著者
Joff Peter Norman Bradley
journal or
publication title
dialogos
number
14
page range
51-81
year
2014-02
URL
http://id.nii.ac.jp/1060/00006638/
Creative Commons : 表示 - 非営利 - 改変禁止 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/deed.jaPinter:heldincommunicadoonthemobile
JoffPeterNormanBradley
Keepyoz"･mj”加舵〃α”叱叩α〃〃o/'GillianRoseIsLov的〃brk zI/bisI)eα"/”/butthewol〃/sﾉ1e//'HaroldPinter W"ﾉ加/〃Ba"g肋ﾙα”乃Ayo,/ee"qgel)qysq"dg"IFvα/"erex""g"sαmeα"”o com〃""Jcarew"肋z"加v加g/ovo/ce.たe""邸α〃/ﾙo"g〃応'SadiePlant Abstract Thispapermountsacritiqueofthemobilephoneasaninstanceofso-called｡industrialtemporaloljectr(Stiegler,1998).Phannacologically,itwill beseenthatthemobilephoneactsasbothameansandanimpedimentto廿ank communication.Thethoughtsofarangeofcontinentalphilosophersareused toconsidertheproblemofhowpeopleareincreasinglyinapermanentstateof hibernationandheldincommunicado.Thepaperwillreflectonsilence,taken asnotsimplytheabsenceofspeech,butassomethingprofbund,menacing, unsettling,haunting:asilencethatthreatenstoerupt,abecoming-wild("ve""‐ J"c""e)(Stiegler,2011,p.15).ThefirstpartofthisessayaddressesRoman Jakobson'sworkonphaticcommunicationbefbredetailingtheuseofsilence intheshortsketch4pq"R℃加剛"(2006/2011)by20thcenturydramatistand NobelLaureateHaroldPinter.ThepaperasksinwhatsenseitiSpossibletosay thatPintermoved廿omtheunspokenorunspeakabletothe6mustbesaid'.Keywords:Silence,Pinter,Jakobson,Lingis,Phenomenology,SuMectivity HaroldPinter(1930-2008)-"pαγ／ F>℃加剛αr(2006)-AShortSketch GENE:Howareyou？ LAKE：Verywell,Andyou？Areyou well？ GENE:IImterriblywell.Howabout you？ LAKE:Reallywell.I'mreallywell. GENE:I'msoglad. LAKE:Apart廿om…ohyouknow GENE:Iknow. LAKE:Apart丘om…ohyouknow GENE:Idoknow.Butapart廿omthat ？ LAKE:Howaboutyou？ GENE:Ohyouknow…allthings considered... LAKE:Iknow.Butapartfifomthat…？ Silence. GENE:Sorry.IIvelostyou. LAKE:Whatdoyoumean？ GENE:I…IIostyou. LAKE:No,youdidn't…I'mrighthere wherelwas. ハロルド・ピンター(1930-2008)そ れはそれとして（喜志哲雄訳） Gene:どうしてる？ Lake:とても元気だ。で、君は？ 君は元気かい？ Gene:おそろしく元気だ。君はど うだい？ Lake:ほんとに元気だ。ほんとに 元気だよ、俺は。 Gene:そりゃよかった。 Lake:ただ、その･｡｡｡。ほら、分 るだる･｡｡｡◎ Gene:分るよ。 Lake:ただ、その･oco･ほら、分 るだる・｡｡｡。 Gene:分るとも。でもさ、それは それとして｡｡｡｡。？ Lake:君はどうだい？ Gene:ほら、分るだる･｡｡｡。あれ これ考えてみれば.｡｡｡｡。 Lake:分るよ。でもき、それはそ れとして｡｡｡｡。？ 沈黙。 Gene:ごめん。どこにいるんだ。 Lake:何だって？ Gene:どこにいるんだ。 Lake:何を言ってるんだ｡俺はこ こにいる。もとのまま。
GENE:Anyway,wherewerewe？ LAKE：Sorry？ GENE:Imean…apart丘omallthat howareyoureally？ LAKE:Tb耐blywell. GENE:Wellyoucertainlysoundwell LAKE:Iam…apart廿om…ohyou know... GENE:Yes,Iknow. LAKE:Butyouirewell…anyway. GENE:IImwonderfilllywell,tobe honest. LAKE:I'mreallyglad. GENE:Apart廿om…youknow... LAKE:Butapartfromthat... Silence. GENE:What？ LAKE:Apartfiomthat…howareyou really？…Apartfromthat？ そ れ は そ れ と し て Gene:とにかくざ、何の話だった かな？ Lake:何だって？ 間。 Gene:つまりね、それはそれとし て 、 君 は ど う な ん だ い 、 ほ ん と の と こ ろ ？ Lake:おそろしく元気だ。 Gene:うん、確かに元気そうな声 をしてる。 Lake:元気なんだよ。ただ、そ のcoo｡。ほら、分かるだろcc｡｡◎ Gene:うん、分かるよ。 Lake:でも、君は元気なんだね、 とにかく。 Gene:僕はすばらしく元気だ、実 を言うと。 Lake:ほんとによかった。 Gene:ただ、その･｡｡｡。ほら｡。｡｡。 Lake:でもさ、それはそれとして？ 沈黙･ Gene:何だい？ Lake:それはそれとして、どうな ん だ い 君 は 、 ほ ん と の と こ ろ ？ そ れ は そ れ と し て ？ Theinspirationfbrthisessaystemsfifomtwochiefsources.Itemerged throughareadingoftheJapanesetranslationofPinter's"pα〃F>℃加剛a/(そ れはそれとして)byTbtsuoKishi(2009)inwhich沈黙isusedtoexpress theequivalentmeaningofthePinterianpauseorsilence.Whenlfirstthought
aboutthis,Iwonderedwhetheritwaspossibletotranslatesuchachingsilences intoaculturethat〃""αeんc/eandfbrthemostpartembracestoalargedegree thetranquillityoftheunsaid・Thoughtson沈黙werealsostirredbyAlphonso LingiTs20131ectureentitled.CommunicationandSilence',attheCGLifeand Phenomenology:CelebratingAlgisMickUnasat80''conferenceatVytautas MagnusUniversityinLithuania,inwhichhespokeoftheheavysilencesthatone mustendureinlife. RomanJakobson RomanJakobson'sphilosophyofconnnunication(1956)makesgreatstrides inexplainingtheroleofphaticutterancesinconversation.Atfirstglance,the modeliscommonsensical;itgoessomethinglikethis.Theaddressersendsa messagetotheaddressee.Themessageinneedofacontextattachestoaverbalor otherwise1referent!orsomethingreferredtobytheaddressee.Assuch,thecode mustbecommonandsharedbetweentheaddresserandaddresseeasthemessage operatesthroughadyadofencoderanddecoder・Lastly,theremustbeameansof contact,aphysicalchannelandpsychologicalconnectionbetweentheaddresser andtheaddressee,sustainingthechitchat.Althoughverbalmessagesmust includealloftheafbrementionedfimctions,fbrJakobson(1960)somefimctions dominateothers.Jakobson'sfimctionalistmodelofuniversalrepresentationof communication-partofthefbrmalist-filnctionalistcommitmentofthePrague school-isstructuredaroundsixcomponents-addresser,context,message,contact, code,andaddressee.Thesixfilnctionsareorientatedtowardsoneoranother factor.Thesefilnctionscorrespondtothefbllowing:theemotive(expressive),the referential(cognitive,denotative,ideational),thepoetic(aesthetic),thephatic,the metalingual(iglossing'),andtheconative(appellative).
Asonemightexpect,theemotivefilnctionexpressestheaddresser'sattitudes orfeelings,thoughthisneednotbethroughanexplicitstatement.Itcanmanifest inanexclamation,suchas@ohno'or@wonderfill'.AccordingtoJakobson(1960), referentialcommunicationisthe｡realorextemalsituationinwhichthemessage occurs'.Itisusedwhenwestateafact,ordescribeasituation.Thepoetic filnctionfbcusesonthemessageitselfalthoughinitselfitpertainsnotonlyto poetry.ForJakobson,thepoeticfilnctionoflanguagechallengesthereferential fimctionintermsofthefimdamentalambiguityofmessages.Ambiguityalters thereferentialfimction・Wecanuseitwhenwedecidehowtosaysomething-fbrexample,changingword-order,orchoosmgspecincwordstosaysomething.
