From Bloch’s utopian surplus to Žižek’s fantasmatic spectre: Re-evaluating the interplay of utopia and ideology

Hempel, Daniel

doi:10.1080/13569317.2019.1631540

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…History is thus understood as a repository of possibilities; what could have been can still be (Kellner 2012). Bloch thus turns Mannheim's criterion of realizability on its head; for Mannheim, an idea proves itself to be utopian only in retrospect, while for Bloch, a utopian idea distinguishes itself by having not yet been realized, in other words prospectively (Hempel 2019). According to Bloch (1995), it is the utopian surplus that makes ideology dependent on utopia.…”

Section: The Not-yet the Principle Of Hope And The Utopian Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Utopia thus gives an appealing shine to ideology, which is necessary to uphold the current order. Simultaneously, Bloch suggested that it is through the utopia present in each ideology that a space outside of ideology is provided, hence making it possible to challenge the ideological order (Hempel 2019).…”

Section: The Not-yet the Principle Of Hope And The Utopian Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Venturing beyond Koselleck’sErwartungshorizont: on the category of the utopian

Friberg

2021

Rethinking History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For a long time, the reception of German historian and theorist Reinhart Koselleck's work focused on disciplinary and methodological aspects of conceptual history (Begriffsgeschichte). However, in recent years, there has been an increased interest in Koselleck's more theoretical discussions on historical time and temporality, highlighting his oeuvre of a theory of the conditions for possible histories (Historik). Taking its cue from the current trend, this article revisits the Koselleckian category of horizon of expectation (Erwartungshorizont) in light of Ernst Bloch's work on the principle of hope (Das Prinzip Hoffnung) and the concept of utopia as the forward dreaming of the Not-Yet (Noch-Nicht). By exploring and developing the utopian as a formal category -used as a supplement to Koselleck's conceptualization of the relationship between the space of experience and the horizon of expectation -the article argues that Koselleck's theory can be reframed into one that can fully account for the utopian imaginaries of political thinking.

show abstract

Section: The Not-yet the Principle Of Hope And The Utopian Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Not-yet the Principle Of Hope And The Utopian Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Venturing beyond Koselleck’sErwartungshorizont: on the category of the utopian

Friberg

2021

Rethinking History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…295–301; Stolze, 2019, pp. 207–208) or at least finds the two approaches (whether in whole or in part) rather unproblematically compatible (Boucher, 2020; Hempel, 2019; Thompson, 2012; Thompson, 2009, pp. 10–11).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

With Bloch against Žižek: Towards a critique of decisionist political theology

Paukstat

2021

Constellations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

From Bloch’s utopian surplus to Žižek’s fantasmatic spectre: Re-evaluating the interplay of utopia and ideology

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Venturing beyond Koselleck’sErwartungshorizont: on the category of the utopian

Venturing beyond Koselleck’sErwartungshorizont: on the category of the utopian

With Bloch against Žižek: Towards a critique of decisionist political theology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About