Christoph Menke

Hermann Pfütze und Christoph Menke stellen in dem Podiumsgespräch die Frage nach den widerständigen Potentialen der Kunst. Was ist das Spezifische der Kunst gegenüber anderen sozialen Feldern oder Praxisformen? Was lässt sich unter Ästhetischem Widerstand genau verstehen? Auch wenn die Kunst nicht über Gewaltmittel verfügt, so könnte es doch einen Wettstreit um die Idee der Kunst geben. Ästhetischer Widerstand ist dann der Widerstand einer Kunstform gegen eine andere. Oder ist die ästhetische Erfahrung gerade nicht antagonistisch organisiert? Dann könnte Kunst als eine heilende Praxis erscheinen, die anderen Antagonismen entgegenwirkt und so Angst und Schrecken bannt. Nach Hermann Pfütze weist das Ästhetische eine Nähe zur Demokratie auf, da Kunst wie Demokratie die Unabgeschlossenheit der Welt betonen und von Angst und Schrecken befreien wollen. Dieser an Judith Shklar gewonnene Demokratiebegriff ist für Christoph Menke zu defensiv. Kunst scheint für Menke in unserer Gegenwartsgesellschaft eher der spezifische Ort eines utopischen Potentials zu sein, denn die Kunst kritisiert durch ihren Versuch der Darstellung von Lebendigkeit unbelebte Praxisformen, wie etwa die entfremdete Arbeit.

_Tragic Play_ explores the deep philosophical significance of classic and modern tragedies in order to cast light on the tragic dimensions of contemporary experience. Romanticism, it has often been claimed, brought tragedy to an end, making modernity the age _after_ tragedy. Christoph Menke opposes this modernist prejudice by arguing that tragedy remains alive in the present in the distinctively new form of the playful, ironic, and self-consciously performative. Through close readings of plays by William Shakespeare, Samuel Beckett, Heiner Müller, and Botho Strauss, Menke shows how tragedy re-emerges in modernity as "tragedy of play." In _Hamlet_, _Endgame_, _Philoktet_, and _Ithaka_, Menke integrates philosophical theory with critical readings to investigate shifting terms of judgment, curse, reversal, misfortune, and violence.

The violence of the law, its unavoidability and its foundational character, becomes one of the main features pointed out by a philosophical critical engagement with the sphere of right. The expression "transitional justice" points, not only to the transitional form that legal justice attains in such a context, but also to the fact that justice itself is also in transition, and with it the sphere of law, as its requirement and justification. Transitional justice processes bring to light more than ever the incapacity of the law to provide retribution for the quality and sometimes the sheer quantity of the harms that are to be addressed by the legal process. Christoph Menke sees in law's self-reflective capacity the potentiality of the law to judge differently while being sustained by the very same operation that makes its violence unavoidable.

The third generation of critical theorists affiliated with the Frankfurt School has now established legal theory as a central field of research, also with significant contributions from scholars whose primary training is in other fields. Postmodern legal theory will have to face up to the challenges of legal practice and broaden its reflections to take into account forms of lawmaking beyond the political community conceived in unitary terms. Only by integrating this possibility of transcendence will postmodern legal theory be able to carry forward the tradition of the first generation of critical theory with regard also to its demand for the realization of the ideal of emancipation and justice. The proletarian general strike, by contrast, is an expression of sovereign violence and, as such, breaks the cycle of violence, of calculation and counter-calculation, of success, concession, compromise, struggle, and so on.

According to Christoph Menke, there never was and never can be any law without violence. The reason for this dependency of law on violence lies in its need to be enforced; Menke follows Immanuel Kant's definition according to which law consists in a reciprocal authority to use coercion. Immanuel Kant's definition has been extremely influential, not only in legal and political philosophy, but also in public discourse and in our everyday understanding of law and legal matters. Over centuries, Jewish legal traditions have not only theoretically reflected, but also reliably practiced, a law without any recourse to state-sanctioned violence. Interestingly though, due to the conditions of the Diaspora, Jewish law cannot have recourse to any governmental apparatus of power by way of an enforcement agency. By introducing an argument concerning the strategy of social transformation, Menke leaves the terrain of legal philosophy in favor of a philosophy of history.

This essay examines how Joseph Beuys uses the social plastic concept (›soziale Plastik‹) to think about the relationship between art and democracy. To this end, the first part analyzes the oppositions that define this concept in order to read them as the basic determinations of a dialectical concept of democracy. Against this background, the second part of the essay deals with how Beuys understands the contribution of art to democracy. In doing so, Beuys’ statement ›Every man is an artist‹ is subjected to a new reading.

This book brings a new perspective—mainly out of German intellectual discussions rooted in Hegel—to bear on the problems of equality as discussed in Anglo-American conceptions of liberalism. Menke argues that the idea of equality is at the heart of political modernity. At the same time, political modernity is characterized by an attitude of critical reflection on the notion of equality in view of its consequences for the lives of individuals. This book explores the sources and legitimacy as well as the limitations and problems of this attitude toward equality in the work of such thinkers as Adorno, Habermas, Derrida, Hegel, Luhmann, Nietzsche, Rawls, and Schmitt. Looking at key texts in modern political philosophy, the author develops the claim that there is a basic and irreconcilable conflict in justice: between general demands of equality and attention to the individual. In a debate with contemporary Anglo-American liberal philosophy’s concepts of rights, the political process is thereby understood as an interminable strife and negotation between equality and individuality.