S
e
v
e
r
a
l
p
a
r
o
n
o
m
a
s
t
i
c
'
i
m
a
g
e
s
u
s
e
d
b
y
J
a
k
o
b
s
o
n
a
r
e
i
l
l
u
s
t
r
a
t
i
v
e
o
f
t
h
e
p
o
e
t
i
c
fUnction.Onthismatterofphaticspeech,Burgess(1965)viewsthisas:speechto promotehumanwannth'.Itisthesmalltalkbetweenpeople,whetherthatisface-to-faceorotherwise,fbrexample,viaelectronicmeans.Whilethemetalingual communicationpertainstotalkaboutgrammar,pronunciationorthegivingof instructions(Leeds-Hurwitz,1992),theconativefimctionconsistsoftheeffect themessagehasontheaddressee'sfeelingsorattitudes.Itisalsoassumedthat theconativeinvolvessomedegreeofimperativeorvocativelanguage,suchas Gleavemealone'.Inanycommunicativeevent,itisclaimedoneofthefilnctions takesprecedencetoagreaterorlesserextentovertheothers.AsJakobson saystheverbalstructureofamessagedependsprimarilyonthe｡predominant function'.Ergo,thefilllmeaningoftheillocutionaryactisdependenttoa significantdegreeonthecontext,code,ormeansofcontact,andtheresultant combinationswhichensue.Importantly,themeaningofamessageisgraspedin thetotalactofcommunication,whichentertainsdistinctextralinguisticfactors. WhileinSaussure'sworkthereisadistinctionbetweenlangueandparole,with languetakenasthesystematichomogeneousaspectoflanguage,andparolethemdividualuseandvariation,mJakobson,wefindthelinkbetweensigliherand signifiedloosenedtotakebetteraccountoftherolethelatterplays.hhisl960 paper@CIosingStatement:LinguisticsandPoeticg,Jakobsonacknowledgesthe mdebtednessfbrhismodelofcommunicationtoBromslawMalmowski'sconc"t ofphaticcommunion(seeOgdenαα/,1923).Inthelatter,thisuseoflanguage sustainsasocialrelationthroughritualisedfbnnulassuchasgreetings,chit-chat orsmalltalk.Despitetheapparentvacuityofutterances,theemptinessofcontact servesasatechnicalhmction,toteSttheSystemitselftotestthemediumnotthe message,asMarshallMcLuhan(2005)famouslyputit.Forexample,themering ofthequestion:@Hello,doyouhearme?'isdevoidofcontentassuchasitmerely teststhatthesystemiswolking・Wehndhsexplanationhintsattheemptmessof suchcontentbecauseintheveryactofprolongingofdialoguethereisanimplicit demandfbrtheinterlocutor'sconstantattention.WhatislefiiSasenSeofconstant contactwithoutcontent.Thephaticfilnctionisakintothemetalingualfilnction mthatthefbnnerchecksthee缶ciencyofthechannel,whilethelatterisusedby interlocutorstoassesswhetherthesamecodeisused.ItisviewedbyJakobsonas
6
a
n
i
n
d
i
s
p
e
n
s
a
b
l
e
e
l
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
c
o
n
c
e
r
t
e
d
h
u
m
a
n
a
c
t
i
o
n
'
､
2
BaudrillardcontraJakobson WritinginthetraditionofsurrealismandSituationalism,JeanBaudrillard (1929-2007)fbrmulatesathought-provokingalbeitultimatelypessimisticcritique ofmediated-communication(Genosko,2012).Histheoreticalmodelresonatesa geatdealwithPinter'sdramaswhichwewillanalyselaterinthiSessayandmuch withthedisquietingproblemsoftheisolatedindividualofourage-thecurrent fbcusofStiegler'sphilosophyofmediaandcommunication.ContraShannon andWeaver'smodelofcommunication(1949),Baudrillard(1981)writesthatcommunicationissomethingessentiallyotherthan@thesimpletransmission-receptionofamessage'(p.169).Insumma:Baudrillardinsistssimulacrahave WOnOut・Inanextremesense,thereisnothingotherthanphaticcommunication. InSed"c加刀(1990,p.163-66),Baudrillardoutlineshisviewofthezerodegree ofcontactortele-phasisandclaimsthatthephaticfimctionoflanguageisused toestablishcontactandsustainspeech'sfbrmaldimension.Thisisrelatively straightfbrwardexceptitistakeninahypertrophiedsense,inthetele-dimension ofthecommunicationsnetworks.Andpsychoanalytically,contactfbrcontact's sakeisthedeceptiveemptyfbnn-akintoLacan'scpqro/eW"'-throughwhich @languageseducesitselfwhenitnolongerhasanythingtosay'(Federicie/α/， 2005).ForLacan,emptyspeechoccurswhenthesumectappearstobetalking/〃 vα加aboutsomeonewho,｡evenifhewerehisspittingimage,canneverbecome onewiththeassumptionofhisdesire'(Lacan,1977).Putanotherway,infbnnation fbrinfbrmation'ssakeobliteratestheprospectoftransparentorunmediated communication.Phaticcommunicationhasthisdysiimctionalfbnnatitsheart,as thisfimctionisirremediablytiedtothesimulacrum'ssystemicdysfimctionality. Inshort,itdominatesthechannelandunderminestransparentcommunication. ThereismentionofthisinAlainBadiou'snotionofthereignofopinionorphatic discourseandechoesofitarefbundinGiorgioAgamben'smotifofGcommunication withouthavinganythingtocommunicate'(Heron,2008,p.48).Suchamotif viewspurecommunicabilityasthatwhichdissolvesthereceiveddifferences between<man'and｡animal'inthepureopeningofvoice.Writingagainstthe terrorinherentinthecode-whichJakobson'smodelofcommunicationgrants primacyto-acodethatprivilegesthesenderoverreceiverandtherefrainthat maintainstheirrelation、andtranslatestheunivocityandlegibilityofmessages -Baudrillardbleaklycritiquesthewaysuchacodeexcludesambivalenceand domesticatessigns.Herethephaticfilnctionisa@simulationpact'basedontele
-p
h
a
s
i
s
o
r
c
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
f
b
r
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
'
s
s
a
k
e
'
-
n
o
w
a
d
a
y
s
f
b
u
n
d
i
n
t
e
x
t
i
n
g
,
e
m
a
i
l
,
c
h
a
t
,
e
t
c
.
