RC

Ghosts are not renowned for their sense of humour. As Charles Lamb (he
of the undeconstructed tales from
Shakespeare) put it; 'Can a ghost laugh, or shake his gaunt sides,
when you are pleasant with him?' But
the ghost of the theorist of farcical returns might well be something
of an exception. At any rate, one can't
help thinking that, were the personal spirit of Marx to be in any
position to take note of his conjurings in the
pages of Specters of Marx, it might be a little tickled in its gaunt
ribs, inclined even to give vent to some
hollow-sounding cries of mirth. For there is surely an element of
irony about this supposedly overdue
encounter between Derrida and Marx: namely, that it may be the cause -
and this conference is itself
confirming of the suspicion - of a certain rehabilitation of Marx.
I say 'certain' because we must add 'in the academy', or 'in
philosophy'. The rehabilitation may prove
some-what local and limited, but nonetheless its peculiarity should
not pass entirely without comment.
That the deconstructive turn in philosophy which looked to be
exorcizing Marx, and which was certainly
interpreted by many as wanting to do so, may be that which conjures
him forth again and puts him back
into philosophical vogue; that it may only be through the
authorization of Derrida that Marx may return from
the shadowy wings of the academy to centre stage and even be allowed a
speaking part: this is an odd
turnabout, maybe even a bit spooky, certainly a funny business.
Derrida is right that there are several
spirits of Marx, including some we may want finally to put to rest.
But one which we should surely continue
to summon is that which invites philosophy to be sensitive to its
context and effects, and to see the
humour in some of its own inversions. Regrettably, Derrida's return to
Marx is too little haunted by this
spirit of self-appraisal.
But how far, in any case, is this coming back to Marx a genuinely new
event, how far a revenant of Derrida's
earlier deferrings of the engagement with the ethical and the
political - which have always taken the form,
in fact, not so much of a postponement or a confident 'don't call me,
I'll call you', but of what one might call
a politely tentative gesturing towards a possible handshake with the nettle.
Three aspects of Specters of Marx seem noteworthy here. In the first
place, it offers a definite statement of
political affiliation. Derrida makes plain his distance from the
celebrants of the demise of Marxism and from
all those who would echo Fukuyama's triumphalist prophecies about the
'end of history'. He is very ready
to acknowledge that if we measure the out-of-jointness of our times by
the degree of human misery already
occurred or in the offing, then our times are indeed askew. In his ten
indictments of global capitalism, he
also makes it very clear that he subscribes to a broadly Marxist view
of the sources of the disorder.


31. The word closest to the contextual meaning of 'indictments' in the
passage is:
(a) Commandments (b) Pronouncements (c) Accusations (d) Postulates


32. How does the author view Derrida's earlier engagements with the
ethical and political?
(a) A possible collaboration with a wise group.
(b) An assertive and overt expression of postponement.
(c) An unpleasant collaboration, which can result in pain.
(d) A collaboration done with some reluctance but which can prove to
be highly profitable.

33. The author would agree with which of the following?
(a) Despite opposing some Marxist ideas, Derrida's writings hint at a
revival of Marx.
(b) These days we experience an equal amount of misery as we did in the past.
(c) The roots of our present disorder can be traced back reasonably
accurately by Marxist views.
(d) Derrida has never shown any indication in the past that he would
come back to conform with
some of Marx's views.