JEAN BAUDRILLARD WHY HASN'T EVERYTHING ALREADY DISAPPEARED 7

TRAN SLATED BY CHRIS TURNER

WITH IM ACES BY ALAIN WlllA UME

Sugull Book.. 2009

J('~n Ib udrillard. i>oMrq" l1 /(J.N "·~ · ' " I JI<lJ Ji.J4 tUfJ><lnJr l3clmons d~ L'I!ernt", 2(1(17

ruhli~hc<1 by nr.ongcmcm ,,·j,h !",d irions dc 1 : Herne, c/ o Agcn(;(' lmer.lIfe PIcHe t\~IICf & t\wxic~ AU ngh ts rCK rv('.;I.

Engh;h tr.on ;.bn(m C Om' Turna 2O.Y.l Images C 1\1:.111 \'fillaulIlc 20()')

This compi1:ar ion C Sn b'llil Books 200')

FlrSI puhhsh«lm English hr &a~.'ull iSoah, 2009

ISUN-IJ 9781 'JOM '} H 08

Rrilish Uhrary Cataloguing.in.Publicalion Data A clrlll'1.'llC" ITcurd fur Ihi~ book l~ a,",ubble from II .. : Ih ilhh 1 i br. .. r

Typc~1 and de.o;igncd by Sunlln<hni Ihncr lCC, Seagull Books Pnmed at CDC i'nnlcrs 1>"'1 U.1. Cakulta

}

\

CO N Te N TS

Fo reword

\Vhy Hasn't Everything Already D is:Jppe m:d? 9

\.

I

FOREWORD

He that hath no t, from him shall

be taken even that which he hath

(? latthew 25: 29).1

'W'hy is there nothing rather than someth ing?'

T his is Lcibniz's '1ucs tiot1 , exactly reversed . It is

also a radical way of taking o ne's !c:wc of meta­

physics.

Tbr Joms is 1101 n Oll ' Oil hring, hul Oil tI)t II olbi/~p".

3

J£AN BAUDRILLARD

;\ I:lccdonio Fert1:lndt,z. the l\rgen tini:Jn wnter

;Jnd friend of B()rgt:~, h:ld alre;Jch' r:lken the ex­

ploration of tht, nUlhing [() grc:u length ~ : ; E\'er~'­

th ing o n-and including- the Nothing, j U~1 011

the I'pthing, btu no t entirely, On th (' j\uthing.

there i ~ more: some (If it s illlerstices. which are

IlUT11 I.: WlIS.'! Je:1I1 Ihud ril b rd pushes its limits

even furthl..'r :lnd sa tLlr ~II CS the iT1l crstict.: s. It's a

ques tion of being logical. \\ c imaf,rlnl.:d th:lt Good

was the product of dimin:ll ing b ·il. tht, l: tert1:l1

the product of dimin:lling the Tempor:!1 or the

All the produc t of dimin:ll ing the Nothing, AI ­

W:lys thi s IOtalit:l rian temptation to uni fy. to re­

duce dU:ll ity. [() dil11in:lte I: vil. to exterminate the

nothing. W'e ha\'e rid our~ekes of the :t l11biguit y

of I hI.: world.

\'\ e ha\"e (0 l e~rt1 to d~ l1Cc with ,hc nothing;

thi s i ~ Ihe g rc:t l game and the g r:tl1d style: 'the

j\othing is ~I ~ essc llli:d to life:ts :u c air and wind

to the !l ight of the do\'c:: 1 a refe rence to t-.: alll 's

'light dm'C" which imagines it would fh beller if

i, could overcome :til res ist:t flcc.

,

WHY HA SN 'T EVE RY TH IN G A LREA DY DISAPPEARED?

N ihilism ? 10, nihili sm is precisely the fo r­

getting of the no thing. It is the system th:tt is ni ­

hi listic through its power to consign everyt hing

to ind iffe rence. 'f he sys tcm is '!ruly negn ionist',

to usc 13:tudrilbrd 's express ion. ~ incc it is a denial

of the no thing. a denial of :111 illusion. There re­

mains the ch:tll cnge o f radical tllOught which

gambles on the world being illu :-> iun , which hr·

pOlhcsizes th~1 Ihen: is perh~p s nothing rather

than so mething :lnd which 'huill s clown the no­

thing thai runs benea th the apparenl contin ui ty

of Il1 c:tning'.

This isn't :I cOlllr:t rr mctilphysics, but Ihl:

contrary of :I mct:lph}'sics.

5

\X 'hen I spe:lk of timl:. it is n01 YCt

\,\ 'hen i spe:lk of :l pbce, it has d isappc:m:d

\'\ ·hen i spe:lk o f a man. il!..' ·s already (Il::ld

\'\ ·hcn I spc:lk o f timc. it :ltrc:ldy is no Illtlrl:4

!.I ·.T l ' :-; Sp l.., ..... then . of Ihe world from which

human beings ha\T di sappeared .

It 's a llUl:stioll uf di sappC:Ir.IIlCl:. n01 exhaus4

nnn, ex tinctitln or cx termination . Thc cxh:lllsr.io n

of resources, th(' cx tinc tion uf spl:cics-thcse

are physical processes or narur:ll pheno mena.

9

JfAN 8AUDRIlLARD

' \!ld th :lt 's the whole difference. T he human

species is doubtless the only o ne to have Invcntcd

:l specific mode of di s:lppearllnce that h:l s noth.

ing 10 do with Na ture's bw. Perhaps cven an :lr!

of disappear:tnce.

l.ET 'S BEG I1\: \'\ tTIl the d is:1 ppeara ncc of the re:ll.

We have talked eno ugh abotH the murder of re­

aliry in the age of thc media. vi rru:11 re:11iry :md

networks, withou t enelui ring 10 :111\' IIre:lr degree , ;:, ...

whcn the rea l began 10 ex ist. I f we look closely.

\\'e sec that the rea l world begi ns in the modern c ,

:lge. with the decision to tr:t nsform the wo rld ,

:1Ild 10 do so by means of science, an:ll\'tical , knowledge and the implementation of technol ­

ogY- lh:lt is to say Ih:ll it begins, in Hannah

Arendt's words, wi th the invention of an

Archil11cdean poi nt outside the world (o n rhe

basis of the invention of the telescope by G:llilen

and the di scovery of modern mmhcma[ical ca l­

culatio n) by which the n:u-ur:11 \\"o rld is defin i-

10

WHY HA SN 'T EVERYTHI N G ALREADY DISAPPEARED ?

li vely a l ienated. ~ T hi s is the 1110ll1C lll whcn

human beings, while se tt ing abou t aO:llysi ng :lOci

transform ing the wo rld, rake thei r !ca\'e of it,

whi le at the same time lending it forcc of rca li ty.

\'( 'e may say, thcn, [hal lhc rca l wurld begi ns. par­

ad OX Icall y, 10 d isappea r :1.1 the ve ry samc tin1c :lS

it begins to exist.

By their c.:xcept:ion:d f:lcuhr fur knuwledge,

human beings, while giving meaning. valuc :Ind

reahty 10 the wo rld , :1 t the S:\l11e ti me begi n :I

process of di ssolutio n ('to :In:il}'se' me:lns liter:t.ll )'

' to di ssolve ') .

But doubtless we have to go b:lck cven fur­

ther- as far as concept's :lnd bngu:lgc, By rep re­

senting things to o urselves, by naming them :lnd

conccprual izing them, hU1l1:l1l beings call them

into existence and at the same time h:-' slen their

doom, subtly det:lch thcm from their brUle rcaliry"

ror eX:1111ple, the cbss struggle exists fro m the

mo ment ~ I arx names il. But it no doubt exists in

its g reates t in tensity o nly before being T1:ll11ed.

