A problem is now imposed on me that I seek to entitle as briefly as
possible. For reasons of economy. I seek a title for it as formalizing and thus as economical as possible: well, precisely, it is economy. My problem is: economy. While respecting the constraints of this colloquium, which are above all temporal constraints, how shall I determine the most inclusive and most interlaced guiding thread possible through so many virtual trajectories in Heidegger's immense corpus, as one says, and in his tangled writing? How to order the readings, interpretations, or rewritings of them that I am tempted to offer? I could have chosen, among many other possibilities, the one that has just presented itself to me under the name of entanglement or interlacing—-something I have long been interested in and on which I am currently working in another manner. In the form of the German noun Geflecht, it plays a discreet but irreducible role in "Der Weg zur Sprache" and designates this singular, unique interlacing between, on the one hand. Sprache (a word I will not translate, so as not to have to choose between language, tongue, and speech) and, on the other, path (Weg, Bewegung, Bewegen, etc.), a binding-unbinding inter-lacing(entbindende Band) toward which we are incessantly and properly being led back, following a circle that Heidegger proposes thinking or practicing otherwise than as a regression or vicious circle. The circle is a "particular case" of the Geflecht. Just like "path," Geflecht is nor one figure among others. We are implicated in it. interlaced in advance when we wish to speak of Sprache and of Weg, which are “already in advance of us" (uns stets schon voraus).

But after a first anticipation, I had to decide to leave this theme in the background [en retrait]: it would not have been economical enough. And I must speak here economically of economy. For at least four reasons, which I will name algebraically.

a. Economy in order to articulate what I am going to say with the other possible tropical system of usure, in the sense of usury, thus of interest, surplus value, fiduciary calculation, or interest rate, which Ricoeur indicates but leaves in the shadows, although it forms a heterogeneous and discontinuous supplement. a tropical divergence irreducible to that of being-worn-out or worn down.

b. Economy in order to articulate this possibility with the law-of-the-house and the law of the proper. oiko-nomia, which led me to reserve a particular Place for the two motif of light and home (Du Marsais cites "borrowed home" in his metaphoric definition of metaphor: "Metaphor is a species of Trope; the word that one uses in metaphor is taken in another sense than the proper meaning. it is, so to speak, in a borrowed home, says an ancient; this is common and essential to all Tropes" [Des tropes, ch. 10]).

c. Economy in order to steer, if one can say that, toward the value of
Ereignis, so difficult to translate and whose entire family (ereignen, eigen, eigens, enteignen) is intersecting, with increasing density in Heidegger’s last texts, with the themes of the proper, of propriety, of propriation, of de-propriation, and with that of light, the clearing, the eye (Heidegger says that one may hear Er-aügnis in Ereignis), and finally, in current usage, with what comes as event: what is the Place, the taking-place, the metaphoric event, or the event of the metaphoric? What is going on, what is happening, today, with metaphor?

d. Economy, finally, because the economic consideration appears to me to have an essential relation with the determinations of the passage or of path-breaking according to the modes of trans-fer or trans-lation (Über-setzen) that I believe must be linked here to the question of metaphoric transfer (Übertragung). By reason of this economy of economy, I proposed to give this discourse the title of retrait. Not economies in the plural, but retrait, withdrawal/redrawing.

Pp. 60-1

¶ 5:17 AM