追悼　デヴィッド・グレーバー　

David Graeber and those of us in Japan and Korea

編集部より

 

　追記：当初、英語版のみ掲載していた韓国の方々による追悼文であるが、日本語訳が完了したため（原文のハングルとともに）追加掲載をする運びとなった。非常に胸に迫る４本の追悼文（韓国でのグレーバー「読み」の早さも窺える）をぜひお目通しいだければ幸いである。

 

　なお、これら追悼文は、遅れての掲載となったため、しばらくの間「はじめに」の後に４本続けて掲載させていただくこととした。

 

　また、日本語では「デヴィッド」として記載されることの多い、グレーバーのファースト・ネームであるが、ハングルの表音表記に合わせ、今回の訳文では「デイヴィッド」で統一させていただいたことをお断りしておく。

 

　韓国語からの日本語訳は今政肇氏によるもので、英語訳は今政氏とジェフ・ラザール氏によるものである。お二人に厚く御礼申し上げたい。

2020年11月18日

 

＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿

 

　去る2020年10月11日、9月に急逝したデヴィッド・グレーバーを記念するメモリアル・カーニバルが、グレーバーのパートナーであるニカ・ドゥブロフスキーとグレーバーの友人たちが呼びかけ人となり、全世界で同時多発的に行われた。

 

「彼［グレーバー］には、あたかも5万人の兄弟姉妹と、20万人の親友がいたかのようでした。だからこそ、デヴィッドの追悼カーニバルは、彼がそばにいるように感じたい全ての人に、あらゆるところで空間を開くのです」

 

　と、ニカと友人たちが呼びかけたように、カーニバル当日は、グレーバーの交友範囲の広さやその影響力をあらためて示すかのように、大小さまざまな規模、そしてさまざまな趣向の追悼イベントが文字通り世界各地で催された。ここ日本でも少なくとも６つの場所で追悼イベントが行われ、また、グレーバー追悼の特設サイトには、東アジアで彼と交流のあった人びとによる追悼文が掲載されるに至った。

 

　この「東アジアからの追悼」を企画した今政肇氏、高祖岩三郎氏、仲田教人氏のご厚意により、今回、そこに集まったグレーバーへの追悼文を本サイトに転載させていただくこととなった。お三方には深く感謝申し上げたい。

 

　われわれの知る限り、グレーバーは計３度、東アジアを来訪している。１度目は2006年、次に2008年、そして2009年。この10年ほどの間は彼がこの地に足を踏み入れることはなかったとはいえ、近年、特にここ日本では、グレーバーの再来訪への期待感が非常に高まってきており、また、それは近く実現するはずだった。

 

　今回の追悼文は、主に2008年の反・洞爺湖サミットのために、グレーバーが、マイケル・ハートやマウリツィオ・ラッツァラート、ジョン・ホロウェイ、ハリー・ハルトゥニアン、フランコ・ベラルディなどなど、錚々たるメンバーとともに来日した際に交流をもち、共に闘った人々、そして2009年のグレーバー「東アジアツアー」で、日本そして韓国で対話を重ねた人々を中心に執筆を依頼をし、それを集めたものである。追悼文をご執筆くださり、転載を許可してくださった計17名の皆様にも厚く御礼申し上げたい。

 

　日本語からの英訳は主に高祖岩三郎氏・アリエル・イスラ氏によるもので、韓国語からの英訳は今政肇氏によるものである。

　なお現在、韓国語から日本語への翻訳を鋭意作成中である。今回、韓国の方々の追悼文は英語のみの掲載となるが、日本語訳が完了次第、本ページに追加掲載する予定である。

 

　また、本サイトでは、今回追悼文を掲載した方々以外の、グレーバーと過去に交流した皆様の追悼文や交遊録、証言を引き続き募集していきたい。ご連絡をお待ちしております。　

2020年11月11日

はじめに　今政肇・高祖岩三郎・仲田教人

　デヴィッド・グレーバーが初めて日本と韓国を訪れたのは2006年のことでした。かれはそれ以来、大学や出版産業の狭い世界にとどまることなく、活動家や知識人たちと親密な関係を育んできました。かれは個人的な交流をとおして、さまざまな反権威主義的闘争のつながりをつくり、どこまでも拡がっていくような地図や星座を描いていきました。かれはこの東アジアに住むたくさんのわたしたちの友人であり、同志だったのです。かれとのかけがえのない経験を多言語で共有するために、わたしたち三人は、デヴィッドとともにさまざまな時間を過ごしてきた人びとに声をかけ、二つの文章――短い追悼と長い報告――を書いてもらえないかと頼むことにしました。そのなかには、かれとセミナーや抗議行動をともにした人もいますし、別のかたちの交流をした人もいます。わたしたちは追悼カーニバルまでに、できるだけ多くの短い文章を英語に訳したいと思います。より長い文章についても、近い将来に届けられるよう、作業をつづけていくつもりです。

今政肇
高祖岩三郎
仲田教人

Since his first visit to Japan and Korea in 2006, David Graeber nurtured rapport with activists and intellectuals beyond the narrow confines of academia and the publishing industry. His engagement contributed to creating connectivity among antiauthoritarian struggles by way of personal exchanges, drawing divergent maps and constellations. He was a friend and comrade for many of us in Japan and Korea. In order to share our indispensable experiences with David in multiple languages, three of us have decided to ask those who had spent times with him through seminars, protests and other exchanges to contribute two pieces of writing, a short memoire and a longer account. We are hoping to translate as many short pieces as possible into English by the time of the Carnival; meanwhile, the longer texts will be collected and translated for future distribution.

Hajime Imamasa
Sabu Kohso
Norihito Nakata

李珍景（イ・ジンギョン）

遅ればせながら、デイヴィッド・グレーバーを思いつつ

　私が初めて彼に出会ったのは2009年、スユノモの国際ワークショップでのことだった。しかし、彼と初めから近しかったわけではないことを告白しなければならない。グレーバーのイェール大学での再任用を求める署名活動の際、私がそれに署名をしたことで彼の名前を知ったけれども、アナキズムと私の間には、小さくない距離が存在したのだから。つまり、私は彼がアナキストだから彼に会ったのではなく、アナキストにも関わらず会ったことになる。なぜ会ったのか。友人のためである。私が好きな友人が好きな人だから。「友人の友人は友人」だという友情の等式のために、私は友人として彼に出会った。この等式では、同一性や唯一性よりは、隣接性の連関によって、隣の項がつながるのであるから、趣向や考えが異なっていても、いくらでも異なる人々をつないでくれる。

　考えてみれば、彼と私は正反対の場所にいた。彼は著者の名によって命名されるマルクス主義理論や規律を強要する前衛主義政党を嫌っていたが、私はマルクスという著者の本に巻き込まれ、思いもしなかった生を始め、職業的な革命家の組織が必要だとして、地下運動をしたレーニン主義者だったのだから。彼はフーコー、ドゥルーズをあげながら、最新理論の理論家たちを批判するが、私は現存社会主義の崩壊ののち、レーニンの代わりにドゥルーズ／ガタリの理論から、資本主義とは別の生の可能性を発見した理論家だったから。

　その小さくない距離を間に挟み、私は彼とソウルで一週間討論をした。友情の等式の間から浸透する情動によって距離感は狭まったが、それでも残る距離を間に置いて、次は東京で、それも二度も隣に座って討論した。幸い、距離を越えさせる喜びの引力があって私は彼の言葉と文章をかみしめた。

　それ以降、それぞれの生に導かれ遠く離れてしまった後になってやっと、いや彼が再び会うことの出来ない遥か彼方へと去った後になってやっと、彼の本を読み返し、私は自分自身が彼のいうアナキストだったことを知った。依然として好きな「著者」の本を抱いて生きているが、前衛政党の代わりに贈与に基づいた共同体を通じて自律的で水平な連帯に向かって進もうとするならば、それはアナキズムだと言えるのではないだろうか。そうでなければ、何がアナキズムなのだろうか。依然としてマルクスやドゥルーズのような理論的概念を利用して思考しているが、訪れはしない未来に生を任せる空虚な希望の代わりに、今ここの時空間の中で資本と権力から抜け出した生を構成しようとしているならば、「新しい形式の社会性を創出し、あたかもすでに自由であるかのように行動」する「予示的政治」と何が違うのだろうか。 科学と必然の名によって社会全体を一挙に変える転覆を夢見て、旗を手に国家権力と闘う代わりに、現行の現実の外を想像する想像力の力を信じて資本や国家の外部を考え出す肯定的な離脱を実験しているならば、グレーバーなどの人類学者たちが発見した「原始人のアナキスト政治学」にすでに足を踏み出しているのではないだろうか。マダガスカルでのフィールドワークを終えた後に、やっとマダガスカルの人々がすでに実践していたアナキズムに気づき理解することができたというグレーバーの言葉が突然脳裏に浮かんでくる。遅ればせながら、気づきの中に悲しみと寂しさを呼んでくる。

　いつのことだったか、急須の中にお湯を注ぎながら、茶を淹れている私に向かって、茶を飲みながら中国学者の友人が言った。「茶を飲むことは、時間を飲むことですね。」そうだ！それが茶を飲むことが、コーヒーを飲むことと根本的に異なる点だ。誰かと一緒に茶を飲むとき、私たちは「ともに」の時間を飲むのだ。そのように時間を飲みつつ、「無駄な」言葉を分かちあい、「無駄な」考えを何の目的もなく交わすのだ。彼の横に座ってそうやって茶を飲みたい。彼と一緒に「ともに」の時間を飲みたい。 その剰余の時間の中で、無駄な想像を分かち合いたい。無駄だと非難される生を分かち合いたい。普通は見えないものの中に、何か重要なことを読み取る彼の鋭い目は、その無駄なものの中に何か重要な「可能性」を見つけるだろう。その可能性へと彼は素敵に私たちを再び誘惑するだろう。彼の素敵な誘惑のために尚饗という祭文の形式を借りて、茶を捧げたい。

뒤늦게, 데이비드 그레이버를 생각하며

이 진 경

내가 그를 처음 만났던 건 2009년, <수유+너머> 국제워크숍 때였다. 하지만 그와 처음부터 가까웠던 건 아니었음을 고백해야겠다. 예일대 재임용 문제로 서명을 하면서 이름을 알게 되었지만, 아나키즘이란 당시 나로선 적지 않은 거리가 있었으니까. 그러니 나는 그를 아나키스트여서 만난 게 아니라 아나키스트임에도 만났던 셈이다. 왜? 친구들 때문이다. 내가 좋아하는 친구가 좋아하는 사람이었기 때문이다. ‘친구의 친구는 친구’라는 우정의 등식 때문에 나는 그를 친구로 맞아들였다. 이 등식은 동일성이나 유사성보다는 인접성 연관에 의해 이웃한 항들을 연결하기에, 취향이나 생각이 달라도 얼마든지 다른 사람들을 이어준다.

