Tzvetan Todorov (1939–2017)
Author of The Conquest of America: The Question of the Other
About the Author
Tzvetan Todorov was born in Sofia, Bulgaria on March 1, 1939. He did his undergraduate studies at the University of Sofia and then moved to France to pursue postgraduate work. He completed his doctorate at the School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences in 1966 and he began teaching at the show more National Center for Scientific Research in 1968. In 1983, he helped found the Center for Arts and Language Research, involving scholars from both institutions. He was a literary theorist and historian. He wrote numerous books including The Fantastic: A Structural Approach to a Literary Genre, The Conquest of America: The Question of the Other, On Human Diversity, Facing the Extreme: Moral Life in the Concentration Camps, A French Tragedy: Scenes of Civil War Summer 1944, The New World Disorder: Reflections of a European, and Fear of the Barbarians: Beyond the Clash of Civilizations. He died of multiple system atrophy, a progressive brain disorder, on February 7, 2017 at the age of 77. (Bowker Author Biography) show less
Series
Works by Tzvetan Todorov
Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Sciences of Language (Softshell Books) (1972) — Author — 148 copies, 1 review
On Human Diversity: Nationalism, Racism, and Exoticism in French Thought (1989) 107 copies, 1 review
A French Tragedy: Scenes of Civil War, Summer 1944 (Contemporary French Culture and Society) (1994) 34 copies, 1 review
Fantastique! : l'estampe visionnaire de Goya à Redon [cat. exp., Paris, Petit Palais, du 1er octobre 2015-17 jar 2016] (2015) 5 copies
Estruturalismo e poética 5 copies
L'arte nella tempesta. L'avventura di poeti, scrittori e pittori nella rivoluzione russa (2017) 3 copies
O Discurso da Poesia 2 copies
Recherches semantiques 2 copies
Pensée de Rousseau 1 copy
KONKUISTA E AMERIKËS 1 copy
Associated Works
The Possibility of Hope [2007 film] — Philosopher and Historian — 3 copies
Tagged
Common Knowledge
- Canonical name
- Todorov, Tzvetan
- Other names
- Тодоров, Цветан
- Birthdate
- 1939-03-01
- Date of death
- 2017-02-07
- Gender
- male
- Education
- University of Sofia (M.A.) (philology) (1961)
University of Paris, Doctorat de troisième cycle (1966)
University of Paris, Doctorat ès lettres (1970) - Occupations
- philosopher
historian
critic - Organizations
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
- Awards and honors
- Bronze Medal from Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (1974)
Prix Jean Jacques Rousseau (1991)
Prix Ch. Veillon (1998)
Prix Nonino (2002)
Ordre des Arts et des Lettres (Officier)
American Philosophical Society (1998) (show all 13)
American Academy of Arts and Sciences (2007)
Prix Charles Lévêque
Prince of Asturias Award for Social Sciences (2008)
Wayne C. Booth Award (2015)
Prix Grinzane Cavour (2007)
Spinoza Prize (2004)
Prix Maujean (1989) - Relationships
- Woerkens, Martine van (ex-spouse)
Huston, Nancy (ex-spouse) - Short biography
- Tzvetan Todorov was a Bulgarian born historian, cultural critic and essayist who lived in France from 1963 until his death February 7, 2017, in Paris at age 77. After his pioneering early work on literary theory, he chose to explore issues of human diversity, of universalism vs. relativism and of human behavior in extreme situations. He did this with erudition, balance, and a sense of compassion - not to mention extraordinary productivity. Dr. Todorov published more than 30 books, including The Poetics of Prose (1971), Introduction to Poetics (1981), The Conquest of America (1982), Mikhail Bakhtin: The Dialogical Principle (1984), Facing the Extreme: Moral Life in the Concentration Camps (1991), On Human Diversity (1993), Hope and Memory (2000), and Imperfect Garden: The Legacy of Humanism (2002). He was a member of the Conseil National des Programmes au Ministère de l'Education Nationale and has served as visiting professor at several universities, including Harvard, Yale, Columbia and the University of California, Berkeley. His honors include the prizes Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1991), Charles Veillon (1998), Nonino (2002), Spinoza (2004), Grinzane Cavour (2007) and Prince of Asturias (2008); he also was an Officer of the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres. He was a Doctor honoris causa of the Universities of Sofia, Liège, Mannheim and the American University in Paris, a Chevalier of the Légion d'honneur and an honorary member of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences. Dr. Todorov held the title of Directeur de recherches honoraire at CNRS, Paris at the time of his death.
