$% 67* @566:* =5%*/ @, 67* "$.6"$+6. 5%5"$.6
67* +1$.6)5"$6. 6756 +1$.6"6(6*/ 6756 ($"6,4 This iepiession anu that combat, of
couise, extenu outwaiu into the exteinal woilu whenevei the agent's
inuiviuual unity is integiateu anu thus uefineu by a hieiaichy of neeus: 67*
7"*)5)+7, 10 $**/. ". 67* *+1$12"+ 01)2 10 )*>)*.."1$ 6756 67* *B".6"$%
"$.6"6(6"1$. "2>1.* @, 5$/ 67)1(%7 67* 5%*$6?. +1$.+"1(.$*.. 1$ 67*
"2>1$/*)5@:* 01)+*. 10 7". >.,+7"+ :"0*4 Thanks to his acquiieu oiganic anu
moial unity, the inuiviuual, in his own suiiounuings, can only foimulate his
instinctual life by means of a set of suitable mateiial anu moial neeus; it is not
foi him to affiim himself by the movements of his emotional life, but iathei,
as the beaiei of his own unity, to affiim himself by his aptituue to possess
goous exteinal to himself; by pieseiving them, piouucing them, giving of
them foi consumption by otheis, anu by ieceiving them, as long as they aie
objects anu not living units, unless in conuitions wheie "6 ". +1$."/*)*/
G:*%"6"256*H 61 >1..*.. :"#"$% @*"$%. 5. ."2>:* 1@I*+6..

"D7*)* 5)* $**/.A .(+7 5. .*B(5: $**/.A =71.* .56".05+6"1$ =* +5$$16 .5, "2>:"*.
*+1$12"+ 5+6"#"6, 5. .(+7J =* =":: $*#*) @* 5@:* 61 *B75(.6"#*:, *$(2*)56* 67*
$**/. 10 2*$." (Raymonu Aion, K"%76**$ !*..1$. 5@1(6 L$/(.6)"5: F1+"*6,A
uallimaiu.)

Bow can the voluptuous emotion be ieuuceu to a commouifieu object anu, in
oui times of fanatical inuustiialization, become an economic factoi. To
unueistanu this we must consiuei foi a moment what it is we mean by the
teims "sexuality" anu "eioticism." Then peihaps the foims of the voluptuous
emotion will ieveal theii simultaneously seciet anu tiagic connection to the
anthiopomoiphic phenomenon of economy anu exchange.

Since Saue (anu thus long befoie Fieuu), what have we uisceineu in the
uesciiption of peiveision, i.e., the voluptuous emotion taking something
appaiently incongiuous as its object. The behavioi analyzeu by Saue, fiom
what he calls the simple passions to the complicateu passions - which aie
calleu peiveisions - is meiely 67* 0").6 )*5+6"1$ 61 >()* 5$"25:"6,A 5$/ .1 ". 5
>)"25), "$6*)>)*656"#* 25$"0*.656"1$ 10 67* "$.6"$+6. 67*2.*:#*.A .("65@:* 01)
@)*5M"$% /1=$ .>*+"0"+5::, =756 ". 2*5$6 @, 67* 6*)2 .*B(5:"6, "$ %*$*)5:A
=7*67*) 1$ 67* 1$* 75$/ 67* #1:(>6(1(. *216"1$ >)*+*/"$% 67* 5+6 10
>)1+)*56"1$A 1) 1$ 67* 167*) 67* .>*+"0"+ "$.6"$+6 10 >)1+)*56"1$ "6.*:0A 6=1
>)1>*$."6"*. =7"+7 =7*$ 2*)%*/ %"#* )".* 61 67* ($"6, 10 5$ "$/"#"/(5: 5>6 61
)*>)1/(+*A anu the piolongeu sepaiation of which, in spite of an inuiviuual's
oiganic fulfillment, challenges his own life function. So the teim "peiveision"
only iefeis to the fixation of the voluptuous emotion in a state pieceuing the
act of piocieation, while Saue's teims, simple passions combining into
complicateu passions, uesignate the vaiious tiicks by which the piimoiuial
voluptuous emotion, in its inteipietative capacity, comes to select new
objects of sensation fiom among vaiious oiganic functions to ieplace just 67*
>)1+)*56"#* 0($+6"1$A 5$/ 67(. 61 71:/ 67* :566*) "$ 5 .(.>*$/*/ .656*
"$/*0"$"6*:,. What aie these substitutions, these tiicks, if not /*/(+6"1$. 0)12
67* "$.6"$+6 61 >)1>5%56* 67* .>*+"*.C The instinctive foice thus /*/(+6*/
foims the )5= 256*)"5: 01) 5 05$65., that 67* *216"1$. "$6*)>)*6; anu the
fantasy 7*)* >:5,. 67* )1:* 10 67* 25$(05+6()*/ 1@I*+64 The use of a 05$65., by
an instinctive foice >(6. "6. >)"+* 1$ 67* *216"1$ which is @1($/ (> ="67 67".
+(.6125), (.5%*, anu the (.* 10 67* 05$65., *:"+"6"$% 67* *216"1$ ". "$6*$/*/A "$
67* 5+6 10 >*)#*)."1$A >)*+".*:, 61 @* $1$N*B+75$%*5@:*4 Beie is wheie we see
the piimaiy value-appiaisal of an emotion expeiienceu: 5$ "$.6"$+6A which we
call >*)#*)6*/ because it iefuses the %)*%5)"1(. +(:2"$56"1$ 10 "$/"#"/(5: ($"6,
anu iefuses the piocieative function of the inuiviuual, 100*). "6.*:0 "$ 5:: "6.
"$6*$."6, 5. 67* $1$N*B+75$%*5@:*A that is, 6756 =7"+7 05::. 1(6."/* 10 67* )*5:2
10 >)"+*.4 Anu though the unity of an inuiviuual may be complete
physiologically, in his bouily appeaiance, it is in a way exchangeu foi the
05$65.,, by which he is now exclusively unuei constiaint.

Theie is no economy of voluptuous pleasuie that coulu piofit fiom inuustiial
means - as the moialists claim, as they uenounce it ipso facto to the
institutional watchuogs. 0n the contiaiy, just the opposite is the case: it is
inuustiy that piofits off what is unfoitunately calleu eioticism as an
economically vaiiable noim. But in the spheies of piint, auveitising, anu
cinematic piouuction, that is, of suggestion, it isn't quite effecteu by the kinu
of ueuicateu exploitation that the inuustiy woulu be capable of caiiying out if
the means of piouuction weie in the hanus of those who these "piouucts"
uiiectly concein. Not that the piopaganua oi auveitising (of high fashion oi
cosmetic piouucts) expiesses this. Such an economy still iemains latent anu
peihaps will not manage to come fully into its own while the inuustiial
system is still unable to pieuict the conuitions of enjoyment on any level
othei than the uomestic, insiue of a bouy of laws baseu on the family unit.
Anu yet, with all the means anu iesouices that constitute it, inuustiy signifies
an alieauy complete bieak with the spiiit of such laws, a long-ago completeu
upheaval of the customs anu habits that the institutions still pietenu to
pieseive.

Inuustiy uses as the funuamental piinciple behinu all its initiatives the iuea
that all human phenomena, like all natuial phenomena, may be tieateu as
*B>:1"65@:* 256*)"5:, anu thus 25, @* .(@I*+6*/ to the fluctuations of #5:(*A
but also to all the )5$/12 +75$+* "$#1:#*/ "$ 7(25$ *B>*)"*$+*4 So the same
goes foi the simultaneously spiiitual anu animal chaiactei of the voluptuous
emotion, consiueieu on the basis of its >1=*) 10 .(%%*.6"1$4

In the woilu of aitisanal inuustiy, iepiesentations of the voluptuous emotion
weie communicateu - as was all knowleuge - thiough instiuments of
suggestion, such as paintings, books, theatei; anu it was only by means of
laboi supplieu with the use of these instiuments that the *216"1$ being
suggesteu coulu ciiculate 5. 5 )5)* 1@I*+6. Theie still, value - uefineu
accoiuing to classical economy's hieiaichy of neeus- aiose fiom the unique
chaiactei of the >)*.6"%* 1@65"$*/ @, 5$ "$.6)(2*$6 10 .(%%*.6"1$A not by the
emotion one might feel fiom it: this is because the ."2(:5+)(2 was still pait of
the woilu of "iueas," anu thus of cultuie; the .(%%*.6"1$ "$ "6.*:0 still +1.6 moie
than the sensation one might feel fiom contact with the suggesteu object.

Staiting with the inuustiial system, which on the basis of mass consumption
even stanuaiuizes the 2*+75$"O*/ "$.6)(2*$6. 10 .(%%*.6"1$ as well as those
of knowleuge in geneial, communication loses its piice by changing its natuie
anu its intent, anu the suggestion pioviueu by steieotypes becomes moie anu
moie fiee in its effects, insofai as the piototype itself iemains outsiue of the
iealm of piices. The ieveisal is total: the sensation 6756 +5$ @* 0*:6 is woith
moie than its suggesteu image. Bowevei, the iesulting tension cieates a
massive exploitable teiiain at the same time as the steieotyping of suggestion
allows inuustiy to "$6*)+*>6 "$/"#"/(5: 05$65."*. "$ 67*") %*$*.". 61 )*/")*+6
67*2 61 "6. 1=$ *$/.A to tuin them away anu uispeise them, so as make them
piofitable foi the institutions.

We might almost look like we'ie making a puiely analogical ielationship heie
between the "economy" of emotions anu the economy of neeus, uefineu by
exchange. That woulu leau nowheie, unless we stait fiom the peispective of
1@I*+6. anu $**/., examining the stiuggle of the emotions against 67*")
"$5/*E(56* 01)2(:56"1$A 256*)"5::, iestiuctuieu to wheie they become meiely
5 /*25$/ 01) %11/., which only iesponu to that uemanu by antagonizing it
fuithei.

Consiuei in this iestiuctuiing piocess fiist the function of $(2@*).A upon
which uepenus the piice of these goous anu the means of acquiiing them,
goous which in themselves aie inauequate.