3
Omnipresentandvapid,tele-phasissymbolisesaveritableimplosionofmeaninga
n
d
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
4
B
a
u
d
r
i
l
l
a
r
d
呵
e
c
t
s
t
h
e
c
l
a
i
m
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
s
e
m
a
n
t
i
c
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
o
f
amessageisalwayslegibleandl皿vocal.hthesensethisiswhatonenndsm Pinter'sdialoguesandamidstthemenacing,sinistersilence,filllofill-intent,inthe ambivalenceofexchange.Languageisactuallyemployedtokeepthoughtatbay.It lies.Onthis,SteinerinhisLα"g"age""ds//e"ce.･跡sqWo〃/α"g"age,/"""z"qe, α〃ﾉﾙe加加加α〃(1967,p.150-151)discussesthematterclinicallyanddecisively, insisting: Somaﾙ腕gQf//ie""q"dsqdM7w"/se"/e加ﾉﾙe碗arrowq/r/ie/α"g"age･ 〃”eｱ℃ql"的α//肺/,ﾉ伽rhepo""sq/""jα伽"s流"gs"e"/IyMor/ie肋"e、 B"/illecα"c〃wj〃beg加,q"dr舵昨ep-se/"s〃"c伽"・剛e/α"g"αgew"/〃o /o"gergrowq"d"s/7e"."w///no/o"gerpe枕γ加,9""easwe〃as〃"sedro," /wo〃加叩αノル"c伽"&･r/ieco"veyα"ceqf加加α"eo'伽"w/lic/Iwecα〃/αwα〃 //7eco加加""ica伽"QMe9"ickQ///ie加加α"叩""w"cﾙwecα"〃ace．Pinterandphaticcommunication
Atfirstglanceandfbrthemostpart,Pinter's〃α〃F》⑩加肋arisashort, scathingsketchlambastingthewaypeoplesaylittlealmostnothingineveryday utteranceso"r/ie"7oMe.ItiswellknownthatPinterwashighlycriticalofmobile phonesandheldaconsiderableaversionanddisdainfbrthewaypeopleusethem tocommunicate.TheafbrememioneddialogueclearlyisinHuencedbyBeckett's 恥"加g/b7Godb/,inwhichVladimirandEstragonarecompelledtoprolong theirconversation,whilewaitingfbrGodot.Yet,whereasthephaticinteljeCtions appearvacuousin〃α"伽加/加/,inBeckett'splaythecharactersdoindeedholdsomefbnnofminimalexchangeofcontent.WhileBeckett'ssilencesintimatethe disintegrationoflanguage,Pinter'ssilencesareinfilsedwithaffectandapregnant transmissionofmeanin9. Brieflysummarised,intheexchange,twocharactersGeneandLakearefbund communingviamobilephones,sayinglittlealmostnothingapart廿omthatseems likebanalconcems.Althoughrepeatedreferencesaremadetoan叩α〃/加加/加／ theprecisecontentisleftunsaid・ThediscussioncontinuesdespiteintelTuptions andcommunicationbreakdownandendslefthangingintheair,withoutresolution. ItconcludeswiththeunsaidyettobeutteredandfbrgoodreasonbecausePinter oftenendsinsilence,heexplains,ashehasnoanswerstoaffbrdus.Thisis ourlot.WhenthesketchwasincludedinPinter'sPeoplein2007,whichwas comprisedofsketchesandmonologues,circumstanceswerechangedtopresent thecommunicationbetweentwopatientsinhospital(PhillipsandKevinEldon), onepatientintraction,theotheronanintravenousdrip.Herethespectreofdecay anddeathissilencedthroughphaticconnnunication.Whenwelookat〃α〃F》て)加 肪α/againandconsidermobiletelephonywecanimagineGeneandLakewrapped upclosetotheirmobilephones,hibernatingincommunicado.OneimaginesGene andLakealone,staringintotheabyss,amidstthechaosandnoiseofabustling cityjwiththeirsilencesinsinuatingvariousaffectssuchasconfilsion,uncertainty, andsadness.Althoughfacingtheabyssthroughterminalillness,thepatients remainsteadfastlyfbcussedonthemundane.Inthisinstance,whenGeneinquires intoLake'swell-beingwhatheisreallydoingisestablishingaphaticrelation toLakewiththesoleintentionofascertainingifthemeansofcommunicationis working-asJakobsonexplainedabove.ThkeninthiswaylitwouldseemPinter's pointisthatthemediumitselfridsthemessageofcontent,despitetheeffbrtsto conveymessageswithexistentialcontent. Phaticcommunicationthuspertainstothechannel:itisfbundinthe
expression<Icanithearyou,youirebreakingup'inthemiddleofaconversation. LakeasksGeneGHowaboutyou?'TowitGenereplies6Ohyouknow…allthings considered…'Lakesympathiseswiththisandadds:@Iknow.Butapartfromthat ...?'Ininquiringintosomethingotherthanthe叩α〃ﾉ℃mrﾙα/onecaninferthat Geneisutteringtheconativeorimperativefimction,whichdominatesthestrucmre ofthespeechevent-sincethedialogueisclearlydirectedtoLake.AsJakobson insiststheintendedmessageofanexchangecannotcapturethefilllmeaningof theverbaleventbecausethecontentofthecommunicationisdependentonthe context,thecode,themeansofcomact,andotherconngurations.nemeaningofa messageisenclosedinthetotalactofcommunication,withthesemanticelements ofthemessageinsinuatedamidstotherextra-linguisticfactors(Bradley,2012). Criticsofsuchamodelpointtotheargumentthatthenumberofdistinctparts constitutingatotalcommunicativeeventcannotbedecomposedsoreadily.On thislineofreasoning,thisisbecausethecommunicativeeventiscontinuousand dynamic.TheJakobsonmodeliscriticisedpreciselyfbritslinearityandsequencing ofrelation:廿omtheaddressertotheaddressee,anunalterable@unidirectional sequencing'(Chang,p・177).Whatisextractedfromthemessage,廿omtheabsurd, phaticexchangeoftheinessentialbetweenGeneandLakeisanelementwhich challengesJakobson'smodelofphaticcommunion.Althoughthelanguagepasses fbrcommunication,thereissomethingunsettlingaboutthedialogue.Something jarsandsticksmthethroat:whatwefindisaneconomyofaHect(aHectssuch asanxiety,confilsion,bewilderment),aneventandperfbrmanceofpoweras pz"ssα"ce,astammeringandsmttering(6egqie"7e"/火ね/α"g"easDeleuzeand Guattarisay)oranin-between.ForBasilChiasson(2010),intemretingBrian MassumiandDeleuze,theroleofaffectinfbnnsPinter'sworkasitisthrough!the direct,mutualinvoIvementoflanguageandextra-linguisticfbrcer(Massumi, 2002,p.xix)thatmeaningcanbeconstruedasamaterialprocess,an@expression
offbrcesactinguponeachother'.Wecansaythatanordinaryconversationandthe everV"yareseldomjust/加/,becausespokenlanguageisrepletewiththeunsaid, theunabletobesaidq/r加//"e,theunspoken:itisin/ﾙﾉssilencethatadark senseoffbrebodingleaksoutcancerously.Pinter'sworkexploressuchcontortions oflanguagetothenthdegree:expressionsarehammeredandbentoutofshape,no longertransparent,nolongersignifyingwhattheyusuallysignify.In“α〃F7om 剛α/,whatislurkingunderneaththeclichesindailyconversationistheeverso slighthintofanunwelcome@elephantintheroom'or､we"e/underthecocktail cabinet',acertainmalignantpresencepregnantwithmisfbrtuneandfbreboding. Ontheothersideofthephaticspectrum,andtakeninaphenomenologicalsense, itcanequallybearguedthatanaffectiverelationexists,ashowingofempathy,a detenninationtosimplybe//7eﾉでfbrtheother:inotherwords,thesimplysaying ofsomethingisasequallyimportantasthesaid.InLevinisianlanguage,inPinterIs dialogue,anddespitetheapparentlackofexplicitmeaningfillcommunication, GeneandLakeshoweachotherthattheyarepresentand/brtheother. Clich6 Yetthelinesin4pα〃F>℃加剛α/areSimpleenough.Theyarepackedwith everydayinteljectionwords:thesamekindofchatonehearsofienonthetrain,bus orinthestreet.Butin-betweenPinter'slinesthereissomethingthathintsatthe unsaid.Hehasaknackfbros〃α"e"/e-themakingstrangeofordinarypatternsof
l
i
n
g
u
i
s
t
i
c
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
-
a
p
o
i
n
t
p
i
c
k
e
d
u
p
b
y
J
a
k
o
b
s
o
n
w
h
o
u
r
g
e
s
a
r
t
i
s
t
s
t
o
m
a
k
e
theordinaryuncannyinhisfamousdehitionoftheartist'stask,@tomakethe
ordinarystrange'(Bruner,1983). Inthemobilephonedialogue,itwouldseemthetopicsofdeath,disease, illnessandthehorrorofwararetootraumatictocon廿ontdirectly.Suchtopicsarenotpartofthegameof//ieeve"C加ﾉ.Mattersofthehelloftheworldarebetter blocked廿omtransmission.Yet,inthesketchunderneaththeemptywords,thereis thehintofourthrowness,anuttennostimpossibmtywellmgup;ahnallastlaugh. "isr馳走ineverywordandutterance.Morethanthis,itisthatwhichenvelops andnestlesitselfineverygasp,vibrationofsonicmatter,ineverybreath.Itis thatthickblackmelancholywhichhoversaboveeveryinterlocution.Listening ineverydormant,broodingsilence,itisenmeshedinthesubtextandshadows shroudingsilence.Thequietreposeisdeafenedbyrowdylunwantedguests.Itisa terseandausterefbnnofexpression,inwhichallisdenuded.Inthemasterfilluse ofapoeticsofsilenceinthedramasofPinterandBeckettisasilencethatpours likewaterinto｡asinkingship'.“α〃F7℃加剛"isapart廿omone'smortality. Theunsettlingpartisthatl'mspeakingonthemobilebut叩α〃ガ℃加//m/Ihave nothingmeaningfilltosay. Tbxtingfbritsownsakeisthephaticfilnctionoflanguagep"exce此"ce:itis
t
h
e
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
o
f
a
n
a
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
b
r
i
d
g
e
.