- Cause of death
- multiple system atrophy
- Nationality
- Bulgaria (birth)
France (naturalized 1973) - Birthplace
- Sofia, Bulgaria
- Places of residence
- Paris, France
- Place of death
- Paris, France
- Map Location
- Bulgaria
Members
Reviews
It is always difficult to know how to judge books that were published several decades ago. There is a lot wrong with this book, but it was revolutionary enough when it was published to have influenced the field ever since. So first the positive moves:
Todorov was one of the first people to portray Christopher Columbus as anything other than a genius and a hero. In The Conquest of America he comes off as a religious fanatic trying to raise money for a Crusade no one is interested, and as dead show more set on imposing his vision of reality on the world despite all empirical evidence (as for instance, when he lands on yet another island and insists that he has found the mainland even though the inhabitants keep saying it is an island. He makes his whole crew swear an oath that it is the mainland and that anyone who says otherwise will have their tongue cut off.) Todorov is also one of the first people to move beyond the idea that because Cortez had guns and horses he had to win, even though he was vastly outnumbered.
And the negatives:
In order to determine why Cortez won even though he was so badly outnumbered, Todorov turns to semiotics--the study of signs and symbols. He is especially interested in language. Basically, his argument is that because the Aztecs do not have a phonetic alphabet they are unable to improvise. Aztec communication is ritualized and directed at the world, Spanish communication is improvisational and directed at man. Thus Cortez is able to understand the Aztecs better than they are able to understand him enabling him to use their rituals and symbols against the Aztecs and ultimately triumph. The problem with this is that it is the same old Europeans are more rational/smarter/advanced than the Aztecs therefore they won argument wrapped up in new paper. It takes the Conquistadors post facto descriptions of the invasion at face value. show less
Todorov was one of the first people to portray Christopher Columbus as anything other than a genius and a hero. In The Conquest of America he comes off as a religious fanatic trying to raise money for a Crusade no one is interested, and as dead show more set on imposing his vision of reality on the world despite all empirical evidence (as for instance, when he lands on yet another island and insists that he has found the mainland even though the inhabitants keep saying it is an island. He makes his whole crew swear an oath that it is the mainland and that anyone who says otherwise will have their tongue cut off.) Todorov is also one of the first people to move beyond the idea that because Cortez had guns and horses he had to win, even though he was vastly outnumbered.
And the negatives:
In order to determine why Cortez won even though he was so badly outnumbered, Todorov turns to semiotics--the study of signs and symbols. He is especially interested in language. Basically, his argument is that because the Aztecs do not have a phonetic alphabet they are unable to improvise. Aztec communication is ritualized and directed at the world, Spanish communication is improvisational and directed at man. Thus Cortez is able to understand the Aztecs better than they are able to understand him enabling him to use their rituals and symbols against the Aztecs and ultimately triumph. The problem with this is that it is the same old Europeans are more rational/smarter/advanced than the Aztecs therefore they won argument wrapped up in new paper. It takes the Conquistadors post facto descriptions of the invasion at face value. show less
A very short, dense, yet highly readable book that is well worth picking up. As the title implies, this is not an in-depth exposition or analysis of enlightenment philosophy. Rather it is a polemic - an argument for the importance of enlightenment ideas in the world today. Along the way Todorov provides many original, perhaps provocative and always thought provoking insights into what enlightenment philosophy really means, along with a litany of criticisms of the enlightenment to which he show more provides a vigorous response. Maybe I enjoyed this book so much precisely because Todorov provides such a compelling case for much of what I believe and articulates it so well. But considering how central the enlightenment is in modern discourse, I would recommend this book to anyone with a modicum of curiosity about contemporary political and moral thinking.
Side note: I heard an interview with Todorov on Philosophy Bites which got me interested in the book. When I went to find it, I was shocked to discover I had to order this from Amazon UK - for some bizarre reason it's not available in US. show less
Side note: I heard an interview with Todorov on Philosophy Bites which got me interested in the book. When I went to find it, I was shocked to discover I had to order this from Amazon UK - for some bizarre reason it's not available in US. show less
It is an understatement to call the Nazi and Soviet death camps "outposts of hell on earth", as we know from the testimony of a powerful body of witnesses. Todorov looks inside these camps, and there he finds hope for all humankind, arguing that innumerable instances of heroism, self-sacrifice, and caring show that "moral reactions are spontaneous, omnipresent, and eradicable only with the greatest violence" and that "morality cannot disappear without a radical mutation of the human show more species". Even in a regime of terror and depersonalisation, the ordinary virtues survived and sometimes even flourished, Todorov maintains. His wide-ranging study bears him out, and it makes for fascinating reading.
