William Large

ABSTRACTIt is well known that advertising and branding co-opts counter culture to sell commodities, but in this article we uncover the ontological conditions for such an appropriation. We investigate a particular example of contemporary advertising, the Levis commercial “Legacy – Now is our Time“, which was subsequently pulled because of the British riots of that year, as a historical situated and saturated moment. This article employs Benjamin's notion of the phantasmagoria to uncover the messianic possibilities of a future hidden in the cynicism of the image, and Freud’s essay on ‘The Uncanny’ to suggest the particular temporal structure of this future as a repetition of an absolute past. Such an example of advertising and branding is situated within the overall theory of subjectification of late capitalism, where the dominate concept of capital is human capital, and in which capital is directly parasitical on creativity and life

Usually, when we determine the authenticity of a performer in popular music then we do so either through their biography or their inherence within a tradition. The question of authenticity then becomes one of betrayal. This article argues that there might be a unique way of approaching authenticity through affects, where authenticity is impersonal rather than personal. It uses the work of Pierre Schaeffer to describe the difference between indexes and signs on the one hand, and affects on the other, to develop a concept of abstract subjectivity, which is not the same as the individual. It explains abstract subjectivity through Will Oldham’s description of his performance. Finally, it compares this method of listening to popular music with Blanchot’s description of literature as free indirect discourse, speaking without a first person. It is abstract subjectivity that allows popular music to resist its own commodification, which is the very opposite of authenticity.

Kant argues against the ontological argument for the existence of God but replaces it with a moral theism. This article analyses Kant’s moral proof with emphasis on the Critique of the Power of Judgement, and his historical and political writings. It argues that at the heart of this argument is the idea of progress. The concrete content of the moral law is the idea of a just world. Such a just world would be impossible without the idea of God, since there would be no harmony between nature and freedom. It contrasts Kant’s concept of time and history with Heidegger’s. The difference between them is a reversal of modality. For Kant, actuality determines possibility. If I cannot imagine a just word as actual, then I would fall into moral despair. The idea of God grounds this actuality. For Heidegger, possibility is higher than actuality. Since history has no teleology, then no idea of God is required.

Without Maurice Blanchot, literary theory as we know it today would have been unthinkable. Jacques Derrida, Paul de Man, Michel Foucault, Roland Barthes, Gilles Deleuze: all are key theorists crucially influenced by Blanchot's work. This accessible guide: * works 'idea by idea' through Blanchot's writings, anchoring them in historical and intellectual contexts * examines Blanchot's understanding of literature, death, ethics and politics and the relationship between these themes * unravels even Blanchot's most complex ideas for the beginner * sketches the lasting impact of Blanchot's work on the field of critical theory. For those trying to come to grips with contemporary literary theory and modern French thought, the best advice is to start at the beginning: begin with Blanchot, and begin with this guide.

Available from UMI in association with The British Library. Requires signed TDF. ;This thesis is divided into two parts. The first part is an investigation of the logic or the formal construction of the ethical relation described by Levinas. I argue that this relation has two forms: one in which the Other operates as a transcendent figure excluded from immanence, which I name exclusive separation, and the other, where it operates within immanence, which I name inclusive separation. This first form of the ethical relation is the basis of Levinas' theory of language in Totality and Infinity, and probably constitutes the "orthodox" reading of Levinas' work. The second form of the relation can be traced from the the idea of the infinity to the descriptions of the self in Otherwise than Being. The second part approaches the difficult status of writing in Levinas' work. It is only in terms of second form of the ethical relation, and guided by Blanchot's reading of Levinas in L'Entretien infini , that the apparent conflict between writing and the demand of ethical responsibility can be thought. I suggest that the relation between ethics and writing ought to be conceived in terms of the practice of ambiguity or alternance, which Levinas himself outlines in his texts