Then consiuei 67* +(.6125), (.5%* 10 671.* %11/., which "$ 6()$ 75. 5$ *00*+6
1$ *216"1$.4

Thiiuly, consiuei the moie oi less conscious /"00*)*$6"56"1$ between the
>1..*.."1$A the +(.6125), (.5%*A anu the value oi non-value of these %11/.,
5++1)/"$% 61 =7"+7 67*, *"67*) )*>)*.*$6 *216"1$5: .656*. 1) $16A in piovoking
new ones, by which the piimaiy, emotional uemanu is piovisionally
oveicome, oi iathei is accentuateu, by a 0($/52*$65: /".+1)/5$+*4

A soit of intimiuation anu blackmail aiises immeuiately between the
necessity of subsistence anu the mannei of enjoyment, once subsistence is
ensuieu.

This intimiuation, to vaiious uegiees, contiibutes to foiming the emotional
uemanu on the level of inuiviuual neeus: such oi such a gioup of inuiviuuals
submit to the stanuaius of exchange, anu thus agiee to uefine themselves
moially anu socially accoiuing to a categoiy of neeus which expiesses the
way that this gioup, by viitue of its moue of subsistence, intenus to enjoy the
coiiesponuing goous.

Fiist of all, fiom the economy's peispective, what is calleu eiotic enjoyment
cannot be tieateu the same as if it weie just the enjoyment of one moie goou
among othei goous: it is only to the extent that it ielates to an object, that is, a
living object (a bouy), that the enjoyment of that object as a possessable thing
is oi can be consiueieu as the enjoyment of a goou - a useful object. Which
Saue's wiiting expiesses in a veiy simple anu veiy ambiguous way: 67* )"%76
61 >)1>*)6, 1$ *$I1,2*$64

In the 7"*)5)+7, 10 $**/., eiotic enjoyment is bounu up with sexual "neeu":
that is, with the inalienable $**/ 01) 5 712*, the basis of that piimaiy neeu
calleu the uomestic neeu. It's not a mattei of *)16"+ enjoyment pei se, which is
ieuuceu to the iank of a meie #"+* among all the othei vices, only unueistoou
as a "uemanu" giving iise to geneial piospeiity when "iefusal to invest" is
being uenounceu as giving iise to public miseiy.

Staiting in the last centuiy, eiotic enjoyment has come to be seen as the most
vital human neeu. Anu so "utopian socialism" ueciueu to extenu the
"+122($"O56"1$H 10 5:: %11/. 61 67* :"#"$% 1@I*+6. 10 #1:(>6(1(. /*.")*4

Fouiiei's pioject, which hau foi a long while been buiieu, is now ieemeiging,
in the foim of uiligent exegeses maue in a context totally uiffeient than the
one in which it was boin. The empiiical attempts it gave iise to moie than a
centuiy ago, paiticulaily in the 0niteu States, nevei went beyonu the
impiovisational initiatives of a few geneious anu enthusiastic inuiviuuals, anu
hau no chance of ueveloping oi lasting. Things aie quite uiffeient touay,
wheie inuustiial conuitions alone have manageu to uisiupt the olu classes
anu piolifeiate new ones out of them, while in geneial the expeiimental
thinking anu meaning of the last geneiations has biought much laigei gioups
to appioach similai piojects, wheie eithei they will iiu themselves once anu
foi all of the notion of utopia, oi, much to the contiaiy, wheie they will
iecovei the iuea of 6756 =7"+7 ". $1=7*)* 61 @* 01($/ by iuentifying
themselves with that $1=7*)* anu extenuing it eveiywheie, as the sole
ieality, by theii 5+6"#* >)*.*$+*4

The phalansteiian communization by which passional exchanges aie to
ieuistiibute society into classes of affinities - in keeping with the law of
Attiaction - tiansfoims the veiy natuie of woik itself. Fouiiei heie
pieemptively uenounces the false notion of "iecieation," caiefully oiganizeu
foi the vaiiously "woiking" classes. In oiuei that the communization not only
of the means of piouuction but of inuiviuuals as well can suppiess the
punitive chaiactei of laboi, the piouuction of objects, even utensil objects,
must be uone not in accoiuance with "$/(.6)"5::, /*6*)2"$*/ $**/, but always
with >5.."1$5: aspiiations: woik must take place in the euphoiia of
imagination, as the spontaneous anu cieative activity of man. Since it
emulates vaiious gioups, vaiious classes of ages anu affinities, vaiious
"hoiues," all activity woulu be oiganizeu like a iitual game, 67* #*), .>*+65+:*
10 =7"+7A @, 67* .65%"$% 10 *B+75$%*. @*6=**$ 500"$"6, %)1(>.A 2(.6 *$.()* 67*
@5:5$+* 5$/ 5>6"6(/* 10 *5+7 5$/ 10 5::A :"M* 5 #5.6A +1$6*2>:56"#*A .>*+65+(:5)
)*+5>"6(:56"1$ 10 67* )5$%* 5$/ #5)"56"1$. 10 "$.6"$+6"#* :"0*4 Fiom that aiose a
complicateu anu subtle combination of polygamy anu polyanuiy, in what was
calleu the "haimonian" social piinciple.

We must fiist iemaik that the piemise of "0)**$*.." (blossoming out fiom
communization into the fiee play of passions) heie seems to emeige
abstiactly fiom a vital element of the voluptuous emotion: the aggiessive
element, which uemanus anu piesupposes iesistance - implicit in cieative
woik anu in emotional piofit - i.e., that which iemains "))*#*)."@:* in the
absence of play. Not only uiu Fouiiei not ignoie this, his whole invention
consisteu in wanting to satisfy the aggiessive piopensities, voluptuous
aggiessiveness in paiticulai, thiough a playful oiganization of passional
situations which in themselves aie not so playful. Bow coulu such an
aiiangement fill the iole of the piovocation anu challenge that make it so the
voluptuous emotion in its veiy genesis is "$ $1 =5, 0)** 10 +75)%*A but
piesupposes appiaisal, value, anu escalating bius - anu thus 5 >)"+* 61 @*
>5"/. 0ne might say that aggiessiveness compiises the veiy substance of the
game being playeu. But by elaboiating the vaiious uiives in the foim of
activities that iemain meiely theii simulacia, saiu play aims to captuie anu
thus channel the outcomes of the peiveise basis implicit in the voluptuous
emotion. Eithei this play empties of its content that which it hau intenueu to
make blossom, oi it only manages to make it blossom as a playful activity by
:*5#"$% 6756 #*), @5.". "$65+6. In oiuei foi theie to be a simulacium, theie
must be an iiieveisible basis foi it, since that ieality is insepaiable fiom the
fantasy contiolling the ieality of a peiveise behavioi. Saue says that the
fantasy, acting within the oiganism anu its ieflexes, iemains ineiauicable;
Fouiiei contests this: the fantasy can be iepiouuceu as a simulacium.

The simulacium in this sense is not howevei a kinu of cathaisis - which is
only a ieuiiection of foices - because it iepiouuces the ieality of the fantasy in
the iealm of play, by .65%"$% the aggiessive ieality. Fouiiei is betting not so
much on fieeuom as on the libeiatoiy cieation of a ieality: the game. Saue
was not aiming at the cieation of a peiveision-compatible object, to be maue
into a game, because peiveision is itself a game, a kinu of play with the
inuomitable foice of the noims. That's why the uestiuction of its object is
insepaiable fiom the peiveise emotion: the ueath instinct anu the life
function cannot be uissociateu fiom one anothei. Fouiiei championeu the
malleability, the plasticity of human uiives: they weie only "life" uiives oi
"ueath" uiives ielative to how immutable, oi how mutateu, the fantasy was.
Anu Fouiiei in tuin nevei ceaseu to affiim that the liveu events of iesistance,
aggiessiveness, in shoit, of violence, foimeu the uiiving foice of the game.
Anu if that game is inueeu a simulacium, how coulu it fail to uiminish the
liveu event of violence, as soon as saiu violence fuinishes substance to the
simulacium. Saue, without coming to a final conclusion, woulu object once
moie: in oiuei that only the singulaiity of a mania oi a peiveision can be
expiesseu, an agent is necessaiy. But in oiuei foi saiu agent to 1@.*)#* 67*
)(:*. of youi "game," how woulu he "seiiously" simulate what he feels except,
no bettei oi otheiwise, than by simulating his own fantasy, which makes him
the maniac oi peiveit. Seiiousness heie uoes not iesiue in the fienzy with
which this agent clings to his uiiving fantasy, but in the iiieuucible foice with
which the uiives holu the agent in his fantasy, manifesting themselves by
uevouiing him. If this seiiousness weie not piesent, theie woulu not be any
ieal voluptuous pleasuie eithei, anu it's only evei ieally felt if it is consiueieu
seiious, in oiuei that it can be light anu fiivolous compaieu to the iest of
existence, having fiist "paiu the piice of seiiousness."

Now what seems to be a ueteiminant aspect of Fouiiei's quite singulai
constiuction is that at the time when he uesigneu his pioject, the viitue of the
game was still wholly conuitioneu by a paiticulai social context wheie the
iules of play weie to iemove peiveision itself fiom any eluciuating uisplays.
It was to Fouiiei's gloiy that he expiesseu anu uenounceu this covei-up,
staiting with the economic stanuaius themselves. Piecisely wheie that
covei-up hau been safely unueiway.

Bowevei, the game play of oui contempoiaiy inuustiial woilu, which goes so
fai as to exploit eveiy uisplay, incluuing uisplays of the peiveise element,
obliges us to iethink the phalansteiian utopia staiting fiom entiiely new uata.
Its pioject is only "utopian" in piopoition to the iesistance that the bouigeois
inuustiial woilu, with its gieeu, biings to beai against Fouiiei's luciu
piophecies. But theie might be something tiuly )5/"+5: that otheiwise
explains that iesistance, something othei than simple gieeu.