11

HAN 8AUORIllARO

\ltl'rW,trth , It mneh d('cJmcs. The 1110111COI ,I

thing t, tUllled, the moment reprc~(,nlauon Jnd

concept' tah' hold of It, t, the !l10Il1COI when 11

1)C~n, 10 lo!'c II' l:ncrg~'-wllh lht' risk that II wIll

bcco!l1e a truth or impll'l: Itself a~ ideology. \X 'I:

I1U\ ',1\ the "a me of Ihe: l ' nconsciou:- and II' diS.

emcry b~ Frcud. 111:- whe: n a Ihing i!' beginning

10 dl:o., tppclr thai dll' concl:pl appear:-;,

T he 0"1. "';\\:0. I k gd, tllCS out at dusk.

T ,lhe: gloh,lli/.llIon: If tl1l:rc i!'i so much t.tlk

of II.'" 01,\ IOU' t:lct, .1' Indi'plHablc realiry, lh,ll

I' perh,lp' bccau,e It I' ;llread~' no longer at II"

hl:lghl ,till! wc ;I re alfl'ad~ contending with "O!l1C.

thll1g d'e.

Tlm<; thl: rc.11 \'anl,hc:, Into Ihe concept. But

\\I1.It ., e\ l:Il Illorl: p;lrJeio,\lcal 1<; the ('xactl, op

pO ... I1C: 1ll0\ l'l1ll'1lI b~ \\hICh concepr... ;tIlt! idea,

(but ;11'0 pIUIlI.l"les. utopia" dreams and til::-i rc.;)

\,1I11,h IIll0 their \Tn fultilmC:1l 1. \X 'h{'l1 en:f\

thing d"appcar, Il\ c'cc!'s of reality. \\'hc:n,

"

' j

, .

. '.

l

WH Y HAS N 'T EVERYTHI NG ALREADY DISAPPEARED?

thanks ro the deployment of a limi tless technol·

ogy. both mental and material, human bei ngs are

capablc of fulfilling all their pOlcntiali ties :md, as

a consequence, disappear, givi ng way to an :u ti·

ficial world that expels them from it. to an integral

perfo rmance that is, in a sense, the highest stage

o f materiali sm. (l\ larx: the idealist smge of inter·

preration, and the irresistible tr:msformation that

leads to a world withou t tis.) That world is per·

fec tly objective since there is no one left to see it.

Havi ng become purely operational. it no longer

has need o f our representation. Indeed, there no

longer is any possible representa tion of iT.

Fo r, if what is proper to human beings is not

to realize all their possibili ties, it is of the essence

of the technical objec t 10 exhaust its poss ibilities

and even to go quite some way beyond them,

stakjng out in that way the definitive demarca­

tion line between technica l objects and human

beings, ro the po int of deploying an infin ite

opera tional potential agai nst human beings

I S

JEAN BAUORlllARO

thcm ... c!n:s .IIH\ Il11pl\"ln~. sooner or later. their

d''>'lppc'lrancc.

Thu .... the Illodern world forc<;.cen by ,\I an.

dmcl1 011 h~ the work of Ihe ncgau\'C, by the CIl ­

gmt: of col1tr:ullction. bcc:1mc, by the \'cry excess

of liS fulfilmcllt. another world in which thing!'>

no long1..' r ('\TIl need their opposites in order to

Oi ... l, in which I1ghl no longer needs sh:tdc, the

fl:l11in1l1c no \ongcr needs the masculine (o r vicc

\cr ... a?), good no longcr need ... c\' ll- and the

world no longer need, us.

I I 1 ... \u:n: we 'iCC thm the mode of (I!sappc:u­

,l11el: of the: hUIlUI1 (and n:lIur:llly of cn:rythmg

rd<ltni 10 11 Gunther \nelcr .. · oUldau:dncs .. of

human lX'lIlg.... the cchp ... c: of nilies. etc.) is pre.>

cl\ch the product of :\11 Internal logic. of a built

in ob"oil:',ccncc, of the hum:1Il mce's fulfilment

of II' mo'" g r;lndio,c projcct. the Promcthc:\11

prolect of nla!'tcnng the.: uni versc, of accJuiring

c:-.hauslln:: htlowlcdge. \,\ 'c: ~cc, ttlO, that il is Ihi ..

which pn.'clpltalc<; 11 tow:\rd" liS dis:\ppcamncc.

I.

WH Y HA SN ' T EVE RY TH ING A LREADY DIS APP EARE D ?

much mo re cluiekly than animal species, by the

:tcceler:nio n it imp:tns 10 :tn evolutio n th :'! t no

lungt: f has an ything n:u u r:il :il)oUI iT.

D o ing so not out of ~ome d t: ad l dri \'~ o r

some inVillutive. reg ress l \,~ d ispOSitio n towa rd

undiffere ntiat ed fo rms. but fro m :\11 impul se to

go :ts far as possible in Ihe t:x pr~ss i()n of :,11 il s

po wer, all it s f;'tculti es- IO the point even o f

dreanllng of abo hsh1l1g dea th ,

N ow, \\ 'h:lt is muSI surpri sing IS Ih al th is

amounts to th e: S:ll11e th ing. This ex trelll e ~n ­

dellvo ur o n the pari o f li fe (o r n f I ~ros . if. by that

te rm , o ne understands Ihe deploym ent of :111

capaCi t ies, t h t.: d eepe n ing u f kno wkdgc, con­

scio usness :lnd jollissflllrt') :lrri vt:s :1I Iht: saill e o u t­

com e: the vinu :'! l di sappc:'! rance of ,hc hUI1l ;'t1l

species, as tho ugh th:1I destiny were programmed

somt:where li nd we we re m erely d Ie long-Te rm

exeClIl:lnl S uf the prug ramme (which irres istibly

brings to m ind flpoplosis. Iha t prucess by which a

cell is pre-prog rammed to die) .

19

JEAN BAUDRlllARD

All th is may gin : Ihe impression or illusion

of a raw.1 sLnncgr. of an evolution at the end of

which we would h:1\"e passed beyond tha i

va nishing poin t Cancili speaks of, where, wilh·

uu t realizing it, Ihe human race would have left

rea li ty and hislOrr behind, where any distinction

bet,veen the true :lnd ,he fal st: would have

disappeared , etc.1I

In which cast: \\ 'e and our bodies would be

mncly the phanlOll1 limb. the weak link. the in­

Emlile.: mabdy of :I technological appara rus that

dominates LIS n:moldy Gust as thought would be

merely the inf:mti le mabdy of AI o r the hllm:m

being the infantile malady of the machine o r the

real the inf:mtilc maladr of the \·irrual). All th is

reillains confined still wil hin an evolutionary per·

spcClive th:u seTS evcrything in tcrms of a linear

tr:ljeclory, from urigin to end, frolll cause to

cffcct, from birth to death , from appearanct: 10

cii sappca n l nee.

20

WHY HASN'T EVERYTHING ALREADY DISAPPEARED?

But d isappearance 11l:l}' be concei'-ed differ·

end y: as a singular event and the obiect uf a

specific desire, the des ire no longer to be there.

which is no t nega tive at all. QUilC to the contrary,

disappearance may be the desire to sec what the

world looks like in our absence (phutog raphy) o r

lO see, beyond the end, beyond the subject. be·

yond all meaning, beyond thc hurizun of d isap.

pea rance, if there sti ll is an occurrence of the

world , an unprogramillcd nppear:lIl CC of things.

i\ domain of pure appearance. of the world as it

is (and not of the r'lI/world , which is only ever the

w'Orld of represcnmtion). which can eillerge onlr

from the disappearance of all the added values.

'fherc arc here the first fruit's of :111 an of dis·

appearance, of anotlll:r Slr.llcgr. The disso lution

of val lies, of the real. of ideologies. of ultim:ltc

ends.

