MARIANA DI STELLA PIAZZOLLA

It is not fortuity that the feminine participates in Jacques Derrida's thought of hospitality, although it is not always considered. Perhaps this is due to the invisibility that characterizes it. According to the philosopher, it is a supplementary hypothesis. Thereby, rather than a cultural contingency, the feminine is elevated to the condition of (im)possibility: a support for what is left out. In this way, this work aims to understand this position in consonance with its aporia. Firstly, it is shown in his early work how Derrida's deconstruction of the Husserlian subjectivity reports an opening in phenomenology that remains, seemingly, closed to the other. This interruption of the subject who stated himself in presence – gaining properties through a sight of the world – reveals the blind man who has the capacity to receive the other. Therewithal, he is displaced towards the woman's blindness, within a movement that does not carry out a simple inversion, as it depends on a temporality in which past-present-future are folded in an instant: messianic time. When analyzing the subjectivity whose sight has been sacrificed afterwards, one realizes that it transcends into the immemorial past, since it is persecuted by an alterity that demands sharing its properties. Losing them becomes a necessity to receive the other, therefore, Derrida compares the subjectivities of Levinas and Pascal. Consequently, a supplementary aspect of sight was found in this tradition, in which external blindness is replaced by the eyes of the heart, whose operability would give access to the trace of the Infinite on the Face of the Other. Therefore, the blind man remains a visionary, because it is preceded by the Augustinian cry. The supplementary of the feminine comes, then, to supplement the sight of the blind man who sees the supernatural light. Associated with the woman's sensibility, the tears are those allow the external eyes neither seeing nor unseeing. The feminine becomes the impossibility of the hospitality: to receive Other it is necessary to be blind and cry. The detour from reason to sensibility results in a necessary discussion of how women and feminine interact in welcome. Derrida, reading Levinas's works, offers two interpretations that are distinguished by the association with the "fact of empirical women" to androcentric hyperbole; and with "the feminine being" to feminist hyperbole. The first reading accuses the deprivations that women suffer as alterity that supports an ethics in which they are not allowed to participate. They are sacrificed, just like the witches, so that men can (con)fraternize. In this interpretation, welcome is treated as work, whose demands for visibility are allocated to the strategies in vogue for the end of women's subordination. But there is another possible of reading: the one that is sensitive in opposition to the intelligible (tearful), the one does not have access to the intuition of essence in contrast to the seer (blind), the one that must be sacrificed in opposition to whom transcends (witch). That's the Feminist Manifesto. It must assume the invisibility of a feminine as a messianic time that returns, without reproducing the same situations of oppression, to bring, with the novelty, freedom.