T
h
i
n
k
o
f
t
h
e
三
砧
露
蕊
毒
b
u
t
t
o
n
o
n
F
a
c
e
b
o
o
k
orothersocialnetworkswhichisusedmoreoftenthannottoreplyviscerally, howevertrivial,inaneorinconsequential,toconveyatleastthatoneispresentand understandsthatotherpeoplearetooin丘ontoftheirluminescentscreens、alone andisolated,communingincommunicado.Themobilephonebecomesthedevice throughwhichshort,phaticcommunicationssustainsocialcontactandconvey affects,howevervirtual,ratherthanthemeanstoconfiDnt,challengeandexchange filndamentalideasandbeliefS.Mobilecommunicationistherefbreaffectiveand phaticthroughandthrough,byitsveryintentionality.ItisthiswhichPinterpicks upontoshowhowphaticlanguagecanplayapivotal,albeitdeleteriousrolein humanrelations・Peopleusecommunicationdevicesnottoconcealtheirthoughts buttohidethefact/》℃〃/ﾙe版seんesthattheyhavenone.Thiscriticismisnotnew, anditisnotjustanattackonthestupidityofeverydaytalk,thetalkof//ie//iey.ItisfbundinVoltaire,whoclaimswehavelanguagetoconcealthoughts廿omeach other.Voltaireisusuallyattributedassaying: Mど〃〃sejﾙo"g/"o"かasαz"肋"収/brrﾉ7e"""s"ce,q"de"7p/qySpeeclio"かro co"Ceα〃力e〃/ﾙo"g〃応． WhilefbrHermannMelville(1971).allprofbundthingsandemotionsofthings areprecededandattendedbysilence',assilenceisdeemedageneralconsecration oftheuniverse,theonlyvoiceofGod,orfbrPicolyerfbrwhomsilenceisa divinevoice,aneloquentsound,onethatenvelopswords,fbrPinter,silenceisnot somucharesponsetotheineffable:itissomethingmoremundane,lessother-worldy,moreconcreteandfinite.Itisthemirroroppositeofthisdivinesolimde andcommunion.Itmakesaracket.Earlierinhiscareer,Pinterinsistedtherewere twoprincipaldiHeremfbnnsoftheideaofsilence.Thefirstisthestraigntfbrward caseofwhennowordisspoken.Itistheabsenceofcontent.Theotheriswhen onefinds.atorremoflanguage'preciselymthemtialabsence.Ashesays(1977): 剛jsSpeec/7jsSpeα〃"gQ/"/α"g"age/ocked6e"e"ル〃､剛α〃s"Bco""""α/ 'E/b花"ce.77ieSpeec/iwe/ieα〃sα"/"dica伽"q///7q/wﾙﾉc/7we伽"7. Inthissense,Pinterseemstobedramatisingtheunsaidbehindtheplatitudesof smalltalk.Despitetheclichespropagatedbyhearsay:thereisalsosomethingelse pertainingtoalterity,perhapsundecidable,somethingmoretobegleaned.The pointisthatconversationsareinvariablyladenwithacrustofmeaningofamuch moreexistentialregisterandcadence.Behindeverydaydialogue-salutations, talkoftheweather-thereisadeSirefbradeeperlevelofculturalandintercultural
communication-whichsometimesindirectlyintimatesatbeing-towards-death.Meaningisburieddeepwithina@languagecloud'ofchatter,nonsense, evasion,withsilencesengagedinpowergames,politicalstatements,refilsals, grudgingconsents.Atthelimitofthespokenword,thereistheagonisedsilence: intimidationitselfSkepticaloftheliteraldenotationsofwords,Pintersaysone shouldlookdeeperfbrtheimplicationsandwhatislefiunsaid・Thereisclearlya preoccupationwithsilencethroughoutPinter'scomus:itistheincommunicable thatisalwaysintimated.Inaveryimportantsense,Pintersuggestswe communicateinthethreefbllowingfilllstops…Ginoursilence'.Underneath theconveyanceofunadulteratedinfbnnationisaconsciousanddeliberateuseof orders,responses,solicitations,silencestoexpress,ofienarticulatingunsavory powerrelations.Theobverseofthisisamasqueradingofdialoguetoconceal one'struethoughts,apointwhichVictorL.Cahn(1993)picksupuponandinsists languageisinfilsedwiththeunanswerable.TowardoffthisconfrontatiOn,we deployquestions,awkward,intermittedpauses,silences,andrepetitionstohold ontopower.Pinter'scharactersinplayssuchasMeCα/画akeﾉ･(1960)relyon colloquialisms,professionaljargon,andconvolutedwordpattemsastheytwist andspasminevercomplexpowerrelations.InMoz""α"7Peop/e(1988),Pinter critiquestheoppressionofgovernmentsagainstthepopulace,inparticularthe suppressionoftheKurdsinTurkeyinthel980s.Thefbllowingmonologueof theoffIcertauntinghisprisonersisinstructive,asitplaysontheideathateven ordersladenwiththethreatofviolenceandreprimandareseldomtransparentand communicable・Itwouldappeareventhebrutenatureofsuchlanguagefailstoget itsintendedmessageacross.Pinterattackstheabuseofpowerinthismonologue, affirmmgtherighttosilenceofthevictms.(1988,p.251256): Ⅳひwルear伽s.If〕〃αノセ〃7o""/αﾉ〃pe叩/e.ル〃ルeα7脚e？肋"『/α"g"age/s虎αα I〃sjbr6m庇".I//s"o/pe'γ"/"ecﾉ/oSpeqk)ﾉo"『'"o""〃〃/α"g"age"7/ﾙﾉ8
p/ace、殉〃cα""o/Speaルyo"〃α"g"αgeroyoz〃〃e"．〃な〃orpeﾉ"""賊Doyo" ""虎'wα"〃…〃なo""αwecilb〃mavo"か叩eα肺ﾙe/α"g"αgeq"7ec叩加/,剛α／ /s//ieo"か/α"g"agepej"伽"副加/肋p/ace,肋ｲw///6ebqc"y〃"杣〃〃yo" α"e"7p//oSpeα〃yo2〃加o""/α加ね"g"αgej刀伽sp/qce.7Wsなα”/"α〃庇cree." jsr"e/Qww.lb"〃α"g"αgeな/b"肋たた".〃jsctQcJNoo"e/sα"owed/oSpeαﾙyoz"． /α"g"age・lbz〃/α"g"αge"o/o"geF･ex/s". Heretakingtheperspectiveoftheabused,silenceisnotafailureoflanguageper sebutarefUsaltouselanguageasacommunicativeconduittothoseinpower. ForPinteritwouldseemthestructuresofdominationandpowerindialogueofien keeptruth-statementsatbay.Silenceissilentthroughthisverydomination.Inthis respect,thatoneleamstospeakinone'sownnameisnoeasytask.Inthisitseems itisPinter'spointtosuggestthatitisnotuptothemastertolegislatewhenthe oppressedareatlibertytospeak.TbwardstheendofMo""〃"Lα"g"age(Pinter, 2001,p.22),thefbllowingdialogueisheard.Silenceispresent.Yetoneitsown tacimmlevel,itrefilsestobudge,confbnn,tobecomplicitinwrongdoings. G"α湫O",Iん堰o"o/e"yo".777ey'vec加"ged/ﾉ7er"/es.Mecα"Speqk.Mecα〃 叩eα肘"力erow"/α"g"age.[ﾉ肋ﾉﾉi"油eγ"o"ce. TheOldWomanremainsstill. 馳噌e""r.･Lookα〃ﾉ血lb"goo"/Qfyo"'wqy/ogjve//7e腕αルe〃"g加”α” /"eyj¥*k〃叩． Languageisusedperfbrmativelytosustainpowerstructures.Betweenwords, silencemeanssomethinghashappenedanditisnotyetthetimetospeak.To returnto〃α〃かo"7//7"therearetwoobstacleswhichblockunmediated communication.Thefirstistheexistentialproblemsofsilence;thesecond,
