254 Derrida 1963–1983
the houses, closed or left with their doors open, emptying of
their residents swept away by a river of cars and pedestrians
through streets restored to their ‘profound yesterdays’ as
roads, traced in an immemorial past by the great migrations.^59The text comes to a more serene ending, with Levinas acknow ledging
that he neither can or will ‘prolong the trajectory of a thought in
another direction than that in which its word [verbe] is dissemi-
nated’, and that he is even less inclined to indulge in ‘the ridiculous
ambition of “improving” a true philosopher’. ‘To come across him
on his path is already a good thing, and it is probably the very mode
of the encounter in philosophy. While emphasizing the fundamental
importance of the questions asked by Derrida, we wanted to express
the pleasure of a contact at the heart of a chiasmus.’^60
Derrida, who had become increasingly interested in Levinas’s
work since the fi rst long study he had written on it, nearly ten
years earlier, wished to remember only the things in this article
that brought them close to one another. He immediately wrote to
thank him:
Dear friend,
From the bottom of my heart (of the chiasm), thank you.
Allow me to tell you quite simply that your generosity has
touched me – that you know [.. .] that we dwell together in, I
will not say the same, but a strangely refi ned X, an enigmatic
affi nity. When all the landmarks disappear (cultural, historical,
philosophical, institutional), when everything is ‘deconstructed
and desolate’ by war, this austere complicity is – for me – vital,
the last sign of life.61*A few weeks after this special issue of L’Arc, Fayard published the
fi rst book entirely devoted to Derrida. Écarts had been organized
by Jean Ristat and brought together four essays: ‘The throw of
the dice/D.’s move/and (is) Judas’ by Lucette Finas, ‘An “unheim-
lich” philosopher’ by Sarah Kofman, ‘A double strategy’ by Roger
Laporte and ‘Marginal note on a text in progress’ by Jean-Michel
- Derrida alluded to his article several times in their later correspondence. On 6
March 1976, he wrote to Levinas: ‘I don’t express properly, or enough, how touched
I am by the way you send me your texts, and everything they give me to read, to
think. Forgive me. The strange relationship that you have so lucidly and generously
defi ned, “contact at the heart of a chiasmus”, is still for me a living experience.
Especially since, on this chiasmus – and such is the logic of the chiasmus – I feel
unstable enough to pass over, often, to your side. [.. .] Across the distance, the
silences, the dispersion, all the diffi culties that make encounters so rare, please
believe in my proximity, very attentive and very friendly, very cordial – for I am sure
that at the heart of the chiasmus the heart must always prefer itself.’