생각해 보면 그와 나는 정반대 편에 있었다. 그는 저자의 이름으로 명명되는 맑스주의 이론이나 규율을 강요하는 전위주의 정당을 싫어하지만, 나는 맑스라는 저자의 책에 휘말려 뜻하지 않은 삶을 시작했고, 직업적 혁명가 조직이 필요하다며 지하운동을 하던 레닌주의자였으니까. 그는 푸코, 들뢰즈를 거명하며 최신의 이론을 자랑하는 이론가들을 비판하는데, 나는 사회주의 붕괴 이후 레닌 대신 들뢰즈/가타리의 이론에서 다른 삶의 가능성을 발견했던 이론가였으니까.
그 작지 않은 거리를 두고서 나는 그와 서울에서 일주일간 토론했다. 우정의 등식 사이로 스며든 감응(affect) 덕에 많이 축소되었지만 여전히 사라지지 않은 거리를 사이에 두고 도쿄에서, 그것도 두 번이나 나란히 앉아 발표하고 토론했다. 다행히도 거리를 넘어서게 하는 기쁨의 인력이 컸기에 나는 그의 말과 글들을 곱씹었다.

이후 각자의 삶을 따라 멀어진 뒤에야, 아니 어쩌면 그가 다시 만날 수 있는 거리 저편으로 떠난 뒤에야, 그의 책을 다시 읽으며 나는 내가 그가 말하는 아나키스트였음을 알게 되었다. 여전히 좋아하는 ‘저자’들의 책을 끼고 살았지만, 전위정당 대신 증여에 기반한 공동체를 통해 자율적이고 평등주의적 연대를 향해 가고자 한다면, 그게 바로 아나키즘 아니면 무엇일 것인가? 여전히 맑스나 들뢰즈 같은 이들의 이론적 개념을 이용해 사유하고 있지만, 오지 않을 미래에 삶을 맡기는 공허한 희망 대신에 지금 여기의 시공 속에서 자본과 권력에서 벗어난 삶을 구성하고자 하고 있다면, “새로운 형식의 사회성을 창출하여 이미 자유로운 것처럼 행동”하는 ‘예시적 정치’와 무엇이 다를 것인가? 과학과 필연의 이름으로 사회 전체를 단번에 바꾸는 전복을 꿈꾸며 깃발을 들고 국가권력과 대결하는 저항 대신, 현행의 현실 바깥을 상상하는 상상력의 힘을 믿고 자본이나 국가의 외부를 창안하는 긍정적 이탈을 실험하고 있다면, 그레이버나 그의 선배 인류학자가 발견한 ‘원시인의 아나키즘 정치학’에 이미 발을 담그고 있는 것 아닌가? 마다가스카르를 떠난 뒤에야 그들의 아나키즘을 이해할 수 있었다는 그의 말이 불쑥 솟아오르며, 뒤늦은 깨달음 속으로 안타까움과 그리움을 불러들인다.

언젠가 차호(茶壺)에 물을 부으며 차를 내리는 내게, 같이 차를 마시던 중국학자 친구가 말했다. “차를 마시는 것은 시간을 마시는 것이지요.” 맞다! 그것이 차를 마시는 것이 커피를 마시는 것과 근본적으로 다른 점이다. 누군가와 같이 차를 마실 때, 우리는 ‘함께’의 시간을 마시는 것이다. 그렇게 시간을 마시며 ‘쓸데없는’ 말을 나누고 ‘쓸데없는’ 생각을 어떤 목적도 없이 섞는다. 그와 나란히 앉아 그렇게 차를 마시고 싶다. 그와 더불어 ‘함께’의 시간을 마시고 싶다. 그 잉여의 시간 속에서 쓸데없는 상상을 나누고 싶다. 쓸데없다고 비난받는 삶을 나누고 싶다. 보이지 않는 것에서 어떤 중요한 것을 읽어내는 그의 예리한 눈은 필경 그 쓸데없는 것들 속에서 무언가 중요한 ‘가능성’을 찾아낼 것이다. 그 가능성으로 그는 우리를 다시 멋지게 유혹할 것이다. 그의 멋진 유혹을 위해 ‘상향(尙饗)’이라는 제문(祭文)을 형식을 빌어 차를 바치고 싶다.

Thinking of David Graeber, Belatedly

Including the time when we invited David for the International Workshop at our commune Suyu+Nomo in 2009, I met him several times in Korea as well as Japan. I need to confess, however, that I felt this distance from him at first. This was because I felt a not insignificant distance existed between myself and anarchism at the time, even though I had known David through signing the petition to renew his contract with Yale. So perhaps, I can say that I met him not because he was an anarchist but in spite of him being an anarchist.

Why did I do that? Because of friends. He was someone my friends cared for. And I cared for my friends. I received him as a friend, because I believe in the equation of friendship–“a friend’s friend is also a friend.” This equation is in accord with the relation of proximity rather than that of identity or similarity. I believe we can relate to each other in spite of our difference in tastes or thoughts in affirmation of this equation.

Come to think of it, David and I were at opposite poles. David did not like a theory that is named after an author such as Marxism or vanguard party that demanded discipline. I, on the other hand, encountered the books written by Marx when I was young and became embroiled in the unexpected life of becoming an underground Leninist, trying to establish an organization of professional revolutionaries. David was equally critical of the modish theories such as Foucault and Deleuze. In contrast, I was a theorist who had an eye opening experience encountering Deleuze and Guattari in place of Lenin after the collapse of the socialist states.

When we met in Seoul in 2009, we debated for a week with this not-so-small distance between us. Thanks to the affective equation of friendship, we could become closer. We then went on to debate twice in front of the public in Tokyo. All thanks to the joyful attraction David exuded, I came to appreciate his ideas expressed in words and text beyond the preexisting distance.

Each of us then followed our own path in life, never to meet each other again. He went far beyond the distance that can be encompassed in this life. Now that he is gone and I am rereading his books. And I realize belatedly that I have been an anarchist. The kinds of anarchists he spoke of. Yes, I have lived and thought with those books and authors dear to me. But as I have espoused autonomous and horizontal solidarity through building a community based on the principle of gift exchange rather than a vanguard party. If this was not anarchism, what is anarchism? We do still think by making use of theoretical concepts by the likes of Marx and Deleuze. But if we also try to form a life that is beyond capital and the powers that be, here and now, instead of entrusting our lives in the vacant hope for the future that is yet to come, are we not “creating a new form of sociality and acting as if we are already free” in the spirit of prefigurative politics? If we experiment with our affirmative spirit of diversion, believing in the power of imagining the outside beyond capital and state instead of trying to change the entire society in a single revolutionary act by seizing power from the state with a flag in hand in the name of science and truth, are we not already dipping our foot in “the anarchist politics of primitives” that David and his predecessors in anthropology spoke of? As I remember his words that he could understand anarchism of Malagasies after leaving Madagascar, I also feel how belated these realizations were. I dearly miss his presence in these realizations.

Once I was sharing tea with a friend, who was a scholar of China. As I poured hot water into a tea pot, he said, “Isn’t drinking tea like drinking time?” That’s right! This was something that sets apart drinking tea from drinking coffee, I thought. When you drink tea with someone, we drink time in common. Drinking time together, we share “useless” words and thoughts for no particular ends. I wish we could drink tea together like that. I wish we could drink time in common with him. I wish we could share useless imagination with him in such time of surplus. I wish we could share life that would be accused of uselessness by the society with him. But then, even in those moments, he would find important “possibilities,” as he always found importance in things that seemed so ordinary and useless, being the seer that he was. He would then wonderfully attract us yet again toward those possibilities. For that splendid power of attraction, I want to dedicate a cup of tea and beg his spirit to partake in it.

高秉権（コ・ビョングォン）

デイヴィッド・グレーバーの朝食

　デイヴィッドが去ってしまったことは、時間がかなり経った今でも信じがたい。訃報に接して私は、銃弾が貫通してしまったかのように、何の悲しみも感じられないまま、ただどさりと座り込んだ。そして、ある活力、ある喜びが抜け出て行ったのを感じた。

　直接会ったのは、数回でしかない。しかし、彼の名前は常に私にとって活力と喜びを意味した。搾取と抑圧の世界、そして苦痛を受けている人々について語るときでさえ、彼の光輝くアイディアと驚くべき数々の解釈は、人を喜ばせた。彼から「直接行動」について初めて話を聞いたときのことだ。直接行動とは、あたかも既存の権力構造が存在しないかのように行動することであり、私たちがすでに自由なひとびとであるかのように行動することだという言葉を聞いた時、単にその言葉を聞くだけで、まだ行動しようとしているわけでもないにもかかわらず、私の体は自由を感じて喜びに震えた。

　私だけがそうなのではなかった。スユノモでデイヴィッドが、何度か講演をしたとき、私は聴衆の口からこぼれ出る感嘆の声を幾度となく耳にした。ある場面が心に浮かぶ。今にも笑い出しそうな気配に満ちた特有の表情でデイヴィッドはサンタクロースと泥棒について話をした。どちらも煙突から入ってくる。ところでサンタクロースは、あの沢山の贈り物をどこから持ってくるのだろうか。それはもしかして盗んできたんじゃないのか。そう問いかけながら、デイヴィッドは、金持ちの家からぶんどって貧しい家に分け与える義賊の分配システムを資本主義の市場と対比させた。彼が義賊の分配システムを「能力に応じて働き、必要に応じて分ける」という共産主義につなげて語ったとき、皆が笑った。その夜、 デイヴィッドは、 あれやこれやの物語の贈り物を袋から取り出してみせるサンタクロースのようだった。そして、会場に座った私たちは、盗まれてきたものを山のように積んでパーティを開いている泥棒の集まりのようだった。その日、私は私たちのコミューンが実際に無償で持ち寄ったものに溢れていて、それらは全て無償で他の人々に贈られるべきものでもあるということに気づいた。

　デイヴィッドの言葉を理解するためには、とてつもない学問的訓練が必要なわけではなかった。いや、こう言うべきだろう。デイヴィッドは、学問的な訓練を受けていない人たちにも自分の考えを分かりやすく話すことのできる人だった。確か2009年のことだっただろうか。彼にソウルに位置する性的な人身売買から脱出した女性たちの小さなコミューンを紹介したことがある。そこで最後に人々はデイヴィッドに希望を見出せるようにひとこと話して欲しいと言った。デイヴィッドは現在の世界を支配し搾取している機械的な政治について話した。彼はその機械的な政治が、最近あちこちで故障を起こしていると言った。まさにこの場所のように人々がお互いをケアする場所で、その機械は故障を起こしてばかりいるんだと、だからまさにここがその希望を作る場所なのだと。人々は笑い歓呼した。