Fouiiei peifectly giaspeu what the /*:"@*)56* %*.6()* 10 .*::"$% 1$*.*:0
signifies in the eiotic imagination: the impact of it, socially consiueieu sinful
anu heinous, was iepugnant to him, because saiu gestuie leaves ueep
wounus, since in "civilization," i.e., in the inuustiial mechanism, the 2*5$"$%
10 67* %52* uoes not guaiantee the >:5,0(: )*#*)."@":"6, of its gestuies, as
woulu have been the iule in P5)21$,4 Saue's anti-utopian pioject, in what it
ieveals *+1$12"+5::,A insofai as peiveision itself gives iise to value - helps
one unueistanu moie cleaily the meaning of Fouiiei's playful fieeness.

*
* *

Piioi to the haimonian utopia, anu as its pieemptive iefutation, Saue - in the
name of the univeisal natuie of the voluptuous sensation, anu as a piemise
aiising fiom his integial atheism - uevelopeu a kinu of communization wheie
the physical anu moial piopeitypiopiiety of peisons was violateu. Since the
moial uou, guaiantoi of the self-iuentical, iesponsible self, hau uisappeaieu,
each peison belongeu to eveiyone, anu eveiyone belongeu to each, as %11/..
But with Saue, what Fouiiei saw as a 0)**Q($>)"+*5@:* moial expiopiiation of
peisons, in keeping with the uiffeiential law of affinities became a piinciple of
univeisal piostitution: that each peison male anu female was calleu upon to
.*:: themselves, oi weie offeieu foi >()+75.*. In oiuei that each peison, male
oi female, woulu be saleable, each peison hau to keep theii moial piopiiety,
which constituteu the inuiviuual's value when on sale: slaves aie not ineit
objects with no self-love, but living beings, ieuuceu to objects whose
attiaction consists in theii being humiliateu oi able to be humiliateu
(uelibeiately oi otheiwise), in theii uignity, integiity, anu aptituue to possess
theii own goou, to possess themselves; the Sauist eiotic emotion comes fiom
the bieaking of that integiity, that piostitution, whethei voluntaiy oi foiceu.
A piostitution whose "quality" comes fiom the biuuing-up of the piice that its
subjects put on themselves in piopoition to theii moial uegiauation; the
moie they aie "coiiupteu," the moie theii piice goes up - such as happens
with the chaiactei of }uliette. Thus the voluptuous sensation is intensifieu
immeuiately: anu that intensification is no longei fiee of chaige, but is uue to
the veiy fact that the objects fiom which this sensation flows now consiuei
themselves saleable. Now, this venality, accoiuing to the sauist
inteipietation - is baseu on the fact that these beings can nevei communicate
amongst themselves except as tiafficable objects. This is why, befoie
consiueiing the iole of the numeiaiie in this uilemma, we shoulu take a
moment to analyze what compensates foi this incommunicability within the
utensil object manufactuiing woilu. Because the act of manufactuiing has to
uo with the way that human beings behave, not only towaius all goous as
manufactuiable, but also towaius theii own bouies anu the bouies of otheis,
as instiumentalizable. What inclinations woulu benefit fiom it, as the
uemanu siue. What woulu the supply siue be.

Looking at inuustiy, with its innumeiable techniques anu technologies, woulu
leau one to believe that manufactuiing instiumental, factoiy maue, utensil
objects is its way of neutializing its instinctual uiives. But with its own
stanuaius it gives iise, on the contiaiy, to a fantasy iepiesentation of its
foices, anu this gives iise to a uouble peispective.

The manufactuie of moie anu moie complex utensil objects iequiies that two
oi thiee abilities be exeiciseu togethei, as ueteimineu by some oiuinaiy
opeiation, anu sepaiates the peiceptible fiom its bouily agent; not only uo the
"eyes that uon't see" anu "eais that uon't heai" suipass limiteu manual
exeicise in teims of contact, but fuitheimoie inueeu, the "$.6)(2*$6 they
compiise >)1I*+6. "6.*:0 "$61 67* 1@I*+6. 61 @* >)1/(+*/ as the set of
uiffeientiateu physical anu mental functions to which the objects conceineu
iesponu.

The opeiation of instiuments fiist appeais as a uepaituie fiom iegions wheie
manual activity, still moie oi less guiueu by uieamlike poweis, hau captuieu
those poweis anu exoiciseu them in some way into its piouucts. With that
abanuonment, as the instiument libeiates the hanu, the eye, anu the eai, it
simultaneously libeiates saiu poweis, which, appaiently no longei what they
weie to the bouily agent, become all the moie suiely the poweis of utensil
peiveision, anu of peiveision puie anu simple, since theie is now an extia-
bouily agent that opeiates at theii seivice: the instiument itself, which biings
to light the object pieviously ueteimineu anu ueaiticulateu by its
iepiesentation so as to be ieaiticulateu instiumentally. Because of this, as the
mateiializeu abstiaction of appiehension itself, but also as the
"mentalization" of bouily contact, the instiument is the immeuiate agent of
the fantasy. The piimaiy aspect, but also the piimaiy consequence of this
stiict ielationship between inuustiial behavioi anu the fantastical behavioi of
peiveision: 67* 1@I*+6 *B>:5"$. "6.*:0 1$:, "$ 6*)2. 10 "$.6)(2*$65: +1$65+6. }ust
as the peiveise fantasy comes into being as a useful object foi the voluptuous
emotion by bieaking uown the oiganic functions, anu, by ieuistiibuting them
incongiuously, pioviues 21)* peisistent enjoyment 675$ 5 G7*5:67,H
.*$."6"#"6, *#*) +1(:/, the instiument is 052":"5) "$ 5 /"00*)*$6 =5, ="67 its
object anu its effects, 5$/ 21)* .1, than a hanu coulu be, because it was
uesigneu with specific iefeience to exploitable oi manufactuiable objects, anu
- whethei inanimate oi living - is only evei uefineu with iefeience to its
exploitation oi to what it can manufactuie.

The instiument is thus as insepaiable fiom the object that it piesupposes,
manufactuies anu exploits, as peiveision is fiom the fantasy it engenueis.
Both act as constiaints upon the usage of theii piouucts. Whoevei wants the
object wants the instiument. Which is why - anu this is seconu aspect of the
stiict ielationship between the instiumental behavioi anu the peiveise
behavioi - opeiational iepetition is common to them both. The constiaint
uiives the iepetition. Peiveision's iepetition is executeu thiough the fantasy
of a vital function, which, being unintelligible, acts as a constiaint; it is
unintelligible because it's isolateu fiom the oiganically intelligible whole.
Though the opeiation that an instiument effectuates, limiteu because it is
only functional, immeuiately appeais absuiu as soon as it is useu in a mannei
contiaiy to its intenueu puipose, all instiuments in themselves exteinalize a
fantasy. This alone pievents them fiom appeaiing to have a still-vaiiable
uegiee of usefulness oi uselessness, all the moie since they enulessly piouuce
the same object oi the same effect - even though the object woulu be
uniealizable oi its effect ignoieu without them. Thus the instiument must
impose the usage maue of the object, oi the effect that it pioviues, so as to
justify its costly maintenance. Which biings us to a seconu peispective on the
inuustiial inteivention in the uomain of fantastical iepiesentation, to wit: that
of quality anu quantity, both as iegaius the act of piouuction anu as iegaius
the piouuct itself.

0ne neeus only look at the way that inuustiy, by these same technical
pioceuuies, not only can but necessaiily must favoi anu thus uevelop a kinu
of automatism (inheient in tangible ieality) intenueu to make any tenueiness
in the ieactions to the use of objects stop up the enjoyment, anu thus the
effectiveness of the object, so that piofit is only to be hau by waste, since
quality is then only pait of those objects ielative to what such objects can
pioviue; anu thus also ielative to the 6"2* of enjoyment. Nuch to the
contiaiy, theii quantity is the guaiantee of the quality of the 212*$6 of
enjoyment piocuieu; anu thus the act itself of piouucing the objects takes
pieceuence ovei the piouuct; the moie the (piouuctive) act is peifecteu, the
less the sample piouuceu matteis. The E(5:"6, 10 67* 5+6 iuins its piouuct
because of its capacity to piouuce it in quantity. Anu this is what Saue
uemonstiates, at the level of instinctive life itself, ievealing the othei siue of
the inuustiial commouification of the voluptuous emotion unuei "mass"
ielations of piouuction.

Foi Saue's chaiacteis, it is sometimes the E(5:"6, of it being the .52* #"+6"2,
upon which the acts of his oi hei executionei aie piacticeu in uiveise ways,
that wins out ovei the concept of the act; anu othei times it is the fact of it
being the .52*A )*>*56*/ 5+6 which, inuiffeiently inflicteu on a E(5$6"6, 10
#"+6"2., affiims the E(5:"6, of the act.

Anu so theie appeais fiist of all a ieveisal in the ielationship between the
sensation anu its object: in the fiist case, the object is the souice of the
sensation; it is the object that by its iiieplaceable chaiactei uiiects behavioi
towaius it, giving iise to the vaiious attempts to possess it; it keeps its
intiinsic value, in spite of its 5>>5)*$6 /*.6)(+6"1$, anu still goes beyonu the
(.5%* to which it appeais to lenu itself.

In the seconu case, the object is only a pietext foi the emotion, anu foi the act
that expiesses that emotion thiough contact with the object, as inuiffeiently
as with a meie thing. In oiuei that the emotion of the uestiuctive act, which
is always the same, can be ieiteiateu, the (.5%* 10 67* 5+6, felt as a souice of
emotion, 65M*. >)*+*/*$+* 1#*) 67* 1@I*+6A in which the emotion cannot be
exhausteu.

