Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Subject
The Absent Centre o f
Political Ontology
SLAVOJ ZIZEK
V
VERSO
London • New York
First p u b l i s h e d bv V e r s o 1 9 9 9
© Slavoj Z i i e k 1 9 9 9
P a p e r b a c k e d i t i o n first p u b l i s h e d bv \ ' e r s o 2 0 0 0
© Slavoj Zizek 2 0 0 0
All rights r e s e r v e d
Verso
UK: 0 M e a r d Street, L o n d o n WTV 3 H R
US: 180 Varick Street, New York, N Y 1 0 0 1 4 - 4 6 0 6
V e r s o is t h e i m p r i n t o f N e w Left B o o k s
ISBN 1 - 8 5 9 8 4 - 2 9 1 - 7
Wo es war, soil ich werden - Where it was, I shall come into being — is F r e u d ' s
v e r s i o n o f t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t g o a l o f k n o w l e d g e t h a t is i n i t s e l f a n a c t o f
l i b e r a t i o n . Is i t still p o s s i b l e t o p u r s u e t h i s g o a l t o d a y , i n t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f
l a t e c a p i t a l i s m ? I f ' i t ' t o d a y is t h e twin r u l e o f p r a g m a t i c - r e l a t i v i s t New
S o p h i s t s a n d N e w A g e o b s c u r a n t i s t s , w h a t ' s h a l l c o m e i n t o b e i n g ' i n its
place? T h e premiss o f t h e s e r i e s is t h a t t h e explosive c o m b i n a t i o n of
L a c a n i a n psychoanalysis a n d Marxist tradition detonates a d y n a m i c free
d o m that e n a b l e s us to q u e s t i o n t h e very p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s o f t h e c i r c u i t o f
Capital.
Forthcoming:
A l e n k a Z u p a n c i c , Ethics of the Real: Kant, Lacan
Alain Badiou, Ethics
Contents
I n t r o d u c t i o n : A S p e c t r e Is H a u n t i n g W e s t e r n A c a d e m i a . . . 1
as a Reader of Kant 9
H e i d e g g e r i a n P o l i t i c a l ( D i s ) E n g a g e m e n t - W h y D i d Being and
Time R e m a i n U n f i n i s h e d ? - T h e T r o u b l e w i t h T r a n s c e n d e n t a l
Imagination - T h e Passage through Madness - T h e Violence
o f I m a g i n a t i o n - T h e M o n s t r o u s - K a n t with David L y n c h -
Kant's Acosmism
W h a t Is ' N e g a t i o n o f N e g a t i o n ' ? - T h e D i a l e c t i c a l
A n a m o r p h o s i s - 3 , 4 , 5 - T h e Speculative Identity o f Substance
and Subject - T h e Hegelian Forced Choice - 'Concrete
U n i v e r s a l i t y ' - ' R a t h e r t h a n w a n t n o t h i n g . . .' - ' I n c l u d e m e
out!' - Towards a Materialist T h e o r y o f G r a c e
T h e T r u t h - E v e n t . . . . . . . a n d Its U n d e c i d a b i l i t y - T r u t h and
B a d i o u , B a l i b a r , R a n c i e r e - H e g e m o n y a n d Its S y m p t o m s -
T h o s e W h o R u l e ? - T h e P o l i t i c a l a n d Its D i s a v o w a l s - T h e
( M i s ) U s e s o f A p p e a r a n c e - P o s t - P o l i t i c s - Is T h e r e a
W h y P e r v e r s i o n Is N o t S u b v e r s i o n - I d e o l o g i c a l I n t e r p e l l a t i o n
M a s o c h i s t i c D e c e p t i o n - F r o m D e s i r e to Drive . . . a n d B a c k
Index 401
Introduction: A Spectre Is Haunting
Western Academia . . .
1. C a r t e s i a n s u b j e c t i v i t y c o n t i n u e s t o b e a c k n o w l e d g e d b y all a c a d e m i c
p o w e r s as a p o w e r f u l a n d still a c t i v e i n t e l l e c t u a l t r a d i t i o n .
•J
2 . I t is h i g h t i m e t h a t t h e p a r t i s a n s o f C a r t e s i a n s u b j e c t i v i t y s h o u l d , i n t h e
f a c e o f t h e w h o l e w o r l d , p u b l i s h t h e i r views, t h e i r a i m s , t h e i r tenden
c i e s , a n d m e e t t h i s nursery- t a l e o f t h e S p e c t r e o f C a r t e s i a n s u b j e c t i v i t y
with t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l m a n i f e s t o o f C a r t e s i a n subjectivity itself.
B e c k ) , it a r g u e s f o r t h e c o n t i n u o u s actuality o f t h e ' d i a l e c t i c o f E n l i g h t
e n m e n t ' : far f r o m simply l i b e r a t i n g us f r o m t h e c o n s t r a i n t s o f p a t r i a r c h a l
tradition, the unprecedented shift in t h e m o d e o f functioning o f the
s y m b o l i c o r d e r t h a t w e a r e w i t n e s s i n g t o d a y e n g e n d e r s its o w n n e w r i s k s
and dangers.