　デイヴィッドの概念は、現実の運動の中でよく作動した。その意味で彼の概念は、アカデミアの自閉的な回路でのみ流通する一般の学者たちの概念とは違っていた。十年以上前に、私は大型スーパーでストライキをしている労働者たちと話をしていた時に、彼の「解釈労働 (interpretive labor) 」という概念を紹介したことがあった。労働者たちは、この概念が何を意味しているかを、自分たちの経験からすぐに見出した。別に何か説明をする必要もなかった。最近では、障害者の運動家たちと彼のいう「ブルシットジョブ」について話しあった。私たちは今、重度の障害者に職を要求する闘争をしているが、デイヴィッドのおかげで私たちは私たちの闘いの意味を新たに認識することができた。私たちは雇用を守る名目で、企業に莫大な公的資金を投入する政府に対して、企業の利潤創出には寄与しても、社会的には何の意味もない仕事、それだけでなく社会と自然を破壊する仕事、そんな仕事を守るために金を使うなと主張している。そのようなところに金を使う代わりに、社会的な意味と価値、連帯を創出する障害者の活動（文化活動はもちろんのこと社会的な差別と闘う路上闘争に至るまでの全て）の公共性を認め、その活動に対する賃金を支給せよという闘争を起こした。この闘争は最近かなりの成果をあげた。

　このようにデイヴィッドの言葉を聞いたり読んだりすることで、問題が新しく見え、今とは違った形態の運動、別の形態の生を試みたい気持ちになるのだ。突然、去ってしまった彼を追悼する今のこの瞬間にも、私にはなぜか悲しい考えではなく、喜ばしい考え、喜ばしい記憶が浮かんできて仕方がない。

　スユノモが解体したのち、私は喪失感を抱いたまま2011年の春、渡米した。そして、その年の夏、ニューヨークでデイヴィッドに会った。かなり夜遅くのことだった。食堂であれやこれや話を交わす中で、アラブ、北アフリカ、ヨーロッパなどで巻き起こった占拠デモについての話が持ち上がった。ニューヨークでもこんなことが可能だろうか。簡単じゃないだろうね、とデイヴィッドは言った。ここは３万人を超える警察が闊歩する警察都市なんだよ、と。ところが、すぐにいたずらっぽい表情を満面に浮かべながら、私の方に体を傾けながら、まるで秘密要員に指令を伝えるかのように小さな声で「だけど来月なにかおきるよ」と言った。 9月17日に 友人の何人かと面白いことを作り出すから、と。「オキュパイ・ウォールストリート」のことだった。私にも参加してみろと言った。私はその年、デイヴィッドと友人たちがニューヨークのど真ん中に作り出した小さな解放区を経験し活力をとり戻した（大切な友人Sabu Kohsoの助けも非常に大きかった）。

　その夜、デイヴィッドは、ニューヨークの街のいくつかの場所を案内してくれた。どれも彼が幼いころ過ごした場所だった。そして、いろんな話をしてくれた。労働組合から提供された両親のアパートの話、学生時代のエピソード、ニューヨーク市の街ごとの特色についての話まで。英語が拙い私に、その言葉の数々をつなぎとめるのは無理なことだった。 おそらく私が聞きとったよりもはるかに多くの言葉が、ニューヨークの夜空に散らばっていったことだろう（ニューヨークだけでなく、ソウルでも彼と道を歩きながら、話をしたのだが、彼が聞かせてくれた沢山の話を留めることかできずに、聞きこぼしてしまった）。私がよく理解できていないことを知りながらも、彼は溢れるように語り続けた。 しかし、その時の表情と身振りだけでも大きな活力になった。素敵な人だと思った。

　デイヴィッドが去って、私の中に空っぽの空間ができてしまった。しかし、この空洞には少なくとも悲しみや恐怖、無力感のようなものを詰め込みたくない。私にとってデイヴィッド・グレーバーという名前はそのようなものとはあまりにも似合わないからだ。 彼に初めて出会ったときのことが思い浮かぶ。2006年の秋、日本の友人たちのおかげで彼をソウルに招待する運びになった。ソウルに着いてあくる日、 彼は朝早くスユノモのカフェに座ってメールを確認していた。彼は突然口を覆い、眼に涙を溜めてモニターに釘付けになった。そして、親しい友人がメキシコのオアハカ（Oaxaca）で銃に撃たれて息を引き取ったんだと言った。当時、現地の蜂起を伝えていたメディア活動家のブラッド・ウィル（Brad Will）だったようだ。彼はしばらくの間、落ち着きなくテーブルの周りをうろうろした。その一日がどう過ぎたのかは覚えていない。スユノモの共同住宅で泊まった、次の日の朝、デイヴィッドの顔のあちこちに赤い点ができていた。 彼は私たちにいたずら気に満ちた表情を作って見せながら、その夜の凄まじい戦闘について語った。一晩中、蚊と戦い自らも負傷、されど蚊は敗北せり。そうやってみんなを笑わせた。そして、友人たちが準備した朝食を美味しそうに食べた。

　2020年秋、今度はデイヴィッドが去り、私には友人たちとの朝食を準備し、それを美味しく食べることが残された。それが2006年のデイヴィッドがしたことであり、2020年の私がなすべきことだ。

데이빗 그레이버의 아침 식사

고병권

데이빗의 부고(訃告)는 시간이 제법 흐른 지금까지도 믿기지 않는다. 총탄이 뚫고 지나간 것처럼 나는 아무런 슬픔도 느끼지 못한 채 그냥 털썩 주저앉았다. 그리고는 어떤 활력, 어떤 기쁨이 빠져나갔음을 느꼈다.

직접 만난 것은 몇 차례뿐이지만 그의 이름은 언제나 내게 활력과 기쁨을 의미했다. 착취와 억압의 세계 그리고 고통 받는 사람들에 대해 이야기할 때조차 그의 빛나는 아이디어와 놀라운 해석들은 사람을 기쁘게 했다. 그에게 ‘직접행동’(direct action)에 대해 처음 들었을 때, 그러니까 직접행동이란 기존의 권력구조가 존재하지 않는 것처럼 행동하는 것이며, 우리가 이미 자유로운 사람들인 것처럼 행동하는 것이라는 말을 들었을 때, 단지 말을 들은 것만으로도, 아직 행동에 나서기 전인데도 불구하고, 내 몸은 자유를 느끼며 기쁨에 떨었다.

나만 그런 게 아니었다. 수유너머에서 데이빗이 몇 차례 강연을 했을 때 나는 청중들이 내뱉는 탄성을 여러 번 들었다. 한 장면이 떠오른다. 웃음기 가득한 특유의 표정으로 데이빗은 산타클로스와 도둑에 대해 이야기했다. 둘은 모두 굴뚝을 타고 들어온다. 산타클로스는 그 많은 선물을 어디서 가져온 걸까. 그것은 혹시 도둑질한 게 아닐까. 데이빗은 부자 집을 털어서 가난한 집에 나누어주던 의적들의 분배 시스템을 자본주의 시장과 대비시켰다. 그가 의적들의 분배 시스템을 ‘능력에 따라 일하고 필요에 따라 나누는’ 공산주의와 연결지었을 때 모두가 웃었다. 그날 밤 내게는 이런저런 이야기보따리를 풀어놓는 데이빗이 산타클로스처럼 보였다. 그리고 강연장에 참석한 우리 모두가 훔친 물건을 쌓아두고 잔치를 벌이는 도둑떼처럼 보였다. 그날 나는 우리의 코뮨이 실제로 무상으로 가져온 것들로 가득 차 있으며 그것들은 모두 무상으로 다른 사람들에게 선사해야 하는 것들이기도 하다는 것을 깨달았다.

데이빗의 말을 이해하기 위해서는 대단한 학문적 훈련이 필요하지 않았다. 아니, 이렇게 말해야 할 것 같다. 데이빗은 학문적 훈련을 받지 않은 사람들에게도 자기 생각을 쉽게 말할 수 있는 사람이었다. 2009년엔가, 나는 그에게 서울에 있는 탈성매매여성들의 작은 코뮨을 소개했다. 그곳을 방문했을 때 사람들은 데이빗에게 희망을 찾을 수 있는 말을 해달라고 했다. 데이빗은 현재 세계를 지배하고 착취하는 기계 장치에 대해 말했다. 그는 그 기계 장치가 요즘 곳곳에서 고장을 일으킨다고 했다. 바로 여기처럼 사람들이 서로를 돌보는 곳에서 그 기계가 자꾸 고장난다고, 그러니까 여기가 바로 희망을 만드는 곳이라고. 사람들은 웃으며 환호했다.

데이빗의 개념들은 현실 운동에서 잘 작동했다. 그의 개념들은 아카데미의 자폐적 회로에서 순환하는 여느 학자들의 개념들과는 달랐다. 십여 년 전에 나는 대형 마트의 파업노동자들과 이야기를 나누던 중 그의 ‘해석노동’(interpretive labor) 개념을 소개한 적이 있다. 노동자들은 그 개념이 가리키는 바를 자신들의 경험에서 쉽게 찾아냈다. 따로 어떤 설명을 할 필요가 없었다. 최근에는 장애운동가들과 그의 ‘불쉿잡’(bullshit jobs)에 대한 이야기를 나누었다. 우리는 지금 중증장애인 일자리를 요구하는 투쟁을 벌이고 있는데, 데이빗 덕분에 우리는 우리 투쟁의 의미를 새롭게 인식할 수 있었다. 우리는 일자리를 지킨다는 명목으로 기업들에 막대한 공적 자금을 투입하는 정부를 향해, 기업의 이윤 창출에는 기여하지만 사회적으로는 아무런 의미도 없는, 심지어 사회와 자연을 파괴하는 그런 일자리들을 지키는 데 돈을 쓰지 말라고 주장하고 있다. 그런 곳에 돈을 쓰는 대신 사회적 의미와 가치, 연대를 창출하는 장애인의 활동들(문화 활동은 물론이고 사회적 차별에 맞서는 길거리 투쟁들까지 모두)의 공공성을 인정하고 이 활동들에 대한 임금을 지급하라는 투쟁을 벌였다. 이 투쟁은 최근 상당한 성공을 거두었다.

이처럼 데이빗의 말을 듣거나 글을 읽으면 문제가 새롭게 보이고, 지금과는 다른 형태의 운동, 다른 형태의 삶을 시도하고 싶은 마음이 든다. 급작스레 떠난 그를 추억하는 지금 이 순간에도 내게는 왠지 슬픈 생각이 아니라 기쁜 생각들, 기쁜 기억들이 자꾸 떠오른다.

수유너머가 해체된 후 나는 상실감을 안은 채 2011년 봄에 미국으로 건너갔다. 그리고 그해 여름 뉴욕에서 데이빗을 만났다. 제법 늦은 밤이었다. 식당에서 이런저런 이야기를 나누던 중 아랍과 아프리카, 유럽 등에서 일어난 점거 시위에 대한 이야기가 나왔다. 뉴욕에서도 이런 일이 가능할까. 데이빗은 쉽지는 않을 거라고 했다. 여기는 3만 명이 넘는 경찰들이 돌아다니는 경찰도시라고. 그러나 곧이어 장난기 가득한 얼굴로 내게 몸을 기울이더니, 비밀요원이 지령을 전달하듯 작은 목소리로 ‘그런데 다음 달에 뭔가 일어날 거야’라고 했다. 9월 17일, 몇몇 친구들과 재밌는 일을 만들 거라고. ‘월가점거’(Occupy Wallstreet)에 대한 이야기였다. 내게도 거기 참여해보라고 했다. 나는 그해 데이빗과 친구들이 뉴욕 한복판에 만들어낸 작은 해방구를 경험하면서 활력을 찾았다(여기에는 소중한 친구 사부 코소의 도움도 매우 컸다).