First published in early 1999, this historical study of the human capacity for compassion focuses on the Nazi concentration camps and the Soviet gulag. Using eyewitness accounts, Todorov creates a portrait of the conduct of those who ran the camps and those who were the victims revealing dignity, care, compassion and solidarity. show less
First published in early 1999, this historical study of the human capacity for compassion focuses on the Nazi concentration camps and the Soviet gulag. Using eyewitness accounts, Todorov creates a portrait of the conduct of those who ran the camps and those who were the victims revealing dignity, care, compassion and solidarity. show less
Facing the Extreme is an impressive book: impressive in its ambition, and in the breadth of thinking and observation and analysis by the author. Based on a detailed reading of the literature by camp survivors, mainly Nazi but also Stalinist, Todorov seeks to "use the extreme as an instrument, a sort of magnifying glass that can bring into better focus certain things that in the normal course of human affairs remain blurry". Following Primo Levi, Todorov believes that no human experience, no show more matter how exceptional, is without meaning and that fundamental values, even if not positive, can be deduced from that experience. Todorov argues that it is possible, "to take the extreme experience of the camps as a basis from which to reflect on moral life, not because moral life was superior in the camps but because it was more visible and thus more telling there".
Todorov constructs a typology of virtues and values. The former he divides into heroic, i.e. actions taken on behalf of humanity or nations, actions that are abstract and taken for ideas; ordinary virtues are those that provide their own justification and are taken for the sake of an individual human being. He expands upon three ordinary virtues: caring for individuals, dignity; and the life of the mind. Values are divided those that are vital, i.e. actions required to save one's own life or furthering the individual's well-being, and those that are moral, i.e. actions that pertain to something more precious than life itself, where staying human is more important than staying alive.
Todorov acknowledges that extreme measures can destroy the social contract at its very foundations and human beings are then reduced to animal reactions. But, he argues:
"...what exactly does this observation mean? Does it reflect the fundamental truth about human nature, that morality is but a superficial convention jettisoned at the first opportunity? On the contrary, what it demonstrates is that moral reactions are spontaneous, omnipresent, and eradicable only with the greatest violence."
Todorov disagrees with the popular version of Hobbes's doctrine. He argues that, "except under extreme constraint, human beings are prompted, among other things, to communicate with one another, to help one another, and to distinguish good from evil."
Todorov thinks about the nature of evil and its perpetrators. He agrees with Primo Levi that "Monsters exist, but they are too few in number to be truly dangerous. More dangerous are the common man". He argues that to explain evil on the magnitude of the camps, one must look not to the character of the individual, but to that of the society; the explanation will be political and social, not psychological and individual: "The Germans, the Russians, and all the others who committed these unspeakable crimes are human beings, no different from any others; what sets them apart is the political regime under which they lived". He then goes on to examine the nature of totalitarianism and how it imposes its own morality under which, through habituation and inurement, atrocities were, in fact, seen to be good things.
On the perpetrators, Todorov follows Arendt on the banality of evil, in the sense that this is precisely what made it so dangerous: it was so easy that no exceptional human qualities were required for it to come into being. And, in addition, "For evil to come into being, the actions of a few are not sufficient; it is also necessary that the vast majority stand aside, indifferent; of such behavior, as we know well, we are all of capable". Evil is not accidental; it is always there at hand, ready to manifest itself: "All it needs to emerge is for us to do nothing".
These notes cannot do justice to the breadth of this book and Todorov's cogitations upon nonviolence and resignation, forms of combat, the perils of judgement, and telling, judging, understanding. This is a book that requires serious re-reading and thinking.