W h i l e t h i s b o o k is p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n its b a s i c t e n o r , i t is first a n d f o r e m o s t
an e n g a g e d political intervention, addressing the burning question o f how
w e a r e t o r e f o r m u l a t e a leftist, a n t i - c a p i t a l i s t p o l i t i c a l p r o j e c t i n o u r e r a o f
global capitalism andiks ideological supplement, liberal-democratic multi-
c u l t u r a l i s m . O n e o f the p h o t o s o f 1 9 9 7 w a s u n d o u b t e d l y t h a t o f m e m b e r s
o f s o m e i n d i g e n o u s tribe from B o r n e o carrying water in plastic bags to
p u t o u t g i g a n t i c fires w h i c h w e r e d e s t r o y i n g t h e i r h a b i t a t , t h e r i d i c u l o u s
i n a d e q u a c y o f their m o d e s t effort m a t c h e d by the h o r r o r o f s e e i n g their
e n t i r e life-world disappear. A c c o r d i n g to n e w s p a p e r r e p o r t s , t h e g i g a n t i c
cloud o f s m o k e covering the entire a r e a o f n o r t h e r n I n d o n e s i a , Malaysia
and the southern Philippines derailed nature i t s e l f , its n o r m a l cycle
( b e c a u s e o f the c o n t i n u o u s darkness, b e e s were u n a b l e to a c c o m p l i s h
their part in the biological r e p r o d u c t i o n o f p l a n t s ) . H e r e we have an
e x a m p l e o f the u n c o n d i t i o n a l R e a l o f global Capital p e r t u r b i n g t h e very
r e a l i t y o f n a t u r e - t h e r e f e r e n c e t o g l o b a l C a p i t a l is n e c e s s a r y h e r e , s i n c e
t h e fires w e r e n o t s i m p l y t h e r e s u l t o f t h e ' g r e e d ' o f l o c a l w o o d m e r c h a n t s
and farmers ( a n d o f c o r r u p t I n d o n e s i a n state officials allowing i t ) , b u t
also o f the fact that b e c a u s e o f the El N i n o effect, the extraordinary
d r o u g h t did n o t e n d in t h e rains w h i c h regularily q u e n c h s u c h fires, a n d
t h e E l N i n o e f f e c t is global.
T h i s c a t a s t r o p h e t h u s gives b o d y to t h e R e a l o f o u r t i m e : t h e t h r u s t o f
Capital which ruthlessly disregards and destroys particular life-worlds,
t h r e a t e n i n g t h e v e r y survival o f h u m a n i t y . W h a t , h o w e v e r , a r e t h e i m p l i
cations o f this c a t a s t r o p h e ? A r e we d e a l i n g m e r e l y with the logic of
Capital, or is t h i s l o g i c j u s t the predominant thrust o f the modern
productivist attitude o f technological d o m i n a t i o n over a n d exploitation o f
nature? O r furthermore, is t h i s v e r y t e c h n o l o g i c a l e x p l o i t a t i o n t h e u l t i
mate expression, the realization o f the deepest potential of modern
C a r t e s i a n s u b j e c t i v i t y itself? T h e a u t h o r ' s a n s w e r t o t h i s d i l e m m a is t h e
e m p h a t i c p l e a o f ' N o t guilty!' f o r t h e C a r t e s i a n s u b j e c t .
Notes
T h a t is t h e t e r r i b l e d e a d l o c k : i f o n e e n d o r s e s H e i d e g g e r ' s 'deconstruc-
tion' o f the metaphysics o f subjectivity, d o e s o n e n o t thus u n d e r m i n e the
very possibility o f a p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y g r o u n d e d d e m o c r a t i c r e s i s t a n c e to t h e
totalitarian h o r r o r s o f the twentieth c e n t u r y ? H a b e r m a s ' s a n s w e r to this
q u e s t i o n is a d e f i n i t i v e a n d p a t h e t i c ' Y e s ! ' , a n d , f o r t h a t r e a s o n , h e a l s o
opposed Adorno's and Horkheimcr's Dialectic of Enlightenment, a book
w h i c h - i n a way n o t t o t a l l y d i s s i m i l a r t o H e i d e g g e r - l o c a t e s t h e r o o t s o f
t h e ' t o t a l i t a r i a n ' h o r r o r s in t h e b a s i c p r o j e c t o f W e s t e r n Enlightenment.
Heideggerians, o f course, would retort that o n e c a n n o t simply oppose
d e m o c r a t i c s u b j e c t i v i t y to its ' t o t a l i t a r i a n ' e x c e s s , s i n c e t h e l a t t e r is t h e
' t r u t h ' o f t h e f o r m e r - t h a t is t o say, s i n c e p h e n o m e n a l i k e ' t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m '
a r e e f f e c t i v e l y g r o u n d e d i n m o d e r n s u b j e c t i v i t y . ( T h i s is h o w - to p u t it in
a s o m e w h a t s i m p l i f i e d way - H e i d e g g e r h i m s e l f e x p l a i n s h i s b r i e f Nazi
e n g a g e m e n t : b y t h e Tact t h a t t h e p r o j e c t o f Being and Time was n o t y e t
wholly freed o f the t r a n s c e n d e n t a l approach.)
The same ambiguity also seems to determine Lacan's own (often
i n c o n s i s t e n t ) r e f e r e n c e to H e i d e g g e r , o s c i l l a t i n g b e t w e e n appropriation
o f s o m e k e y H e i d e g g e r t e r m s as p r o v i d i n g t h e s o u g h t - a f t e r f o u n d a t i o n for
psychoanalysis, a n d a series o f dismissive passing r e m a r k s in his last years
(like the o n e qualifying his e a r l i e r r e f e r e n c e s to H e i d e g g e r as purely
external and didactic). Against the b a c k g r o u n d o f this i m b r o g l i o , our
t h e s i s will b e t h a t L a c a n s u c c e e d s w h e r e H a b e r m a s a n d o t h e r 'defenders
o f t h e s u b j e c t ' , i n c l u d i n g D i e t e r H e n r i c h , fail: t h e L a c a n i a n (re)reading
o f t h e p r o b l e m a t i c o f s u b j e c t i v i t y i n G e r m a n I d e a l i s m e n a b l e s us n o t o n l y
t o d e l i n e a t e c o n t o u r s o f a n o t i o n o f s u b j e c t i v i t y t h a t d o e s n o t fit t h e f r a m e
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 11
H e i d e g g e r i a n P o l i t i c a l (Dis) E n g a g e m e n t
t h e s t a t e o f o u r n a t u r a l s u r r o u n d i n g s is t h u s d e v a l u e d as r e l y i n g o n the
very s o u r c e o f t h e t r o u b l e .
