446 Jacques Derrida 1984–2004
his candidacy, though this would involve a somewhat convoluted
strategy:
Rather than presenting you in terms of pure quality, I feel it
will be useful for me to set out my position in terms of the big
choices that are worrying certain of my colleagues: showing
that you are the antagonist they need to develop their own
thinking, in a situation of dialogue that one needs to realize is
the innermost vocation of the Collège.^18In January 1991, Bourdieu and Bonnefoy felt that the situation
had become more favourable. Derrida needed to prepare his ‘state-
ment of qualifi cations and published work’ over the summer so that
his candidacy could go forward in November.^19 Unfortunately,
the ‘grand project’ failed. Sensing the diffi culties, Bourdieu sug-
gested to his colleagues that they admit Derrida and Bouveresse
at the same time: surely it would be a good idea to welcome to the
Collège de France these two very diff erent currents of contempor-
ary philosophy? Only recently, after all, both Michel Foucault and
Jules Vuillemin had been professors there. His eff orts were in vain:
while Bouveresse’s candidacy succeeded without much diffi culty,
Derrida’s then encountered such opposition that it was impos-
sible to present him offi cially. According to Didier Eribon, ‘It left
Bourdieu feeling very bitter. He was actually pretty furious about
this debacle (“I really let them walk all over me like a bloody fool,”
he kept telling me at that time). And he was saddened and dismayed
that he hadn’t managed to get Derrida elected.’^20
Needless to say, Derrida was even more disappointed: he was
cross with Bourdieu for luring him into this sticky situation, which
brought back unhappy memories of Nanterre. This time, he fi nally
realized that he could expect nothing from the French university
system.
While this failure caused few ripples, another controversy hit the
headlines soon afterwards. In March 1992, the announcement that
Derrida was to receive an honorary doctorate from the University
of Cambridge provoked an outcry. There had not been such a spec-
tacular academic showdown since Margaret Thatcher had been
refused an honorary doctorate by the rival university, Oxford, in
- The polemic was soon being splashed across the media.
On Saturday 9 May 1992, an open letter was published in The
Times, under the heading ‘A question of honour’. It was signed by
a score of philosophers from various countries, including one of
the major fi gures of American analytic philosophy, Willard Quine.
Derrida’s eternal enemy, Ruth Marcus, naturally played an active
part in this campaign. But the signatories also included the famous