The final word to Todorov on why it is important to consider these questions:
"The first duty of the witness is to tell, so that the truth can be established. The task of the judge is to judge, and, in so doing, uphold the principles of justice. But even these things are not enough. Ultimately an effort must be made at all costs to understand. If we are content to tell the event without trying to relate it to other events that have occurred in the past or are taking place now, we turn it into a monument. This is better than ignoring it, of course, but that doesn't mean it's enough. Our memory of the camps should become an instrument that informs our capacity to analyze the present; for this to happen, we must recognize our own image in the caricature reflected back at us by the camps, regardless of how much this mirror deforms and how painful the recognition is. Only then can we tell ourselves that, at least from the viewpoint of humanity, the horrible experience of the camps will not have been in vain, that it contains lessons for us, who think we live in a completely different world. The act of telling events of the past without seeking to understand them and without allowing them to be compared with other events, past and present, amounts to a consecration of the horror. To reject that consecration does not mean we wish to turn this page of history. Instead, it means that we have finally decided to read it."
(Jan/06) show less
Todorov constructs a typology of virtues and values. The former he divides into heroic, i.e. actions taken on behalf of humanity or nations, actions that are abstract and taken for ideas; ordinary virtues are those that provide their own justification and are taken for the sake of an individual human being. He expands upon three ordinary virtues: caring for individuals, dignity; and the life of the mind. Values are divided those that are vital, i.e. actions required to save one's own life or furthering the individual's well-being, and those that are moral, i.e. actions that pertain to something more precious than life itself, where staying human is more important than staying alive.
Todorov acknowledges that extreme measures can destroy the social contract at its very foundations and human beings are then reduced to animal reactions. But, he argues:
"...what exactly does this observation mean? Does it reflect the fundamental truth about human nature, that morality is but a superficial convention jettisoned at the first opportunity? On the contrary, what it demonstrates is that moral reactions are spontaneous, omnipresent, and eradicable only with the greatest violence."
Todorov disagrees with the popular version of Hobbes's doctrine. He argues that, "except under extreme constraint, human beings are prompted, among other things, to communicate with one another, to help one another, and to distinguish good from evil."
Todorov thinks about the nature of evil and its perpetrators. He agrees with Primo Levi that "Monsters exist, but they are too few in number to be truly dangerous. More dangerous are the common man". He argues that to explain evil on the magnitude of the camps, one must look not to the character of the individual, but to that of the society; the explanation will be political and social, not psychological and individual: "The Germans, the Russians, and all the others who committed these unspeakable crimes are human beings, no different from any others; what sets them apart is the political regime under which they lived". He then goes on to examine the nature of totalitarianism and how it imposes its own morality under which, through habituation and inurement, atrocities were, in fact, seen to be good things.
On the perpetrators, Todorov follows Arendt on the banality of evil, in the sense that this is precisely what made it so dangerous: it was so easy that no exceptional human qualities were required for it to come into being. And, in addition, "For evil to come into being, the actions of a few are not sufficient; it is also necessary that the vast majority stand aside, indifferent; of such behavior, as we know well, we are all of capable". Evil is not accidental; it is always there at hand, ready to manifest itself: "All it needs to emerge is for us to do nothing".
These notes cannot do justice to the breadth of this book and Todorov's cogitations upon nonviolence and resignation, forms of combat, the perils of judgement, and telling, judging, understanding. This is a book that requires serious re-reading and thinking.
The final word to Todorov on why it is important to consider these questions:
"The first duty of the witness is to tell, so that the truth can be established. The task of the judge is to judge, and, in so doing, uphold the principles of justice. But even these things are not enough. Ultimately an effort must be made at all costs to understand. If we are content to tell the event without trying to relate it to other events that have occurred in the past or are taking place now, we turn it into a monument. This is better than ignoring it, of course, but that doesn't mean it's enough. Our memory of the camps should become an instrument that informs our capacity to analyze the present; for this to happen, we must recognize our own image in the caricature reflected back at us by the camps, regardless of how much this mirror deforms and how painful the recognition is. Only then can we tell ourselves that, at least from the viewpoint of humanity, the horrible experience of the camps will not have been in vain, that it contains lessons for us, who think we live in a completely different world. The act of telling events of the past without seeking to understand them and without allowing them to be compared with other events, past and present, amounts to a consecration of the horror. To reject that consecration does not mean we wish to turn this page of history. Instead, it means that we have finally decided to read it."
(Jan/06) show less
Lists
Awards
You May Also Like
Associated Authors
Statistics
- Works
- 104
- Also by
- 17
- Members
- 4,154
- Popularity
- #6,056
- Rating
- 4.1
- Reviews
- 41
- ISBNs
- 470
- Languages
- 19
- Favorited
- 6