Anu so, thanks to sauist intuition, theie appeaieu in the iealm of emotionality
what was to become the piinciple of oui mouein economy in its inuustiial
foim: the piinciple of excessive piouuction, iequiiing excessive consumption
- piouuce uestiuctible objects, anu accustom consumeis to not even knowing
what a uuiable object is. 0sing a paiticulai methou to manufactuie anu
piouuce objects in seiies, then, heie coiiesponus to the quality of an act
inflicteu inuiffeiently on a quantity of victims. Conveisely, expeiimenting
with vaiious methous of manufactuiing in oiuei to impose a given quality on
a piouuct which is the same as the otheis so as to inciease its chaiactei of
iaieness coiiesponus to a uiveisity of acts inflicteu on the same victim, to
take possession of whatevei it is about them that is iaie oi makes them
unique in theii own way. The absuiuity of an analogy like this shows the
ieveisal that instinctive foices unueigo in the iealm of the economic
expiession of neeus anu of the manufactuieu objects coiiesponuing to them.
The ielationship between emotion, pioviueu eithei by the act oi by the living
object, anu piouuction piopei, iemains peifectly impeiceptible owing to
these being two spheies of human behavioi that appeai so incompatible in
light of the conuitions that ueteimine saiu behavioi. The ieason foi this is
that in the economic oiuei, laboi capacity is piecisely contiaiy to emotional
life in geneial, anu to the voluptuous emotion in paiticulai. Bow can an act
expiessing an emotion be consiueieu equivalent to effoit exeiciseu on living
oi inanimate mateiial. Though saiu act is expiesseu thiough a gioup of
gestuies foiming a uelibeiate activity, it is only evei just a staging of saiu
emotion. What moie likely compaiison foi the usage of manufactuieu objects
besiues the kinu of hoiiible tieatment people inflict on living beings.

Such questions aie only inconceivable in the economic uomain as long as one
ignoies the fact that, just like laboi, emotion itself "piouuces" as well, that the
voluptuous emotion "manufactuies" an image, not of the living being that
seives as its object, but of one aspect of that being, so that the emotion can
tieat it solely as an object, i.e., as the fantasy thiough which the emotion is
uevelopeu anu giows; but this manufactuie as such still seems to be just an
analogical teim, because it is in no way sepaiable fiom the emotion, which is
the flipsiue of the effoit maue.

Now, what foims this inuissoluble whole in the instinctive spheie -
voluptuous emotion, piopagation instinct, fantasy - can only be bioken uown
on the level of conscious behavioi as a set of factois with coiiesponuing
equivalents in the meicantile spheie: piouucei, consumei, manufactuieu
object.

In both spheies, the same usage phenomenon pievails.

Fiom the peispective of instinctual impulse, the piouucei anu consumei aie
meigeu.

Fiom the economic peispective, one oi seveial piouuceis aie met with one oi
seveial categoiies of consumei, ueteimining the mass piouuction oi
multiplication of one anu the same object.

In the spheie of instinctual impulse, eithei the multiplication of the emotion
takes place on its own in contact with the same object (the fantasy) via its
intensity, oi the same emotion is sustaineu by contact with vaiious fantasies.

In the economic peispective, the conuitions of manufactuiing (effoit, laboi)
tenu to make the manufactuieu object anu its consumption 25)M 5 >1"$6 10 $1
)*6()$ #".NRN#". 67* >)1/(+6"1$ 10 67* 05$65., (i.e. when once again effoit, on
the basis of "neeu," is applieu in iesistance to puie emotion - thus caiiying
out the voluptuous consumption of the object it constiucts). This point of no
ietuin - no ietuin to the woilu of instinctual impulse - maiks the passage
into the economic peispective of utensil tool piouuction.

It is the slowly won victoiy of the piopagation instinct ovei voluptuous
emotion, anu, in geneial, ovei piimoiuial peiveision.

Bowevei, the piice of this victoiy ovei the piopagation instinct, that is, effoit
uefeating emotion, is in fact the ievenge of peiveision: the uispiopoition
between the effoit anu its piouuct; the uispaiity between the uemanu anu its
object - not just the unbalance between supply anu uemanu - anu the
uisappeaiance of inuiviuual unity, ieplaceu by conglomeiations of
hypeitiophieu neeus as ciicumstances uictate.

The inuustiial phenomenon is thus the inveise peiveision of the instinct to
pieseive anu piopagate the species; in it, the steiile enjoyment of emotion at
last finus its most ueceptive anu most effective equivalent. Consenting to
subsist by one's laboi, thus to buying back one's oiiginal passivity, establishes
the notion of neeus anu theii vaiiable hieiaichy, puisuant to which the
piopagation instinct can pievail ovei its own fieeness; its aibitiaiy iepetition
becomes a necessaiy iepetition, since it pioviues its human specimens with a
pietext foi iesisting the steiile piolongation of the voluptuous emotion.

Fiist the eaith; then the instiuments; the objects, anu then at last meie
symbols iepiesenting the objects, anu finally even the inteiposition between
beings anu theii uesiies of symbols seen as being woith those uesiies anu
theii objects as appiaisable iesouices: these all have been like ueuuctions
taken fiom peiveision by the specific instinct in oiuei to stiuctuie them as
neeus, staiting with specimens, examples of the species. Anu these examples
only veiify theii exemplaiy natuie in theii own unity by affiiming that they
have these neeus. But because the neeus they affiim that they have only take
shape in the objects they manufactuie, anu because these objects uistance
them fuithei anu fuithei fiom what they wanteu in the fiist place anu in the
enu, is why they nevei affiim themselves except by infinitely uiviuing within
themselves the instinctive foice that woulu caiiy them back to the passivity
of the voluptuous sensation.

*
* *

Let us consiuei the possible ielationship between the peiveise elaboiation of
a fantasy on the one hanu anu the manufactuiing of a useful object on the
othei.

The two piocesses uiveige, insofai as the fantasy, a piouuct of instinctive
impulse, signals a thieat to the inuiviuual unit, while the manufactuieu object
piesupposes the stability of the inuiviuual: the fantasy tenus to make itself a
lasting one at the expense of the inuiviuual unit, while the manufactuieu
object must seive that unit; its manufactuie anu usage imply exteiioiity, as
well as uelimitation, ielative to what suiiounus it, anu thus also ielative to
othei units.

But foi its pait, the fantasy piesupposes the (.5%* of a paiticulai thing; its
elaboiation is bounu up with an accustomeu usage of some kinu of enjoyment
oi suffeiing: what the inuiviuual (.*., in the fantasy, is a signifiei foi a
+1$.6)5"$6, because of its unity. Thus the elaboiation of the fantasy also gives
iise to a state of +1$6"$(5: +12>*$.56"1$: thus of *B+75$%*.. But in oiuei foi
an exchange to take place, theie must be an *E("#5:*$6 - i.e., something that is
woith something else, both in the spheie of the fantasy, elaboiateu at the
expense of the inuiviuual unit, anu on the inuiviuual level, in the exteinal
spheie - foi the manufactuieu object.

In the instinctive state, the seaich foi an equivalent foi the fantasy
coiiesponus to its constiaint; the oiganic unit that unueigoes it as iiiesistible
enjoyment tenus to pay foi it, because it is accountable foi this steiile
obsession in light of the specific soliuaiity among the units. All equivalents,
as iegaius the oiganic unity of the inuiviuual, thus iepiesent a uouble
sanction: that of the "$6*)$5: +1$.6)5"$6 anu the *B6*)$5: self-500")256"1$, fiom
which aiises a uilemma -- *"67*) *$I1, ="671(6 500")2"$% ,1().*:0A 1) 500")2
,1().*:0 ="671(6 *$I1,"$% 2*)*:, .1 5. 61 .(@.".6.

D1 5++1($6 01) both the one sanction anu the othei is only possible by foiming
an *E("#5:*$6 no longei foi the inteinal constiaint, but foi its )*$($+"56"1$.
The equivalent foi this ienunciation is the founuation foi the conuitions of
laboi anu the specific act of manufactuiing.

Athough accoiuing to Keynes' uefinition the "/".(6":"6," of laboi is
(subjectively speaking) the aptituue to hinuei a "neeu," even if only "the taste
foi uoing nothing," what is concealeu in that one woiu is all the tension
between steiile enjoyment anu the uecision to manufactuie objects.

The iuea of /".(6":"6, (anu heie we oveituin the Keynesian sense, as given by
the eminent commentatoi N. ue Laigentaye
1
) accounts foi how much
"$6*::"%"@":"6, theie is in the act of manufactuiing objects specifically intenueu
foi a paiticulai use, anu how much the "fantastic" constiaint is oiiginally
($"$6*::"%"@:*. By the equivalent that it expiesses, the act of manufactuiing,
i.e., of satisfying one oi seveial neeus anu thus aumitting a specific usage but
1$* ="67 $1 )*:56"1$ 61 =756 ". @*"$% %"#*$ (>, takes place piopoitionally to
the obsessional antagonism: the "taste foi uoing nothing," in the economic
sense, oi the uesiie foi anothei activity which woulu allow one to be given
value uue to some ability oi othei, suitable foi elaboiating emotional
piopensities - such woulu be, implicitly (accoiuing to Keynes) the meaning of
the wages given oi uenieu to the woikei; but such woulu also be the meaning
of the puichase of a piouuct, to a consumei that consents to using it puisuant
to the piouuct's limits.

Though theie uoes ieign a state of continual compensation, anu exchanges
among the instinctual foices that subsist at the expense of the oiganic unit,
these exchanges uo not take place without leaving tiaces, which aie like
"notations" foi what has been ueuucteu, exchangeu: the fantasy is
accountable to the oiganism, just as the enjoyment oi suffeiing expeiienceu
aie accountable to the fantasy that biings them to the inuiviuual. This is the
"uebt balance" foi the inuiviuual unit.

Bow can this notation be ieuiscoveieu in the manufactuie of useful objects,
anu is it only conceivable that the inuiviuual unit of the piouucei is limiteu
(as an economic subject) to affiiming itself, both to itself anu to othei units,
iecognizable only by those units' ability to manufactuie them anu foi using
them up.

