I have read this book all the way through the final page, but I am far from done with it. I will never be done with it. For, as Blanchot says, "The book: a ruse by which writing goest toward the absence of the book." (p. 424)
I cannot help but start from Jean-Luc Nancy's protests against accusations of Blanchot being mystical and nihilistic (Multiple Arts; The Muses II (Stanford, CA; 2006); p. 85). I protest, but not because Blanchot is not a mystic, but because the word is thrown out by these erstwhile critics as an epithet. For me a mystic is one of the four figures that are essential for demarcating a human endeavor worthy of the name. Blanchot is a mystic in that his work breaks out of the everyday, the set, commonplace and utilitarian to the "ungraspable ambiguity" that opens onto "being's inertia," its foregone onwarding, toward which the human reaches its extremity and its strangely demarcated way. He is a mystic because he does the work, and places into circulation the precept and precursor on which a course of vibrancy and generativity can take shape.
It is not surprising that such a stance and such work escapes the comprehension of many, or that it frightens those who get the words and syntax but cannot place themselves in motion synchronous with Blanchot (or Nancy -- the two are synchronous and syncopate, without repeating together).
This book publishes late writings in Blanchot's career. They are crisp and without exposition in casting out into word-forms what always exceeds these words, always originates what words set into play. I call this a "destinational comprehension: a "region" of psychic/somatic formation that arises in order to generate a locus of human gathering, a gathering most at home when in estrangement, new lands of newly strange and potent, and as yet unnamed forces. (If Blanchot is anti-Semetic -- another charge vehemently protested by Nancy -- he is one in the way of Moses, shattering the tablets of what beckons to become law in order to form a new people who then seek out a new law, one of generative ventures into the art work: "the unique, ineffable and untranslatable." (p. 231), "the voice, but not speech..., the reverberation of a space opening onto the outside." (p. 258). He opposes any and all rigid formulation as having any value for generative human life. He writes as a Jew, always venerating the Exodus, reaching out even into the desert, toward that destination that cannot be reached, Hearing (O Israel) that word that is never comprehended. See Pt II, Chr V; and Pt III, Ch XVIII.
Calling Blanchot a "critic" or "social commentator" is like calling Frank Lloyd Wright a home builder. Blanchot is marking out new dimensions of human capability, right in the heart, as Nancy might say, of the most strident and difficult, the most obscure and ambiguous of human endeavors. His company -- Bataille, Sade, Nietzsche (right in the middle of the work), Mallarme (throughout the work), Rimbaud, Kafka and Mann among others -- bespeaks of the courage of this journey (for all involved). Hegel forms the backdrop and foil, and Heidegger's shadow looms silently over the the work.
The paradox of the work is that while extolling speech, it inscribes what is only now becoming writable -- though his efforts, and the efforts of his companions, Nancy, Foucault, even Deleuze. But written, these words stand not just for affect, but to set in motion a new encounter that offers a return and a new gathering, and not just once, but as a way, a as a demarcating of a re-envisioned human endeavor (the exigency set before us after the 20th century's catastrophes of wars, holocaust and self-satisfied ignorance, bigotry and power grabs).
The book amazes me. It may be the one that I rescue from the fire. It shows the benefit of keeping good company, and since a book cannot refuse the company that enters its sway, I will keep company with it.