thetechnicalproblemoftransmissionofmeaningviamobilephones.The interlocutorsarecloseyetsofaraway.Insomesense,Pinterseemstobesaying thattheclaustrophobicclosenesstotheother9"αothermakesoneconvulse. EchoingWittgenstein'sclaim(1922/2010)that:@whatwecannotspeakaboutwe mustpassoverinsilence,'Pinter(1998)describesthefimctionofspeechasa deceptive!stratagemtocovernakednessI.Inl962,inadiscussiononthepoverty ofcommunication,wefindPinterthinkmgdeeplyabouttheterrorofsilence・He writes: 〃ﾙ肋ルwecom耐""cq/eo"Iyroowe/〃〃o"rs//e"ce,加w加/な〃"sα賦α"d/ﾙα／ w加血α沈esp/qce/sQco"〃""αノeVqSJO",娩叩eγα/eγeα聰"α〃α"e〃うおrokeep o"応eんeS/OO"応eんes.Co加加""jca"o"/s/ooα/α""J"g.乃e"/eγJ"IC”碗eo"e e/s的/i/bjs/oo"jg/7/e"加9.乃〃ﾉ“/osero“ﾙeγ”"e〃ve岬w"ﾙ加〃sis/oo たα応o”eα加剛〃岬 Weseldomhearspeechasitisanecessary･avoidance,aviolent,sly,and anguishedormockingsmokescreen'whichinvariablycontrolstheother.The obverseofthisisthatintruesilencewecomeclosertovulnerability.In冊"加g/br 的e〃ea"e(1977),Pinterinsiststhatitisfromsilencethatlanguagestrugglesto emerge yb〃α"αZ//7ec伽γαae7swﾙﾉcル印CWO〃αpqge,"fos/Q///7e/Mewe'7e 加exp形“んe,g伽"g〃"/eaw卿,〃"だ加況e,I,ev"/1ﾉe,obs〃"c"ve,〃"w"ﾉﾉ"g.Bz" "<so"rqfr/7eseα""伽/e師加/α/α"g"αgearjs“.』/α"g"age,/Jepe",w/7ere ""晩rw〃α/な""α"orﾉ7eγ〃"g"6e加gsα凧 Underneathwhatissaid,fbrPinter,anothermatterisuttered.Wordsobscure
silence.Silenceistherefbreakintoaminortongue;itisthefbreignlanguage withinlanguage;itcontortsandstrainslanguageandfbrcesittostutterand stammer.Stammeringoccursinthissilence.Itisgenerativeofnewgrammatical orsyntacticpowers:itmakeslanguagedelirious.Insimilarways,thephilosopher DavidWood(1990)considersindirectcommunicationasaperlocutionaryact -thecarryingoutofanexistentialperlocution.Hewrites(1990,p.ll0):"To understandhowindirectcommunicationispossiblewemustgraspwhatitis
a
b
o
u
t
o
r
d
i
n
a
l
y
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
t
h
a
t
i
s
b
e
i
n
g
c
h
a
n
g
e
d
.
'
'
5
S
i
l
e
n
c
e
p
r
o
p
e
l
s
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
tothelimitofwhatcanandcannotbeuttered.Aswordscreatesilence,thelatter suspendsmeaningandexhaustslanguage.Atthelimitofwhatcanbesaidthereis aconfiontationwithsilence.Silenceisbothadramaticandrhetoricalstrategy.Itis adeliberaterhetoricalstrategy,a6desperaterearguardattempttokeepourselvesto ourselveg,asPintersays.Iflanguageisahgmentaryandincompletemediumto expressanxietyandincompleteness,itisalsoawaytostallconversation. SilenCeandJapan ThesnencefbundmcommunicativebehaviourmJapanisdefinedlargelyby Confilcianism・Thechin(沈)ofchinmoku(沈黙)siglifesamovmgm,ameaI血g whichdiffersfromtheoriginalmeaningtohangdown.Themoku(黙)suggests amixingofblackanddog,asilentdog.Silenceandspeechfbrmacontinuum ofcommunication・Forexample,silencecommunicatesthroughreticence, ambivalence,situationallogic.Severalinterestingsensesofsilencearefbundin Japaneseproverbsorkotowaza-(seeNakane,2007;Loveday,1986;Fischerand Yoshida,1968,p.37-39)-suchas@iftherearemanywords,therewillbemuch shame',@cIoseyourmouthandopenyourearg.Othersinclude.onetreatsone's mouthlikeaguardedjar',@mouthsaretoeatwith,nottospeakwith',@iftherearemanywordstherewillbemuchshame',@thetigerinoneismouthdestroys oneself',.apersonofmanywordshaslittlerefinemem',6thosewhoknowdonot speak､thosewhospeakdonotknow',6honeyinthemouth,aswordinthebelly'. Suchkindsofkotowazaindicatetheculturalroleandphilosophicalimportsilence
h
a
s
i
n
J
a
p
a
n
e
s
e
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
s
.
6
0
n
t
h
i
s
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
t
h
e
P
i
n
t
e
r
p
a
u
s
e
s
e
e
m
s
atoddswiththeintendedmeaningencapsulatedinthekotowaza@iwanugahana' (GtosaynothingisaHower'or@silenceiswisdomwhenspeakingisfblly').hdeed, Yamada(1997,p.17))notesthatthekotowaza@onlythebellyspeaksthetruth' suggeststheidealcommunicationmodelisoneamonginterlocutorsprecisely w"ﾙo"/talk.InS池"ce,"ieP/ie"o"Ie"o"α噸施O"ro/Ogicα/Sig"旅α"ce(1980), BernardPLDauenhauerconsidersdiscourseaspreciselyarisingoutofsilence.Itis thelatterthatpreparesthewayfbrdiscoursetoappearand@allotsitroominwhich toappear'.Befbrethewordtherewassilence.AndaccordingtoTBnnen(1985,p. 94),sharedbetweenintimates,silencesaresharedasaninterpersonalbond.This isthesilenceofthat.sweetsilentthought!fbundinShakespeare'sSonnet30,that perfectrapportbetweenintimateswithoutwords.Allofthisseemsveryfarfifom theexistentialdreadloominginPinter'splaysandprose.AlphonsoLingis
ThephilosopherLingissuggeststhat@genuine'communicationtakesplace onamuchdeeperlevelofsocialrelation.Ifthespokenwordossifiesthought, congealsrelations,stratifiesandblockstheconveyanceofmeaningwithout explicitarticulation,anddespitethefeverishdesirefbrinstantcommunication, aswearealwaysenshroudedbythe:clangoroftheworld'(Iyer),Lingis(2013) claimsthatinourgreaturbantechnopoles,thereisindeedaneedtowithdraw,to goincommunicadoasitwere,fromtheclamourofbeingwithothers.Hewrites:Tb"yo"e加〃Q加加α"j秒加sα”e'"6/師加c"jeswﾉ7erew/7e"everpe叩/eαだ 'α/""g/oorﾉ'ers,/ZIc加gr/7e"7,"Jaym/kj"/oce//p/io"es,'力e"exMsα伽we碗ノ 伽ve/brso/加娩． Inhis20131ecture&CommunicationandSilence',Lingisinsiststhatonetravels wellwhenweoneleaveslanguagebehind.Withoutwords,withoutacommon tongue,oneencounterstheotherandisotherfbrtheother.Aloneinafbreignland, withoutthecomfbrtofasharedtongue,oneappealstotheotherfbrhelpinone's verycomportment.One'snakednessbefbretheother､unmasksthefalseidentities ofpersonhoodandrevealsone'sessentialsingularity.Onthisaccount,silenceis singular.Itismineandyours:sometimesaprison,ahome,aviolence,atorture house.Languageconcealsthoughtsfabricatedinsilence.Inhislecture,Lingis says:@6Wordsdonotattachtothesingular,apparitionorevent,butdesignateswhat iscommontoasuccessionofpastandfiltureapparitionsofevents.''Ifsilenceis refilgeandsanctuary,conversationpullsus廿omthepossibilityofinsight,and fromtheuneasiness,attractions,desires,lustsanxieties,mountingpleasureof bodies,asLingisputsit.Discussingthewebofclosedrelationsenmeshingthe s血ect,hewrites: 晩s"〃ec/o"応e/ves/o庇加α"戒"gwo'rﾒ3,Oppressive,woJW,α〃qsivewor伽， s伽g加gwoJ曲,6"加gwoﾉ伽,c""加gwoﾉ℃ﾒs."刀油/〃α/CO"S""C/"S,ノαCe7"e"S, 加加加/e"s,sicke""S,"IO"鋤"s、 Forthephenomenologist(Lingis,1994),noiseisthatwhichisinternaltoand disruptiveofrationaldiscourse.Foritisinvoiceswhichtremblewithemotion,and crackwithtears,whichexposeshame,sorrowandanger,thatrenderthespeaker presentandknowabletothelistener.OneimaginesLingisanalysingPinter'splays