F o r H e i d e g g e r , t h e t r u e p r o b l e m is n o t e c o l o g i c a l c r i s i s i n its o n t i c
dimension, including a possible global catastrophe ( h o l e in the ozone
layer, m e l t i n g o f t h e ice c a p s , e t c . ) , b u t t h e t e c h n o l o g i c a l m o d e o f r e l a t i n g
t o e n t i t i e s a r o u n d u s - t h i s t r u e c r i s i s will c o n f r o n t u s e v e n m o r e r a d i c a l l y
i f t h e e x p e c t e d c a t a s t r o p h e d o e s not o c c u r ; t h a t is, i f h u m a n k i n d does
s u c c e e d in technologically ' m a s t e r i n g ' the critical situation. . . . F o r that
reason, H e i d e g g e r also d e n i e s p h i l o s o p h i c a l relevance to the standard
liberal problematic o f the tension between ' o p e n ' a n d 'closed' societies,
b e t w e e n t h e ' n o r m a l ' f u n c t i o n i n g o f t h e d e m o c r a t i c capitalist system, with
its r e s p e c t f o r h u m a n r i g h t s a n d f r e e d o m s , a n d its ( F a s c i s t o r C o m m u n i s t )
totalitarian 'excesses'. Implicitly, at least, H e i d e g g e r devalues t h e effort to
c o n s t r a i n t h e s y s t e m - t o m a i n t a i n its ' h u m a n f a c e ' , t o c o m p e l it t o r e s p e c t
t h e basic rules o f d e m o c r a c y a n d f r e e d o m , to provide f o r h u m a n solidar
ity, t o p r e v e n t its s l i d i n g i n t o t o t a l i t a r i a n e x c e s s — as a n e s c a p e f r o m the
i n n e r t r u t h o f t h e s y s t e m t h a t b e c o m e s p e r c e p t i b l e in s u c h e x c e s s e s ; s u c h
half-hearted e f f o r t s t o k e e p t h e s y s t e m i n c h e c k a r e t h e w o r s t way t o
r e m a i n w i t h i n its h o r i z o n . O n e s h o u l d r e c a l l h e r e t h e k e y s t r a t e g i c r o l e o f
the signifier 'hysteria' in the m o d e r n 'radical' political discourse, up to
t h e B o l s h e v i k s , w h o d i s m i s s e d as ' h y s t e r i c s ' t h e i r o p p o n e n t s w h o g r o a n e d
a b o u t the n e e d for d e m o c r a t i c values, the totalitarian threat to humanity,
and so on. A l o n g the same lines, H e i d e g g e r also d e n o u n c e s liberal-
h u m a n i t a r i a n d e m a n d s f o r ' c a p i t a l i s m w i t h a h u m a n f a c e ' as t h e u n w i l l
i n g n e s s t o c o n f r o n t t h e e p o c h a l t r u t h i n all its u n b e a r a b l e r a d i c a l i t y . T h e
p a r a l l e l w i t h t h e B o l s h e v i k s is a b s o l u t e l y p e r t i n e n t : w h a t H e i d e g g e r s h a r e s
w i t h r e v o l u t i o n a r y M a r x i s t s is t h e n o t i o n t h a t t h e s y s t e m ' s t r u t h e m e r g e s
i n its e x c e s s - t h a t is t o say, f o r H e i d e g g e r , as w e l l as f o r M a r x i s t s , F a s c i s m
is n o t a s i m p l e a b e r r a t i o n o f t h e ' n o r m a l ' d e v e l o p m e n t o f c a p i t a l i s m b u t
t h e n e c e s s a r y o u t c o m e o f its i n n e r d y n a m i c s .
Here, however, complications arise: on closer inspection, it soon
b e c o m e s c l e a r t h a t H e i d e g g e r ' s a r g u m e n t a t i v e s t r a t e g y is t w o f o l d . O n t h e
o n e h a n d , h e r e j e c t s every c o n c e r n f o r d e m o c r a c y a n d h u m a n r i g h t s as a
purely o n t i c affair u n w o r t h y o f p r o p e r p h i l o s o p h i c a l o n t o l o g i c a l q u e s t i o n
i n g - d e m o c r a c y , F a s c i s m , C o m m u n i s m , t h e y all a m o u n t t o t h e s a m e w i t h
regard to the epochal Destiny o f the West; on the other hand, his
i n s i s t e n c e t h a t h e is n o t c o n v i n c e d t h a t d e m o c r a c y is t h e p o l i t i c a l f o r m
0
w h i c h b e s t suits t h e e s s e n c e o f t e c h n o l o g y n o n e t h e less suggests that
t h e r e is another p o l i t i c a l f o r m w h i c h suits t h i s ecological e s s e n c e better -
f o r s o m e t i m e , H e i d e g g e r t h o u g h t h e h a d f o u n d it i n t h e F a s c i s t ' t o t a l
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 13
r e p r o a c h o f h i s N a z i p a s t c o n s i s t s o f two p o i n t s : n o t o n l y w a s h i s N a z i
e n g a g e m e n t a s i m p l e p e r s o n a l e r r o r ( a ' s t u p i d i t y [Dummheit]', as H e i d e g
ger himself put i t ) i n n o way i n h e r e n t l y r e l a t e d to his philosophical
p r o j e c t ; t h e m a i n c o u n t e r - a r g u m e n t is t h a t it is H e i d e g g e r ' s o w n p h i l o s
ophy that enables us to discern the true epochal roots of modern
totalitariarnsm. However, what remains unthought here is t h e hidden
complicity between the ontological indifference towards c o n c r e t e social
s y s t e m s ( c a p i t a l i s m , F a s c i s m , C o m m u n i s m ) , i n s o f a r as t h e y a l l b e l o n g to
the same horizon o f m o d e r n technology, and the secret privileging o f a
c o n c r e t e s o c i o p o l i t i c a l m o d e l (Nazism with H e i d e g g e r , C o m m u n i s m with
s o m e ' H e i d e g g e r i a n M a r x i s t s ' ) as c l o s e r t o t h e o n t o l o g i c a l t r u t h o f o u r
epoch.
