Mariusz Ruszel

The quest: energy, security, and the remaking of the modern world

dition’s concentration on reason misses this crucial part of human interaction. Though here the metaphor actually helps to clarify the argument, the usage does not appear necessary. Overall, the metaphors seem to be over-employed and the importance of fire stretched (e.g. “Revolutionary fire similarly melts the solid structures of the old regime in order to synthesis the new”, p. 44). Fire and other elements as intervening factors could be understood as a critique of the nature–culture dualism and a focus on reason in general. But the very notion of an age of geopolitics is also modernist. It is Eurocentric and has to be attributed to state-centred schools of thought. Meanwhile Marder might be taking the concept of geopolitics for granted. Whether and how the concept of pyropolitics can be meaningful and useful probably remains questionable to many readers. For instance, the power of fire as a symbol is undeniable. It derives from the real material power of fire and the intricate relationship of humans with this source of destruction and “rebirth”. To point out the importance of elements is tautological. An element is a fundamental component after all. It is not clear how spotlighting fire advances an understanding of current affairs. Furthermore, the author largely ignores digital communication technology, which might be attributed to a different element, namely air. The change induced by constant interconnectedness is undisputed. Failing to integrate clearly these technological developments into a concept could be a major shortcoming. Publishing more than one book a year, the sheer amount of Marder’s intellectual output in this decade is admirable. The usefulness of this book depends on the intent. The book is directed to a specific audience. It is suitable neither for layman readers nor undergraduates due to a wealth of concepts and a peculiar style (e.g. “The leitmotif of fire in Heidegger’s reading of Georg Trakl’s poetry On the Way of Language has provided Derrida with ample material for deconstruction”, p. 158). To conclude, the book may be baffling to some readers and it appears that, to utilize the author’s metaphor, the ideas have not been melted into one recognizable shape.