Cette confession (ou les tribulations d’un Hamlet de la révolution) se trouve dans The Committed de Viet Thanh Nguyen, dont l'extrait est ici lu dans la traduction française de C. Baude « Le dévoué ».
Voix 1 : la confession du Dévoué Sans-Nom
Voix 2 : JP Léaud, dans Liberté, la nuit, de P. Garrel
Voix 3 : GD the Great Daimôn (δαίμων)
Musique finale : Ahmad Kaabour - أناديكم (Ounadikom) "Je vous appelle tous"
Nguyễn Thanh Việt, The Committed
“You watch yourself point the way to the Boss’s cash and request-no, demand-that they check you into Paradise. And here you are, safe in your asylum, one of the committed.
The question is: Committed to what? […] beginning with what the most sympathetic Federico García Lorca, assassinated by the Spanish fascists, once said, “I will always be on the side of those who have nothing and who are not even allowed to enjoy the nothing they have in peace,” an empathetic principle that, if followed with action, whether it is doing something or doing nothing, depending on the dialectical need of the situation, will never lead you in the wrong direction, even if that direction is death, since so many people are committed to the exact opposite principle, to side with those who already have something and want everything, and if you were sane you would side with them, too, but revolution is always an act of insanity, because revolution is not a revolution unless it is committed to the impossible, although if this is too depressing and daunting one needs to remember that only a few thousand years ago it was beyond the human imagination that one could travel around the world in a day, an amazing feat that has brought the world together, so that today nowhere in the world is beyond the reach of tourists, investors, missionaries, and intercontinental ballistic missiles, meaning that the infinite dialectic still swings back and forth between the impossible and the possible, between salvation and annihilation, between nonviolence and violence, between our capacity to save ourselves and destroy ourselves, and the only real mystery is which part of us-our humanity or inhumanity-will triumph in the human species’ perpetual game of Russian roulette with itself, and you yourself, human and inhuman, are demented enough to believe that if the human species does not self-destruct-an IF that should be capitalized, it is so big-then one day the nobodies of the world with nothing to lose will finally have enough of not having enough and realize that they have more in common with the nobodies on the other side of the world, or just the other side of the nearest border, than they do with the somebodies of their own kind who care nothing about them, and when these nobodies with nothing finally do unite, stand up, take to the streets, and claim their voices and their power, the only thing that the somebodies with something must do is nothing, realizing that their Ideological State Apparatus cannot stop all these people, because for all of its might their Repressive State Apparatus cannot kill them all. Can it?"
Deleuze, Abécédaire :
“And about the revolution going wrong, that makes me laugh because, really, who are they trying to kid? When the “New Philosophers” (nouveaux philosophes) discovered that the revolution turned out badly, you really have to be a bit dimwitted (débile), since we discovered that with Stalin. So henceforth, the road was open, everyone discovered it, for example, quite recently, about the Algerian revolution - “Hey, it turned out badly because they fired on students!” Who ever thought that a revolution would go well? Who? Even if revolutions fail, go badly, that still never stopped people or prevented people from becoming revolutionary. They are confusing two absolutely different things: the situations in which the only outcome for man is to become revolutionary… […] it's the confusion between becoming and history, and if people become revolutionary… Yes, this historians' confusion… Historians speak of the future of the revolution, the future of revolutions, but that is not at all the question. They can always go so far back and try to demonstrate that if the future was bad, it’s because the bad element (le mauvais) was there right from the start. The concrete problem is how and why do people become revolutionary? And fortunately, historians can't prevent them from doing so. It's obvious that […] the Palestinians are caught up in a becoming-revolutionary. Then, if someone tells me afterwards, “oh you will see, when they have won, if their revolution succeeds, it will go badly,” etc., well, first of all, there will not be the same kinds of problems, and then a new situation will be created, once again becomings-revolutionary will be unleashed. The business of men (des hommes), it’s in situations of tyranny, of oppression, effectively it’s to enter into becomings-revolutionary because there is nothing else to be done.”
#livreaudio #audiobook #vietthanhnguyen #litterature