ABSTRACT

While Deleuze’s To have done with judgement’ modifies the title of Antonin Artaud’s essay and radio play ‘To have done with the judgement of God’, in no way does he alter its sentiment.2 Likewise, other than introducing God as an object for his scorn, Artaud’s critique of judgement differs little from that of Deleuze. Artaud campaigns against God, for he considers him to encompass all conditions of judgement, including man’s3 habitual practice of judging and being judged. As he is transcendent, rational and eternal, God epitomises the very form of judgement. Moreover, God presupposes an ideal against which everything is measured, making of judgement the confirmation of an obligation, or the settling of a debt. In relation to Artaud’s essay, Deleuze’s title underscores rather than ignores the omnipotence of God’s judgement. Such is its ubiquity, that evocation of his name becomes superfluous. In other words, judgement functions effectively whether or not it relates to God. Thus it matters less that the judgement to be confronted is abstract or divine than that, whether it is in the hands of man or God, judgement is a transcendent, inveterate and formidable opponent.