But there is simultaneously a game, the pos·

sibi lity of playi ng wi lh all these things; the pos·

sibility o f an an, though 11 0 1 in any W :1y:111 an in

21

JEA N BAUORlllARO

the cultural :lIld aC~lhctlc sense, but sOlllething

clo"er to:1 marna I an.

,\n It<;clf In the modern period exi~ls only

on the ba<;l<; of It<; cltsappearance-not JUSt the

~Irt of making the real disappear and supplaming

it with antHher :->cc ne, but the lift of abolishing

IIself 111 the course of its prac tice (I lcgcl). It was

br doing this that it cOl1sli tLlII . .:d an e"e lll, thm it

wa .. of (kcisi\'e importance. I say 'was' advi~t:dly,

fur art today, though \I has disappeared, doesn't

know It has disappeared and-this is the worst

of it-conunues on its trajectory in a \,cget:lli\,e

';;Iale.

,\nd become ... the par:tdigm of c\'erything

that sur\'\\es it, o\\'n dis:tppc:trance. There arc

tho<;c who phn on their disappt:amnec, make lISC

of il :\'> :I 1t\,1Ilg form, l'Xp loit it by excess, and

there arc tl1O:-e who :Ire in a stale of disappea r­

ance :lnd who survive it by default. It is dear that

the political scene, for cX:llllple. merely reneets

the shado\\'s of a cave and the--disembodied-

2l

• WH Y HASN'T EVE RYTHING AL READY DISAPPEAREO?

bei ngs lhal muve around in it, but d o su (Illi te

unwitti ngly (it wo uld take 100 lo ng 10 li st every­

thing 1hat has di sappeared in th is war-institu­

tiom , n ducs, indi vid ua ls). It is, un fo nunatcly,

(Illit e pu ss ible thaI wt: ourselves, as a spec ies,

al ready form pan- in the fo rm of cloning, con1-

plilcriz:1.tion and t.he netwo rks, fo r ex:unplc-of

th is artifici:d survival , of rhi s prolong:nion 10

perpcrui ry uf so methi ng ,h:11 has d isappeared,

bu t JU St keeps on and on d isappea ri ng. \,'I/ hcre ls

the whole an is 10 know how 10 disappe:lf be­

fo re dying and instead of dying.

At any ratc, no thing JUS t v:t nishcs: o f every­

th ing ,hal di sappears the re remain traces. The

p ro blem is what remain s when everything l1:1.s

d i:mp pcllred. It 's a bi t likt: Lewis Cnrro ll's

Cheshire Cat, whose grin still hovers in the air

afte r the res t of him ha s vanished. Or like the

judgement of God: God di sappears, but he

!cil\·es behind his judgement . Nu\\~ a ca t's grin is

alread y something Icrrif}'ing, but the g rin wi th ·

o ut rhe cat is even more terrifying .. . Ane! God 's

25

JEAN 8AUORIllARO

iud~el1lent is te rrifying in itself, but the judgt:.

m CIlI of GIKI without God . , .

\X 'c,: l1l:ly thus suppose that c\'eryth ing that

disappc:lrs-insri rution!', \'alues. prohibitions. ide·

o lo,l!;ics. even ide:ls--cominues to le:ld a cbndes­

tine t:X iSICIlCC ~lIld t:xe rt :ln ocellI! influence, as was

s:lid of Ihe :lIlcit:nt gods who, in the Chri sri:l l1 era.

assulllt:d the fo rm of demons. 1':\,erv thill 11 th:1I , ~

dis:lppe:l rs seeps back int u our Jives in in fin itcsi­

Illal dose!', often more (bngerous than the visible

au thority th ~1t ru led {)\,t:r LI S. In our age of IOler­

ance and tml1$parency, prohibitions, controls and

inequaliti t.:s disappear one by one, btu o nly thc

bener 10 bc imernali z('d in the 111 (~ntal sphcre. \XC

might even suppose ourselves to be following in

the tT'ack~ of our prt:\' iolls li\'t:s, not to spellk of

the Unconsciolls. Nothing c\'cr di sappears. !JUI

let's not get into pampsrcho logy. l .c t's star wi th

psycholo,l!,r and look :l little at the di sappear:lnce

of the subject, which is, more or less, the mirror

image of the di sappcllr:lIlce of the rcal.

26

WH Y HAS N't EVERytHI NG ALREAOY OISAPP£ARE07

And in f:lel thc subjt:ct- tht: :-. uh ject as

agency of wi ll. o f freedom. of represen tation:

the subject of power. of knowledge. o f his­

tory-is di s:lppe:lTing. but it le:l\'l,:s its ghosl be­

hind. its nllrcissis tic doubk, Illore o r less :IS the

C:l t left ils g rin hovering. The subjec t disapp{'a rs,

gives way to a d iffuse, /loaling. insubsl:lllti :ll sub­

jectivity, all ectoplasm that envelops e\'cryth ing

li nd tnlllsfn rm s evcrything into an immcnse

sounding board for a disembodietl, empt y con­

sciousness-ali things radiating nut from :I sub­

jcc[i\'ity \\'ithOlil objecl; c:lCh monad. each

molecule caughl in the toil s of:l definitive narcis­

sism, a pcrpcftl:ll image-playback. This is thc im:lgc

uf an end-of-\\urld subjcctivit y, :I subjccti\'it~ for

an cnd of the wo rld from which the subject as

such h:ls di sappe:l red. no longer h:l\'ing anyth ing

left to gmpple \\'ith. The subjt:c t is the victim of

this b fefu l rurn of t:\'e Ilf S, and, in a Sensc, it no

longer has anything st:lnding over :lg:liTlSI it- nei­

ther objects, no r the real. nor the Other.

27

JEAI\I 8AUDRlll~RD

()ur grc.:;ltt.: .. l ~H_h n"~lfit.:'i now dut':Hen u ..

onl~ \\"lIh tht'lr th"appe:lr:lncc.

1111 (.K1 \I 1)1:-. \Pl'l \R \'( 1 I:-! 'OT, then. simply

L1ut of the \Irllul Ir.lI1 ... mul:ltion of thin~l'. of

IIw lIIisf (II (/"11111" of n.:(\l1n, hut that of Ihe diYI

'Hl!1of tht.: ,uhltTI 10 IIlfinuy. of a serial pulver-

1/,111011 of con .. ciou,ne:-;~ imo all the intc:r~lict.:~

of realin. \,'c.: might ";1\, at a pinch, rhat con

"Ctou"oc .... (Ihe "ill, frecdom) is everywhere; 11

mc.:rge .. \\"lIh tht' course of thlll~s and. a" a rt.: .. uh.

become .... upertlllou", T his is the analysis CaHIi­

lullblllllgcr hllll .. clf made of re1i,!-,rion: a rehwon

which accommod,Ht'" to the world. which at­

lune .. lI .. clf 10 the (pohtlcal. socia l ... ) ,,·orld. he­

C011ll'" 'iupertlllous. It I .. for the samc rC:lSOi1-

bcelll't.: II hCCllllC Incrc:l'1I1gl~ merged with ob­

ICC tin.' han:lhn'-that .ut. ceasing to be different

from life. ha .. bl:comc ~upt.:rnuoll:-;.

Onl: might argue, alternatively. Ihat there

h:\\I.: been ~oml: po .. iti\'(: di~appc:\fllllces: of vio­

lence. threats. illne~s or dt.::llh, but we know tha t

'8

,

· 0

WHY HASN'T eV ERYTHING ALREADY DISAPPEARED?

everything repressed or eliminated in this way re­

sults in a malign, viral infiltration of the social

and individual body.

IT IS, THEREFORE, IMPOSSIBLE to assign disap­

pearance--disappearance as form-to some par­

ticular purpose or end (any more than we can

with appearance indeed), either in the order of

Good or In the order of EviL Apart from all the

phantasies we maintain around it-and in the en­

tirely justified hope of seeing a certain number

of things disappear ooet: and for all-we must

give disappearance back its prestige or, quite sim­

ply, its power, its impact. We must reinvest it not

as a final but as an immanent dimension-l

would even say as a vital dimension of existence.

