Czy rzeczywiście należało zabić Emmę Bovary? Jacques Rancière i sprawa Flauberta

Abstrakt

The article attempts to argue with the essay entitled Why Emma Bovary had to be killed by Jacques Rancière contained in the volume Politique de la littérature. The author uses Rancière’s argument and its inherent context – the theory of art regimes, the autonomy of aesthetic experience and the concept of molecular egalitarianism. Then he verifies the legitimacy of the French philosopher’s conclusions in the light of f‌indings that he formulates in other, more central places of his ‘aesthetics as politics’. He uses them to challenge the criticism of kitsch developed on the occasion of Emma Bovary’s accusation and refutes the accusation of the alleged trivialisation of art. He uses the feminist theory to show the possibility of another interpretation of this story, which, instead of legitimising Flaubert’s verdict, indicates the author’s hidden misogyny and questions the lack of alternatives to which he condemns his heroine. Going beyond the perspective of internal criticism, he points to dependencies that can be described in terms of Pierre Bourdieu’s ‘literary f‌ield’, from which Rancière’s position is not free at all. Based on these counterarguments, he formulates a general problem concerning Rancière’s theory of politics, which is focused on ‘molecular’ effects and promises of equality, yet sometimes seems to underestimate the ‘molar’ possibilities of fulf‌illing these promises.