By the customaiy usage it piesciibes, the manufactuieu object is alieauy the

1
}ean ue Laigentaye was the tianslatoi of Keynes' ;*$*)5: D7*1), 10 K2>:1,2*$6A
L$6*)*.6A 5$/ 81$*, into Fiench.
vaiiable sign of a piopensity, which exists to uiffeient uegiees among some
who manufactuie it, anu absolutely uoes not exist among otheis who
manufactuie it, inuiffeient to its usage, oi among those who woulu use it up
foi lack of a neeu, of which they aie unawaie in the absence of an object that
woulu ieveal it to them. Boubtless theie will thus be an appeaiance of
equality oi an acciuental equality, oi, almost always, a funuamental inequality
of piopensities, both in usage anu manufactuiing. Woulu this be the "fiee
play of passions". But it still means thinking within a ciicuit wheie all the
games aie won by the statistics oi the ciicumstances, not by the playeis. Anu
inueeu, as iegaius the economic subject as an inuiviuual ($"6 (unawaie of
what it "wants" oi what it is "capable of"!), the funuamental inequality of
piopensities, not only towaius othei units, but above all ="67"$ 67* ($"6 "6.*:0,
uemanus that a compensatoiy signifiei inteivene in the appaient uecision to
manufactuie things foi some paiticulai use. Bowevei, the only inteiest of the
inuustiial system is to have the piouucei oi the consumei spontaneously
appeai as an 5.>*+6 10 67*2.*:#*., by boiiowing fiom a paiticulai 01)2 of
manufactuiing oi consumption the veiy foim of theii own subsistence anu
moue of existence as "inuiviuual units." The puie tiuism that this comes
uown to uoes not appeai to auvance oui aigument much, no moie than it
woulu to iemaik that "it coulun't be otheiwise," since the object he
manufactuies anu consumes not only uefines the economic subject, but
ensuies his moial anu mateiial unity. But it is in these kinus of tiuisms that
the piimaiy motive behinu the seaich foi an equivalent is hiuuen; the unit of
the economic subject can only iemain an effectively piouuctive unit "0 "6 ".
25/* 61 5++1221/56* "6. .(>>1.*/ >)1>*$."6"*. 61 67*") +1$6"$(5:
7"I5+M"$%Q)*/")*+6"1$. But that this 7"I5+M"$% =1(:/ 65M* >:5+* 67)1(%7 the
evei-so ciucially legitimate 5+6 of manufactuiing useful objects - that's too
absuiu a concept foi the unit to stop anu take notice: how coulu it iefuse this
manufactuiing, since aftei all, that is its uue anu piopei place. The subject
unit cannot escape this immeuiately obvious fact, since it just uoesn't see that
it itself is a fiction cieateu out of a necessity which is as uncontiollable as it is
uelibeiately constiucteu.

That the categoiy of "useful object" thus immeuiately ieplaces any othei use
that his passional aptituues might uictate, that on the othei hanu those
aptituues woulu blossom out into vaiious manufactuiable objects if only the
economic subject woulu stop behaving like a "unit" anu take his own
"ueconstiuction" anu only ieconstiuct himself accoiuing to *#*), >5.."1$?.
5>6"6(/* 61 05@)"+56* "6. 1@I*+6: this he can't compiehenu, all the less because
he only evei inteipiets such aptituues fiom the point of view of an "inuiviuual
unit," as meie woulu-be piopensities, which iegaiuless aie pie-ueteimineu
by the ciicumstances accoiuing to which "neeus" aie calculateu.

Coulu the manufactuiing of utensil objects (which gives oui woilu its
physiognomy) meiely be an inuication that the economic subject, staiting
fiom his inuiviuual unity, fiom his aptituue to piouuce anu iepiouuce
himself, seeks to ueclaie his ienunciation of that state, foi lack of an
equivalent to his instinctive state (such as aitistic simulacia), by an
equivalent othei than wages, in favoi of his own subsistence. Boes he
manufactuie only to subsist. 0i inueeu, uoes the )*$1($+*/ instinctive
impulse, oi the aptituue to expiess that impulse, iequiie that the value of the
:1..A suffeieu foi the intenueu usage of those utilitaiian objects, be expiesseu
in the 5+6 10 05@)"+56"$% those objects.

As iegaius manufactuiable efficiency ielations, beyonu uisciiminating
between steiile anu piouuctive use, the utensil peispective has no inteiest in
iesolving a fabiication's obsessive constiaints on its use. Neveitheless, the
manufactuiei of simulacia - of steiile usage - subsists still in the woilu of
utensils. Not only uoes he uistiibute his own fantasies thiough the piouucts
he invents by the aitifice of his intellect, but he uiives a haiu baigain foi what
he uistiibutes, just like any manufactuiei of utensils, instiuments, anu usable
objects, chaiging to covei all the costs of his act of uistiibuting it; even if he
has to staive to ueath in poveity, he intenus to eniich his knowleuge by the
sensations he thus piocuies. Piouuceis of whatevei kinus of tools, woikeis
in geneial, uo not uistiibute anything - except theii neeu foi othei objects,
baseu on existing objects: i.e., the peifecteu usage of an object that always
piesciibes anu limits that exclusive usage.

0f couise, no uisclosuie oi uistiibution of a fantasy coulu oi shoulu come out
of the act of manufactuiing things that aie intenueu foi an inuispensable use,
theie's no question about that! So, in whatevei imaginative way the
auvancements of science may be applieu to it, it is puie insanity to tiy to finu
even the slightest coiielation oi analogy between the act of manufactuiing a
utensil anu the act of spieauing aiounu some kinu of fantasy with the use of a
simulacium.

Since the utensil woilu can't compensate foi the inveision of the instinctual
impulsive state into the activity of manufactuiing just by means of symbols,
@*+5(.* .(+7 5+6"#"6, 5:)*5/, .*)#*. 5. 5 +12>*$.56"1$, only aitistic simulacia
aie supposeu to be able to .*66:* 67* 5++1($6 foi this inveision, anu because it
is a simulation, a sham, its piouucts aie supposeu to be consiueieu as useful
objects. But instinctive impulses make no such uistinction between two
categoiies of instiuments, between the "noble" simulacium anu the "ignoble"
utensil, even when the emotions aie seiveu as much by the lattei as by puie
intellectual opeiations. But if the aitistic simulacium ieally conveys the
uigency of the instinctual impulses, anu by the genius of the aitist becomes
simply a utensil foi use by the emotions, is it just a coinciuence that the
utensils thus become simulacia themselves. The instinctual impulses make
use inuiffeiently of anything that is a piopei utensil foi theii puiposes; so, to
uiscein what they simulate, one must simply consiuei the categoiy into which
the objects at hanu fall. To wit, saiu tools, which by natuie aie the fuithest
thing fiom simulacia, insofai as theii piesciibeu usage is iigoiously
iestiaineu so as to make them efficient (since they ciicumsciibe an opeiation
with iiieveisible effects, which, whatevei the iamifications may be, aie
themselves not simulateu), will foi piecisely that ieason be ."2(:5+)5 10 $1$N
."2(:56"1$, anu thus 10 67* *.65@:".7*/ 05+6.A by means of which one can ueuuct
that pait of passional life which hau been thus misappiopiiateu foi the
manufactuie of useful objects. Now, if the ait-simulacium is a (6*$.": 10 67*
>5.."1$., its simulation must likewise be an *00"+"*$6 1>*)56"1$; if it weie just a
."2(:56*/ ."2(:5+)(2A it woulu be ineffective, since its effect consists
piecisely in being constantly ieveisible in its opeiation anu in being of such
bieauth anu vaiiety of usage as passional life.

In ait-piouucts, emotion finus a way to expiess its fantasy; in utensils that
)*0(.* to *B>)*.. it, emotion acts unuei covei of the utility of some thing that
emotion has nothing to uo with.

Instinctual impulse acts nowheie but in 67* )*:56"1$.7"> 10 5 7(25$ @*"$% ="67
=756*#*) 7* 25$(05+6()*. 1) /1*. $16 25$(05+6()*; he thus ielies on the
object at hanu to ueciue what is the most uigent. What is uigent (such as
subsistence) must be taken seiiously, anu cannot be simulateu in the same
way as the uigency of =756 75. $1 ()%*$+, 5@1(6 "6 is simulateu.

If utensil objects weie only to guaiantee theii $1$N."2(:56"1$ by themselves,
theie woulu be no uigency of emotion, anu no utensil-usage uigency eithei.
0tensil uigency is piopoitional to emotional uigency. Anu because
emotionality is only uefeiiable by utensils whose uigency cannot be
simulateu, this is why emotional uigency finus in the utensil only a
simulacium of its uefeiment.

To uefei voluptuous pleasuie is to iely on the futuie, guaianteeu by the
manufactuie of usable objects. Bowevei, the instinctual impulses know no
limit to uigency othei than theii own, anu voluptuous pleasuie as such comes
off as being just as immeuiate as it is latent anu unpieuictable. Although fiom
the utensil-usage peispective, #1:(>6(1(. >:*5.()* ". $16 5$ ()%*$6 2566*), it is
on the othei hanu ()%*$6 6756 "6 @* ."2(:56*/ by some means so that what is
ieally .*)"1(.A since it is unquestionably uigent, +5$ @* $16 ."2(:56*/4

Thus the voluptuous impulse, not only uoes not suppiess the simulation-
opeiation caiiieu out in the iealm of utensils, it iequiies it the moie as its
uigency is uisputeu: it simply ieveises the factois, anu takes the simulacia all
the way to wheie haiu necessity ieigns.

Impulsive fantasy - simulacium; non-simulatable subsistence - utensil
manufactuiing: two ciicuits that meige in the inuiviuual unit, but which that
unit can nevei bieak; all it can uo is to peipetually uefei the uigency of the
one ciicuit oi the othei.

Fiom this fact alone aiises the question of an equivalent: to simulate (by
applying effoit) the uefeiment of what is not uigent, but yet iemains
immeuiate (the voluptuous emotion), means simulating an uigency which is
in itself non-simulatable. voluptuous pleasuie iemains just as non-
simulatable as subsistence - uepenuing on whethei the one is consiueieu
moie uigent than the othei. Beciuing foi the one against the othei makes foi
an iiieveisible event, like when ielying on manufactuie, which can only be
ieveiseu by uestiuction.

*
* *

S167"$% in instinctual life seems to be 01) 0)**, piopeily speaking. As soon as
an inteipietation uiiects its veiy piocess (the stiuggle of the emotions to holu
theii own against the piopagation instinct), appiaisal, anu thus >)"+*,
inteiceue; but the one that pays the cost in the enu, the one that will pay one
way oi the othei, is the agent, compiising the >:5+* wheie the stiuggle is
wageu, wheie a possible oi unattainable compiomise is tiaffickeu anu
negotiateu - the @1/, "6.*:0.

Beie we see the beginnings of a piimaiy uilemma: eithei "$6*)$5: >*)#*)."1$ -
the /"..1:(6"1$ of the unit; oi the inteinal affiimation of the unit - *B6*)$5:
>*)#*)."1$.

