Abstract
In this article, I discuss the vitality and the limits of the poststructural archive. I argue against the temptation to essentialise poststructuralism or define its ‘ontology’; instead, I present some of the avenues that can be taken to further its theoretical practice. With Trump and the rise of ‘post-truth’ politics, poststructural political thought has recently come back to the centre of political debate. By using Pierre Macherey and François Châtelet’s perspective on Marxism, I turn to contemporary problems and studies to imagine how to renew the poststructuralist experience of thought. Following Boris Groys, I suggest that by producing theory as form, artists had a more immediate recourse to theoretical practice, by using all sorts of media to perform knowledge. Finally, by mainly referring to the work of Gilles Deleuze and Michel Foucault, I present some elements of a poststructural critique of political economy. I do this not by forcing the application of poststructural theories or concepts onto a supposedly external reality, but by immanently integrating more and more social and political problems into the schemes of thought. A poststructural theoretical practice means integrating into thought problems and events, in order to compose with them, and not simply study discursive strategies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
