If you liked Sokal, you might enjoy this: Bernard-Henri Levy cites Jean-Baptiste Botul approvingly in his new book. Sadly Botul is a fictional creation.
There were clues. One supposed work by Botul — from which BHL quoted — was entitled The Sex Life of Immanuel Kant. The philosopher’s school is known as Botulism and subscribes to his theory of “La Metaphysique du Mou” — the Metaphysics of the Flabby. Botul even has a Wikipedia entry that explains that he is a “fictional French philosopher”….
But Mr Lévy, a leader among the nouveaux philosophes school of the 1970s, was unaware. In On War in Philosophy, he writes that Botul had proved once and for all “just after the Second World War, in his series of lectures to the neo-Kantians of Paraguay, that their hero was an abstract fake, a pure spirit of pure appearance”….
Appearing on Canal+ television, he said he had always admired The Sex Life of Immanuel Kant and that its arguments were solid, whether written by Botul or Pages. “I salute the artist [Pages],” he said, adding with a philosophical flourish: “Hats off for this invented-but-more-real-than-real Kant, whose portrait, whether signed Botul, Pages or John Smith, seems to be in harmony with my idea of a Kant who was tormented by demons that were less theoretical than it seemed.”
Can fictional authors die?
Via Brian Leiter.
22 comments
February 10, 2010 at 10:07 am
Kieran
Appearing on Canal+ television, he said he had always admired The Sex Life of Immanuel Kant and that its arguments were solid, whether written by Botul or Pages.
Wasn’t this also Fish’s response to Sokal — i.e., to try to take it on the chin by saying “So what if it’s a joke, this stuff is actually pretty interesting”.
February 10, 2010 at 11:01 am
ben
I wonder if anyone writing about this has been able to resist the “botulism” pun.
February 10, 2010 at 11:21 am
kid bitzer
is it a pun? i mean–i suppose it was when pages named the school ‘botulism’ and then back-formed the author’s name from that.
but when neddy refers to botulism now, he may not have any thought that he is punning. certainly not that he is coming up with an original quip, given that this was the joke from the start.
February 10, 2010 at 11:24 am
Neddy Merrill
The post title was indeed written in light of knowledge of Pages’ own “botulism” label, fwiw.
February 10, 2010 at 11:44 am
chingona
“neo-Kantians of Paraguay” just made my day.
February 10, 2010 at 11:51 am
kid bitzer
the boys from brazil meet the kingdom of ends.
February 10, 2010 at 12:33 pm
dana
the signs of Botulism are a swollen then bruised ego.
February 10, 2010 at 4:45 pm
ben
I was unaware of the direction of coinage.
February 10, 2010 at 6:00 pm
herbert browne
Fictional authors are surely as immortal as corporations… ^..^
February 10, 2010 at 6:33 pm
Charlieford
Back in the ’50s, a couple Chicago seminarians began including fake footnotes in their papers to a fictitious German theologian, Franz Bibfeldt, who had done research into “the search for the year zero.” In the decades since, numerous grad students and scholars also made unironic reference to this research. Marin Marty eventually reviewed Bibfeldt’s THE RELIEVED PARADOX, and in the 1990s a festschrift was issued, THE UNRELIEVED PARADOX: STUDIES IN THE THEOLOGY OF FRANZ BIBFELDT. And in a related 2010 story, Richard Hofstedter waxed poetic from beyond the grave–or so I’ve been told. All I can say is, don’t anyone tell Lynne Cheney about any of this . . .
February 10, 2010 at 7:22 pm
ben
Every field should have a Bibfeldt.
February 10, 2010 at 8:58 pm
Carl
In my dissertation I footnoted Merlot-Chianti’s classic treatise on dionysian materialism, Humidor and Terroir, but so far I am unaware of anyone taking me up on it.
February 10, 2010 at 9:10 pm
TF Smith
Tre poseur
February 11, 2010 at 12:40 am
andrew
the signs of Botulism are a swollen then bruised ego.
Occasionally, open wounds appear; these can be disinfected with the topical application of Bakhtin.
February 11, 2010 at 2:22 am
K
Lévy’s response: “My source of information is books, not Wikipedia.” See him regaining the intellectual high ground here. Books are better than Wikipedia.
February 11, 2010 at 3:39 am
rea
I have a certain sympathy toward the attitude, “Well, if it isn’t true, it should be.” I realize, however, that certain academic circles regard it with disapproval . . .
February 11, 2010 at 11:39 am
corey
As Kant said, being is not a real predicate…
February 11, 2010 at 12:10 pm
kid bitzer
did bibfeldt hail from bielefeld?
cause i understand that whole city is just another fictional prank.
February 12, 2010 at 9:35 am
Neddy Merrill
There’s kind of a neat debate in epistemology literature on disagreement about whether and why actual interlocutors have more epistemic force than equally reasonable possible interlocutors. Why would it matter if the position is really held or just possibly held?
February 12, 2010 at 11:40 am
kid bitzer
you know, that *could* have been a neat debate, only none of the people writing on it actually believe what they’re saying.
February 12, 2010 at 2:35 pm
andrew
Canned laughter is more dangerous than the laughter of actual people.
February 13, 2010 at 8:55 am
dave
It has sharper edges when flung.