366 Jacques Derrida 1984–2004
decisively. Althusser had told us that he wanted to make his
big come-back, hiring La Mutualité* to organize a meeting
on ‘Communism today’. We were terrifi ed at this idea, since it
would rekindle all the old hostilities. But Louis wouldn’t listen
to reason. Derrida and I knew from experience that there was
no other solution than to have him hospitalized before the
depressive phase began. But, in order to avoid the risks and
burdens of a long-term internment, we needed to persuade
Althusser to ask for himself to be hospitalized. In spite of all
my eff orts, I hadn’t managed to persuade him. Derrida suc-
ceeded, after just one meeting, which speaks volumes about the
relationship they had. I honestly think that nobody else could
have managed.^34In spite of ever heavier responsibilities, and ever more fre-
quent trips abroad, Derrida continued to visit Althusser regularly.
Sometimes they would go for walks together in the Père-Lachaise
cemetery, very close to where he lived. The exchanges of ideas
between them were freer and deeper than before. Althusser had
started to read or reread Nietzsche, Husserl, and Heidegger. When
he was in reasonable shape, he enjoyed discussing them with
Derrida, as the latter related in his interview with Michael Sprinker:
Althusser was always fascinated with Husserl and Heidegger
without his having ever given any public sign for this fascina-
ton. [.. .] For Althusser, if I may be allowed to say it in such a
brutal way, Heidegger is the great unavoidable thinker of this
century. [.. .] how many times did he say to me during the last
years in the hospital: ‘Listen, you’ve got to talk to me about
Heidegger. You’ve got to teach me Heidegger.’ [.. .] Heidegger
was a great (oral) reference point for him and [.. .] he was never
one of those who tried to denigrate or disqualify Heidegger’s
thought, even for the political reasons of which you are aware.
But you are very well aware that a certain confi guration,
even a reciprocal fascination-repulsion between Marxism and
Heideggereanism is one of the most signifi cant phenomena
of this century. And we have not fi nished meditating on it,
assuming that we have seriously begun to do so.^35In March 1985, just as Michel Deguy was trying in vain to get
Derrida onto the Gallimard list, the latter renewed contact with
Michel Delorme, who ran the Galilée publishing house – he had
- A conference centre in the fi fth arrondissement of Paris. – Tr.