In our very first author interview we talk to Will Buckingham, author of Levinas, Storytelling and Anti-Storytelling, an exploration of philosophical storytelling in the work of the French-Lithuanian philosopher Emmanuel Levinas, published by Bloomsbury on February 14th. Will is a writer of many talents; as well as philosophy books, he has written both fiction and children's books, and you can read his personal blog at http://willbuckingham.com/. We were keen to find out a little more about his philosophical interests and the inspiration behind his book.
"As a novelist as well as a philosophy writer... for me writing does involve a kind of delight. I think that one of the greatest pleasures is the pleasure of discovery, the fascination of giving shape to thoughts that you had not yet known how to think, until you had sat down to write them."
As a writer of philosophy (rather than as a reader, where perhaps my interests are more eclectic), I'm particularly intersted in ethics. However, I see ethics as being far more than a body of theory. What I'm really interested in is the ways in which it is possible to give shape to human lives and human action, and how it might be possible to live a little more kindly, generously and graciously. Here I don't think that the Western philosophical tradition has a monopoly, and so I've long been interested in other approaches to philosophy, for example those stemming from the Buddhist traditions and, more recently, the rich resources of Chinese thought.
It's about the ethical questions provoked by stories and storytelling, questions that I tackle through an exploration of the complex and intriguing work of the philosopher Emmanuel Levinas.
A long time ago. I started reading Levinas for purely personal reasons perhaps thirteen or fourteen years ago, because he seemed to be saying something urgent about the business of existence and, in particular, about the nature of our relationships with others. Later I did a PhD and studied Levinas intensely, and a few years later I put my thoughts in order for this book.
It's fairly straightforward, I think. "Levinas," of course, refers to Levinas. "Anti-storytelling" is about the way in which Levinas raises tricky questions about the ways in which storytelling and narrative may be used to betray the demands of ethics. And the "storytelling" in the title is probably more about my response to this, an attempt to find a way of holding out for the importance, or even the inescapability, of thinking in terms of stories when talking about ethics.
There are certain philosophers who are suspicious of enjoyment, or for whom enjoyment is, at least, not the whole story. But I am generally less inclined to suspicion, and—as a novelist as well as a philosophy writer—for me writing does involve a kind of delight. I think that one of the greatest pleasures is the pleasure of discovery, the fascination of giving shape to thoughts that you had not yet known how to think, until you had sat down to write them.
The book is, in some ways, quite technical; but at the same time, I've tried to write with a measure of style, so that it might be both pleasurable and engaging, as well as saying things that I think are genuinely important. I'm aware that different readers may approach it for different purposes; but my general "tip" for reading—whatever the book, and for whatever reason you might be reading it—is this: read creatively, and remember that there's no single right way to read a book.
China and Chinese thought are increasingly preoccupying me, partly in connection with a large-scale fiction project I am working with, but also for reasons that are more strictly philosophical. In terms of my work in philosophy, I'm currently working on a book that picks up on the theme of tragedy in Levinas, Storytelling and Anti-Storytelling. I won't say too much, but my argument is more or less that one particular unhappiness that afflicts the Western philosophical tradition is the habit of seeing the world as inherently tragic. So the book I'm working on aims to be a response to this, and draws on philosophical sources from the West as well as from traditions more further afield, in particular Cinese and Buddhist sources.
Good philosophers and good dinner guests are not the same thing; so there are philosophers I love for their philosophy, but who I wouldn't want in my house, and philosophers who would be charming guests even if I am not tremendously excited by their philosophy. I think that David Hume would probably be good fun to have dinner with, so he might be high on my list—he is both interesting for his philosophy and was apparently quite well-socialised, which is not true of all philosophers.