|
23f60ad
|
What we are dealing with here is another version of the Lacanian ' ...': if, for Lacan, there is no sexual relationship, then, for Marxism proper, there is no 'meta-language' enabling us to grasp the two levels from the same neutral standpoint, although--or, rather, --these two levels are inextricably intertwined.
|
|
sex
politics
lacan
marxism
|
Slavoj Žižek |
|
f1eeedd
|
If this constant sliding and hiding of meaning were true of conscious life, then we would of course never be able to speak coherently at all. If the whole of language were present to me when I spoke, then I would not be able to articulate anything at all. The ego, or consciousness, can therefore only work by repressing this turbulent activity, provisionally nailing down words on to meanings. Every now and then a word from the unconscious which I do not want insinuates itself into my discourse, and this is the famous Freudian slip of the tongue or parapraxis. But for Lacan all our discourse is in a sense a slip of the tongue: if the process of language is as slippery and ambiguous as he suggests, we can never mean precisely what we say and never say precisely what we mean. Meaning is always in some sense an approximation, a near-miss, a part-failure, mixing non-sense and non-communication into sense and dialogue.
|
|
meaning
freudian-slips
parapraxis
lacan
discourse
unconscious
psychoanalysis
language
consciousness
failure
|
Terry Eagleton |
|
e0b40ef
|
Language, the unconscious, the parents, the symbolic order: these terms in Lacan are not exactly synonymous, but they are intimately allied. They are sometimes spoken of by him as the 'Other' -- as that which like language is always anterior to us and will always escape us, that which brought us into being as subjects in the first place but which always outruns our grasp. We have seen that for Lacan our unconscious desire is directed towards this Other, in the shape of some ultimately gratifying reality which we can never have; but it is also true for Lacan that our desire is in some way always received from the Other too. We desire what others -- our parents, for instance -- unconsciously desire for us; and desire can only happen because we are caught up in linguistic, sexual and social relations -- the whole field of the 'Other' -- which generate it.
|
|
otherness
psychonanlysis
the-symbolic
lacan
unconscious
the-other
language
|
Terry Eagleton |
|
fd397dc
|
...when do I actually encounter the Other 'beyond the wall of language', in the rel of his or her being? Not when I am able to describe her, not even when I learn her values, dreams, and so on, but only when I encounter the Other in her moment of jouissance: when I discern in her a tiny detail (a compulsive gesture, a facial expression, a tic) which signals the intensity of the real of jouissance. This encounter with the real is always traumatic; there is something at least minimally obscene about it; I cannot simply integrate it into my universe, there is always a gulf separating me from it.
|
|
the-real
lacan
the-other
|
Slavoj Žižek |
|
e1aa8fd
|
We thus have three levels of antagonism: the Two are never two, the One is never one, the Nothing is never nothing. Sinthome--the signifier of the barred Other--registers the antagonism of the Two, their non-relationship. The object a registers the antagonism of the One, its inability to be one. $ registers the antagonism of Nothing, its inability to be the Void at peace with itself, to annul all struggles. The position of Wisdom is that the Void brings ultimate peace, a state in which all differences are obliterated; the position of dialectical materialism is that there is no peace even in the Void.
|
|
struggle
philosophy
lacan
|
Slavoj Žižek |