The Global, the Local, and the Forgotten Dimension of History— Reconsidering Translation, Time, and Historical Consciousness

The last decades have witnessed the domination of two apparently contradictory global tendencies: on the one hand, a process of globalization and concentration of capital on a new, very abstract level far beyond immediate experience; on the other, the decentralization of production and politics accompanied by the emergence of a great number of new social formations, movements, parties and sub-cultures.  The resultant uncertainty concerning the nature of modern life and society has arguably manifested itself most prominently in the crisis of traditional Marxism, which gave way to the postmodern critique of “grand narratives” and “Eurocentric” or “hegemonic” standpoints and conceptions of historical change.  It can however be argued that precisely because of their reluctance to treat capitalism as a matter of scholarly concern, post-structuralist  and post-colonial theories have had to remain merely descriptive and fall short in terms of analytical power and historical depth.  This paper will attempt to assess such tendencies through a case study tracing the translation of “philosophy” into Japanese, along with the history of its institutionalization and eventual entanglement with Japanese imperialism.  My starting point is a re-consideration of the concept of “cultural translation”, which has become a cornerstone of many post-structuralist theories of cultural transformation.  On the basis of a non-Derridian re-interpretation of Walter Benjamin’s theses on translation and history, I will try to show that “cultural translation” is, in fact, of utmost significance, not because it is the cradle of “diversity”, but because it is the site at which a global, capitalist modernity reproduces itself through the summoning of “tradition,”  i.e., modern historical consciousness with its specific temporalities.  Herein may lie the seeds of revolution.  For “any genuine revolution” as Agambern says, “is never merely ‘to change the world but also – and most of all – ‘to change time.’”