Things live onJy on the basis of their digappear­

ance, and, if one wishes to interpret them with

entire lucidity, one must do so as a function of

their disappearance. There is no better analytical

grid.

31

JEAN BAUDRlllARD

I' (\ IV I.l!)J()'. J ~Jt \t.J . :-.TKI _":-. the total ambigu­

ilY of Oll r relation tu the rt.:;J1 ;Jnd its d is:lppc:lr­

anct.:. Bt.:hind evcry im:l~e. sOllle thin!4 ha ~

di ~appeared. Ami Ihal is the source of its fasci ­

na llon. Behind \'irilial rea lity in all ils forms

(tc1ematics, IT. eligiliz:llion. etc.), the rcal has d is­

appeared. t\nel that is Wh:ll fa!'cinalcs C\'l;f\'one,

According 10 the officia l version. we worship tht:

real :lnd the reali ty principle, bu t-and this is tht.:

source of all the CU ff C11I suspense- is it. in fact.

tht.: re:ll we worship. o r its di sappearancc?

\'\'e may. then. take thc sallle gencr:ll si tua­

tion-cxactly the sal111;-c.:i ther ~I S a curse.:1S the

commonplacc critical ve rsion h:l s il. or:lS:1 pleas­

ure into which we can rCtrea t, :lS a h:lppy cven­

lU:llity so to spc.:ak.

A contradictory twofuld posrulale thm C!1Il ­

not , in :IIW \\':1\'. be resolved.

'1'111 FI t"\. I -.5T IU .L:::.TIt\TIO;'\. o f this s),stcl11:ltic van­

ishing of a rea lity, whosc tw il ight, as it were, one

31

,

WHY HASN'T EVERYTHI NG ALREADY DISAPPEARED'

savou rs, would be the cur rent des ti ny of the

il11:lge. of the d is:1ppe:l r:lncc o f the image in the

ino:urablt:: mo\'t.: from tht: :In:.Jogic:ll to the digi ­

tal. Tht.: dt.:s tin ~ of the imagt: being eXt:l11pbr~­

fo r the invemion of the technical imag{' in a11l1s

forms is our laSt grea t il1\'cmiol1 in the unremit­

ting llLieSt for :I ll 'ob jeCl ive' re:tl ity, an objec tive

trllth (0 be mir rored to LI S by technology ... I t

would seem that the mirror has gOt caugh t up in

the ~~me and has transfo rmed e\'cryth ing into a

\'inual, digital, compu terized , numeric;) 1 ' rc:d­

iry'- th c des ti n ~' of the im:lge being merely the

tiny detail of this anth rupulogical n: \'ulutinn.

O N THE HEGEMONIC AND THE DIGITAL, . ,

\X'hCI1, from aTl exct:ss of re:lliry, e\'e rp hing dis­

appe:lrs th:ll1ks to the deployment o f :l limitless

mel1l:11 o r ll1:ltcri!l.t technology, when hUIll!l.n be­

ings arc capable o f fulfi ll ing :ltl their pOlemi:ll i­

li es. then, by that \'cry lohn. they enter a wo rld

that expds thc.:m. Fu r, if it is char!l.cterislic of

33

HAN 8AUORIllARO

h\' ln~ belllg!' not to fultil :til thei r potc.:nr ia litic!', it

IS of the essence of technical objects 1O e;.,.hawa

all of their" and to deplo} the.:m despite all op­

pO"lI1on. dC"I)ltc human beings them5cl\'e5.

\\'hich implic5. in the longer or shorter term, the

disappearance of humans. /\t the end of this ir­

resistible proCCS5, 1C:lding to a perfectly object i\'c

universe. \\'hich is, as it \\'ere, the sup reme stage

of n.:,dit)'. th t re i5 no subject any longer; there is

no OIlL: th t: rc 10 "ec H. T hat world no longer has

need of us. no r of our representation. f\nd the.:re

i~. indeed. no lo nger am possible representation

of it.

'11) II J.I ...,n{ ,n 1IIIs Tit '\.=--ITI<)\. to the hegemonic,

there is no finer :In:tlog} than that of the photo­

graph th ~H has becol1lt: dl,lQTal. being liberated at

a s1l1gle stroke from bOlh the negalive :tnd the.:

rea l \\'orld. And the conseclllt:l1cCS of both these

things :Irc inc:tlcllbble, though Oil diffen:nt scales.

of cour!'t:. Thi ~ marks the end of a singubr

34

WHY HAS N 'T EVERYTHI NG AlR[ADV DISAPP£AR£D?

presence for the objecl, since it 1n:1)" now be dig­

il:1ll )" Cl II1 Sl rtI Ctt:d , ,\ nd the l: nd of Ihe ~i ngu lar

mo ment o( the ph tJlog r;lph ic ;lCI. since the

1111;111e Gill now be im mcdi:uck t: r!l~ed o r recon-~ ,

struc led, And the end of the irrefu l:lble I C~ l j ­

mony of Ihe nega ti ve, Bo th the timc-b g and

distance di s:"Ippl':"Ir :11 the ~:lT1le ti llle, :lIld with

thel11 th:"lt blank between objl:ct :lIld i l1l:"lge that

\\ ':"IS the ncg:"l l-j\·t:. T he tradition:ll phOlogr:lph is

:111 im:lge producl:d by Ihe world. which. th :..nks

to the medium of film. still i l1 voh'l:s:1 dimension

of representation. ·flle digital il1l:lge is an image

thai comes straigh t out of the screen ;lnd be­

comes submerge,-I in the m:.. ~s uf :.. 11 the o ther

images from screens. II is of tht: order of flow,

and i!' :I prisoner 10 the aUIOI1l:l!ic operfllion of

the c:lI1,e r:1. \X /hen ca icublioll fmd the digital win

O llt over fo rm, when softw:.. rc wins Ollt over the

eye, can we still spe:.. k of phi HI Igr:lphy?

J7

JEA N BAUDRIHARD

THb I~ ;-"OT \ 11 RI.! Y " I.Pb() l) l ~ in the hi~ lUr} of tcchno logy: with this ru rn to the digita l. the whole of :lIlalo/!,ue photography, the im:lge in il ~

entirety-conceivcd a~ the convergence of the light from the objec t with the light from the gaze- is s:1 crificcd. is doomed fureve r. As di~iti ­

zmion ad":1 l1cc!', soon there will no longer be any film . :l1ly light -sensitive slIfbcc onto which things inscribed t hemsd ves nega ti vely. °f herc will only be an image $oftw;1. fe pacb~e, a d i~6tal effect runn ing to thc bil1ionrh o f a pixel and, a t the same time, unprecedented e:-lse of picture-tak­ing, of image-playback and o f rhe photo-syn­thesis" of anything whatcver, Metapho ricall y, the sophistica tion o f the play o f prcsence and ab­sence, of appearance ;1. nd disappcamncc-allthe sophisticatio n o f the photographic aCl-disap­pcars wi th the coming of the digital (the phlllu , gr:lphic ac t causes the ob ject in its 'rea lit y' to vanish for a moment ; there is no thing o f the sort in the virtu;1.1 image, nor its digi t;1.1 c;1.p ture- not

38

.. ,

•

WHY HASN ' t EVERYTHI NG AlREADY OlSAP PEAR£D 1

to mentio n the magic o f the im:lgt.:'$ t.: l11 ergence

as it is develo ped),

It is the wo rld and our vision o f the wo rld

that is ch;1. nged by this.

