Ideology and Utopia in the Twenty-First Century: The Surplus of Meaning in Ricoeur's Dialectical Concept ed. by Stephanie N. Arel and Dan R. Stiver (review)
- Ideology and Utopia in the Twenty-First Century: The Surplus of Meaning in Ricoeur's Dialectical Concept ed. by Stephanie N. Arel and Dan R. Stiver
Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2018. 264 pp. Hardcover, $105, ISBN-13 : 978-1498577298.
Paul Ricoeur's philosophy, including notably the Lectures on Ideology and Utopia (1986), has been rather underappreciated in the contemporary critical theory literature. This is in spite of some excellent attempts to highlight the value of his contribution to the field (see, e.g., Kaplan 2003). In the Lectures on Ideology and Utopia (hereafter "the Lectures") Ricoeur brings two traditionally opposed concepts of ideology and utopia together in a dialectic, a move that is both innovative and radical. While the lectures were first delivered in Chicago back in 1975, they still have something to offer contemporary scholarship in critical theory. Some forty years on, the collection edited by Stephanie Arel and Dan Stiver being reviewed here seeks to provide new insight into the continuing value of the Lectures alongside work that aims to expand the original ideas, all with an eye to how this material might be of value to the contemporary political landscape. This is a laudable aim.
Arel and Stivers's collection offers the reader an opportunity to engage with some genuinely interesting and potentially important scholarship, and I believe it represents a valuable addition to the literature on the Lectures and Ricoeur's [End Page 132] contribution to political theory more broadly. Sadly, however, the book is decidedly uneven in quality and focus, and would have benefited from a stronger editorial hand. There are far too many typos and grammatical issues throughout. Some chapters are particularly poorly written, as if writing tortuous prose is the aspirational sine qua non for contemporary critical scholarship. Many of these same chapters also sadly appear to contribute very little to the field, at least not enough to warrant the battle to understand them. And, finally, I must issue a plea to all working in critical theory: the completely uncritical importation of ideas from unrelated fields, most especially where there is no authorial expertise, is something that really needs to stop. I remain forever perplexed as to why the "critical" in "critical theory" should be switched off so completely when it comes to the importation of ideas from psychology or psychoanalysis, for instance. All that now said, I will concentrate in the remainder of this review on what I think are the genuine highlights of the collection, the chapters that I believe make a substantive contribution to Ricoeur's theory of ideology and utopia and the application of this theoretical stance to contemporary political thinking.
The collection begins with a superb chapter by John Arthos. He deftly explores Ricoeur's political thought, drawing the reader into many of the key debates, while interweaving it with biographical detail, some of which was completely new to me. Arthos is particularly concerned with the intellectual journey taken by Ricoeur from erstwhile radical to the now-familiar role of mediator or—in other words—a journey from ideology critique alone to the dialectical position espoused in the Lectures. Two "durable concepts" are identified as a potential legacy for Ricoeur's political theory and which to some extent frame the remaining chapters: the notion of political paradox (the tension between a desire for freedom and order), and the dialectic of ideology and utopia itself. My only (very minor) criticism is the rather pessimistic endpoint and occasional throwaway lines of critique. My own natural inclination against prevailing and fashionable trends, especially those that are hegemonic within the academy, leads to greater belief in the lasting power of Ricoeur's political philosophy than that expressed by Arthos, and—as an aside—also considerably more skepticism concerning output from the likes of Žižek and his contemporaries that form one example of throwaway critique.
The chapter by Dan Stiver, "Renewing the Period of Effervescence," while at first rather mysteriously titled, is also excellent. He extends Ricoeur's work in the Lectures by...