그날 밤 데이빗은 뉴욕의 거리들 몇 곳을 소개해주었다. 자신이 어린 시절을 보낸 곳들이었다. 그리고는 여러 이야기를 들려주었다. 노동조합에서 제공했던 부모님 아파트에 대한 이야기, 학창시절의 에피소드들, 뉴욕시의 거리별 특색들에 대한 이야기까지. 영어가 서툰 나로서는 그 많은 말들을 붙잡을 수 없었다. 아마도 내가 알아듣지 못한 더 많은 말들이 뉴욕의 밤하늘에 뿌려졌을 것이다(뉴욕에서만이 아니라 서울에서도 그와 길을 걸으며 몇 가지 이야기를 나누었지만 그가 들려준 많은 이야기들을 붙잡지 못하고 흘려보냈다). 내가 잘 알아듣지 못한다는 것을 알면서도 그는 계속해서 이야기를 쏟아냈다. 그런데 그 표정과 몸짓만으로도 나는 큰 힘을 얻었다. 그가 멋진 사람이라는 생각을 했다.

이제 데이빗이 떠나고 내 안에는 텅 빈 공간이 생겼지만, 이 공간에는 적어도 슬픔이나 두려움, 무력함 같은 것을 채우고 싶지 않다. 데이빗 그레이버라는 이름은 내게 그것과는 너무 어울리지 않기 때문이다. 그를 처음 만났던 때가 기억난다. 2006년 가을, 일본의 친구들 도움으로 그를 서울에 초대할 수 있게 되었다. 서울에 온 이튿날 그는 아침 일찍 수유너머의 카페에 앉아 메일을 확인하고 있었다. 그는 갑자기 입을 감싸더니 눈물을 글썽이며 모니터에서 눈을 떼지 못했다. 그리고는 친한 친구가 멕시코 옥사카(Oaxaca)에서 총에 맞아 숨을 거두었다고 말했다. 비디오 액티비스트 브래드 윌(Brad Will)이었던 것 같다. 그는 한동안 안절부절못하고 테이블 주변을 서성였다. 그 하루가 어떻게 갔는지는 기억나지 않는다. 수유너머의 공동주택에서 잔 다음날 아침 데이빗의 얼굴 곳곳에 빨간 점들이 보였다. 그는 우리에게 장난기 가득한 표정을 짓고는 전날 밤 자신이 벌인 대단한 전투에 대해 말했다. 밤새 모기들과 싸웠는데, 자신도 부상을 입기는 했지만 모기들에게 처참한 패배를 안겼노라고. 그는 모두를 웃게 만들었다. 그리고는 친구들이 마련한 아침식사를 맛있게 먹었다.

2020년 가을, 이번에는 데이빗이 떠났고 내게는 친구들과 아침식사를 마련하고 그것을 맛있게 먹는 일이 남았다. 그것이 2006년 데이빗이 했던 일이고 2020년 내가 해야 할 일이다.

David Graeber’s Breakfast

Goh Byeong-gwon

David’s death is still difficult to believe, even though quite some time has now passed. When I heard the news, I sat down with a thud. I could not feel anything, not even sadness. It was as if a bullet had passed through my body. I felt a certain energy, a certain joy had left me at that moment.

I only met him several times, but his name always meant energy and joy to me. Even when he spoke about the world of exploitation and oppression, or the people who were in pain, his dazzling ideas and eye-opening interpretations made people jubilant. I remember the first time I heard him speak about direct action. He said that direct action was to act as if the pre-existing power structures no longer existed and as if we were already free. Even though these were merely words explaining the idea and we were not anywhere close to actually doing something, my body sensed the freedom and shook with joy.

It was not just me who felt this. When David gave a series of talks at our collective SuyuNomo in Seoul, I could hear the audience exclaim in amazement. I particularly remember one moment. With his typical facial expression almost bursting into a grin, David told the story of Santa Claus and thieves. Both enter houses through the chimney. Where does Santa Claus get all of those presents? Could it be that they were stolen? David then contrasted the capitalist market economy with the distribution system of bandits who steal from the rich only to share with the poor. He then connected the latter to communism, quoting the famous saying, “from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.” Everyone laughed. That night, David seemed like Santa Claus with a bag full of stories, and it felt like those of us in the room had become a group of thieves partying over stolen goods. That day, I realised that our commune was made up of things that people gave us freely and that we were also to give away these gifts freely to others.

You didn’t need to have received intensive academic training in order to understand David’s words. Rather, I should say: David was someone who was able to convey his thoughts to those who did not have academic training. It was around 2009 when I took him to a commune of women who had fled sexual trafficking in Seoul. The people there asked David if he could tell them something that would give them hope. David’s answer was that there was a machine of politics that dominates and exploits the world right now, but that that machine was starting to break down. He said that the machine was coming apart all across the globe, wherever people were helping one another. Just like this place. Therefore, he said, your commune is where hope is made. Everyone beamed and cheered at this.

The concepts David used worked well in actual on-the-ground situations in social movements. His concepts were different from those of typical scholars, whose ideas only circulated within academia. Over ten years ago, I once discussed David’s concept of interpretive labor with striking workers at a major discount store. The workers immediately understood what the concept meant from their own experience. There was absolutely no need to add any explanation. Recently, I shared his idea of “bullshit jobs” with disabilities rights activists, who have been engaged in a struggle to demand employment for those with severe disabilities. By applying his concepts, we were able to perceive and understand the struggle through a new perspective. The South Korean government pumps in a huge amount of public funds to protect corporate employment. We demanded that the government stop wasting money protecting these jobs, which only help the corporations make greater profits. We believe that not only do such jobs have little social significance whatsoever, they actually harm society and the environment. Instead, we demanded the governement to fully recognize the public nature of the activities of disabled people and fund them, because we believe that the actions that disabled people engage in—from holding cultural events to participating in street struggles that challenge discrimination—create socially relevant meaning, value and solidarity. This struggle has been hugely successful in recent years.

Hearing and reading David’s words helped us see problems differently and made us feel that we could try a different form of activism or live a different form of life. So when I think of David, even in this moment of remembrance after his sudden departure, I somehow have mainly joyous thoughts and memories rather than sad ones.

In spring of 2011, I travelled to the US after our commune SuyuNomo experienced a split. I met David in the summer of that year in New York. It was quite late in the evening. As we chatted at a diner, the subject of the ‘movements of the squares’ that had manifested in the Middle East, North Africa and Europe came up. I asked if something like that would be possible in New York City. David said that it wouldn’t be easy. “Thirty thousand police strut around here. It’s a police city,” he said. But then, he immediately leaned over to me with a mischievous expression and whispered, as if conveying a directive to a secret agent, “But something will happen next month.” He said that he along with some friends were going to make something interesting happen on September 17th. He was talking about Occupy Wall Street. He also invited me to participate in it, which I did. Experiencing the small liberated area in the middle of New York with David and his friends, I gained valuable energy (My dear friend Sabu Kohso was also tremendously helpful in this regard).

That night, David took me around some neighborhoods in New York. They were places he had spent his childhood. He then told me many stories—from his parents’ apartment being provided by a labor union to episodes from his school days. He even went over the unique traits of each neighborhood in New York City. Not being so fluent in English, I could not follow every word. Perhaps more words than I could hold on to scattered across the New York night sky (This also happened in Seoul where we talked as we walked the streets. Unable to keep up, I had to let the stories flow by). He kept on talking even though he knew that I could not understand very well. Nonetheless, I received so much energy just from his expression and gestures. What a cool person. I thought.

Now that David is gone, an empty space has formed inside of me. However, I resist filling this space with things like sadness, fear or powerlessness. Such sentiments are so unlike David Graeber. I remember the first time I met him. In the fall of 2006, we were able to invite him to Seoul with the help of our friends in Japan. On the morning of his second day in Seoul, he was up early checking his email in the cafe of SuyuNomo. I saw him suddenly cover his mouth with his hand. He was transfixed on the computer monitor. Tears welled up in his eyes. He then said that a good friend of his had been shot in Oaxaca, Mexico and passed away. It must have been the media activist Brad Will. David then restlessly walked around the table for some time. How the rest of that day passed, I do not remember. I remember meeting David the next morning. He had a bunch of red spots on his face. He had spent the night at the collective housing for SuyuNomo. Making a comedically dramatic face, he told us what a great battle he had fought. He had battled with mosquitos all night. He exclaimed that, despite being injured in the battle, he handed a terrible defeat to the army of mosquitos. He made everyone laugh. He then proceeded to eat the breakfast prepared by our friends, and he did so with gusto.

It was David who left us this time, in the fall of 2020. Now, what remains for me to do is to prepare breakfast with some friends and enjoy it with gusto. That is what David did in 2006, and that is what I need to do in 2020.

チェ・ジンギュ

デイヴィッド、

　まさかあなたへの追悼文を書くことになるとは思いもよりませんでした。
ツイッターのアカウントを持っているのですが、それはあなたのツイートを読むために作ったものでした。ツイッターにどうしても慣れなくてあまり使わなかったのですが、本当にたまにログインしてはあなたのアカウントを見たりしていました。そういえば、私の唯一のツイッターでの活動は、あなたへのダイレクトメッセージの送付でした。

　『アナーキスト人類学のための断章（Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology）』の韓国語版を編集したときのこと、私はあなたに韓国語版の序文を書いてほしいというメッセージを送りました。そのとき、あなたと交わしたメッセージがまだ残っています。あなたはあまりにも忙しくて、書くのは難しいという返事をくれましたね。私は一方で残念な気持ちになりましたが、なぜわからないけれど嬉しさと安堵感を覚えました。『アナーキスト人類学のための断章』に出てくるニューヨークのタクシー運転手の逸話を思い出したんです。 その日のノルマを運よく早めに達成したタクシー運転は、一日中働き続けるよりは早退するという話です。だから私はあなたに無理してでも書いてくれとお願いしようと思わなかったのです。

　あなたは『官僚制のユートピア（The Utopia of Rules）』で遊びとゲームの違いについて書きましたね。創造的でかつ破壊的な「遊び」と、純粋に規則によって統制され、それがゆえに一旦規則を受け入れれば心置きなく楽しめる「ゲーム」との間にある、違いをです。 私たちが遊びを疎かにしてゲームを好きになればなるほど、自由とケアの空間は狭められ、代わりにそこに入り込んでくるのは 「規則のユートピア」ですよね。規則が支配する世の中で誰が権力を持つのかは言わなくても明白なことです。

　私は恐れることなく想像する方法をまだ学ばなければなりません。あなたが贈ってくれた創造的で破壊的な遊びをずっと心に留めようと思います。そして楽しく真似しようと思います。あなたがくれた多くの贈り物を噛み締めながら。
ありがとう、デイヴィッド。

2020年10月8日
チェ・ジンギュ（Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology 韓国語版　編集者）

데이비드,
당신을 위한 추도문을 쓰게 될 줄은 생각조차 못했어요.
저도 트위터 계정이 있는데, 당신의 트윗을 읽기 위해 만든 것이었지요. 저는 트위터에 적응하지 못했어요. 계정만 살려 놓고 아주 가끔 들어가 보는 게 전부인데, 아주 가끔 들어갈 때면 꼭 당신 계정을 찾아가보곤 했지요. 제가 트위터 계정을 만들고 한 유일한 활동이 당신에게 쪽지를 보낸 것이네요.