PARTI Cl'L\RI.Y 1;-': T IILSE RLCI~:-"T TI\I I..S o ( ultra­

r3pid technulogical progress, the :Ibsurd ide l h3S emerged of °libemting' the re:ll by me;1. ns o f the im;1.gc, :Inc! of 'libemtingO the image by l11e:1I1S o f the digiul. The 'liberatio n' o f the rcal 3nd o f the il1l:lge arc s;1.id to be effects o f profusio n :md pro · liferation. This is to forgctthe dcwcc o f ch;1.1lcnge and risk involved in the pholOgT;1.ph ic act, the fra~';lity and :Imbivalcncc ()f the relatio n to the ob­ject- the ' failure' o f the !!;aze, we might say. That

is all esscnri:ll fO photo!!.raphy- and it is :t rare thing! Yo u canno t liberate pIH ,tt'~"l ph}'!

O nc!.: aga in, this is :t Il JUSt o ne tiny example o f wha t is happening on :1 m:tssivc scale in :IJl

fields-particularly in the field s o f tho ught, con·

ccpr s, bngu :tge and represent ation . The S:ltllC

39

JI AN 8AUORIUARO

dc<;um of (!1glll/;lllon looms o\er the world of

the Illlnd ;lIlcl IIll' whole range of thought.

\\111\\1 IllRt 1111 ;-,\\\1 :'(I'\RIO, term for

term: with programmes based on the 0/ I binan

con"lrLlCI, \\ hleh i" a kind of integral calculm.

Ihl' cnurc s~ mbolic articulat ion of languag(' and

thought dl'i:tppe:lfs. Soon there will no longcr be

<In\" thought -sensltl\'e surf:tcc of confrontation,

;U1\ "u"pell"ion of thought between illUSion and

realu\'. T he re will be no bLinks any more. no SI ­

lences. no cOlllradtcllon- just a single continu

Oll" 110\\, :t "lIlglc IIlll'g rated Ci rCUIt. ,\nd

computer Intelligence lend .. Hsclf to--Of, more

accur.ucly, like the digital in the ca;;;e of tht:

lIll:1gc. forces us lillo- the same faciliry, the same

clpncit)u"ne"" ()f pn)(luclion and accumulation.

of 'photo '" nthe~i~' of the whole of the possi­

ble n::11. Thl'- giganlic- illusion is to confuse

thought with :t prolife ration of calculation:.- o r

photography wuh a prohfcr:Hlotl of ill1agc~. ,\!lel

40

I

WHY HASN'T [V{RYTHING ALREADY DISAPP(ARED?

the fu rt he:r \\T W) in tha t d irutioll. tlll: fllnh ~ r

we Sh:lll be: from ,he s~crc '-:lI1d the pl ~:l ~ ure:­

of b()th. T he e:xtlrbita l1t pri\' il q.:,c: granted 10 the

br:lin. no t itl ~ t in the ncurosc i ~ ll ce~ but in :111

fields. is symplOmalic or th is. i\:( )1 It) memion I,c

l ':ly's rCCt.:111 propos:ll on cnt:in~'c rint: the amoullt

of hUIl1 :Ul brain lilli e a\'ailable (for Coca Cob. :ld ·

vc n s) . w hich W:IS excc(xlcd in ill\'oiull ta ry cr ni .

cism :I nc! ri d ic liloll~n ('ss hy the p rupos:d uf the

I-i e:ld or Cul tllf:ll ,\fffliri' of the P:lris C il"y 1 !:t IL

Christophe G irard : '\X 'h:11 we w:lnt is 10 llI :lke the

brain anibb1c. no t fo r :Id \'cni :- int: :l.nd cflpitaL

but for C ult urt.: :md C reation!'

Il owc\'cr thi s ma\' be, wha t is totall, \\TC)n ~-. .'

hC:ld cd is (0 see the hrain :lS:l recei,'e r. :l synap­

lie Ic rl11in:l1. :1 sc reen f'lr br:lill ima~e r } in r(':l l

rime (in thi s sense. it ii', :11 :l pinch, k s", ah"tml to

corrd :lI c a 'ru llctinn:d' b r:li n wit h :111 :ld n .: rti sing

m :lrke t ,h:\I1 to st..:e it a:- the \'chicle for 'C re -

:lLiun'!). In short, in h 'cping wi dlthc abe tTant as ­

s llmplio n flf the whole or cOllltlluniC:l1io ll

theory (' \'\ 'c a rc a ll ull\\"illiTlt: receivers :lncl tr:lIl :--

.,

JEAN BAUORlllARO

l11il1c: r:o: "), once: you modd the: brni n o n comput ­

t:rs, sc:ci n~ it :1S :1 super machine in the image of

othe: r digi tal l11:1chine:s, then the brnin and (\'ir­

tu:i1) rea lit y simply illt crf:1ce, o pe rate in a loop

with, or mirro r, e::lch ot her in nccordance with :1

single p rogr:u111l1c- thc whole resulLing in wha t

we c:lll Aflifi cb l Intelligence o r A I. \,\Iilhin th is

fram e.:work , in which wc havc de.:fi nitively p rivi ­

Ie.:ge:d th e.: b rain as a str.ll cgic source of tho ugh t­

:H the expense o f :l il y o ther fo rm of intelligence,

part ic u1:1r1r the intel ligence of Evil , which is rd ­

eg:ltnl to IIll: zonc of lIsd e:ss functions-\\"l' as ­

sure it of Ilcge: mo nr. o f hegemo nic power­

precisely in the like:ness of the power that reigns

in the geopolitica l sphe.: rc. The: same mo nopo ly,

the S:1I1lC pyramid:11 symhesis o f powers.

,\1.1. TillS 1) 1 ~SCR mES an overall hegemo nic

proce:o::o:. :lnd thi s is \\'hy the digression o n pho­

tography :1nd the.: dig it:11 can serve as the micro ­

model for a generalized analys is of hegcl11 on ~·.

44

WHY HASN'T EVERytHING ALREADY DISAPPEARED?

Fo r thaI hegemony i" notiling olht:r Ih:l11 the re­

absorption o f any neg:lI i\'it y in human affair". the

reduction to the simpksl lInll:1r~ forlllub, the

formula to which th e.: re i:o: 110 alt e rn ,lI ive:. 0/ 1-

pure difference o f pot enua1. Into wh ich the.: aim

is to have :l1l conl1icI:' \',In i:;; h d igll:1l1y

THE VIOLE N CE DO N E TO THE IM AGE

T he ulril11at~ \'iolence done to the im:1ge.: i:<> thc

violence of the: cgi-compule r-genc rc:l lcd

im:lgc-which emergc" r .... millfo from l1um~ ri ca l

calcula tio n and the computer.

This PlIIS:111 e.:nd nCIl to the inl.lgil1lng of tll('

image. to its fundal1lcnt:11 'llIu ,",lIm' ,",i nc~, in COI1l ­

puter gcnernLio n, the r~ fen.; nl III I I I lI1ge.:r e:\t~t1' and

lhcre: is no place e\'en tor the n:~ll to 'ukc p1:1ce',

being iml1lcdi:1td ~ pn KllIce:d a<; \ ' lffU.11 Rea lit y,

D igltal pnx iliction C r:1 ,",C'" th e.: inugc ,11' (/",,10-

,ejJlr, it erases lhc rcal as :..( ltm:tl ltng c lp:lbk ( )f I.x.:i ng

' imagined ', The photogtilphlc :I( t, Ihi" lllon1c:!l1 of

disappc~mlll(c of both the sub ject ,mel Ih l: o b ject

in the same installl :mcou" con fron t.ll iol1- the

45

HA N BAUO RtUA RO

shutter relc3se aix)hsilmg the world and the ga/c

for:1. Ill(HllCI1I, a ,~nCllpc.:1 fH'lik IIIOrl thai tnAAers

the maclllllic performance of the ima!!c--disap­

pear!' III digItal, Ilumcncal processing.