Here one should avoid the trap that c a u g h t H e i d e g g e r ' s defenders,
w h o d i s m i s s e d H e i d e g g e r ' s N a z i e n g a g e m e n t as a s i m p l e a n o m a l y , a fall
i n t o t h e o n t i c level, in b l a t a n t c o n t r a d i c t i o n to his t h o u g h t , w h i c h t e a c h e s
us n o t t o c o n f u s e o n t o l o g i c a l h o r i z o n w i t h o n t i c c h o i c e s ( a s w e have
a l r e a d y s e e n , H e i d e g g e r is a t h i s s t r o n g e s t w h e n h e d e m o n s t r a t e s h o w , o n
a d e e p e r structural level, e c o l o g i c a l , conservative, a n d so o n , o p p o s i t i o n s
to the modern universe o f t e c h n o l o g y are already embedded in the
horizon o f what they purport to reject: the ecological critique o f the
technological exploitation o f n a t u r e ultimately leads to a m o r e 'environ
m e n t a l l y s o u n d ' t e c h n o l o g y , e t c . ) . H e i d e g g e r d i d n o t e n g a g e in t h e N a z i
political p r o j e c t 'in spite o f his o n t o l o g i c a l p h i l o s o p h i c a l a p p r o a c h , but
because of it; t h i s e n g a g e m e n t was n o t ' b e n e a t h ' h i s p h i l o s o p h i c a l l e v e l -
o n t h e c o n t r a r y , i f o n e is t o u n d e r s t a n d H e i d e g g e r , t h e k e y p o i n t is t o
grasp the complicity (in H e g e l e s e : 'speculative identity') between the
elevation above o n t i c c o n c e r n s a n d the passionate ' o n t i c ' Nazi political
engagement.
O n e can now see the ideological trap that caught H e i d e g g e r : w h e n he
criticizes Nazi racism o n b e h a l f o f the true ' i n n e r greatness' o f the Nazi
movement, he repeats the elementary ideological gesture o f maintaining
a n i n n e r d i s t a n c e t o w a r d s t h e i d e o l o g i c a l t e x t - o f c l a i m i n g t h a t t h e r e is
s o m e t h i n g m o r e b e n e a t h it, a n o n - i d e o l o g i c a l k e r n e l : i d e o l o g y e x e r t s its
h o l d o v e r us b y m e a n s o f t h i s v e r y i n s i s t e n c e t h a t t h e C a u s e w e a d h e r e to
is n o t ' m e r e l y ' i d e o l o g i c a l . S o w h e r e is t h e t r a p ? W h e n t h e disappointed
H e i d e g g e r t u r n s away f r o m a c t i v e e n g a g e m e n t i n t h e N a z i m o v e m e n t , h e
d o e s so b e c a u s e the Nazi m o v e m e n t did n o t m a i n t a i n t h e l e v e l o f its
' i n n e r g r e a t n e s s ' , b u t l e g i t i m i z e d itself with i n a d e q u a t e ( r a c i a l ) i d e o l o g y .
In o t h e r words, what h e e x p e c t e d from it was t h a t it s h o u l d l e g i t i m i z e
i t s e l f t h r o u g h d i r e c t a w a r e n e s s o f its ' i n n e r g r e a t n e s s ' . A n d t h e p r o b l e m
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 15
• lies i n t h i s v e r y e x p e c t a t i o n t h a t a p o l i t i c a l m o v e m e n t t h a t will d i r e c t l y
r e f e r t o its h i s t o r i c o - o n t o l o g i c a l f o u n d a t i o n is p o s s i b l e . T h i s e x p e c t a t i o n ,
| l i b w e v e r , is i n itself p r o f o u n d l y metaphysical, in so far as i t fails to
| recognize that the gap separating the direct ideological legitimization o f
a m o v e m e n t f r o m its ' i n n e r g r e a t n e s s ' (its h i s t o r i c o - o n t o l o g i c a l e s s e n c e )
is constitutive, a p o s i t i v e c o n d i t i o n o f its ' f u n c t i o n i n g ' . T o u s e t h e t e r m s o f
, the later H e i d e g g e r , ontological insight necessarily entails ontic blindness
a n d e r r o r , a n d v i c e v e r s a - t h a t is t o say, i n o r d e r t o b e ' e f f e c t i v e ' a t t h e
o n t i c l e v e l , o n e m u s t d i s r e g a r d t h e o n t o l o g i c a l h o r i z o n o f o n e ' s activity.
( I n this sense, H e i d e g g e r e m p h a s i z e s that 'science doesn't think' and
that, far f r o m b e i n g its l i m i t a t i o n , t h i s i n a b i l i t y is t h e v e r y m o t o r of
scientific progress.) In o t h e r words, what H e i d e g g e r seems u n a b l e to
e n d o r s e is a c o n c r e t e p o l i t i c a l e n g a g e m e n t t h a t w o u l d accept its n e c e s s a r y ,
constitutive blindness - as i f t h e moment we acknowledge the gap
separating the awareness o f the ontological horizon from ontic engage
m e n t , a n y o n t i c e n g a g e m e n t is d e p r e c i a t e d , l o s e s its a u t h e n t i c d i g n i t y .
A n o t h e r a s p e c t o f t h e s a m e p r o b l e m is t h e p a s s a g e f r o m ready-at-hand
t o p r e s e n t - a t - h a n d i n Being and Time. H e i d e g g e r t a k e s as t h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t
t h e a c t i v e i m m e r s i o n i n its s u r r o u n d i n g s o f a f i n i t e e n g a g e d a g e n t w h o
r e l a t e s t o o b j e c t s a r o u n d it as t o s o m e t h i n g r e a d y - a t - h a n d ; the impassive
p e r c e p t i o n o f o b j e c t s as p r e s e n t - a t - h a n d a r i s e s g r a d u a l l y f r o m t h i s e n g a g e
ment when things 'malfunction' i n d i f f e r e n t ways, a n d is t h e r e f o r e a
derivative m o d e o f p r e s e n c e . H e i d e g g e r ' s p o i n t , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t the
p r o p e r o n t o l o g i c a l d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e way Dasein is i n t h e w o r l d h a s t o
a b a n d o n t h e m o d e r n C a r t e s i a n duality o f values a n d facts: t h e n o t i o n t h a t
the subject encounters present-at-hand objects on to which he then
p r o j e c t s h i s a i m s , a n d e x p l o i t s t h e m a c c o r d i n g l y , falsifies t h e p r o p e r s t a t e
o f t h i n g s : t h e f a c t t h a t e n g a g e d i m m e r s i o n i n t h e w o r l d is p r i m o r d i a l , a n d
t h a t all o t h e r m o d e s o f t h e p r e s e n c e o f o b j e c t s a r e d e r i v e d f r o m it.