<아나키스트 인류학의 조각들 Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology> 한국어판을 편집할 때, 당신에게 한국어판 서문을 써달라는 내용의 쪽지를 보낸 적이 있지요. 그때 당신과 주고받은 쪽지가 아직 남아 있어요. 당신은 너무 많은 일들 탓에 글을 쓰기가 어렵다고 답을 주었지요. 저는 그 쪽지를 받고서 아쉬운 마음 한편으로 왠지 모를 기쁨과 안도감이 들었어요. <아나키스트 인류학의 조각들>에 보면 뉴욕의 택시기사 일화가 나오잖아요. 운 좋게 하루 벌이를 일찍 달성한 택시기사는 더 일하는 대신 일찍 퇴근한다는 이야기 말이에요. 저는 당신에게 무리해서라도 꼭 글을 보내달라는 부탁은 하고 싶지 않더라고요.

당신은 <관료제 유토피아 The Utopia of Rules>에서 놀이(play)와 게임(game)의 차이를 말했지요. 창조적이며 동시에 파괴적인 속성의 ‘놀이’와 순전히 규칙에 의해 통제되는, 그래서 규칙을 받아들이고 나면 맘 편히 즐길 수 있는 ‘게임’의 차이를요. 우리가 놀이를 포기하고 게임을 선호할수록 자유와 돌봄의 공간은 줄고 대신 그 자리를 차지하는 건 ‘규칙들의 유토피아’이겠지요. 규칙들이 지배하는 세상에서 누가 권력을 가질지는 말 안 해도 뻔하고요.

저는 두려움 없이 상상하는 방법을 아직도 많이 익혀야 해요. 당신이 선물해준 창조적이고 파괴적인 놀이들을 오래오래 기억할게요. 그리고 신나게 따라하겠어요.
당신이 전해준 많은 선물들을 되새기며.
고마워요. 데이비드.

2020.10.08.
최진규 (<아나키스트 인류학의 조각들> 한국어판 편집자)

David,
I never thought I would write a eulogy for you.
I have a twitter account, which I basically created to read your tweets. But I never got used to Twitter, so I left the account active only to check it only once in a while. But when I did, I would always check your account. The only thing I did on my twitter account was to send a direct message to you.

When I was editing the Korean translation of Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology (아나키스트 인류학의 조작들), I sent you a direct message to ask you to write a forward for the Korean edition. I still have these messages on my account. You told me that you could not write it because you had too many things. While I felt a bit sad, I also felt unexplainably happy and relieved. In Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology, there is an account of cab drivers in New York City. The account goes, when they are lucky to earn enough money for the day early, they would go home rather than work more. I did not want to plead you to write beyond what was sensible to you.

You write about the difference between play and game in The Utopia of Rules(관료제 유토피아), contrasting “play” which is both creative and destructive and “game” that is purely controlled by rules. We feel at ease and enjoy the latter, once we accept the rules. But the more we give up play and are drawn by game, the narrower the space of freedom and care, replaced by the “the utopia of rules.” We don’t need to say much to know what sort of people would take the power in the world dominated by rules. Having said that, personally I still have a lot to learn to imagine without fear. So I will remember your gift for a long time, various plays that are both creative and destructive. And I will happily do likewise, ruminating on the gifts you have left with us.
Thank you, David.

— Choi Jinkyu, the editor, Korean translation of Fragments of Anarchist Anthropology

ディディ

　デイヴィッド・グレーバー「追悼カーニバル」の招待状によれば、

「出会った多くの人々が即座に親友になり…彼には、あたかも5万人の兄弟姉妹と、20万人の親友がいたかのようでした」

　えーと。
　この文は何回も彼に会ったにも関わらず、友達になり損ねた者の記憶です。

　最初の出会いは、2006年。当時韓国で「大秋里（デチュリ）」という農村が米軍基地によって立ち退きを迫られ、抵抗闘争が繰り広げられていた時のことです。私はその闘争にかなり入れ込んでいました。そして組織運動ではない、自由な個人たちのアセンブリーとしての運動、アナキズム、そんなことにやたらと熱くなっていた時期でもありました。デイヴィッドが韓国を訪問したのはそんな只中のことでした。私にとっては。

　デイヴィッドは、私が数年活動していた 、「研究室」と私たちが呼んでいた研究共同体を訪れました。そのとき私は生業とアクティヴィズムが余りにも忙しくて（？）研究室にほとんど顔を出せずにいたのですが、研究室の友人から話を聞いたのです。「デイヴィッドはすごく面白い人だよ。人類学者ですごくアクティヴな活動家なんだよ。ディディも会ってみたら絶対いいよ。」と友人は言いました。会ってみたいと思って、どうにかこうにか連絡をして、当時私が活動していたメディア活動家のグループに彼を招待しました。私は、てっきり他の国のアナキストやメディア活動家たちと交流した時にいつもそうしたように、リラックスした雰囲気で一杯飲みながら、いろんな話をする場になるものだと思っていました。

　ところが、当日、約束の時間よりも遅く到着したデイヴィッド一行は疲れ切った姿で、到着するやいなやすぐに席を立たなければなりませんでした。一緒にきた韓国側の人によると、ちょうど大秋里に行ってきたところで、結構ながい一日でもあり、そんなところに、ちょうど研究室から（予定にはなかった）お別れパーティーを準備したという連絡が来たという話でした。まあ、タイミングが悪かったということです。

　2013年。私は仕事を辞めて、大学院の修士過程に入りました。論文執筆のために読むことになった、彼の本と論文にすっかりのめり込んでしまいました。「コミュニズム」に対する彼の定義は余りにも直ぐに私に染み込んできたので、まるで私がもともと考えていた考えや感覚が、まとめられて文章になっているような気がするほどでした。私の修士論文の依拠した思想の中心にはデイヴィッドの「コミュニズム」の思想がありました。

　2017年。私は別の大学の博士課程に入りました。同じ大学の人類学部にデイヴィッドがいました。コースワークを受講していた一年目に、彼の「人類学における価値論」の授業を聴講しました。なんとなんと面白かったことか。彼はいつももつれた髪に、だいたい何かが染みついたシャツを着て（一度はボタンを掛け違えたまま！）講義室に入ってきました。彼はまるで頭の中から泉が湧いてくるかのように、抑えきれないように、ずらずらと話したかと思うと、突然、 冗談——多くの学生が冗談だと思ってもいない——を言って、ふふふと独り笑いをしたりしました。

　次の年、博士論文の研究計画書を完成させた私は、衝動的に彼に会いに行きました。東アジアの自律空間を志向する運動についてのエスノグラフィーをする計画だという話をしました。彼は自分が日本と韓国を訪れた時の思い出を話してくれました（私との短い出会いは当然覚えてませんでしたが）。一時間ほど結構楽しく話をして、別れ際に突然、よかったら（学校の色々な事務的な問題がなければ）自分が第二指導教官をしてもいいけど、という提案までしてくれました。

　様々な理由で彼の提案は結局実現しませんでした。そのあと私はフィールドワークのためにロンドンを後にしました。これが2年前の話です。でも、いろんなネットワークやプロジェクトの中で、私はずっと、少しずつですが彼の友人たちとつながっていたので、私たちはすぐに、どういう経路であれ、間違いなくまた出くわすはずでした。当然、そうなるだろうと思っていました。

　だから、
　デイヴィッドが死んだという知らせを聞いた時になんと慌てふためいたことか！

　真っ先に迫ってきたのは、一度も一緒に飲んだり、ご飯を食べたこともないのに…という残念さでした。にぎやかに分かち合うコミュニズム、友達になっていく生成変化の楽しみを実のところ彼とまともに共にできなかったという残念さ。友達になるちょうど２ミリ手前にいたのにという残念さ。その残念さがほとんど収まったころになってやっと、資本主義が決して当然の世界のあり方ではないということを、これほど明快に、西欧の外の無数の言葉と生を通じて、示してくれていた学者を失ったのだという悲しみがこみ上げてきました。

　5万人の兄弟姉妹、20万人の親友がいたデイヴィッドへ、
　一度も私と盃をぶつけ合うができなかったけど、私は少しずつあなたの友人たちと友人になってるよ。私たちは、私たちが「もうすでに自由であるかのように生きていく (live as we already free)」ために、共に集まり、賑やかに笑い飲み、闘い続けるよ。その全ての瞬間、あなたの言葉は私たちの力になってくれるでしょ。だから、
　共にある力のもとに安らかに。そして、乾杯！
　Rest in power. And, cheers!

東京にてDidi

데이비드 그래이버 추도 카니발에의 초대장에 의하면,

“그를 만난 사람들은 즉시 그의 가까운 친구가 되었다. (…) 그는 5만명의 형제자매, 20만명의 절친을 가졌다.”

에.. 또.

그러나 이 글은 몇번이나 그를 만났음에도 불구하고 친구가 되지는 못했던 자의 기억.

첫 만남은 2007년. 당시 한국에선 “대추리”라는 시골마을이 미군기지가 되는 것에 저항하는 싸움이 벌어지고 있었다. 나는 그 싸움에 꽤 마음을 기울이고 있었다. 조직운동이 아닌, 자유로운 개인들의 어셈블리로서의 운동, 아나키즘, 이런 것들에 마구 불타오르고 있던 시기이기도 했다. 데이비드가 한국을 방문한건 그런 와중이다. 내게 있어선.

데이비드는 내가 몇년간 활동했던, 우리들이 “연구실”이라고 불렀던 대안학문공동체를 방문했다. 그때 나는 생업과 액티비즘에 너무 바빠서 (?) 연구실은 거의 나가지 못하고 있는 와중이었지만, 연구실 친구로부터 이야기를 전해들었다. “데이비드는 꽤 재미있는 사람이야. 인류학자이고 엄청나게 액티브한 아나키스트 활동가다. 디디도 만나보면 분명 좋아할거야” 라고 친구는 말했다. 만나보고 싶다는 생각에, 어찌어찌 어렵사리 활동하고 있던 미디어 액티비스트 그룹에 그를 초대했다. 우리가 다른 나라의 아나키스트/미디어 액티비스트 그룹과 교류할 때 늘 그랬듯이, 느슨한 분위기로 한잔 하며 운동에 관련한 이야기를 나누는 자리를 상상했다.

그러나, 당일 피곤한 모습으로 약속시간보다 늦게 도착한 데이비드 일행은 연구실에서 (아마도 예정에 없던) 환송파티를 준비했다는 연락을 받고 일찍 자리를 떠야했다. 함께 온 한국측 일행분에게 들은 바로는, 그날 대추리를 방문한 터라 꽤 긴 하루이기도 했다고. 뭐, 타이밍이 안좋았달까.