,\11 thts IC:lds Illc\'itnbly to the death of pho­

tography :, .. an original Illtxi iulll. \X 'ilh the an:1 -

loguc imagc it is the csscncc of photography that

disappcar~. T hat im:lgt: sti ll :ltlcSlcd 10 tht.: lh c

presence of :\ subject to :-tn objec[--{mc laSt rc ­

pm"','!.: from the dl"'''Cllllnatl0!l and digital udal

\\,,)\ c th.u hc.:s 111 store for liS.

The problem of reference was already an al ­

mo ... , lIl ... oluhlc one: how l'i 11 with the real? I low

., It \\ IIh n:prc<;t.:IlI:lf1on? BUI when, \\'lIh the \'ir­

lu,11. the n :f<.:rcl1I dl':lppC:lr~. wht:n it dis:lrpC;lr~

Into the technical programnllng of the il11:lge,

\\hell there I" no l()n~er the SItU:1.tl0n of :1. rC:1.1

world :-ct o\'cr .again." a li~ht - ~cn~itin; film (it i'l

the :-.I111e with 1.lI1gU:lgc, which is like.: the.: ~e.:miti\·e.:

tilm of idc;\.,), then there is, ultimatdy, no po:-:-.iblc.:

reprc<;CIlt:lIlOn :111\ more ..

46

I

W H Y HASN'T EVE RYTHI NG AL READY DISAPPE A RED?

TIIERE IS \'('ORSE, \Vh:\{ di stinguishes thc an:lloguc

image is that it is the pbcc where a fo rm o f di s­

:lppeara ncc. of di st:lncc, of 'freezing' of the

world plays lI se1f o ut. "rh:l t nothingness al the

heart o f the im:lge which \X'arho l spokc o f.

\\;1hcre:ls, in thc digital image, Of, mOfe gen­

eraUy, t.he cgi, therc is no nCb":l.tive :lily longer, no

<ti me lapse', Nothing dies o r disappe:l rs there, The

image is merely the product of ,In inSl"fucti on and

a progr:lllllll c, aggravated by automat.i c di ssemi­

nation from o nc medium to the o ther: computer,

mobile pho ne, T V screen, elc.- the llutOTl1atic

nanlre of rhe network- respo nding 10 the auto­

mat.ic nature o f the constructio n o f the im:lgc.

So should we save absence? Should wc save

the void and this nothi ngness at the hea rt of the

image?

AI any mlC, rcmoving I11 c:l.Iling b ri ngs o ur

thc essential point: namel y, thaI rhe iTl1 l1gC is more

impo rtant than what it speak s about-juSt as

language is morc importan t r.h:lTl what it signifies,

49

JEA N 8AUDRIllARD

BlT IT \It ST \I _~(} RI \ 1 \ 1' \1.1 1 , to itself in somc

wa~, i\ul n: /lecl lonl it~clf :I~ mediulll , 1101 r:l ke

it'~elf ror :U1 i m:lg{~ , It must r{'Il1:1in :I fiction, a f.-Ibk

and hence echo the irn:sukablc fiction o r the

C\'CI11 . It must nOi bc caught in its own trap o r let

itself bl: imprisoned in 1111: i Tl1 :1ge~pbylxlck.

T he worst thing, in our \' iew, is JUSt thi s im ­

possibi li ty of a world withollt il11 age-pbyb:tck­

a world that is :t lways c:lug ht, capturcd, lil mcd

:lnd photographed e\'l:n 1>I.:fore it is ~een. This is

a T1lo!'l:t1 d:lI1gcr for the ' rc:l1' wo rld, but also for

the il11:tge. since. when it merges with the real and

simply imlllerses it self in the real :md re·cycks

ii, therc no longe r is :lny il1la~e-:11 l e:t~ t /1f)l as

cxct:p tion,:ls illusion, :ls p:mtlld \\·orld . In th t: \·i­

~ 1I :l 1 !low in which wt: :Ire currently s ubnlt:r~ed,

Ihere i"n'l eVl:n the tim L' 10 become an im:lge.

I d ream of an illl :lgt: that wou ld be the iail ­

flrl' tllIlOlJltlliqllf of thl: world's singubrit y. :is

drl::ll1lt of b\ the Iconoclasts in the famous

Bynntinc controversy. T hey contended th:l! o nly

50

WH Y HASN'T EVERYT HING ALREADY DISAPPEARED?

lhe illl:lge in which the d ivinity W;IS dirc,:clly

prcsell1-:ls in the \'eil of Ihe Il ol} F:lcelll-w:I:­

:Il1thcmic- :l1l foil" rf tllllolI/aliqllt' of lhe d ivine

(:I CC without :lny hU111:l11 h:lnd h:l\'ill~ intervened

("acllt:iropuie1.ic ') , through a ki nd of lr:lIl s lc r~

priming ana logous to thc m:g:llin : or the phllio.

graphic film. On the other h:md , they violcmly

rcjccred :11 1 icons prllduced by hlll1l:ll1 h:lnd

(,cheiropoil: lic') which for them were mere s illl ~

lIbCr.l o f the did nc,

By COll1 r:tSI, the photogr:lphic :lCI is. in :1

senst:, 'achei ropuielic'. As auto m:ltic ligh t.writing

Ih:lt neither p:lsses through the rea l nor Ihe ide:t

uf the re:ll. pholOgf:tphy 1ll:1Y ht: ~:l id , by thi~ :tu·

lut11:1t:ici t); 10 be the prutut)ve of :1 lit cr:llness of

the world, wi th no interference (mm human h:lIld.

The world producing itself :IS r:ldiC:11 illusion, :I ~

purt: tr.1ce, \\;thOlH :tlly simubtioll, without hum:tn

il1l er\'cmion :lnd, :lbo\'e all. no t :ts truth, for, if

there is onc ~lIpJ'enH': pnxluct of the hUI1l:lIll11ind,

th:t! product is truth :tnc! objccti\T rC:llity.

51

HAN 8AUOII'llAIiO

T1I1IU /..., (.RI \1 \111 (T\IIO, 10 a<;cnbing mean

111j.{ 10 the photographiC 1Il1age, To do so I, to

nuke ohlec,,", ..,Irlkc ,I po<;c, \nd IhlllgS them­

"eke .. bq,~111 10 po"e 111 the light of meaning as

"oon ;1" Ihl'Y fed a subject's ga7e upon them.

II \\ I \\ I '()"J \I \\ \" had the deep-sca led phan­

I.I"Y of a \\1 Irld lhal would go Oil \\'llhOUI liS? The

poetic lempI.lI10n 10 M.:e the world in Our ab­

"enCl:. free of am hUlllan, all -loo-human will?

The IIllen'l' plc;l"ure of poetic language li('s in

"cclng J.lIlguage opeC"lting on ils own. in its Illa

lenal,,\ :1.I1d lileralu\, without Iransitll1g through . . . lllean1l1g-thi" is wh:1I fasClnatcs us. It is il1('

same with anagrams or anamorphoses. with the

'figure in the ca rpel', l1 The \'nnishing Point of

l ':l1lguage.

\1 \, '()J PHOTO(,R WHY :1150 be said 10 fUI1Clion

as 'revealing', in the I\\'()-tech nical and mCla-

52

,

WHY HASN'T EVERyTHING AlREADY DISAPP[ARED?

physical- !<Ocnses of the word , of the 'inngc in

the carpel'? T he V:mishing Pllin! o f the Picrurc.

~ I.KI \I.ITY IS ~O'\ II.TIl"( . :1.ltn os l i n c vjLlhlc.: in

pholOgraphy. fo r the rcasoll th:u the C:lI1H:r.l (c:o: ­

pcc ially the dig ital cam cf':l) ICl1d ~ tuw:mls till: in ­

finite exploita tio n of its possibilities. Fnr bck of

:1 11 intu iting of the d ct:l il of the world. fo r want

of full y plumbing il s mC:lIling and cxh:llI sling ils

~lppCa rat1ces, the sc ri:ll digil:'!l im:lgc fills ,he \'oid

by sclf-muILiplicuioll. In the limi l (:1St.' which is

o ur prescm condit ion. we arrive :11 an unstop­

pable seri es of shots.