On closer examination, however, the picture becomes somewhat
b l u r r e d a n d m o r e c o m p l e x . T h e p r o b l e m w i t h Being and Time is h o w t o
c o - o r d i n a t e the series o f pairs o f oppositions: a u t h e n t i c e x i s t e n c e versus
das Man; a n x i e t y v e r s u s i m m e r s i o n i n w o r l d l y activity; t r u e p h i l o s o p h i c a l
t h o u g h t versus traditional ontology; dispersed m o d e r n society versus the
P e o p l e a s s u m i n g its h i s t o r i c D e s t i n y . . . . T h e p a i r s i n t h i s s e r i e s d o not
simply overlap: when a p r e m o d e r n a r t i s a n o r f a r m e r , f o l l o w i n g h i s tra
d i t i o n a l way o f l i f e , is i m m e r s e d i n h i s d a i l y i n v o l v e m e n t w i t h ready-at-
h a n d o b j e c t s t h a t a r e i n c l u d e d i n h i s w o r l d , t h i s i m m e r s i o n is d e f i n i t e l y
n o t t h e s a m e as t h e das Man o f t h e m o d e r n c i t y - d w e l l e r . ( T h i s is why, i n
his n o t o r i o u s ' W h y s h o u l d we r e m a i n in t h e p r o v i n c e ? ' , H e i d e g g e r h i m s e l f
16 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
r e p o r t s t h a t w h e n h e was u n c e r t a i n w h e t h e r t o a c c e p t t h e i n v i t a t i o n t o g o
to t e a c h in B e r l i n , h e a s k e d his f r i e n d , a h a r d - w o r k i n g l o c a l f a r m e r , w h o
j u s t s i l e n t l y s h o o k h i s h e a d - H e i d e g g e r i m m e d i a t e l y a c c e p t e d t h i s as t h e
a u t h e n t i c a n s w e r t o h i s p r e d i c a m e n t . ) Is it n o t , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t , i n c o n t r a s t
to t h e s e two o p p o s e d m o d e s o f i m m e r s i o n - t h e a u t h e n t i c involvement
with t h e ready-at-hand a n d t h e m o d e r n l e t t i n g o n e s e l f g o with t h e flow o f
das Man - t h e r e a r e a l s o two o p p o s e d m o d e s o f a c q u i r i n g a d i s t a n c e : t h e
s h a t t e r i n g e x i s t e n t i a l e x p e r i e n c e o f a n x i e t y , w h i c h e x t r a n e a t e s us from
t h e t r a d i t i o n a l i m m e r s i o n i n o u r way o f l i f e , a n d t h e t h e o r e t i c a l d i s t a n c e
o f t h e n e u t r a l o b s e r v e r w h o , as i f f r o m o u t s i d e , p e r c e i v e s t h e w o r l d in
'representations'? It seems as i f t h i s 'authentic' tension between the
i m m e r s i o n o f ' b e i n g - i n - t h e - w o r l d ' a n d its s u s p e n s i o n i n a n x i e t y is r e d o u
b l e d by t h e 'inauthentic' p a i r o f das Man and traditional metaphysical
o n t o l o g y . S o we have four positions: the tension in e v e r y d a y life be
t w e e n a u t h e n t i c ' b e i n g - i n - t h e - w o r l d ' a n d das Man, as w e l l as t h e tension
b e t w e e n t h e two m o d e s o f e x t r a c t i n g o u r s e l v e s f r o m the everyday run
of things, authentic existential resoluteness and the traditional meta
p h y s i c a l o n t o l o g y - d o e s n o t t h i s give us a k i n d o f H e i d e g g c r i a n s e m i o t i c
square?
H e i d e g g e r is n o t i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e ( H e g e l i a n ) p r o b l e m o f l e g i t i m i z i n g
n o r m s t h a t r e g u l a t e o u r i m m e r s i o n in t h e everyday life-world: h e o s c i l l a t e s
b e t w e e n d i r e c t ( p r e - r e f l e x i v e ) i m m e r s i o n i n d a i l y life a n d t h e a b y s s o f t h e
disintegration o f this f r a m e w o r k (his version o f e n c o u n t e r i n g 'absolute
9
n e g a t i v i t y ' ) . H e is a c u t e l y a w a r e o f h o w o u r e v e r y d a y life is g r o u n d e d on
s o m e fragile d e c i s i o n - how, a l t h o u g h we a r e i r r e d u c i b l y t h r o w n i n t o a
c o n t i n g e n t situation, this d o e s n o t m e a n that we are simply determined
b y it, c a u g h t i n it l i k e a n a n i m a l : t h e o r i g i n a l h u m a n c o n d i t i o n is t h a t o f
b e i n g o u t o f j o i n t , o f abyss a n d e x c e s s , a n d a n y i n v o l v e m e n t i n t h e d a i l y
life h a b i t a t r e l i e s o n a n a c t o f r e s o l u t e a c c e p t a n c e o f it. D a i l y h a b i t a t a n d
e x c e s s a r e n o t s i m p l y o p p o s e d : , t h e h a b i t a t i t s e l f is ' c h o s e n ' i n a n 'exces
s i v e ' g e s t u r e o f g r o u n d l e s s d e c i s i o n . T h i s a c t o f v i o l e n t i m p o s i t i o n is t h e
'third term' that u n d e r m i n e s t h e a l t e r n a t i v e o f fully f i t t i n g i n t o a life-
w o r l d c o n t e x t a n d o f a b s t r a c t d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d R e a s o n : it c o n s i s t s i n t h e
v i o l e n t g e s t u r e o f b r e a k i n g o u t o f t h e f i n i t e c o n t e x t , t h e g e s t u r e w h i c h is
n o t yet 'stabilized' in t h e p o s i t i o n o f n e u t r a l universality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f
the observing Reason, but remains a kind o f 'universality-in-becoming', to
put it i n Kierkegaardese. T h e 'specifically human' dimension is thus
n e i t h e r that o f the e n g a g e d agent c a u g h t in the finite life-world c o n t e x t ,
n o r that o f universal R e a s o n e x e m p t e d f r o m t h e life-world, but t h e very
d i s c o r d , t h e ' v a n i s h i n g m e d i a t o r ' , b e t w e e n t h e two.