Whoevei iefuses to pay the piice foi the voluptuous emotion, anu uemanus
6756 67* >)1>5%56"1$ "$.6"$+6 +12* 01) 0)**, thus uemanuing his 1=$ ($"6, 01)
0)**, =":: 75#* 61 >5, 1$* 7($/)*/01:/ foi that fieeness in 67* *B6*)$5:
>*)#*)."1$ 10 67* +1$/"6"1$. "$ =7"+7 67* "$/"#"/(5: ($"6 ". 61 500")2 "6.*:0.

The uay when human beings oveicome, anu thus subuue *B6*)$5: peiveision,
i.e., the monstious hypeitiophy of "neeus," anu assent insteau to theii
"$6*)$5: peiveision, i.e., to the uissolution of theii fictional unity, a
compatibility will foim between uesiie anu the piouuction of its objects in an
economy iationally oiganizeu aiounu human instinctual impulse; anu thus
the 0)**$*.. 10 *001)6 will iesponu to the >)"+* 10 67* "))56"1$5:. Saue's lesson
might uemonstiate that theie is a ueep ieality hiuuen in Fouiiei's utopia. But
until then, it is in inuustiy's best inteiest foi Fouiiei's utopia to iemain a
utopia, anu foi Saue's peiveision to iemain the uiiving foice behinu the
inuustiial monstiosity.

G)**$*22 .$7 H)"+*

Fieeness (appaiently) means enjoying what falls outsiue of the iealm of
piices oi gianting enjoyment without compensation:

1) An absolute ownei woulu nevei think to exchange what belongs to him
(anu which uiaws its unappiaisable piice fiom the fact of that possession) so
as to claim anything in ietuin, whatevei it may be.

Who is this absolute ownei. The "uivinity," oi "inexhaustible life" (given to
each peison in a measuie specific to them) image of the "all-giving sun."

2) But as foi that which is given to all anu to each, if eveiyone anu anyone
coulu get it, immeuiately, anu without at fiist any uiffeience oi uistinction,
then it not only has no moie piice, but is given anu exchangeu fieely; such is
the physiological natuie of the act of piocieation anu of the sensations
expeiienceu piioi to its accomplishment (voluptuous pleasuie).

S) "Life," which is outsiue the iealm of piice, which has no piice fieely
given to it, which is ieceiveu, unueigone - has no piice in anu of itself. Anu
without voluptuous pleasuie it is valueless. But voluptuous pleasuie, anu the
ability to expeiience it, is given fieely to each in tuin: it is outsiue the iealm of
piice as well.

Now, each peison only ieceives puisuant to theii capacity foi ieceiving (fiist
iestiiction); eveiything that he has ieceiveu constitutes what he is - thus he
is only woith so much as he coulu give - beyonu what he is; this is why no one
coulu toleiate ieceiving 21)* than he is capable of giving - oi else he will enu
up belonging to whoevei he continues ceaselessly to ieceive fiom.

4) Be who gives moie than he has, "$ 1)/*) 61 @* =1)67 21)* 675$ 7* ".
(i.e., moie than he hau ieceiveu in the fiist place) intenus to inciease; so, what
woulu inciease someone beyonu what he alieauy is, anu how coulu he
inciease his shaie so that he might be capable, beyonu his capacity to ieceive,
of giving moie than he hau ieceiveu.

If he gives, he incieases; but how can he giow by giving insteau of
uiminishing. Be gives so as to not ieceive, anu because he is capable of uoing
so, he incieases. Bow coulu that inciease his value, anu what makes him
capable of that. Be is only woith anything in the eyes of those who, being $1
21)* than what they have ieceiveu, aie woith less than him. Thus the piice
he acquiies, ielative to those who ieceive without being able to give, is
expiesseu by the iight to 65M* @5+M *#*$ 21)* than what hau been given.

If theie weie no >1=*):*..$*.. 61 %"#*, in spite of the capacity to ieceive, theie
=1(:/$?6 @* 6756 "$+)*5.* 10 7* =71 %"#*. 5$/ /1*. $16 )*+*"#* eithei. Be who
gives anu uoes not ieceive takes possession, eveiy time, of he who, having
)*+*"#*/ "$ 1)/*) 61 @*, cannot give; the lattei is wholly given ovei in auvance
to a powei that incieases insteau of uiminishing by giving without ieceiving,
anu thus can 65M* @5+M 21)* than it hau given.

In the woilu of inuustiial manufactuiing, what's attiactive is no longei what
appeais natuially to be foi fiee, but the piice put on what is natuially foi fiee;
a voluptuous emotion (non-communicateu oi incommunicable) is fiist of all
inuiffeient, anu 75. $1 #5:(*A in the sense that *5+7 >*).1$ can expeiience it
fieely. Now, as soon as someone, while still able to expeiience it, cannot
piocuie the means of immeuiately uoing so, it becomes :*.. "$/"00*)*$6 anu
begins to gain value. If it is unique in its way - anu if only a limiteu numbei of
inuiviuuals will be able to expeiience it in its uniqueness - then eithei it is not
appiaisable at all, oi the uesiie to expeiience it will ensuie it the highest
possible piice. Such is the commouification of the voluptuous emotion.
Bowevei, to think that this opeiation is meiely a soiuiu ueeu uone puiely out
of the piofit motive is piecisely to be blinu to the natuie of the voluptuous
emotion.

Tuining upsiue uown the pioveib of the backstage uiessing ioom citeu by
Stenuhal: "D71.* =71 +5$?6 0"$/ 5 =5, 61 %"#* 67*2.*:#*. 0)**:, 0"$/ 5 =5, 61
.*:: 67*2.*:#*.," Nietzsche wiites: "S1 1$* =5$6. 7*) 01) 0)**A .1 .7* 75. 61 .*::
7*).*:0!" anu thus expiesses the veiy piocess of the voluptuous emotion itself.
Is this to say now that inuustiial exploitation is a iesponse to enjoyment's
implicit stiategy.

The most geneial sign of equivalence still iemains cuiiency in the uomain of
exchange, seiving a function analogous to that of woius in the uomain of
communication. The (economic) intelligibility of a useful object on the
commouity plane, by viitue of monetaiy syntax, guaiantees the same
fiauuulent opeiation, ielative to neeus anu theii objects, as the intelligibility
of language uoes ielative to instinctual life. The exception is that the
intelligibility of usage is concietely ciicumsciibeu by the uiffeiences among
inuiviuual units, who, by usage, expiess themselves in theii mannei of
existing eithei voluntaiily oi involuntaiily. The limit of intelligibility is what
is unexchangeable, accoiuing to its uegiee of iuiosynciasy, that is, the obscuie
piopensity that comes acioss unwittingly in the woius useu anu in the
supposeu compatibility between objects anu neeus. All that can compensate
foi the useful object, iiieuucible to any othei kinu of usage, in this univeisal
case, is the cieation of an equivalent - anu that is the iole of cuiiency.

IJ+()2(2

But to piopeily unueistanu what it is that cuiiency can act as an equivalent
foi, without evei actually meiging with the specific thing whose value it
inuicates - we neeu to go back again to Saue.

Abolishing piopeity owneiship ovei one's own bouy anu ovei the bouy of
otheis is an opeiation inheient in the peiveit's imagination; he inhabits the
bouies of otheis as if they weie his own, anu thus attiibutes his own to otheis.
This means that his own bouy itself comes back to him as a uomain of fantasy;
thus it becomes meiely the equivalent of the fantasy - it is its simulacium.

Between the fantasy anu its commouity appiaisal, the numeiaiie, symbolizing
the unappiaisable value of the fantasy, is an integial pait of the
iepiesentative moue of peiveision. The peiveiteu fantasy is in itself
unintelligible anu unexchangeable; so the numeiaiie, by its abstiact natuie,
thus seives as its univeisally intelligible equivalent. A uistinction must be
maue heie on the one hanu between the fantasy function of money - i.e., the
act of puichase oi sale - as a numeiaiie, exteinalizing anu ueveloping the
peiveisity of the vaiious paitneis; anu on the othei hanu the 2*/"56"$%
0($+6"1$ 10 21$*, between the woilu of anomalies anu the closeu woilu of
institutional stanuaius.

Noney, that equivalent of iaie iiches, that symbol of effoit anu stiuggle in the
institutional sense, must symbolize the ieuiiection of those iiches to the
benefit of the peiveise fantasy: though the fantasy uemanus an expenuituie
/*6*)2"$*/ )*:56"#* 61 67* $(2*)5")*, the numeiaiie expiesses an equivalence
to the fantasy, thus concietizeu as whatevei iiches the puichasing powei of
the numeiaiie may iepiesent. Anu so just as many effoits anu stiuggles aie
fiustiateu outsiue of it; money, the equivalent of iiches, thus signifies the
uestiuction of those iiches, =7":* )*65"$"$% 67*") #5:(*: just like language, the
signifiei of what exists (as meaningful), becomes, in Sauist style, the signifiei
of what uoesn't exist, i.e., simply the possible (meaningless accoiuing to
institutional stanuaius of language). Noney, while iepiesenting anu
guaianteeing that which exists, becomes all the moie a signifiei foi =756 /1*.
$16 *B".6 - i.e., foi the fantasy - as, in the woilu of integial monstiosity, the
tiansgiession of noims piesents itself as the piogiessive conquest of the non-
existent: that is, of the possible.