andagreeingthatthenoiseoftheworldissoveryalienけomthehumanistrational discourseofphilosophyandscience(Lingis,1994,p.80).ContraSerres'notion ofrationalcommunication(1992),Lingisinsistslanguageismuchmorethan theidealspeechcommunitiesofthelinguistsandphilosophers.Behindabstract meaning,thereisagamutofidiosyncrasiesundenniningtheabstractmessagefbr rationalcommunication,whichnecessitatestherepressionofbackgroundnoise, astheunsayablethatfbnnsthebackdroptotheworld,asnoise.Ashesays:$the particulartimber,pitch,volume,andtonallengthofthewordsbeinguttered,the particularcolor,penmanship,andtypeface,ofthevisiblepattemS(Lingis,1994, p.77).Inthisnotionofnoiseandthemurmuroftheworld,thereissomething aboveandbeyondtheidletalkineverydaydiscourseandcommunication・Itisnot somuchthatthemessageislostintheinterferenceandconfilsionofbackground noise,asmunnurandthebackgroundnoisearebothessentialtothetotalspeech act.Writingagainsttheidealcityofcommunicationmaximallypurgedofnoise (Lingis,1994,p.12)andcontraSerres,Lingiscritiquestheviewthatthe.maximal eliminationofnoisewouldproducesuccessMcommunicationamonginterlocutors themselvesmaximallyinterchangeable'(1994,p.78).Insilence,fbrLingislike Pinter,thereisevidenceofacharacter'swilltocommunicate.Evenasnowordsare spoken,inothersilentspacesthereisa/o7だ"/oflanguage:theexpectantsilenceof waiting.ThePinterpause…representssuchasubtleorellipticalfbnnofdialogue. hhswayjsilenceisanescape廿omclicheasitdisruptstheHowofnarrativeand providesanunsettlingpause,anabsenceofcommunicationladenwithmeaning. Itisanexampleofacircuitbreaker,thevacuolesofnon-communicationofwhich Deleuzespeaksofinhiscritiqueoforder-wordsandthecompulsiontospeechand reiterateeverydayspeech(Bradley,2012).DeleuzeandGuattariwrite:@Wedonot lackcommunication.Onthecontrary,wehavetoomuchofit.Welackcreation. 晩/qckres航α"ce/o"7e"ese"/'(1994,p､108).
InhismasterfillLα"g"ageα"JS"e"ce(2010),Steinerdiscemsatrend towardstheretreat廿omthewordinmodernliteratureastheviolenceofwar makesmankindspeechless.AsKazuyoshiOishi(2007,p.lll)putsit:｡6Withthe deathofLogos,wehavelostthetraditionalorderoflanguageandtheauthoritative modeofcommunication.''SteinerclaimstheworldofAuschwitzliesoutside speechbecauseitisoutsidereason.Onecannotutterthetruthofitbecause@to speakoftheunspeakableistoriskthesurvivanceoflanguageascreatorand bearerofhumane,rationaltruth.Wordsthataresaturatedwithliesoratrocitydo noteasilyresumelife'(p.182).Onthisaccount,languageisdethroned,nolonger sovereign,therepositoryofhumanerationality,valueandtruth.Inpoetry,Steiner hndstheh皿tsoftheexpressable,thethresholdofmeaning.Bmevenpoetryitself iscontaminated;itscomposureandcomportmenttotheworldaffectedbymodern technologybecausethequalityofsilenceinlanguageis@organicallylinked'. DiscussingportabletechnologysuchasmobilephonesortheWalkmanandits effectsonyoungpeople,heexplains(Cerf2011): Xﾌ〃α""Iα花s〃"gﾙe'で,/"/肋〃o"sesz"｡、""火Jhyqgα'伽",w/iere//i"eis"o o//7er"o/seo//ie/"/加〃//ieso""Qjoz"･co"ve応α"o".〃ど花Icα"woFk.He"Icα〃 f舵α碗α""ro/ﾙ加k.S"e"ce/7"6eco"7eα加ge/zfxz"JAPeOp/eqre/M"g"7Q “"s/α"/‘加.〃e彫ﾉs〃o"70""ig〃〃〃c"/“・肋"7gpeOp/eα花峨α〃Q/.si/e"ce. 〃ﾙa/W"/6eco"'eQiser/o"sQ"α城c"〃rEα‘加9？13〃〃ss/6/e/oreqdP/α/o wMeweaが"gα〃h/k腕α"?峨加//mverywoγ〃"g. SamuelBeCkett 〃e"ce,yes,Z)2"whars//e"ce/For〃おα〃ve"ji"eroﾙeeps//e"ce,6z"o"eJI" α伽/oco"s/"r//iek/"Qfs//e"ceo"ekeeps.Beckett,777e[/>7"α"7eq6/e,(1959)
I
n
t
h
e
J
u
l
y
9
t
h
l
9
3
7
1
e
t
t
e
r
t
o
A
x
e
l
K
a
u
n
,
B
e
c
k
e
t
t
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
s
E
n
g
l
i
s
h
a
s
@
a
v
e
i
l
thatmustbetomapartinordertogetatthethings(ortheNothingness)behind it'(1983,p.171).Thelrishpoetimaginesaliterarytechniquetogetatthethings themselves､asitwere.Themaskmustbetomoffdismantled,drilledintountil somethingstartstoemerge.Thecrafiofthewriteristoboreoneholeafieranother intothematerialityoflanguageitselfuntilwhatlurksbeneathandbehindbegins toseepthrough・Inthisrespect,thewriterisaseer,ahearer.Althoughlater dismissingtheletter,describingitas｡cGermanbilge'',heneverthelessadmitshe cannotimagineahighergoalfbrawriter(1983,p,172)thantheboringaway atlanguageuntiltheincommunicableentersintowords.InD花amQf肋〃jo Mic刷加g〃bme"(1923/1993),Beckettsuggeststhatsemanticcontentisfbund betweenphrases,inthesilence,communicatedintheintervalsandnotalwaysin thetennsofthestatement.ForBeckettitwouldseemthatsilenceisusedasan altemativetolanguageasheviewslanguageasanexcess.Thereisnorepose@in thefbrestofsymbol3(1983,p.172)heinsists.ForBeckett,behindtheveilof languageliessilenceasthatabsolutezerotowhichallconnnunicationissent. IimaginePinteralsoburrowinghiswayintothesilencethatlurksunderthe thinsuperficialmeniscusofmeaning.Havingfbundit,hegrantsitamenacing perlocution.Ashecan'tsimplyliberatetheincommunicablefromthat､terrible materialityofthewordsurface'ofwhichBeckettspeaks;hecan'tsimplygiveit air,resuscitateit,letitspeak,orfbrceittodeliverutterances.Morethanthis,he can'tsimplyrepresentitinagameofexactequivalence.Respondingtotheshame ofourlot,andtherankcomplicityinlettingpowerholdswaywithoutresistance, onetearsattheveilwhichconcealsandcompromises,oneripsoneselftobits. PintersetstherecordstraightonhisattitudetowardlanguageinhisNobelPrize speech4",〃"/ﾉiα〃po/耐",insistinglanguageisakindofregimeoforder-words,clicheandhearsay.Itisofiendeployedtokeepthoughtatbayandtomaintainthestatusquo.Thoughtsandcounter-thoughtshappenbutlanguagehides them廿omunbridledexposure.Itisaquestionoftruthandthemaintenanceof power.Thepublic,fbrPinter,areacquiescentinthemaintenanceofthisstamsquo. Whatsurroundsus,heinsists,@isavasttapestryoflies,uponwhichwefeed'(Pinter, 2005).Pinterconcludeshisspeechbydiscussingtheroleofthewriter,suggesting themetaphOrofthemirrorbearscloseexaminationtoBeckett'sveil.Hewrites: 〃ﾙe"we/ook/"/oαﾉ""mFweﾉﾙ加肺ﾙe伽age//Mco"加加s"s/sqcα"n/e.B"/ 〃oveα〃"伽e〃eα〃/ﾙe伽agec加"ges.