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 17
as ' a l w a y s - a l r e a d y ' t h a t as w h i c h I a m i n t e r p e l l a t e d : i n r e c o g n i z i n g m y s e l f
as X , I f r e e l y a s s u m e / c h o o s e t h e f a c t t h a t I a l w a y s - a l r e a d y was X . W h e n ,
say, I a m a c c u s e d o f a c r i m e a n d a g r e e t o d e f e n d m y s e l f , I presuppose myself
as a f r e e a g e n t l e g a l l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r m y a c t s .
I n h e r I n t e r n e t discussion widi E r n e s t o L a c l a u , J u d i t h B u t l e r m a d e a
n i c e H e g e l i a n p o i n t a b o u t d e c i s i o n : i t is n o t o n l y t h a t n o d e c i s i o n is t a k e n
i n a n a b s o l u t e v o i d , t h a t e v e r y d e c i s i o n is c o n t e x t u a l i z e d , is a d e c i s i o n - i n -
context, but contexts ihemsejyes:
T h e u n d e c i d a b i l i t y h e r e is r a d i c a l : o n e c a n n e v e r r e a c h a ' p u r e ' c o n t e x t
p r i o r t o a d e c i s i o n ; e v e r y c o n t e x t is ' a l w a y s - a l r e a d y ' r e t r o a c t i v e l y c o n s t i
t u t e d b y a d e c i s i o n ( a s w i t h r e a s o n s t o d o s o m e t h i n g , w h i c h a r e always at
least m i n i m a l l y retroactively posited by the act o f d e c i s i o n they..ground -
o n l y o n c e we d e c i d e to b e l i e v e d o r e a s o n s to b e l i e v e b e c o m e c o n v i n c i n g
t o us, n o t v i c e v e r s a ) . A n o t h e r a s p e c t o f t h i s s a m e p o i n t is t h a t n o t o n l y is
t h e r e n o d e c i s i o n w i t h o u t e x c l u s i o n (i.e. every d e c i s i o n p r e c l u d e s a series
o f p o s s i b i l i t i e s ) , b u t a l s o t h e a c t o f d e c i s i o n i t s e l f is m a d e p o s s i b l e b y s o m e
k i n d o f e x c l u s i o n : s o m e t h i n g m u s t b e e x c l u d e d in o r d e r f o r us t o b e c o m e
beings which make decisions.
Is n o t t h e L a c a n i a n n o t i o n o f 'forced choice' a way t o e x p l a i n this
paradox? Does n o t the primordial 'exclusion' which grounds decision
( i . e . c h o i c e ) i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e c h o i c e is, a t a c e r t a i n r a d i c a l l y fundamental
level, f o r c e d - that I have a (free) c h o i c e only o n c o n d i t i o n that I m a k e
t h e p r o p e r c h o i c e - s o t h a t , at t h i s l e v e l , o n e e n c o u n t e r s a p a r a d o x i c a l
c h o i c e w h i c h o v e r l a p s w i t h its m e t a - c h o i c e : I a m t o l d w h a t I m u s t c h o o s e
freely. . . . F a r f r o m b e i n g a sign o f ' p a t h o l o g i c a l ( o r politically "totalitar
i a n " ) d i s t o r t i o n ' , t h i s l e v e l o f ' f o r c e d c h o i c e ' is p r e c i s e l y w h a t t h e p s y c h o t i c
p o s i t i o n lacks: t h e p s y c h o t i c s u b j e c t a c t s as i f h e h a s a t r u l y f r e e c h o i c e ' a l l
t h e way a l o n g ' .
S o , b e f o r e we dismiss H e i d e g g e r ' s d e s c r i p t i o n o f a n t i c i p a t o r y d e c i s i o n
as f r e e l y a s s u m i n g o n e ' s d e s t i n y as a c o d e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f a c o n s e r v a t i v e
^rjserudo-revolution, we should stop for a moment and recall Fredric
J a m e s o n ' s a s s e r t i o n t h a t a t r u e L e f t i s t is in a way m u c h c l o s e r t o t o d a y ' s
n e o - c o n s e r v a t i v e c o m m u n i t a r i a n t h a n h e is t o a l i b e r a l d e m o c r a t : h e fully
e n d o r s e s t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e c r i t i c i s m o f liberal d e m o c r a c y a n d a g r e e s with
20 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
c o m p l e t e l y m i s s e s t h e p o i n t : w h a t t h i s c r i t i c i s m r e j e c t s as p r o t o - F a s c i s t
( J e c i s i o n i s m is s i m p l y t h e b a s i c c o n d i t i o n o f t h e political. In a perverted
^y, H e i d e g g e r ' s N a z i e n g a g e m e n t was t h e r e f o r e a 'step in the right
*• f j j r e c t i o n ' , a s t e p t o w a r d s o p e n l y a d m i t t i n g a n d fully a s s u m i n g t h e c o n s e
quences o f the lack o f ontological guarantee, o f the abyss o f human
1 5
freedom: as A l a i n B a d i o u p u t it, i n H e i d e g g e r ' s e y e s t h e N a z i ' r e v o l u t i o n '
vns formally indistinguishable from the authentic politico-historical
' e v e n t ' . O r - t o p u t it i n a n o t h e r way - H e i d e g g e r ' s p o l i t i c a l e n g a g e m e n t
was a k i n d o f passage a Facte i n t h e R e a l t h a t b e a r s w i t n e s s t o t h e f a c t t h a t
h e refused to g o to t h e e n d in t h e S y m b o l i c - to t h i n k o u t t h e t h e o r e t i c a l
C o n s e q u e n c e s o f h i s b r e a k t h r o u g h i n Being and Time.