But this is no lo nger :l pho tograph :Ind, lil e r­

all y speaking. it is no lon~('r (,\,(,11 :1.11 im:lgc. T hese

shots may be said. r.ahcr. tn be pan o f the murder

of the image. Tha, murder is heing pe rpclF.lt ed

continually by aU the il11age~ th:\I :lCculllubt<.' in se­

rics, in ·,hcl1l:lt.ic' sequences. w h ich illustrat e thc

same evcm tlt/lltlllSetll/l. which th ink they :l rc acclI­

mulating, but are, in fan, canC(.: lling e:tch t Hiler t Jut,

ti ll th ey reach the zero degree of info rm:llioTl .

55

JEAN BAUDRILLARO

There j" a violence done to rhe world in rhls

way. but there i~ :ilso a \'iolence done 10 th t:

image. h) Ihe so\crcig1ll~ uf images. j\;u\\', an

image has to be sO\en~ ign; it has 10 have;: its own

symbol ic space. If they arc li\'ing images-'aes­

thetic ' (. lu :ililY is no t at issue hcn.:-thcy ensure

the t.::\i~tencc of that ~ymbulic ~pacc by dimimlt ­

ing an infinite number of other spaces frOln il.

T here IS a perpe tual ri\·:tlry between (true) im­

ages. But it is exactly the o pposi te {oelay wilh the

d igi 1:!1 , when: Ihe parade of im:lgcs n:semblcs the

sC,] lIcncing o f the geno me.

T il L OI'I'O:-ITI. 1'I ',R':" IJI-CrJ\,I" would be phologra ­

ph~ in liS pure :lbslr:lClioll- roIIi mmlltll'---el1vi ­

sinn ing:1I1 alrc:ldy photog raphed world in one's

head- withou t there being :lny need to material ·

ize it in aC lu:l1 shut s- by imagi ning the world

precisely as the lens Ir:lnsforms it. The innt:r

ecstasy of photography. as it wcre.

56

I WHY HAS N " (VERYTHI N G ALRE A DY DISAPP[ A RED?

1\ total de· regubtiol1 of the il1la~e-pho·

togrnphy can get lost in :I mind boggling fr:lg­

I1K Ilt:ltion. in :t technical delirium of visi bil it} at

all costs, where everything inSISt's on ~Ippca ring on

:l fr:tct:ll o r microscopic sca le. It's not :ll1latt er of

disaplx.-aring into the pby of forms any more. but

o f an automatic substitution. whe re the world it ­

self zaps from one im:tge to the o ther in precisely

the S:Ulll.: way as the individunl c:m di ssolve him­

sel f imo the mental di:lspora o f ,he nt:\"wurks :tnd

the reby :utain a definiLi\'c spectrali!'y.

T hc ulLim:ttc stage o f thi s dc-regulation is

the cgi. From faked phutos of tht: dying D in na to

srudio-manufacrured TV rt: pI Jrt s. tht: immedia te

live shot. taken nt :111 irrevocable moment, is pas t

lInd gonl.:- b st glimmcr of :lcrunlirr in a virtu:l1

dimension \\'he rc im:lgcs no lo ngl.: r h:lvt: the

slightest connecrion wilh lime.

In the vinu:l1 im:lgc there's no longer an y­

th ing uf that punctual exactitude. Ih:1I p"l/rllllll in

time wh ich is the 'poim ' w11l.:11 tht: :l11alugue

57

r

lEA N 8AUDRIllARD

muge \U, nude. In the pn't, 10 (he day" of the

'rcal world', so 10 .. peak, photography wa<;, as

Ihnhe"i argued, \\']{nc~~ to an insuperable ab

"ence, to sOl1lethll1g lIUl had been p rc~ellt once

,lIld for .111 IIIne. h)r 11" pan. rhe digital photo is

III real tlmc and bC;lrs witncss to something that

(bd nOI take place, btl! whose absence ~igni tie"

Ill)t hll1g.

In till'. digiul hberahl'flllOIl of thc photo­

gr:1plllc act, 111 Ihl .. impcr~on<ll process in which

the medium Itself gcncral l;s mass-pnKluced im­

a~e ... \\'lIh no mher Il1lerCeS"lon but the techlllcal,

we C;\Il 'ee seriality 111 its consummate form. In

the licld of ullage ... Ihl .. 1<;, as it were. the e<ltll\'a­

iCI1I of .\1. \,\ 'e I1U\ Ihtl<, regard the Image .. taken

hy ;1 (lignal Cll1lCrn gcne rall~ as an infinite ~cric s

with ,III the pO"'lhditics of manipulallon, pla~,

correcllon, inugc pl:lyback and all rhe thing" that

afC 1Il1lhlnk,lbk in the 'analoguc' world. It "al .. o

the end of any suspensc: the image I:; thcrc:lt th e.::

.. a me lillle as the scene- .l ridicul()ll~ pnlmi .. cuity

58

WHY HASN'T EVERYT HING ALREADY DISAP PEA RED ?

(wha t a m:l rvcl, by Contr:l::; t, is the slow g rad ual

rising to the surfact: of th t: imagt: in the Pobroid

camera!). 'fhl ::; i::; what the digi tal b ch: the rime

of emergence, failing which it is merely a ran­

do m segment of the unive r::; al pi xcllizatio n,

which no longc.: r has anything tv du with the

gaze, no r with the pia), of the negative. the play

of d istance. A new view of the world , glo b:t liz:t­

cio n's view o f the world: the subjectio n of every­

thing to :t single prug ramme, the subjection of

:t ll images ('Q:t single 'geno me', This is why il is a

mistake (Q regard the move 10 digit:t l as :t mere

technical advance, as :1 superio r form of au­

!Umatia n o r eyen, indeed, II finallibenu-inn o f the

Image.

Fo r th is really is the b st straw. this :tspir:ttion

to d ear the wa y, with the digital, for the integral

im:1.ge, free from an y real -wo rld constraints. And

we would nor be forci ng the analog), if we ex­

lended th is same revolution to hum:ln beings in

general , free no\\-; thank ::; to this digital intelligence,

61

J(AN 8AUORIllARO

to oper:ll c within an illlcgr:-tl indi\'iduality, free

from all hislOry and $ubjl.:Cl.i\'c constraints ...

At the cnd-point of this ri se of the machim:,

in which al1 human intelligencc is encapsubted­

:1 ll1:1 chine which is now :Iss tlfcd of total auton-

o my as a result- it is cl c:u that mankind ex ists

only :\I the COSt o f its 0 \\"11 dc:uh. It Ix:coll1cs illl ­

Illort:'ll only by p:'lying th l.: p rice of it s tcchn()log­

iC:'l1 di s:'lppC:lli UlCC, of its inscription in the d igital

order (Ihl.: IllCIl1:'l1 di:1 !>pora of the networks).

~ J"lII . !'I\ \ !lU)1. (JI \ 1.1 \'1'( . DI~PI.R!)IU:-". tllc ide:1.1

spider, which !"pi ns its web and is silllu itaneous ly

spun by its web: Or bCller slill. ' I :1.111 1l0l the spi ­

der who wC:I\'es Ihe web. and I am nut c\'cn a fl\'

c:lUglli in the wcb. I :tm the web it self. streaming

off in all direc tiuns with no centre and no self

Ih:lI I c:-In c:tllmy 0\\"n.'12

But Ihi s is Th e o pcn form of immortali ry and

in realiry. so far :IS t he human species is concerned.