〃セα形αc"ﾉα"V/oo〃"gα／α〃ever-e〃j"gγα"geqW/ibc"o"s.B"rso"'e""'esqw""er/2qsros"7cM//ie""oγ−/bJ"" Lso"//7eo//7ers/"Qf/ﾙα/〃"、〃加〃ﾙe〃2"伽/α花sα/"s， Thinkingthedignityofman,asthatwhichisnearlylosttous,headds:@cI believethatdespitetheenormousoddswhichexist,unninching,unswerving, fierceintellectualdetermination,ascitizens,todefinetherealtruthofourlives andoursocietiesisacrucialobligationwhichdevolvesuponusall.Itisinfact mandatory.99 ConCluSion Themobilephoneisaheuristictropetothinkthewayinwhichinterlocutors areSimultaneouslyinconstantcontaCtandyetcompletelytornapart丘omone another.In〃α〃Fm"7777"interlocutorstalkaboutnothingassuchbutitisthe factofbeingtogetherthatwardsofrthediscussionoftheominoushorrorwaiting onthehorizon.Facingalterity,itisasifintalking,wecro"cルα"d9"α〃through communication,toconceal-disingenuously-theangstofourlot. IthaSbeensuggestedthat"pα〃F7℃加剛α/indirectlypointstothelraqwar
andthehorrorstakingplaceintheancientkingdomtothisdayltotheheinousacts committedatAbuGhraibprisonandtheoverallbetrayalofhercitizensbythe Britishgovernment-intheapart廿om／加/・Indeed,scathinginhiscriticismof theBritishandAmericangovemments,PinterinhisNobelprizelecture-inwhat seemstantamounttoanactofpα〃"e,Wa-anactoftellingthetruthandtakinga potentiallyfatalriskindoingso-seemstodecidetoutterpreciselywhat@mustbe said，､Yetisnottheexplicit‘mustbesaid，alsoindeliblytarredbydissimulation？Is nottheactofpqMieIsja-orspeakingcandidly-theconceitofPinterwhoconsider hisownwordsasbearersoftruthwhilehischaracterstoilintheirmenacing silences？Thispointisinstructiveasitraisesthequestionofhowonepasses 廿omtheimplicit,廿omstrainedarticulation,廿omspeakinginone'sownname, toissuingaclarioncalltothoseattackedinmanifbldwaysbythoseinpower-inPinter'sviewprincipallyTbnyBlairincollusionwiththeUSgovernmentwho roderoughshodoverUnitedNationsresolutionsinthebuilduptothelraqwar. Transposingthe叩α〃ん液//7qrtoJapan,itishardtoseetheそれはそれとし てasanythingotherthanreferencetothecontinuingdangerofradiationleaks homtheFukushimanuclearplant.Thesilencearoundthisissueis-astheysay-deafening. Bringingthematterbacktolinguisticconcerns,wecansaythis:thata fimdamentalimperativeisheardeveninthephaticfactofspeaking,inthe verybeing-there,in-the-accompanying-the-other-towards-death.Intheprior sayablethereissomethingmorefimdamentalthatthesaid.Inthesaying,there istheessentialandweightoftheimperative;somethingdistinct廿omthesaid. Communicationisthusfbundedatthelimitofcommunicationwhenonemust speak,whenone'ssimplepresenceissufficiemtospeakvolumes.Itismlistening tothesoundlessimperativeoftheother'spresence､thatthesubjectindirectedand compelledtorespond.
Endingonapositivenote,whilemoderntechnologyeffectivelyjams communicationbetweeninterlocutors,onecanindeedisolatethedesireto saysomethingaboveandbeyondtheeverydayandthebanal.Fromacursory analysisofPinter'saversiontothemobilephone,wecandemonstratethatthereis somethinglurkingaroundthebanalpassageofnoise.Underneathsucheveryday chatteramidsttheominoussenseofviolence,filllofdarkwamingsandreprisals, thereisalsoafaint,lingeringhope,adesirefbrauthenticity.Silenceisanother battlefeldfbrhumanity.Althoughtheeverpresentdisruptionofcommlmcation isinneedofdeconstruction,thedesirefbrauthentictalkisanelementwhich makesusriseaboveouranhnality.Theconclusionistherefbreaffirmativemthe Deleuziansense,asitasksofthefbrcesofsilencewhichintensifynotdiminish life.
Bibliography
AkibaReynolds,K.(2000).PhaticAspectofLanguage:Channelingandback-channelinginJapaneseandEnglish.PacificandAsianCommunication AssociationConvention.Hawaii. Austin,J.L.HowtoDoThingswithWords.Oxfbrd:OxfbrdURl962. Badiou,A.(2001).Ethics:AnEssayontheUnderstandingofEvil.London:Verso. Baudrillard,J.(1981).Foracritiqueofthepoliticaleconomyofthesigl.St.Louis, MO:1℃IosPress. Baudrillard,J.(1990).Seduction.NewYork:St.MartinisPress. Beckett,S.(1959).Mo//Qy.･MQ/o"e,･777e"""α〃eα〃e・ Beckett,S・(1993).WaitingfbrGodot.Sceptre. Beckett,S.,&Cohn,R(1983).D町eαα.･MIsce"α"eo"sw"""印α"dα〃α〃α"c かα印加e"/.NewYork:GrovePress.Beckett,S.,O'Brien,E.,&Foumier,E.(1993),D花amq〃"〃/oMc〃加gwo"7e". NewYork:ArcadePub.inassociationwithRivelTunPress. Bradley.J.(2012).OnthematerialityofthixotropicsIogans,dialogosl2,Toyo University. Bruner,J.S.ATributetoRomanJakobson.Berlin:WalterdeGrljrter,1983. Burgess,A.(1965).Languagemadeplain.NewYork:T.YCrowell. Cahn,V:L.(1993).GenderandpowerintheplaysofHaroldPinter.NewYork:St. MartinwsPress. CerfJ.(30December2011).@GeorgeSteiner,acertainideaofknowledge'. Tもlerama,Paris,translatedMarkMcGovern. Chang,B.G.(1996).Deconstructingcommunication:Representation,subject,and economiesofexchange.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress. Chiasson,B.A.E.(2010).HaroldPinterandtheperfbrmanceofpower: ConsiderationsoftheaHectmselectplays,screenplaysandfilms,poetryand politicalspeeches.Unpublisheddoctoralthesis､LeedsUniversity. Deleuze,G.,Guattari,F.,Tomlinson,H.,&Burchell,G.(1994).Whatis philosophy?.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress. Ephratt,M.(JanuaryO1,2008).Thefilnctionsofsilence.JournalofPragmatics, 40,ll. Esslin,Martin.6cLanguageandSilence.''HaroldPinter・HaroldBIoom,Ed・New York:ChelseaHouse,1987,139-63. Federici,C.,Boldt-Irons,L.A.,&Virgulti,E.(2005).Imagesandimagery: Frames,borders,limits:interdisciplinaryperspectives.NewYork:P.Lang. Fischel;J.L.,&Yoshida,T.(1968).ThenatureofspeechaccordingtoJapanese proverbs.TheJoumalofAmericanFolklore,81(319),p､34-43. Genosko,G.(2012).Remodellingcommunication:FromWWIItotheWWW. Tbronto:UniversityofTorontoPress.