T h e s t a n d a r d s t o r y a b o u t H e i d e g g e r is t h a t h e a c c o m p l i s h e d h i s Kehre
( t u r n ) a f t e r b e c o m i n g a w a r e o f h o w t h e o r i g i n a l p r o j e c t o f Being and, Time
leads back to transcendental subjectivism: owing to the unreflected
r e m a i n d e r o f subjectivTsm"Xdecisionism, e t c . ) , H e i d e g g e r let h i m s e l f be
s e d u c e d i n t o his Nazi e n g a g e m e n t ; w h e n , however, h e b e c a m e aware
o f h o w h e h a d ' b u r n t h i s f i n g e r s ' w i t h it, h e c l e a r e d u p t h e r e m a i n d e r s o f
Subjectivism a n d d e v e l o p e d the i d e a o f t h e h i s t o r i c a l - e p o c h a l c h a r a c t e r
o f B e i n g i t s e l f . . . . O n e is t e m p t e d t o i n v e r t t h i s s t a n d a r d s t o r y : t h e r e is a
kind o f 'vanishing mediator' between H e i d e g g e r I a n d H e i d e g g e r II, a
p o s i t i o n o f r a d i c a l i z e d s u b j e c t i v i t y c o i n c i d i n g w i t h its o p p o s i t e - t h a t is,
reduced to an empty gesture, the impossible intersection between the
' d e c i s i o n i s m ' o f H e i d e g g e r I a n d his late 'fatalism' ( t h e e v e n t o f B e i n g
' t a k e s p l a c e ' i n m a n , w h o s e r v e s as its s h e p h e r d . . . ) . F a r f r o m b e i n g t h e
' p r a c t i c a l c o n s e q u e n c e ' o f this r a d i c a l i z e d s u b j e c t i v i t y , H e i d e g g e r ' s N a z i
e n g a g e m e n t w a s a d e s p e r a t e a t t e m p t t o avoid it. . . . I n o t h e r w o r d s , w h a t
H e i d e g g e r l a t e r d i s m i s s e d as t h e r e m a i n d e r o f t h e s u b j e c t i v i s t t r a n s c e n -
" dental approach i n Being and Time, is w h a t h e should have stuck to.
H e i d e g g e r ' s u l t i m a t e f a i l u r e is n o t t h a t h e r e m a i n e d s t u c k i n t h e h o r i z o n
"|)&f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s u b j e c t i v i t y , b u t t h a t h e a b a n d o n e d t h i s h o r i z o n all t o o
Q u i c k l y , b e f o r e t h i n k i n g o u t all its i n h e r e n t p o s s i b i l i t i e s . N a z i s m was n o t a
^l^olitical expression o f the 'nihilist, d e m o n i a c potential o f m o d e r n subjec-
;,*Jvity' b u t , r a t h e r , its e x a c t o p p o s i t e : a d e s p e r a t e a t t e m p t t o a v o i d this
jpotential.
T h i s l o g i c o f t h e ' m i s s i n g l i n k ' is o f t e n p r e s e n t i n t h e h i s t o r y o f t h o u g h t ,
from S c h e l l i n g to t h e F r a n k f u r t S c h o o l . I n the case o f S c h e l l i n g , we have
t h e a l m o s t u n b e a r a b l e t e n s i o n o f h i s Weltalter drafts, t h e i r u l t i m a t e failure;
S c h e l l i n g ' s l a t e p h i l o s o p h y , w h i c h f o l l o w s t h e Weltalter, effectively resolves
this u n b e a r a b l e t e n s i o n , b u t in t h e w r o n g way - by l o s i n g t h e very d i m e n
s i o n t h a t was m o s t p r o d u c t i v e i n it. W e e n c o u n t e r t h e s a m e p r o c e d u r e o f
22 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
7
W h y is H e i d e g g e r ' s Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics' crucial here? L e t
us r e c a l l t h e s i m p l e f a c t t h a t Being and Time, as w c k n o w it, is a f r a g m e n t :
w h a t H e i d e g g e r p u b l i s h e d as t h e b o o k c o n s i s t s o f t h e first two s e c t i o n s o f
t h e first p a r t ; t h e p r o j e c t p r o v e d i m p o s s i b l e t o r e a l i z e , a n d w h a t c a m e o u t
o f t h i s f a i l u r e , w h a t ( t o u s e g o o d o l d s t r u c t u r a l i s t j a r g o n ) filled i n t h e l a c k
of the missing final part o f Being and Time, was t h e a b u n d a n c e of
H e i d e g g e r ' s w r i t i n g s a f t e r t h e f a m o u s Kehre. O u r p o i n t , o f c o u r s e , is n o t
simply to imagine t h e finished v e r s i o n o f Being and. Time, the impediment
t h a t s t o p p e d H e i d e g g e r was i n h e r e n t . O n c l o s e r e x a m i n a t i o n , t h e situ
a t i o n is m o r e c o m p l e x . O n t h e o n e h a n d - a t l e a s t a t m a n u s c r i p t l e v e l -
t h e e n t i r e p r o j e c t o f Being and Time was a c c o m p l i s h e d : n o t o n l y d o w e
have Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, which encompasses t h e first
s e c t i o n o f t h e p r o j e c t e d P a r t I I , b u t H e i d e g g e r ' s l e c t u r e s a t M a r b u r g in
1 9 2 7 ( p u b l i s h e d l a t e r as The Basic Problems of Phenomenology) d o loosely
cover precisely the remaining s e c t i o n s o f t h e o r i g i n a l Being and Time
p r o j e c t ( t i m e as t h e h o r i z o n o f t h e q u e s t i o n o f b e i n g ; t h e C a r t e s i a n cogito
a n d t h e A r i s t o t e l i a n c o n c e p t i o n o f t i m e as t h e p l a n n e d s e c t i o n s t w o a n d
t h r e e o f t h e s e c o n d p a r t ) , s o that, i f we p u t t h e s e t h r e e p u b l i s h e d v o l u m e s
t o g e t h e r , w e d o g e t a r o u g h r e a l i z e d v e r s i o n o f t h e e n t i r e Being and Time
project. Furthermore, perhaps even more enigmatic is t h e f a c t that
a l t h o u g h t h e p u b l i s h e d v e r s i o n o f Being and Time d o e s n o t c o v e r e v e n t h e