2013년. 나는 직장을 때려치고 석사과정을 시작했다. 논문을 쓰다가 읽게 된 그의 책과 논문들에 홀딱 빠졌다. “코뮤니즘”에 대한 그의 정의는 너무나 곧장 내게 스며들어서, 마치 내가 원래 갖고 있던 생각/감각을 누군가가 말로 다 정리해놨네, 라는 기분이 들 정도였다. 데이비드의 “코뮤니즘”은 내 석사 논문이 참조한 가장 중심적인 사상이 되었다.

2017년. 나는 박사과정을 시작하였고, 같은 학교 인류학과에 데이비드가 있었다. 코스워크를 밟던 1년차에 나는 그의 “인류학에서의 가치론”수업을 청강했다. 너무 너무 재밌었다. 그는 언제나 헝크러진 머리에, 자주 뭔가가 묻어있는 셔츠 차림으로 수업에 들어왔는데 (한번은 단추가 삐뚤빼뚤 엇갈리게 잠긴 채였다!). 마치 머릿속에서 샘솟아나오는 생각들을 주체할 수 없다는 듯 주절주절 이야기를 하다가 문득 (많은 학생이 농담인지조차 이해하지 못한) 농담을 하고는 혼자서 흐흐 웃곤 했다.

이듬해, 박사논문의 프로포절을 완성한 나는 충동적으로 그를 찾아가, 동아시아의 자율운동에 대한 에스노그래피 리서치를 할 계획이라고 말을 걸었다. 그는 나와의 짧은 만남은 (물론) 기억하지 못했지만, 자신이 일본과 한국을 방문했을 때의 기억을 이야기 했다. 한시간 가량의 꽤 즐거운 대화 끝에 문득, (학교의 여러가지 행정적 문제들이) 괜찮다면 자신이 세컨드 수퍼바이저가 되어주겠다는 제안까지 했다.

이런저런 이유로 그의 제안은 결국 실현되지 않았고, 그 후 나는 필드워크를 위해 런던을 떠났다. 이것이 2년 전의 이야기. 그러나 여러 네트워크와 프로젝트 안에서 나는 꾸준히, 조금씩, 그의 친구들과 연결되고 있었기에, 우리는 곧, 어떤 경위로건 분명히 다시 마주칠 것이었다. 당연히 그럴 것이라고 생각했다.

그렇기에
데이비드의 사망 소식을 전해들었을 때의 황망함이란!

나를 가장 먼저 덮친 것은, 아, 아직 술 한잔 같이 마시지 못했는데, 밥 한번 같이 먹지 못했는데, 라는 아쉬움이었다. 떠들썩하게 나누는 공산주의/친구-되기의 즐거움을 정작 그와 제대로 나눠보지 못했다는 아쉬움. 단 한번만 더 만날 수 있었다면. 그러니까, 친구가 되기까지 딱 2미리정도가 남아있는 기분이었는데. 그 아쉬움이 잦아들고 나자 비로소, 자본주의는 결코 당연한 세계가 아니라는 걸 이토록 명쾌히, 서구 밖의 무수한 말과 삶들을 통해, 보여주고 있던 학자를 잃었다는 안타까움이 밀려들었다.

5만명의 형제자매, 20만명의 절친을 가진 데이비드.
한번도 너와 잔을 부딪치지 못했지만, 나는 점점 더 많은 네 친구들과 친구가 되고 있어. 우리는, 우리가 ”이미 자유로운 것처럼 살아가기 (live as we already free)” 위해서 함께 모이고 떠들썩하게 웃고 마시고 계속 싸울거야. 그 모든 순간, 너의 말들이 우리에게 힘을 주겠지. 그러니

Rest in power. And, cheers!

The invitation to the David Graver Memorial Carnival proclaims that

“he had 50,000 brothers and sisters and 200,000 best friends”.

However, this is a memory from someone who never quite became a friend despite meeting him multiple times.

David visited Korea in 2006. At that time, a struggle was occurring to resist the project to destroy a rural village called “Daechuri” in order to build a US military base, and I was captivated by that struggle. It was also around the time when I got enthralled with the ideas of anarchism and with movements of freely assembled individuals as opposed to more hierarchical and structured movements.

David visited an alternative academic community that I had been involved in for a number of years, but I somewhat missed the event. My friend told me, “David is a really fascinating person. He’s an anthropologist and an incredibly active anarchist activist. You should meet him, you’d really like him.”

So I invited him to meet with the media activist group I was working with at the time. I imagined that we would casually discuss activism and the movement over drinks like we often did when interacting with anarchist/media activist groups from overseas. However, David and his entourage arrived later than expected, appearing rather exhausted due to their long trip to Daechuri. When they were notified that a (surprise) farewell party had been organized at the aforementioned community, they ended up leaving early. And so, we were thwarted by poor timing once again.

In 2013, I had quit my job and was working on my master’s research. While writing my thesis, I found myself captivated by his books and papers. His definition of “communism” instantly resonated with me. It was like someone had organized and expressed all of the ideas and feelings I had held although subtly. David’s “communism” became the most formative ideology that I ended up referring to in my master’s thesis.

When I began my PhD program in geography in 2017, David happened to be a faculty member in the Anthropology Department at the school I was attending. In my first year of coursework, I attended his class “Value Theories in Anthropology”. It was so much fun. He always came to class with disheveled hair, often wearing a shirt with something stained on it (once his shirt was buttoned up unevenly!). As if he couldn’t control the thoughts coming out of his head, he would tell jokes (many students didn’t even get that he was joking) and then laugh by himself.

The following year, I impulsively visited him and told him that I was planning to do ethnographic research on autonomous movements in East Asia. He spoke of his memories of visiting Japan and Korea (though he didn’t remember our brief meeting). After about an hour of a very interesting conversation, he even offered to act as my second supervisor, were that permissible (due to administrative issues in the school). For one reason or another, that never came to be and after that I left London to conduct my fieldwork.

That was two years ago. But, I felt confident that, as I was steadily, little by little, connecting with his friends through various networks and projects, we would inevitably end up crossing paths again. I had no doubt that it would happen.

That is why, when I heard about David’s death, I was overwhelmed with feelings of…
Regret that we never got to share a drink or meal together. Disappointment that we never truly had the joy of communism in which we were raucously sharing stories, jokes, and ideas over foods and drinks. If only we could have met one more time. We were only 2mm away from becoming friends. Once the regret subsided, I was overcome with the painful tragedy of the loss of a scholar who had, through the words and lives of those outside the West, made it clear that capitalism was by no means a world to be taken for granted.

Dear David, who had 50,000 brothers and sisters and 200,000 friends,
I never did get to share a drink with you. But, I’m making friends with more and more of your friends. We’ll gather together to “live as if we are already free”, laughing and drinking and continuing to fight. Throughout all of those moments, your words will give us strength. And so I say to you…

Rest in power. And, cheers, my star-crossed comrade!
— Didi, in Tokyo

萩谷 海

酒井隆史

　かれの訃報はあまりにも不意打ちで、わたし自身、言葉を失った状態から立ち直れていません。そして、その喪失がどれほどのものか、はかりかねています。世界が本当に必要としはじめた時期に（日本では一ヶ月ほど前に公刊された『ブルシット・ジョブ』がみじかいあいだに次々と重版を重ねていた矢先でした）、デヴィッド・グレーバーを失ったことに、わたしはとまどっています。もちろん、このように個人として「必要」とされることをかれは望まなかったでしょう。しかし、その感覚がかれの訃報がつらく感じられたひとつの原因であることは否定できません。わたしは、翻訳者としてかれのテキストに深くつきあってきました。だから確信をもっていえるのですが、かれの知的独創性については、おそらく同時代の世界の研究者にあって比類のないものでした。かれの知的作業は、細部をみれば影響関係はあれこれと特定できます。しかし、総体としては、どこにもかんたんに帰属をゆるさないものでした。それはおそらく、アカデミズムのあれこれの立場を超えて、世界の民衆の闘争が要請する課題にむかって、まっすぐに、おそるべき知識の累積をひたすら総合し、発展させていく、かれのありかたに根ざしているのだとおもいます。

　かれの「国際的名声」の高まりにもかかわらず、このかん書かれたテキストやインタビュー、YouTubeの動画などから浮かびあがるかれのすがたから受ける印象は、2008年の来日のさいのそれと、まったく変わることはありませんでした。だれのなかにあっても、そこに仲間として溶け込んで、わたしたちのなかのひとりと感じさせるようなひとでした。かれの知性は驚嘆すべきものでありながら、秘教的なところがいっさいなく、したがって宗派をつくるようなものではなく、威厳とは無縁で、ひとを威圧するようなところもありませんでした。かれのまなざしを通すと、人々の日々のふつうの暮らしのうちに「諸可能性」に充ちた世界があらわれました。そしてそれを通して、わたしたちは「別の世界」の可能性を確信させられました。わたしたちはかれから、その、好奇心にあふれたやさしい（としかいいようのない）まなざしを学んだのです。むすびの言葉をさがせないのですが、最後に一言だけ、ありがとうといいたいです。

──酒井隆史、研究者

The news of his death was a total shock. I have been left speechless. There is no way to measure the magnitude of this loss. I am confused by this situation that as the world has begun to be really in want of him (in Japan his Bullshit Jobs was reprinted several times only after a month of its first printing), we have lost David Graeber. While I believe he would not necessarily wish to be wanted in this way, it is undeniable that this sense of demand is one of the reasons that the news of his death has been felt so heavily. Because I have had a deep relationship with his texts as a translator, I can say with certainty that David’s intellectual creativity was incomparable to any other contemporary scholar. Should we look at the details of his intellectual itinerary, it is possible to spot certain influences from others. But as a whole, his achievements cannot be easily ascribed to any particular sources. I believe they derived nowhere but from his own way of being that synthesized an incredible accumulation of knowledge, beyond academic positionalities, and developed them in his own manner from the vantage of the tasks truly required by the struggles of people in the world.

In recent years, David’s fame unilaterally increased across the world, but my impression of him, renewed whenever I watch his latest interviews or lectures, is totally the same since I first met him when he visited Japan during the 2008 G8 summit. That is, that he was a person who could exist as one of many — no matter who he was with, he was able to fit into a group. In spite of his remarkable intelligence, he did not develop any esotericism, sectarianism, authoritarianism or oppressiveness out of it. Through his gaze, the world filled with possibilities emerging from within the everyday life of commoners. Through that gaze, we became capable of believing in the possibility of another world. We have learned from him a way of looking filled with wonder, and what can be only called affection. I cannot find a proper word of conclusion, so I just want to say: Thank you David.