62

I

,

WHY HASN'T EV£RVTHING AlR£AOV OISAPP£AR£O?

the choice has been madc :l11d it is cmbod icd in

the supremacy o f Artificia l I nldli~cnce.

IT IS ,\TTIIE OlT I' 1{ 1.l\IIT !'I of this: systcmat.ic di s­

appe::tral1ce, which h:1s, it wou ld !"eelll. been uni ­

vcrs:1.l ly accep tcd. but whose dynamic ulti mately

remains mys tcrious (\'\ '11:1.1 do digi fal ~ h ccp drcam

o f ? as Philip r.::: . D ick might have :1. sked). thaI

somc rroubli ng p::t radoxiC:ll (llIcs liu ns :trise:

1. Is ('\'c rything doomcd 10 disllppea r---( Jr,

mo re precisely. hasn'l eve ryt hing already disap­

peared? (\\ 'h ich connect!" lip with Ihc vcry dislant

p:mldox from a phi losophy th:1I nc\'cr was: Wi lY

IS TH ERE NOTIl ING R,IT II " R T ll tlN

SCH IETH ING')

2. \'\ 'hy isn't everything uni\, ('I"~al ?

3. \,\ 'c arc fa sci naTed by ,hc ph:l1 l1 :ISIll of :1I1

in tegral rca li fY. by fhe :llph:1 :md Olllct:a uf digi lal

progml11 l11 ing. T he rl.::l. i is the Ieitillotif :lnd ub­

sess io n of all di scourses. BUI arc we not fa r tess

63

JEAN BAUDRILLARD

fascmated by the real than b\ liS vanishing. liS

IneiuCt,lble dl..,apPC;lrJnce?

4. WhIch gin: ... me to the Inliy m,-srcnous

llllc..,,,on: how docs tim Irresistible global power

succeed 111 1I11differentiaung the world, in wiping

out Its c:\trcmc si ngula rit y? ,\nd how can the

world be so vulnerable to thi.., IilJuicbtion, this dic­

t'llorship of integral re:tli ty, and how call it be fas ­

cl11:Hed by it- not exactly fascinated by the real

but b~ the disappcar:lI1cc of reality? There j ...

hO\\"(: \"cr, ,I coroll a[\' LO this: what is the source of

the fragIlity of thI S global power, of its ,·ulnera­

hllny to mll)or ('\'CI1I", to c\-em .. that are imignif­

lClIltIII them<,cke<, ('fO)..'\IC (',-ems', terrorism. but

:tl"o the plctun:" from .\bu Ghr:ub, etc.)?

DOl Inll~~, If \\'c ,lfC to a\"old these 1I1soiublc

llue"tlons. \n: ha\c ttl fefcr 10 thaI Olhcr amhro­

pologic:d rn-olutlon. exactly antithetical to our

cur rcnt diglt,ll ' re\"(}iutlllll ', that is never takcn

lilt<> con"'ldcLlIion (wc mIght cven sal it has

64

, \

WHY HA SN't EVERYTHING ALREADY DISAPPEAR EO'

nen;r re ill y bCl:n taken into cons idt: r~lI i()n, except

in :1 Iluml)!.;r of r:lpidly s:lcrificed ht:resies).

D Ui\ 1.1'1"'1'. The inviubblc golden ru le of

dllalil"Y. And thcn.: ':o; no need ttl gn b:lck to :11\ .

thropology'5 roOl5 to rediscover thi5 mdie:11 d e­

lllet11 of hllm:lt1 being; it is present everywhere:

it is what n O I o nly leavc:o; Ihe ~l lI t..:s l i(Jn s posed

:lbove etero:l lly in sLi spense, but :l lso etcrn:lll y

,hw:lrt s hum:ln undertakings (:lll b:lsed on syn·

dH.:sis, intt..:g r:dity and lhe dclibc r:ll c fo rgelling of

all rCfr:lClOry form s, of everything that canno t o r

wil l not be in tt..:grated or reco ncikd .. ,).

Funcbmcmall y.lhc NOR~I A I . hUIll:!n being

:llw:I}'S lives in a SI:lIe of d epcndency o r coullte r·

dependency: he i5 dcpcnc\t;nl on his model

(wI1:IIc\'cr it 111 :l )' be: model of :lnic)Il, social or

imaginary project), but. :11 the :o:1I11e lime. perina·

nendy challenging th:1I l1Iodel. l ie is Il1Ol.i":lI cd and

cOlll1tcr·mori\·aled in the same 1l1()\'emcnt . There

is no need for psycho logy o r psycho:lI1:ll ys is or,

indced. :l.Ily hlll1l:1Il science.: for lhis. Thc .. c scicnccs

67

JEAN BAUORlllA RO

CX ISt only 10 reconci le the irreconc ilable. t\ s :1

cOnSC(l lH::nce, human bcings do :llw:l\'s bOlh \\'h:11 < ,

they need LO fo r lheir model 10 succeed :md all

that is necessary for it 10 fa il. Here again. there's

no need of :lny weakening o r pcr\"(:n~ ion or de:l th

dri ve. It is from [hei r p rimal duality Ih:1I hum:1I1

beings derive th is :l lwl.gonistic energy. This is the

n Onl1:l1 hum;ln being :lnd everything rh:lt sets

abom reconcil ing him with himself ;lnci finding ;l

so lUTion TO the Icillest.ions raised above is of the

o rder of superstitio n :lnd mystification. "

T he ABNOH,i\ j t\L individ u:l1 tOday is the

one who nuw livcs o nly in a unilaleral po sitive

adherence 10 what he is or what he docs. Total

subjection and ad juslmcm 14 (the perfcctly no r­

ma li zed bci ng) . Countlcss ind i\'id llals have gone

o\"er 10 rea lil\'. tu t.heir own rcalin', b\' elil11inat -. , ,

ing all consideratio n of lhe du al and the

insoluble. And the mystcry of t.hi s positivc crys­

I:lUi z:u ion, of this suspensio n of do ubt :1bom the

rcal - necessarik real- wo rld rem:l1ns ennre. ,

68

j

WHY HASN'T EVE RYT HING MR ( AOY DISAPPfAR(O ?

T his raises the whole (llleSllOn of the intell i)!;encc

of Evil.

\\: 'e an.: simplified by technicalmanipubtio n.

r\nd thi s simpl ification goes off on a c rn}'

course \\·hel1 we reach d igiral manipul:uiun.

What beCOmeS:ll t.hi s point of the vCTltrilo­

'-luKit)' of l :v il ?l~ It is the S:ll11e wilh the r:ldical ­

iSIll of yun::; when it d esert s The ind iv idual.

reconciled with himself :lnd humogenized by t.he

good offices o f the digital. and when all criri c:d

thinking has di s:lppe:mx l, radica li sm passes in to

thi ngs. The vcmriloC]uacil), of Evi l IXlsses into

tech no lugy i tscl f.

For duality can be neither climin:l1 cd nor

liquidat ed- it is rhe rule o f the game. Th e ruk of

:1 kind of inviulable pact Ih:1I ~cal s lhc revcrsibil­

ity of things.

I f their own duplicity dese rt s human beings.

t.hen the ro les :l rc reversed: it is the machine Ihat

goes gag:l, that fal le rs and bccolllcs perve rse,

69

JEAN BAUOR!llARO

(il:lhnhc. n ;lltnlo(llIou:-. The dllpliclr~ merrih

!-!OC'i ovcr to thc othcr side.

If !'ublectl\"c Iro!1\' disappears-and H dl!'­

appears 111 the play of the (lIgllal- then irony be­

comes ubjccli\T. Or It becomes silence.

I' 1111 111.(,]"1'(. \\ \,:. 1111 \\(llm. It was onl\·

:lfterward" thar th(' Sikncc camc.

T he end It self h:lS cllsappc:ucd ...

jmll((lf) !()(r

70