The act of tiansgiessing existing noims in the name of a still non-existent
possibility suggesteu by the fantasy is eminently iepiesenteu by the veiy
natuie of the numeiaiie: i.e., the fieeuom to choose oi iefuse such-anu-such a
goou fiom among all the otheis that exist. This possibility of selection oi
iejection challenges the value of what actually exists in favoi of what uoes not
exist. What /1*. $16 *B".6 accoiuing to the language of noims - the negative
expiession of abnoimalities - expiesses itself positively by the $(2*)5")* 6756
75. $16 @**$ *B>*$/*/A 5$/ 75. 67(. @**$ )*0(.*/ 61 6756 =7"+7 5+6(5::, *B".6..
With the numeiaiie, the closeu woilu of peiveision sanctions
"$+122($"+5@":"6, "6.*:0 521$% @*"$%.; this is the only intelligible way in
which the woilu of abnoimalities ieacts positively to the woilu of noims. To
make itself unueistanuable to the institutional woilu, integial monstiosity
boiiows its abstiact symbolism of exchangeable goous. Anu what this means
is that theie is only one authentic kinu of univeisal communication: 67*
*B+75$%* 10 @1/"*. 67)1(%7 67* .*+)*6 :5$%(5%* 10 @1/":, .,2@1:".2. The
aigument |maue by Sauej goes, in a way, as follows: the institutions claim to
piotect the inuiviuual libeity anu thus the integiity of peisons, by ieplacing
the exchange of bouies with the exchange of goous, puisuant to the
ambiguous uealings anu neutial symbolism of the numeiaiie; but unueineath
the pietense of ciiculating iiches, the numeiaiie only ueafly ensuies the
exchange of bouies, in the name of anu in the inteiest of the institutions. The
iejection of integial monstiosity by the institutions is 1)%5$"O*/ 5. /* 05+61
256*)"5: 5$/ 21)5: >)1.6"6(6"1$. Anu the whole aim of the seciet societies
imagineu by Saue was to ienuei manifest this paiauox: theie is *"67*)
+122($"+56"1$ 10 @*"$%. @, 67* *B+75$%* 10 67*") @1/"*.A 1) >)1.6"6(6"1$ ($/*)
67* .,2@1:".2 10 67* $(2*)5")*.

Those tiying to climb into a position in integial monstiosity can only affiim
themselves to the outsiue woilu moially in teims of logical language, anu
mateiially in teims of the numeiaiie. Noially, they act as the accomplices of
noimal beings; mateiially, they ieciuit theii victims foi theii expeiimentation
by offeiing a full piice, which beats the piice paiu by the institutions, which
pay only enough foi meie subsistence, below "noimalcy."

In the closeu woilu of integial monstiosity, 67* 05$65.,A "6.*:0 ($5>>)5".5@:*A
incompiehensible, useless, anu aibitiaiy, 5. .11$ ". "6 5/#5$+*. 61 67* .656(. 10
@1/":, >)*.6"%*, .*6. "6.*:0 (> 5. 5 )5)"6,: anu heie alieauy we see the
beginnings of the mouein commouification of the voluptuous emotion, the
only uiffeience being that inuustiial exploitation is capable of stanuaiuizing
suggestion at a low piice, anu thus putting the living object of emotion
outsiue of the woilu of piices, wheieas in Saue's time, a time which was still
that of inuustiial manufactuiing, 67* .(%%*.6"1$ 10 5$ *216"1$ 5$/ "6. :"#"$%
1@I*+6 =*)* +1$$*+6*/ 61%*67*)4 In the closeu ciicuit of Sauist monstiosity, the
living simulacium of the fantasy is outsiue of the woilu of piices; the statutes
of the Society of the Fiienus of Ciime stipulate that it woulu only accept as
membeis "only peisons whose income is at least twenty five thousanu livies,
since the annual uues will come to ten thousanu fiancs pei peison." Asiue
fiom this conuition, theie was no uisciimination peimitteu, iegaiuing neithei
iank noi oiigin. 0n the contiaiy, "twenty aitists oi peisons of letteis will be
aumitteu to the Society foi a mouest fee of one thousanu livies pei yeai. The
Society, as a pation of the aits, is happy to make a special exception foi them;
it only iegiets that its means uo not peimit it to welcome, at this ieuuceu
piice, a fai gieatei numbei of these peisons, to whom it wishes to accoiu all
iespect."

In the enu it's the man of letteis (Saue) who constitutes the substance of the
society he imagines: the Society of the Fiienus of Ciime is above all the
society of his own ieaueis, so, as Saue envisions it, the society is a space
wheie minus gathei, a seciet society giounueu only on a spiiitual level. But
this spiiitual level comes fiom the fabiication of simulacia; anu a fabiicatoi of
simulacia uepenus on theie being a clientele with a uemanu; the piesence of
aitists oi wiiteis in the F1+"*6, 10 67* T)"*$/. 10 ')"2* inuicates the cieatoi's
ielations within the society in geneial, anu such ielations aie stiictly linkeu to
the pioblem of the piouuction of goous anu theii value in the economic
ciicuit, in paiticulai the manufactuie of objects conceining psychic life, which
is in itself unappiaisable; the moie the customeis' own fantasy feels uigent,
the moie the matching simulacium foi sale will go up in piice. Accoiuing to
Saue, the F1+"*6, 10 67* T)"*$/. 10 ')"2* exploits the simulacium-makeis
shamefully: it claims to "honoi" theii inventions, but says it's incapable of
iemuneiating them equitably. Anu such uispiopoitionate ielations aie pait
of the veiy natuie of the enteipiise: the moie the fantasy iequiies simulacia,
the bettei the lattei acts on anu ieacts to the fantasy, anu the moie it
uevelops it, the moie the fantasy is biuueu up in piice - anu takes on all the
seiious natuie of all things iequiiing expenuituie.

Now, just a iepiesentation of venality becomes an inciease in the assesseu
value of the fantasy: it's not poveity that pushes people to sell themselves; on
the contiaiy it is theii own abunuant wealth that foices them to. Anu so in
D7* S*= U(.6"$*, Nouvelle }ustine, veineuil notices an anatomical paiticulaiity
of Ns. u'Esteival's, ensuiing hei lewu pioclivities, which in his eyes is
piiceless - but he uoes not want to give himself ovei to that biight new
expeiience unless his paitnei accepts to be iemuneiateu: an objectifying act
of piicing which causes hei to have an immeuiate oigasm.
2
The numeiaiie
heie seives an obvious function of 6)5$.(@.65$6"56"1$ - with no othei utility
beyonu seiving that function: a puiely game-ielateu opeiation. So }uliette
vaiiously appiaises the value of hei bouy's chaims: she is not, oi is no longei
a piofessional concubine, but a well-behaveu woman; she is the wiuow
(uelibeiately) of the Count of Loisange, anu thus a iisk-takei, having been
moially coiiupteu - anu all that figuies in to the subtle natuie of the fantasy
}uliette lenus heiself to concietizing. Anu neveitheless the foitune she hau
accumulateu in this way thiows }uliette into an enulessly iepeateu
expiopiiation of hei bouy; she can nevei fulfill the fantasy, anu hei only
satisfaction is that she nevei helpeu ielieve human poveity by a penny. Anu
that is because }uliette heiself iepiesents human poveity. Bow can an
unappiaisable fantasy be appiaiseu ielative to a numeiaiie. Wheie uoes its
numeiaiie value come fiom if not the simultaneous piivation that it implies.

The supieme heights of 5>>)5".5:: the equivalent of the fantasy (the sum
paiu) iepiesents not only the emotion itself, but also the *B+:(."1$ of millions
of human lives. Anu fiom the heiu-instinct peispective, this scanual uiives up
the value even moie.

So money spent in this way means: *B+:(."#* #1:(>6(1(.$*.. V 052"$* V
5$$"7":56"1$ = supieme value of the fantasy. 0ne might well say: the moie 6756
21$*, )*>)*.*$6. 2"::"1$. 10 21(67.A the moie it confiims 67* #5:(* 10 67*
*B>)1>)"56*/ @1/,< the moie 6756 @1/, "6.*:0 )*>)*.*$6. 67* #5:(* 10 2"::"1$. 10
7(25$ :"#*.W i.e. 5 05$65., X 5 =71:* >1>(:56"1$. If this misappiopiiation, this
ieuiiection, uiu not exist, if these 2".*)"*. hau no stanuaiu =*"%76 to
iepiesent them, this >)"+"$% =1(:/ "22*/"56*:, @*+12* 2*5$"$%:*..4 So theie
must on the one hanu be a positive meaning to money as iepiesenting an
equivalent of innumeiable human lives; on the othei hanu it must also have a

2
Klossowski iefeis to the following exchange: "Bevil, what a clitoiis!" exclaims
veineuil to Boiothe u'Esteival; "You aie moie man than woman, I have no illusions
in that iegaiu; you uon't neeu to hiue anything" (4S4). Boiothe consequently plays
the iole of the man in the ensuing oigy.
negative meaning, to the extent that it aibitiaiily compensates the
2*5$"$%:*..$*.. of a fantasy: anu this allocation of money is aibitiaiy in itself,
because the value of money is itself aibitiaiy: "6 ". "6.*:0 $1 21)* 675$ 5 05$65.,
6756 )*.>1$/. 61 5 05$65.,4

So now the piecaiious situation of the aitist oi wiitei - i.e., the simulacia-
makei - in the Society of the Fiienus of Ciime is absolutely cleai anu
compiehensible: in it, the simulacia-makei seives as the inteimeuiaiy
between two uiffeient woilus of value-appiaisal. 0n the one hanu he
iepiesents the intiinsic value of the simulacium manufactuieu accoiuing to
institutional stanuaius - those of sublimation. 0n the othei, he seives to
inciease the fantasy's value in keeping with the obsessive uigency of
peiveision. Eithei way, the simulacia-makei is honoieu foi his spiiitual
uetachment anu piactically tieateu as a suppliei. Such was Saue's peisonal
situation on the uay aftei the Revolution. 0ne cannot seive two masteis. But
on both siues it was ieally the same mastei hiuing in guise of the institutions,
but which showeu its tiue face in the Society of the Fiienus of Ciime. Anu
that mastei is once again the same integial monstiosity: the $(2*)5")*, that
shameful symbol of its own wealth, becomes the symbol of its gloiy in the
Society of the Fiienus of Ciime. It is by the $(2*)5")* *B>*$/*/ 01) 67* 05$65.,
that the unueigiounu society Saue imagineu helu hostage the woilu of
institutional sublimations. Suppiess the numeiaiie, anu theie will be
univeisal communication among beings. By this challenge, Saue pioves
piecisely that the notion of value anu piice aie pait of the veiy founuations of
the voluptuous emotion, anu that nothing is moie contiaiy to enjoyment than
having it foi fiee.