— Takashi Sakai, researcher from Osaka

持木良太

　2009年のあの日、僕らは大学近くで酒を飲んでいた。話題は、ニュースクールの占拠で持ちきりだった。バレンタインデーにニュースクールの学生たちが学長に「ラブレター」を送った戦術に、皆で喝采をあげていた。琉球大学の非常勤の語学教員の大量首切りに対する僕らの大学占拠は、この日の盛り上がりから動き始めた。我々の占拠は、その年の春に物理的には終焉を迎えたが、闘争のエフェクトは波及をやめず、多くの諸力や関係を占拠後も作り続け、その波及の一部の中でグレーバーと出会った。グレーバーは占拠が終わった数ヶ月後に沖縄を訪れ、我々とざっくばらんに語り合った。そして「違う場所の闘争を比較し闘争をアレンジしていく大事さを改めて認識した」「ニュースクールの友人に、琉球大学の占拠がニュースクールからインスパイヤーされて始まったことを伝えれることをとても嬉しく思う。ニュースクールを占拠した友人たちにとって、この自分たちの闘争が他の闘争を呼び込んだということを知ることに勝る喜びはないのではないか」と語った。私にとってグレーバーのイメージは、その後に読んだ著作のイメージよりも、この時イメージの方が強い。つまり、闘争へのパッションや喜びの在り処を探し構成していくことに注意深く耳を傾け、並々ならぬ力を注ぐ人というイメージだ。

　グローバルジャスティス運動とはまた違う局面の現在に、私が今も新たな地球的闘争の関係と連鎖を模索しているのは、グレーバーとの出会いを含めたこの闘争の経験があるからに他ならない。心からこれまでのグレーバーの諸活動を尊敬し、冥福を祈る。

──持木良太、佐用町

On a day in 2009, in Okinawa, we were having a party near Ryukyu University. All of us were enthusiastically talking about the students’ occupation of the New School in New York City. We applauded their creative tactics, such as sending a Valentine to the university president. From this impetus our own occupation struggle began, as we determined to protest the lay-offs of the adjunct professors of foreign languages. Our occupation was terminated that spring, but its aftereffects continued to expand, creating mergers of various individuals and groups for new initiatives. It was along this reverberation that we first met David Graeber. He visited Okinawa that July and had close exchanges with us. We recognized the importance of organizing exchanges between struggles in different places in order to create their synchronicity for mutual empowerment. David said: “I am so happy to tell my friends in the New School that the occupation at the Ryukyu University was inspired by their occupation. For those friends, nothing would be more encouraging than knowing that their struggle inspired other struggle.” My primary image of David was created in this encounter, which overpowers even the conceptual inspirations I got from reading his books thereafter. That is the image of a figure who believed full-heartedly in the empowerment of struggles across the world by looking for and coordinating their joys and passions. Now, facing new realities diverging away from those of the 90’s and early 2000’s global justice movement, I continue to look for rapports and nexuses among struggles across the planet, precisely thanks to the experience of encounter with David. I sincerely send my love and respect to him. He is living with us.

— Ryota Mochiki from Sayo

櫻田和也

　大阪2008年6月20日、ほとんど誰もしらない史実。
　関西国際空港で入管に尋問されて出てこないフランス在住のイタリア人を、ともに出国フロアで彼女とスカイプしながら半日以上まってくれた。

　大阪2008年6月22日、証拠写真ビデオ記録がある。
　モンスーン特有の息ぐるしい梅雨空の下で、大阪の野宿者ら支援者と一緒に抗議行動のためのパペットづくりを楽しんでくれた。
　行進まで雨宿りのまち時間には、雨のなか竹竿を手のひらにのせて一人バランスゲームをしていた。
　大きな公園のなかの小さな聖者の行進で、ピアニカの誰かはインターを吹いた。

　その公園からの帰り途、かれは誰にたのまれたのでもなく布切れのつまった重たい袋をひきずってかえってきた。
　共有された記憶のなかにしかない、ぼくらの荷物か誰かの忘れ物と思い込んでの行動。
　原初的連帯、同志的友愛、すなわち人類としてあたりまえのふるまい。
　こうした歴史を超越した普遍性は絶対に消えることがない。
　闇夜にも塩化ナトリウムは地の塩であるように。

──櫻田和也、Indymedia Japan

Osaka June 20th 2008 – a historical fact nobody knows
At the Kansai International Airport, waiting for an Italian coming from France who was held in interrogation by immigration, you kindly stayed more than half a day with me in the departures lobby, while you skyped with your girlfriend.

Osaka June 22nd 2008 – photographic and video evidence exists
Under the suffocating sky of the rainy season, together with the homeless of Osaka and their supporters, you enjoyed making puppets for the protest.
While we waited under a shelter for the march to begin, you were alone playing a balancing game with a bamboo stick in the palm of your hand,.
As our small saints’ march wove through the huge park, someone on a melodica played “The Internationale”.

On our way back from the park, you dragged a heavy bag filled with cloth scraps, though no one had asked you to.
You had assumed as if from collective memory that it was our bag, that someone had forgotten it.
This was an act of original solidarity and comradely affection — that is, a natural human gesture.
Transcending history, this kind of universality will never disappear.
How even in the darkest night, sodium chloride is the salt of the earth.

— Kazu Sakurada, Indymedia Japan, from Osaka

仲田教人

　親しい先輩たちが、苦労しながら「新しいアナキストたち」を訳していた姿を覚えている。その頃からわたしは反グローバリゼーション運動に関わるようになり、グレーバーとは2008年の洞爺湖サミットの対抗行動の時に、初めて会った。わたしにとってはつねに、革命の問いと実践の楽しさと深さを示すものとして、この運動はあり、その部分としてグレーバーもいた。かれとは夢中で並走した時もあるし、距離をおいた時もある。ずっと会っていなかったけど、デヴィッドが亡くなってしまって、とてもかなしい。かれがまとめられてしまうのが、たまらなく嫌だし、残念だと思う。もちろんそれは不可避なことであり、同時に不可能なことであるというのも、よく分かっているのだけど。

　いま思い出されるのは、2009年の夏にソウルのコミューン「スユ＋ノモ」で行われた、グレーバーを囲むセミナーの風景だ。のちに『負債論』に結実するさまざまな仮説を、グレーバーは披露していた。かれはなにか一言話し終えるたびに笑い、それにつられて通訳の人たちも訳し終えるたびに笑うので、教室は多幸感に包まれていた。たくさんの議論があり、出会いがあった。再開発に反対するスクウォットを訪れ、デモにも参加した。この時にできた友人たちとも、ともにこの追悼に参加できることは、なによりの慰めだ。デヴィッドの偉大さは、革命的な知が生成するあり方を、実践として示したところにあると思う。

──仲田教人、東京

I remember my elder friends working hard to translate “The New Anarchists,” an early article in the New Left Review. Around that time, I came to engage myself in the anti-globalization movement. In that context, I met David Graeber for the first time, during the actions against the 2008 Toyako G8 Summit. This movement taught me the joy and significance that the question and practice of revolution could entail. David existed as an indispensable part of it. Over the years, he and I ran together at times, and kept distance at other times. I had not seen him for a while, and now I am so sad that he is gone. I don’t want to see him being summarized and explained away so quickly and I feel that it is not fair, though I know very well that it is inevitable, and at the same time impossible.

Now I remember very well the scenery of a one-week seminar surrounding David that took place at Suyu+Nomo, a commune in Seoul, Korea, in the summer of 2009. David presented to us many hypotheses that came to fruition later in his magnum opus Debt – the First 5000 Years. After each utterance, he laughed, his laughs prompted translators’ laughs, and the room was filled with euphoria. There was so much discussion and so many encounters. During the same tour, we visited a squat fighting against development and participated in demos. Nothing is more consoling to me than being able to join this memorial Carnival with the friends I met on that occasion. I see the greatness of David in his embodiment of the way by which revolutionary thinking is engendered as life-long practice.

— Norihito Nakata from Tokyo

矢部史郎

　2008年、北海道サミットでの国際抗議行動にグレーバー氏が参加してくれたことを、今も感謝しています。彼は、日本政府の厳重な入国管理をくぐりぬけてやってきた。彼は、日本の若者たちに語りかけ、励ましてくれた。ラディカルな闘争が、たんなる政治の道具ではなく、若者の刹那的な衝動というのでもなく、未開時代から連綿と続く正義の信念に支えられているのだということを、グレーバー氏は非常に明快に説いてくれた。
　 彼と同じ時代にあったことを、誇りに思います。

──矢部史郎、名古屋

I am still appreciative to David Graeber for his having participated in the international protest against the 2008 G8 Summit in Hokkaido. He joined us by bravely going through the nasty immigration blockades set up by the Japanese state against political radicals. He directly spoke to and encouraged Japanese youth. With his witty but accessible language, David taught us the truth that radical struggle is grounded on — neither the political maneuver of the old nor the instantaneous impulse of the young, but the faith in justice that continues to live among people since the time immemorial.

— Shiro Yabu from Nagoya

徳永理彩

　日本での反グローバリゼーション運動への関与と交流活発化を背景に、2009年に早稲田大学で開催されたグレーバー講演の通訳をする縁があった。アナキスト的 joy のハビトスと溢れる知性を反映したテンポの速い話は通訳泣かせだったが、グレーバーの行動する思想のエッセンスに触れる凝縮された時間だった。

　その後グレーバーの仕事を参照する出来事に、2014年の香港雨傘運動がある。路上占拠に参加し、バンク・オブ・アメリカ・タワーと中国人民解放軍香港駐留本部ビルに挟まれた金鐘（Admiralty）の路上テントで一夜を過ごし、資本主義と国家のオルタナティブの集合的夢を垣間見た。インドネシアでは今年の8月に『アナキスト人類学のための断章』が翻訳され、グレーバーに影響を受けた在野研究者によるインドネシア諸島における国家を持たない先住民族についての研究プロジェクト「火の民族プロジェクト（Projek Suku Api）」も始まっている。この研究費用は、Do It With Your Friendsをスローガンにする相互扶助と連帯経済促進プラットフォームを立ち上げて集めている。可能性（possibilities）をつくりだす人々と共に、グレーバーの仕事と精神はずっと生きていくだろう。

──徳永理彩、東京／ヌサンタラ

In the context of Japan’s engagement in the anti-globalization movement and a concomitant acceleration of exchanges, David Graber returned to Japan in 2009. I interpreted for him during a lecture he gave at Waseda University. Although it was tough to interpret his super speedy way of speaking – which reflected his habitus of anarchistic joy and flowing intelligence – we all enjoyed the time that condensed the essence of David’s active thinking.

Since then, as far as I know, Hong Kong’s 2014 umbrella movement is just one among many movements to have been inspired by David’s work. Participating in an occupation there, while spending a night in a tent on the street sandwiched between the Bank of America tower and the headquarters of the People’s Liberation Army, I had a glimpse of a collective dream for an alternative to capitalism and the state. In Indonesia, Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology was translated last August, and thereafter a collective research project was launched by independent scholars influenced by David’s thought: Projek Suku Api (the Project of Fire People) on the indigenous and stateless peoples inhabiting the islands of Indonesia. The fund for this project is collected by way of creating a platform for mutual aid and solidarity economy, with the slogan “Do It With Your Friends.” It is certain that Graeber’s work and spirit will continue to live with the people who seek to create possibilities of a world without capitalism and the state.

