1 One of the central arguments of this book is the claim that temporality is elided,
forgotten, or unrepresented in the discourses and practices of philosophy and
social, cultural, and political theory.This is not simply the consequence of a cor-
rectable elision, but is a function, in part, of language systems themselves. The
language by which we represent temporality, at least in the West from at least the
time of Ancient Greece, is a language of spatiality, in which spatial terms and
relations come to represent temporal movements. This text is no more able to
resist these spatializing tendencies than any other: it is ironic that the metaphor
of time travels I have used as a theme to bind together this collection enacts this
very spatialization! Indeed, it may be that the very concept of metaphor (along
with its rhetorical twin, metonymy) function primarily through spatialization.
2 Deleuze 1989, 81.
3 Nevertheless, there has been an immense effort invested in the management of
time and its ‘‘rational’’ regulation, which has been construed primarily in at-
tempts to measure time, to synchronize different locations according to the same
modes of measurement, and to structure the behavior of individuals and groups
according to the interests of such management. See, for example, Waugh (1999)
for further details. See also Galison (2003).
4 I have discussed in considerable detail the phallocentric structure of binarized
terms in Sexual Subversions (1989).
5 Derrida, Positions (1981b).