2. Philosophy - Stefano Franchi

8
P RELUDE
cheeses, concepts of cheeses, meanings of cheeses, contexts of cheeses, psychologies of
cheeses...”(73). Far from calling things up and bringing them to us, names seem to alienate
them from us, by negating their singularity. Name only repeat the irreducible fracture, the
laceration, the death that separates us from the world. Indeed, could they be the cause of
death itself?
The primary fracture is not just between the self and the world, it also comes between
fellow human beings. In Mr. Palomar communication—and not only denomination—ap-
pears to be impossible. In one of the most beautiful texts of the book, The blackbird’s whis-
tle, Mr. Palomar compares the infinitely monotonous language of the bird—always the
same whistle, identical, rhythmical, unmistakable—with the infinite variety of human lan-
guage. He doubts that any communication between the blackbirds may be established on
such a slim informational basis. At most, the whistle of the bird stands for an existential
affirmation, an “I am here” obstinately repeated. Or perhaps it is just an illusion, the inane
effort to compress into the same sound a whole series of meanings to which the other cannot
but answer—in order to assent, negate, disagree or whatever—with the same identical
sound. It would seem to be a dialogue well below the expressive capacities of human lan-
guage, but a short interaction between Mr. Palomar and his wife, who comes into the garden
to water the flowers, dispels very soon such a comfortable delusion. The dialogue is ex-
tremely short, only a few words—”there they are” “shhh” “it is dry again, since yesterday”
“crooked...for all that, yes, my foot...“ “shhh, you scare them.” Yet, the analytical reflection
of Mr. Palomar does not fail to recognize the unexpressed elements that underlies it, the im-
plicit reproaches and the silent excuses. “It is dry again, since yesterday” means at bottom
“you could take care of the garden as well,” while the grumbles uttered by Mr. Palomar as
an answer are just the usual masculine strategy that opposes its omnipresent activities to
feminine garrulous talk. Deceptive as well is the objectivity of the deixis, of the impera-
tives, of the simplest interjections; those little words almost at the limit of communication
appear overburdened by meaning since they purport to show the proprietary relationship
with nature of each of the conversants. “There they are” means therefore “I was waiting for
them, I know them better than you who only now see and are amazed by them.”The lean