— Risa Tokunaga from Tokyo/Nusantara

成田圭祐

　僕にとってグレーバーは、気さくで親しみやすい、ここぞという時にはいつも頼りになるアナキスト思想家であった。彼の文化人類学にもとづく射程の広い理論は、自分の足元から世界の隅々にまで広がる、常に更新し続けるアナキズムの可能性を鮮やかに示してくれた。まだまだ書きたいこともやりたいこともたくさんあったはずで、それらを形にしていくグレーバーの姿をもはや見ることができないというのは本当に寂しいことだが、現実として受け止めなければならない。すでに世に出ている彼の著作が、今後さらに広く読み継がれていくことを願う。ありがとう、デヴィッド。安らかに。

──成田圭祐、IRREGULAR RHYTHM ASYLUM

For me David Graeber has been the anarchist thinker who is always friendlily accessible and also seriously reliable at crucial moments. The wide-ranged perspective of his theory, based as it is on his anthropological researches, has consistently shown us the possibilities of anarchism that continue to be renewed vis-à-vis the mutating situations of the world. It is an indescribable loss that we can no longer observe his efforts to realize the objectives in struggle and writing that he must have wished to continue. But we must go on, hoping that his words will be shared across the world more and more. Thank you, David. Rest in Peace.

— Keisuke Narita, Irregular Rhythm Asylum, from Tokyo

松本麻里

　あまりに突然のことで、まだ、十分なことばも浮かびません。グレーバーさんとは2008年に日本の北海道で開かれたG8サミットのプロテスト・ツアーの一環でお会いしました。日本では2006年に「アナーキスト人類学のための断章」が、翻訳紹介されたばかりでした。私たち日本のアクティヴストやフェミニストは、その著作で紹介された、アナキスト的合意形成の方法、作法にとても共感しました。ひとがひととつながる原初形態についての感覚をとぎすまされました。

　それから、印象的だったのは講演のあいま、旅の途中で、グレーバーさんは店の小さな看板や、人のうごきになんでもに興味を示し、天衣無縫にふるまっていたことです。

　これから、また彼は、また彼の魂と彼の著作は、どんな旅をつづけるのでしょうか。行く先々で、人々をなごませ、はげますことと思います。

──松本麻里、東京

His death occurred way too suddenly. I don’t have a satisfactory way to talk about David Graeber. I got to know him during the protest against the 2008 G8 Summit that took place in Hokkaido. In Japan the translation of his Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology was published in 2006, and has since been inspiring many of us Japanese anarchists and feminists. We nurtured tremendous sympathy to the anarchist method and manner of building consensus that he introduced, thanks to which we were able to polish our senses for the original form of creating human connectivity.
Meanwhile, David’s person impressed me a great deal. I was struck by his innocent liveliness, how, during breaks from lectures and discussions, he totally immersed himself in everything that fascinated him, people’s behaviors, street signs, urban spaces and so on.

I am wondering what kind of journey is waiting for his books and his spirit. I believe they will embrace and encourage people, wherever they go.

— Mari Matsumoto from Tokyo

前瀬宗祐、大野 真

　あなたの、変革は知識人に先導されるものではない、という確信のもとで記述されてきた、さまざまな民族誌（エスノグラフィー）、そして価値理論は、それゆえ、何度読んでも驚きと発見に満ちた比類なき作品群として、幾度も私たちを無力感から救い出してくれました。ここ日本でも、日を追うごとにあなたの読者は増え続けており、そしてそれこそは私たちの希望でもあります。あなたの作品を何冊も翻訳出版してこれたことを誇りに思い、そして多作だったあなたのおかげで、未だ訳されない作品もまだまだたくさん残っており、これからもあなたと共にいられることに幸せを感じています。

──前瀬宗祐・大野真、以文社編集部

To David: The belief that revolutionary change derives from people rather than intellectuals has consistently grounded your theory of value, as well as your ethnography; for this reason, your work has continually saved us from the state of lethargy that we are entrapped in time and time again in confrontation with crises, by illuminating wondrous events and new discoveries in everyday situations. Here in Japan, too, passionate readers of your work have been increasing day by day. This is what we have always hoped for. We are extremely honored that our press has been able to publish many of your books. And thanks to your rare passion and productivity, we will be able to work on many more. We are happy we can be with you for a long, long time.

— Sosuke Maese and Makoto Ohno, editors at Ibunsha Press, from Tokyo

阿部小涼

　2009年7月、ディヴィッド・グレーバーさんが来沖した。同じ年の春先、ニュースクール、NYUの学生たちに共鳴して大学占拠した琉球大学生たちへの贈り物のように、彼の来沖企画を友人がアレンジしてくれたのだった。那覇では反基地闘争を支援するゲストハウス柏屋に投宿し、7月21日は琉球大学で「前衛主義の後に何が来るのか」What Comes after the Twilight of Vanguardism? をテーマに90分の講義を行った後、当時は宜野湾市にあったスペースG-shelterで、「るー大占拠キャンプ出張編：今宵はグレーバーと」In the Twilight Hour: Lou-Chans Welcome DG to OKと題したゆんたくイベントに登壇していただいた。ガヴァン・マコーマックやコーネル・ウェストを迎えたこともある伝説の地下室G-shelterは、琉大とニュースクールという海を隔てた二つの大学で起こった大学占拠の比較エスノグラフィックなスライドショー大会となり、手作りの食事あり歌ありのコンヴィヴィアルな空間となり、夏の薄闇の時間どころか、延々4時間を超えて、グレーバーさんは、大学生たちと語り合った。

　翌7月22日は、反基地座り込み闘争が（今日も）続いている沖縄島北部の辺野古と高江の直接行動の現場を訪問した。夜は高江の座り込みの家で住民の会と交流した。前提となる土台を共有して交歓した前日とは異なり、長期にわたる住民の座り込みという反軍事主義の沖縄の行動スタイルを、この日、かれがどのように受けとめ、その経験は後にどのように活かされたのか、いつか機会があったら尋ねてみたいと思っていた。それが叶わなくなったのはとても残念だ。沖縄に飛び込んできて、学生たちを大いに触発してくれたグレーバーさんには、感謝しかない。Rest in powerという言い換えを見かけるが、軍事主義を拒否する沖縄の私たちの平和が力を欠くことなど一度もなかった。その精神をまとっているRest in peaceの言葉を、心をこめて。

──阿部小涼、琉球大学、沖縄

In July 2009 David Graeber came to Okinawa. A group of friends organized the trip, which turned out to be a gift for the students of Ryukyu University, who had just been engaged in an occupation, in synchronicity with the occupations at the New School in New York City and the University of California in Santa Cruz. In Naha, David stayed in the Guest House Kashiwa-ya, which was associated with the anti-US military base movement. July 21st was a long and busy day: he gave a 90-minute talk at Ryukyu University entitled “What Comes After the Twilight of Vanguardism?”, and then participated in a collective talk/party event called “In the Twilight Hour: Lou-Chans Welcome DG to OK” at G-Shelter, a legendary underground space that had previously hosted Gavin McCormack and Cornel West. There David had a long, passionate and joyful conversation with the students exceeding four hours into the summer night, in a convivial atmosphere with potluck food and drinks, as well as a slideshow ethnographically comparing the university occupations, unfolding in two distant places separated by the Pacific Ocean. The next day, David visited two sites of mass direct action against US military bases at Henoko (by the sea) and Takae (in the mountain jungle), both of which are still ongoing. That night, he had an exchange with residents engaged in a sit-in struggle in one of their home bases.

Since his memorable visit, I had been hoping to ask David a couple of questions, if there were a chance to meet again: how he perceived the style of Okinawan people’s long lasting action of anti-militarism based on sit-ins – that is different from the shared experience of university occupation – on the day of his visit and if he was able to employ any of its elements in his own context after the visit. I am very sad that this is no longer possible. At the same time, I am sheerly grateful to David for his having jumped into Okinawa and so powerfully inspired students there. I would like to say: Rest in Peace David, which is equal to Rest in Power in Okinawa, where people’s hope for peace entails their power.

—Abe Kosuzu, Univ. of the Ryukyus, Okinawa

樋口拓朗

貴方がとらえて言葉を与えた律動が好きだった。

不思議にも、調律すると、敬愛すべき友人達が現れた。

掛け値無しに愉しかった。

貴方への追悼を捧げるカーニバルを共に思う。

また響く。

ありがとう、グレーバー。

──樋口拓朗、東京

I always loved the rhythms you captured to give words

mysteriously, in their tuning, were friends to be cherished

an incomparable joy

now today mourning you together

their rhythms reverberate again

thank you, David

— Takuro Higuchi from Tokyo

原口 剛

　釜ヶ崎で十数年ぶりの暴動が起こってから１週間後の2008年6月22日、洞爺湖Ｇ８サミットに対抗するために、グレーバーと私たちは大阪城公園に集った。参加者には、公園でくらす野宿者もいたし、暴動に参加した労働者や活動家もいた。私たちは、デイヴィッド・ソルニットのレクチャーのもと、段ボールを切り貼りし、絵の具を塗って、たくさんのパペットや仮面をつくった。グレーバーは、ほんとうに楽しそうで、まるで子どものようだった。大雨だったので公園には他に誰もいなくて、公園はまさに私たちの空間だった。グレーバーと私たちは、パペットや仮面を身に着け、楽器をかき鳴らして、公園を練り歩いた。まるで国家も資本主義も消え失せたような、喜びに満ちた瞬間だった。

　グレーバーが亡くなったという知らせを聞いてから、あの日の経験をなんども思い返している。いまの大阪城公園はといえば、資本に制圧された、みじめな空間に変えられてしまった。公園に建っていた野宿者の小屋（その軒先にはあの日つくったパペットが門番のようにずっと立っていた）も、すべて取り壊されてしまった。それでも私たちは、あの日の公園での経験を、忘れずにいる。そうして、抗いつづけている。何者にも支配されない空間のなかで、手持ちの道具や経験を持ち寄って大小のパペットをつくったあの日の経験は、いまでも私たちの共有財産であり、抵抗の拠り所だ。みんな、あなたのことを覚えているんだよ。そのことを、グレーバーに伝えたい。

On June 22nd, 2008, along with other foreign activists, David Graeber joined a gathering at the Osaka Castle Park, organized as part of the nationwide actions against the G8 Summit in Toyako, Hokkaido. It was one week after the riot that took place in the Osaka day-laborers’ ghetto called Kamagasaki, breaking ten years of silence. Our impetus was high; participants included activists, the homeless inhabitants of the park, and those workers who rose up during the riot. Following a presentation by David Solnit from San Francisco, we made a lot of puppets and masks by cutting, pasting and painting cardboard. David seemed so happy doing all these works, like a little boy. Due to the heavy rain, the park was empty and it became our own space. With David we wore puppets and masks, playing instruments and marching all over the park. It was a blissful moment, as if the state and capitalism had disappeared.

Since the sad news that David passed away, I have been repeatedly thinking of the shared experience of that day. Speaking of the Osaka Castle Park, it has been turned into a sad space by waves of capitalist development and state control. The huts of the park’s homeless inhabitants, their entrances guarded by the puppets we had made, were all ultimately demolished. But we sustain the experience and memory of that day in June 2008, with which we continue our struggles. The experience of making our own symbols in total DIY manners, in a space without any bosses, continues to be our commonwealth and basis for resistance. We will never forget you — this is what I wish to tell David.

— Takeshi Haraguchi from Osaka