Out of Darkness, Light
| Author | Ben Berger |
| Published date | 01 April 2009 |
| Date | 01 April 2009 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1474885108100851 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Out of Darkness, Light
Arendt’s Cautionary and Constructive
Political Theories
Ben Berger Swarthmore College
ABSTRACT: Most scholarly interpretations of Hannah Arendt’s political writings
account for her idiosyncratic understanding of politics and freedom in one of two
ways. They interpret Arendt’s more sensational claims about politics either literally or
figuratively, but not in both ways. This essay proposes a new interpretation of Arendt’s
political writings based on a neglected, dichotomous pattern of metaphors in her
collected works. That pattern, once mapped, yields insights into the meaning,
applications, and limitations of Arendt’s controversial political ideals and rhetoric.
Neither a wholly literal nor a wholly figurative interpretation will do; I propose a
reading that makes use of both strategies and gives Arendt her due while
acknowledging her challenges.
KEY WORDS: Arendt, civic republican, freedom, interpretation, plurality, totalitarianism,
visibility
Most Arendt readers are familiar with her depiction of the political realm as the
sole space in which freedom can appear, a realm characterized by the presence of
spontaneous, competitive, non-instrumentally oriented human action and by the
absence of all matters relating to necessity.1Economics, bodily needs, the pursuit
of coercive power, and even emotions such as compassion, love, and pity are ‘out’.
Courage, creativity, desire for distinction, and identity-revealing performances
are ‘in’. Politics thus conceptualized generates a ‘brilliant light’ of freedom and
fulfillment for its participants.2How should we approach these standards for
thinking and talking about politics, which seem impractically restrictive at best
and elitist or exclusionary at worst? Existing scholarly interpretations generally
fall into one of two broad groups, the literal and figurative readings of Arendt’s
political ideals.3
Some literal readers interpret Arendt’s characterizations of politics in the
tradition of civic republican theory, with its praise for active citizenship and
emphasis on civic duty. They accept at face value Arendt’s depiction of political
157
article
Contact address: Ben Berger, Dept of Political Science, Swarthmore College, 500
College Avenue, Swarthmore, PA 19081–1397, USA.
Email: bberger1@swarthmore.edu
EJPT
European Journal
of Political Theory
© SAGE Publications Ltd,
Los Angeles, London, New Delhi,
Singapore and Washington DC
issn 1474-8851, 8(2) 157–182
[DOI: 10.1177/1474885108100851]
participation as constitutive of freedom and the ‘good life’.4Scholars who are
themselves inclined toward civic republican ideals may enlist Arendt’s claims in
support of their commitments.5Other literal readers object to the practical impli-
cations of Arendt’s political prescriptions. Barring economics from the political
realm might conserve the economic status quo and exclude those whose primary
interests involve competition for scarce resources.6Barring bodily concerns might
exclude, among others, a range of feminist voices and issues from political discus-
sion. Prioritizing virtues such as courage and competitiveness might make politics
the domain of a talented elite.7But in spite of such criticisms, most of the literal
readers find more in Arendt’s work to praise than to reject.8
Among those who read Arendt’s ideals figuratively, some point to instances in
which she demonstrates a fairly traditional understanding of political practices –
including the resolution of economic concerns through the use of state power – as
evidence that her idealized political characterizations are not intended literally.9
Perhaps her political rhetoric was simply intentional overstatement aimed at
‘restoring a sense of balance’ when ‘applied to the era’s prejudices, so sated with
subtle sociology and finely tuned economics’.10 Other figurative readers place her
political ideals in the service of a larger project – seeing them, for example, as ‘an
attempt to conjure a magnificent transfiguring illusion, a via gloriosa, and so reha-
bilitate what she called “the empty space” to which humanity had withdrawn after
Auschwitz’.11
My reading incorporates elements of both the literal and figurative readings
because neither type can satisfy completely on its own. Figurative readings that
explain Arendt’s politics as rhetorical overstatement have difficulty accounting for
the dichotomous, metaphorical pattern that I describe in this article. That pattern
shows a strong connection between the description of authentic politics and free-
dom that Arendt praises and the fearsome dangers against which she warns –
warnings that we cannot help but take literally. Strictly literal interpretations
encounter difficulties as well; Arendt probably intended her ideals not as a blue-
print for political reform but as a tribute to human potentials that have been
overlooked or threatened.12 But even that recognition does not free Arendt from
criticism. She is responsible for having warned against fearful conditions but
having proposed political ideals that offer little help in ‘guarding against the
worst’.13 And if her stylized ideals are not intended literally then she purchased
subtlety at the price of clarity and is accountable for the ample confusion sur-
rounding her texts.14
My critique proceeds from a conviction that Arendt’s political writings, prop-
erly clarified, can be fruitfully applied to the study of political participation,
citizen engagement, and democratic institutions. Arendt’s work is so rich and
provocative that we can learn from her missteps as well as her best insights.15 I
begin with her well-known practice of using binary oppositions to draw concep-
tual distinctions – for example, her stark contrast between the public and the
private, the political and the social, and freedom and necessity. I move beyond
European Journal of Political Theory 8(2)
158
To continue reading
Request your trial