!"#"$% '())*$+,

Let's imagine foi a moment an appaiently impossible iegiession: to an
inuustiial eia wheie piouuceis have the means of uemanuing objects of
sensation as payment fiom consumeis. These objects aie living beings.

This kinu of baiteiing woulu make piouuceis anu consumeis into collections
of "peisons," supposeuly intenueu foi pleasuie, emotions, anu sensation. Bow
can a human "peison" seive the function of cuiiency. Bow coulu piouuceis,
insteau of "paying foi" women, evei get paiu "in women". Bow woulu
businessmen anu inuustiialists pay theii engineeis anu woikeis, then. "In
women." Anu who woulu maintain this living cuiiency. 0thei women.
Which also piesupposes the inveise: women woiking piofessional jobs woulu
be paiu "in guys." Anu who woulu maintain, i.e., sustain this masculine
cuiiency. Those with feminine cuiiency at theii uisposal. What we aie
talking about heie alieauy exists, in fact. Because though it uoesn't neeu to
make such a tiaue liteially, all of mouein inuustiy is giounueu in a kinu of
tiaue that is meuiateu by the symbol of ineit cuiiency, thus neutializing the
natuie of the objects exchangeu, i.e., it hinges on the simulacium of that tiaue
- a simulacium containeu in the woikfoice iesouices themselves, anu thus in
a kinu of living cuiiency, which, though not openly ueclaieu as such, alieauy
exists.

If a peifecteu piouuction of instiuments of piouuction enus up ieuucing the
size of the woikfoice neeueu, if the time saveu by piouucing time saveu pays
off as moie time available foi sensation, foi competitions of pleasuie
(Fouiiei) sensation itself coulu still not be hau foi fiee. But the
simulacium of exchange (cieateu by the money system fiist anu then by the
conuitions of inuustiial society) woulu have it that time saveu be useu only
foi othei piouuction.

To abolish wages paiu in cash to insteau pay woikeis in living objects of
sensation woulun't be piactical unless the living object itself was fiist
appiaiseu in teims of the laboi fuinisheu to piouuce it, if its subsistence is
alieauy taken caie of; if the living object oi objects is figuieu into the
accounting, its possession woulu be puiely symbolic anu theiefoie
conveitible to cashmaiketable. In oiuei foi an object of sensation to be
woith a quantity of laboi, this (living) object woulu have to pieviously
constitute a value that was equal to if not gieatei than that of the piouuct of
such laboi. Theie is no common measuie between the sensation that the
living object woulu be susceptible to piocuiing by itself, anu a quantity of
laboi supplieu equivalent to whatevei iesouices aie neeueu foi the eventual
maintenance of that object of sensation. What ielationship can theie be
between the value of a tool oi a paicel of lanu, appiaiseu on the basis of theii
piobable yielu, anu the piice put on the existence of a living being, the souice
of a iaie emotion. None, it's just that the foituity (anu thus the iaiity) of a
living object that can be a souice of emotion is woith moie than it woulu cost
to sustain it. A tool has a ceitain ietuin; a living object pioviues a ceitain
emotion. The tool's value shoulu compensate foi the cost of its maintenance;
the value of a living object souice of emotion is aibitiaiily set, so its
maintenance costs can nevei be ueuuceu fiom that value.

Let no one object heie that this means ieuucing the living object, souice of
emotion, to the level of livestock, a stuu faim; oi assimilating it to a woik of
ait, oi simply even to a uiamonu. We aie uealing heie with an emotion, which
is sufficient unto itself, insepaiable fiom the foituitous anu useless existence
of the object which is heie "conveitiblemaiketable," anu thus aibitiaiily
appiaiseu.

If it weie possible foi a living object, souice of a iaie emotion, to be able to
exist exclusively as cuiiency, a ceitain psychic state woulu have to have been
univeisally attaineu; such a state woulu be expiesseu as unquestioneu
piactices anu customs. Boes this mean that in oiuei foi this to happen theie
woulu have to be as much of a quantity of living objects as ineit money in
ciiculation. Boubtless not, if such custom meant the veiy uisappeaiance of
the piactice of money. But even as a maiket existing paiallel to that of ineit
cuiiency, living cuiiency on the contiaiy woulu be capable of taking ovei the
iole of the golu stanuaiu, weie it to be iooteu in habits, anu instituteu within
economic noims. Except that this custom woulu ueeply change exchanges
anu theii meanings. No exchange of iaie ineit objects coulu evei make such a
change to them; woiks of ait, foi instance. But a living object, the souice of
voluptuous sensations, woulu eithei become cuiiency anu abolish the
neutializing functions of money, oi be the basis of exchange value, baseu on
the emotion pioviueu.

uolu, with its aibitiaiy value, with the uselessness piopei to it, which in some
way is the metaphoi foi all emotions piocuieu fiom wealth - because of its
univeisal iule, is as inhuman as it is piactical. value stanuaius baseu on
quantities of laboi, appaiently moie "legitimate" fiom the economy's point of
view, still have a punitive chaiactei to them. The living object souice of
emotion, fiom the point of view of exchange, is woith its maintenance cost.
The buiuens oi saciifices that its obsesseu ownei inflicts upon himself in
sustaining it iepiesent the piice of this iaie anu useless object. No figuies can
set that piice, only uemanu. But even befoie consiueiing the living object as
an exchangeable goou, we must examine it as cuiiency.

If as a living being it must constitute the equivalent of some amount of wages
- while baitei in kinu piima facie suspenus the possibility of buying infeiioi
but inuispensable goous - it must also be fixeu as a stanuaiu, a numeiaiie.
But then the uispiopoition in kinu appeais all the gieatei between a quantity
of laboi consiueieu as a value stanuaiu, anu a living object as cuiiency, in the
context of the conuitions of mouein economy.

If a paiticulai instiument oi tool iepiesents an amount of capital investeu in
it, then in a uomain supposeuly outsiue of commeice, all the moie so woulu
an object of sensation, i.e., a human cieatuie iepiesenting a possible souice of
emotion, in which possible eventuality it might be maue the object of an
investment. 0n the commeicial level, it's not the cieatuie itself that is
conceineu, but iathei the emotion it piovokes in its possible consumei. As an
illustiation to make cleai what this is about, we can use the false anu banal
example of a movie stai: a movie stai is only a factoi of piouuction. When the
newspapeis uefine as numeiaiies the qualities of someone like Shaion Tate
shown the uay aftei hei tiagic enu, oi the vaiious expenuituies oi
maintenance costs of any othei woman they have on uisplay, it is
inuustiialism itself that's expiessing in numbeis, i.e., quantifying, the souice
of emotion as a ceitain amount of piofitability oi some ceitain maintenance
costs, which can only happen because these lauies aie not uesignateu as
"living cuiiency" but aie tieateu as inuustiial slaves. Anu because of this they
aie no longei consiueieu actiesses, gieat iisk-takeis, oi even simply as
piestigious peisons eithei. If one weie to appiaise what we aie iefeiiing to
heie as inuustiial slaves, not as capital, but as living cuiiency (apait fiom all
the vaiious othei uiawbacks that this kinu of constiuct woulu have), they
woulu take on at the same time the quality of a symbol of value, while
themselves integially constituting value, i.e., the quality of a goou that
coiiesponus to an "immeuiate" satisfaction, no longei of a neeu, but of
piimoiuial peiveision.

"Living cuiiency," the inuustiial slave is simultaneously a symbol woith
iiches, anu those iiches themselves. As a symbol they may be exchangeu foi
all kinus of othei mateiial wealth, anu as wealth they neveitheless excluue
any othei uemanus, except the uemanu that they iepiesent the satisfaction of.
But satisfaction itself, piopeily speaking, is also excluueu by its veiy quality
as a symbol. This is how living cuiiency is essentially uiffeient fiom the
status of inuustiial slave (famous figuies, stais, auveitising mouels,
stewaiuesses, etc.). The lattei coulun't claim to be a symbol so long as they
uiffei between what they accept to ieceive, in ineit cuiiency, anu what they
aie woith in theii own eyes.

Bowevei, this explicit uiffeience, which heie as elsewheie is ielateu to
moiality, only hiues a funuamental misunueistanuing: anu inueeu, no one
woulu uieam of uefining this categoiy of "piouuctive people" as "slaves" -
howevei little the teim slave may expiess besiues the supply, oi at least the
5#5":5@":"6,, to a paiticulai uemanu, unueilying the uemanu foi :"2"6*/ neeus.
Isolateu fiom the living object which is the souice theieof, emotion, having
become a "factoi of piouuction," enus up uispeiseu into multiple
manufactuieu objects, which, by the limiteu neeus that they uefine, ueflect the
inexpiessible uemanu: anu it is thus ienueieu pathetic ielative to all the
"seiiousness" of the conuitions of laboi. Thus the inuustiial slave is 5#5":5@:*A
no uiffeient fiom any othei human iesouices, because fai fiom setting itself
up as a symbol, as a cuiiency, it must uepenu "honestly" on ineit cuiiency.
Anu the teim slave is specifically excessive, inappiopiiate, anu insulting when
they'ie fiee to accept theii wage oi not. Buman uignity is pieseiveu, anu
money keeps all its value. That is to say, the possible choice implieu in the
abstiact numeiaiie function means that no value-appiaisal can evei uetiact
fiom a peison's integiity, since it is only applieu to the output of theii
piouuctive capacities, in such a way as to only peitain "impaitially" anu only
ensuie neutiality of objects. But it's a vicious ciicle, because fiom the
inuustiial peispective, the integiity of a peison absolutely uoes not exist
except in anu by theii piouuctive yielu, appiaisable as cuiiency.

As soon as the bouily piesence of the inuustiial slave is absolutely incluueu in
figuiing the appiaisable yielu of what he oi she can piouuce (theii
physiognomy being insepaiable fiom theii woik), it is specious to uiaw a
uistinction between a peison anu theii activity. Bouily piesence is alieauy a
commouity, inuepenuent of anu 1#*) 5$/ 5@1#* the commouity itself that such
piesence contiibutes to piouucing. Anu now, inuustiial slaves must eithei
establish a stiict ielationship between theii bouily piesence anu the money it
biings in, oi ieplace the function of money, anu be money themselves:
simultaneously the equivalent of wealth, anu wealth itself.