Guiraud,P.(1975).Semiology.London:Routledge&K.Paul. Hedges,E.,&Fishkin,S.F.(1994).L伽e"j"g/os//e"ces.･Newe""s加た”"畑 c〃"cis"7.NewYork:OxfbrdUniversityPress. Iyer,P.(January25,1993).TheEIoquentSoundsofSilence'.Timel41:4. Jakobson,R,&Halle,M.(1956).Fundamentalsoflanguage.1s-Gravenhage: Mouton. Jakobson,R.(1960a).Linguisticsandpoetics.Cambridge,Mass.?:Massachusetts InstituteofTbchnology?. Jakobson,R.(JanuaryO1,1960b).CIosingstatement:Linguisticsandpoetics. StyleinLanguage/Ed.byThomasA.Sebeck,350-377. Kenny,C.(2011).771epowe"Q/s池"ce.･S此"rco加加""'cα"o〃加伽jか/旅． London:Karnac. King,J.E.,&UniversityofNottingham.(2011).Silenceinthesecondlanguage classroom.UniversityofNottingham. Lacan,Jacques.@TheFunctionandFieldofSpeechandLanguagein Psychoanalysig.InEcrits:ASelectionASelection,trans.AlanSheridan,30 -ll3.NewYork:Norton,1977. Leeds-Hurwitz,W.(1992)．CommunicationinEverydayLife:Asocial interpretation・Norwood,NJ:Ablex. Lingis,A.(1994).Thecommunityofthosewhohavenothingincommon. BIoomington:IndianaUniversityPress.
Lingis,A.(2013)..CommunicationandSilence',LifeandPhenomenology:
CelebratmgAlgisMicknnasat80conference,VytamasMagnusUniversitym Lithuania,Junel3. Loveday,L(1986).EX/ﾌﾉo7α"o"s加Japα"eseSocm伽gz"s"cs・Amsterdam/ Philadelphia:JohnBenjaminsPub.Co. Massumi,B.(2002).Ashocktothought:ExpressionsafierDeleuzeandGuattari.London:Routledge. MacLuhan,M(2005).Themediumisthemessage・CorteMadera:GingkoPr. Melville,H.(1971).Pierre:Or,Theambiguities.Evanston:Northwestern UniversityPress. Nakane,I.(2007).S北"Ce加加”c"/""α/CO加加""/ca"o".･ルグ℃ep"o"sq"" pe枕ﾉ弓"7α"ce.Amsterdam:J・BeljaminsPub.Co. Ogden,C.K.,Richards,I．A.,Malinowski,B.,Crookshank,F.G.,&Postgate,JP. (1923).Themeamngofmeaning:Asmdyoftheinnuenceoflanguageupon thoughtandofthescienceofsymbolism.London:K.Paul,Trench,Trubner &Co. Oishi,K.(March2007).｡TheSilenceofAbraham'sGod:HaroldPinter'sThe DumbWaiterRevisited'.TheJournaloftheOpenUniversityofJapan.(25) lO9-ll6. Pinter,H(1977).Completeworks:Withanintroduction"Writingfbrthetheatrei'. NewYork:GrovePress. PinteLH.(1988).Mountainlanguage.London:FaberandFaber. Pinter,H(1998).Variousvoices:Prose,poetry,politics.NewYork:GrovePress. Pinter,H(2011).Playsfbur.London:FaberandFaber. Pinter,H.,&Kishi,T.(2009).Harorudopmta3:003.TbOkyoO:HayakawashoboO. Plant,S.(2001).O〃油e"7oMe.･777e鋤をc"Qf"7oMe/e/ep/io"eso"socjaノ α噸加"vi伽α〃推.Schaumberg,Ill.?:Motorola. Rose,G.(1995).Love(3work.London:Chatto&Windus. Saville-Trokie,M.(1982).TheEt伽ographyofCommunication:Anlntroduction. Oxfbrd:BasilBlackwell. Saville-Trokie,M(1985)."ThePlaceofSilenceinanlntegratedTheoryof Communication.''PerspectivesonSilence.Ed.D.TannenandM.Saville-Trokie.Norwood:Ablex,p.3-18.
Serres,M(1992).Hennes.Berlin:Merve-Verl. Shamon,CE,&Weaver,W.(1949).Themathematicaltheoryofcommunication. Urbana:UniversityoflllinoisPress. Sontag,S.!&Hardwick,E.(1983).ASusanSontagreader.London:Penguin Books. Steiner,G.(1967/2010).Languageandsilence:Essaysonlanguage,literature,and theinhuman.NewYork:Atheneum. Stiegler,B.(1998).Technicsandtime.Stanfbrd,CalifStanfbrdUniversityPress. Stiegler,B.,&Ross,D.,Arnold,S.(2011).Thedecadenceofindustrial democracies.Cambridge:PolityPress. Thnnen,D.､cSilence:AnythingBut.''PerspectivesonSilence.Ed.D.TannenandM. Saville-Trokie・Norwood:Ablex,1985.93-111 Tannen，D.｡cSilenceasConflictManagementinFictionandDrama:Pinter's BetrayalandaShortStory,｡GreatWit.'''ConnictTalk:Sociolinguistic InvestigationsofArgumentsinConversations.Ed.A.D.Grimshaw. Cambridge:CambridgeURl990,p､260-79. Wood,D.(1990).Philosophyatthelimit.London:UnwinHyman. Yoneyama,S.(1999).7ルル〃"“eﾉ7jg/7sc/7oo/.･S//e"ceq"d"es畑α"ce.London: Routledge. Notes
'Arecurrenttropeofsubstitutionandplayonwords,sometimesreducedto
assonanceandalliteration.2Moreover,fbrJakobson,@eloquentsilence'playsacentralroleinall
communicativefimctions,especiallyinillocutionalyspeechacts.Partofthefabric oftheconativefilnction,eloquentsilenceoperatesasadirectoranindirectspeech actandasadiscoursemarker:itcallsontheaddresseetoleadthediscourse,todecidewhethertocontmueorter皿nateit.Aswellasbemgthefirstverbalfilnction acquiredbyinfants,Jakobsoncontendsthatthephaticfimctionoflanguageisthe onlyonewhichhumanssharewiththeanimalkingdom(seeEphratt,2008).
3
P
i
e
r
r
e
G
u
i
r
a
r
d
(
1
9
7
5
)
c
o
n
t
e
n
d
s
t
h
a
t
p
h
a
t
i
c
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
h
a
s
a
k
e
y
r
o
l
e
i
n
allfbrmsofcommunionhomrites,solemnoccasions,ceremonies;speeches, haranguestofamilyconversationsoramorousexchanges.Agreeingwith Baudrillard,Guirardsuggeststhatcontentofthecommunicationislessimportant thanthefactofbemgthereandGofaffirmingone'smembersmpofthegroup'.4
1
n
@
R
e
q
u
i
e
m
f
b
r
t
h
e
M
e
d
i
a
'
J
e
a
n
B
a
u
d
r
i
l
l
a
r
d
(
1
9
8
1
)
c
r
i
t
i
c
i
s
e
s
J
a
k
o
b
s
o
n
i
s
m
o
d
e
l
ofcommunicationpreciselybecauseitexcludesthereciprocityandantagonismof merlocmors,andtheambivalenceofexchange-thenoiseresistanttocodification. Inotherwords,itexcludesthequintessentialothernessoftheother.5
0
n
e
r
e
c
o
g
n
i
s
e
s
t
h
e
i
m
p
e
r
a
t
i
v
e
o
f
s
i
l
e
n
c
e
,
b
u
t
o
n
e
g
o
e
s
o
n
s
p
e
a
k
i
n
g
a
n
y
w
a
y
.
Exhaustedwithspeech,anddiscoveringonehasnothingelsetosay,oneseeksa waytosaypreciselythat.SusanSontag(1983,p.187-188)lamentedtheconstant chatteralso:｡Onerecognizestheimperativeofsilence,butgoesonspeaking anyway.Discoveringthatonehasnothingtosay,oneseeksawaytosay.'For Sontag,silencecanbeaesthetic,philosophical,preparatory,meditative,oran ordeal・Itisarticulatedinadecision,indecision,orhesitationbefbredeciding.It mightbeserious,dangerous,ordevious・Butitisrarelyasitis-silent-asitisnot simplyabreakdownincommunicationassuchbutisusedtoconveysomefbnnof meaning.AsSontag'spointout,silenceisinescapablyafbnnofspeech.Indeed, aswellashavingperlocutionaryeffect(Austinl962),silentcommunicativeacts possessillocutionaryfbrceinthesensethatitmay<question,promise,deny,wam, threaten,insult,request,orcommand､aswellastocaITyoutvariouskindsofritual interaction'(Saville-Troike,1985,p.6).Asacommunicativestrategy,silence filnctionsasapositivephaticfilnction-usedasaneffectivetoolfbremotionaldefence.Itservesasausefillpolitenessstrategytoavoidthecon廿ontationthata verbalexpressionmayensue(Jaworski,1993).