c o m p l e t e first p a r t o f t h e e n t i r e p r o j e c t , b u t o n l y its first t w o s e c t i o n s
( s e c t i o n t h r e e , t h e e x p o s i t i o n o f t i m e as t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l horizon for
t h e q u e s t i o n o f b e i n g , is m i s s i n g ) , it s o m e h o w s t r i k e s u s as ' c o m p l e t e ' , a s
a n o r g a n i c W h o l e , as i f n o t h i n g is r e a l l y m i s s i n g . W h a t w e a r e d e a l i n g
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 23
with respect to the ' r e c o i l i n g ' H e i d e g g e r imputes to Kant when faced with the
'bottomless abyss' o p e n e d up by the discovery o f t h e transcendental imagin
ation, it is H e i d e g g e r h i m s e l f who in effect 'recoils' after writing his b o o k on
Kant. A new forgetting, covering-over, a n d e f f a c e m e n t o f the question o f t h e
imagination intervenes, for n o further traces o f the question will be found in
any o f his subsequent writings; t h e r e is a suppression o f what this question
2
unsettles for every ontology ( a n d for e v e r y 'thinking o f B e i n g ' ) . ' "
C a s t o r i a d i s a l s o d r a w s p o l i t i c a l c o n s e q u e n c e s f r o m t h i s : it is H e i d e g g e r ' s
r e c o i l i n g f r o m t h e abyss o f i m a g i n a t i o n t h a t j u s t i f i e s h i s a c c e p t a n c e o f
^totalitarian' p o l i t i c a l c l o s u r e , w h i l e t h e abyss o f i m a g i n a t i o n p r o v i d e s t h e
philosophical foundation for the democratic opening - the notion of
s o c i e t y as g r o u n d e d i n a c o l l e c t i v e a c t o f h i s t o r i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n : ' A full
r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e r a d i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n is p o s s i b l e o n l y i f it g o e s h a n d in
h a n d with t h e discovery o f t h e o t h e r d i m e n s i o n o f t h e radical i m a g i n a r y ,
t h e s o c i a l - h i s t o r i c a l i m a g i n a r y , i n s t i t u t i n g s o c i e t y as s o u r c e o f o n t o l o g i c a l
21
c r e a t i o n d e p l o y i n g i t s e l f as h i s t o r y . " However, Castoriadis's notion o f
i m a g i n a t i o n r e m a i n s w i t h i n t h e e x i s t e n t i a l i s t h o r i z o n o f m a n as t h e b e i n g
who p r o j e c t s his ' e s s e n c e ' in the act o f imagination transcending all
p o s i t i v e B e i n g . S o , b e f o r e w e p a s s t h e f i n a l j u d g e m e n t o n it, it w o u l d b e
appropriate to take a c l o s e r l o o k at t h e c o n t o u r s o f i m a g i n a t i o n in K a n t
himself.
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 25
T h e m y s t e r y o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i m a g i n a t i o n qua s p o n t a n e i t y l i e s i n t h e
fact that it c a n n o t b e p r o p e r l y l o c a t e d with regard to the couple of
phenomenal and Noumenal. K a n t h i m s e l f is c a u g h t h e r e i n a deadly
jjnpasse a n d / o r a m b i g u i t y . O n t h e o n e h a n d , h e c o n c e i v e s o f t r a n s c e n
dental freedom ( ' s p o n t a n e i t y ' ) as noumenal: as p h e n o m e n a l e n t i t i e s , w e
;
,!i$re c a u g h t i n t h e w e b o f c a u s a l c o n n e c t i o n s , w h i l e o u r f r e e d o m ( t h e f a c t
that, as m o r a l s u b j e c t s , we a r e f r e e , s e l f - o r i g i n a d n g a g e n t s ) i n d i c a t e s t h e
l i o u m c n a l d i m e n s i o n . In t h i s way, K a n t s o l v e s t h e d y n a m i c a n t i n o m i e s o f
r e a s o n : b o t h p r o p o s i t i o n s c a n b e t r u e - t h a t is t o say, s i n c e all p h e n o m e n a
%re c a u s a l l y l i n k e d , m a n , as a phenomenal entity, is n o t free; as a
''Kioumenal e n t i t y , h o w e v e r , m a n c a n a c t m o r a l l y as a f r e e a g e n t . . . . W h a t
blurs t h i s c l e a r p i c t u r e is K a n t ' s o w n i n s i g h t i n t o t h e c a t a s t r o p h i c c o n s e
quences o f o u r direct access to t h e n o u m e n a l s p h e r e : i f this w e r e to
>$jappen, m e n would lose their moral freedom and/or transcendental
Spontaneity; they would t u r n i n t o l i f e l e s s p u p p e t s . T h a t is t o say: i n a
s u b c h a p t e r o f h i s Critique of Practical Reason mysteriously entitied ' O f the
Wise A d a p t a t i o n o f M a n ' s C o g n i t i v e F a c u l t i e s t o H i s P r a c t i c a l V o c a t i o n ' ,
tic a n s w e r s t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h a t w o u l d h a p p e n t o us i f w e w e r e t o g a i n
access t o t h e n o u m e n a l d o m a i n , t o T h i n g s i n t h e m s e l v e s :
. . . instead o f the conflict which now the moral disposition has to wage with
inclinations and in which, after s o m e defeats, moral strength o f m i n d may b e
gradually won, G o d and eternity in their awful majesty would stand unceasingly
before o u r eyes. . . . T h u s most actions c o n f o r m i n g to the law would b e d o n e
from fear, few would be d o n e from h o p e , n o n e from duty. T h e moral worth o f
actions, on which a l o n e the worth o f t h e person a n d even o f the world d e p e n d s
in t h e eyes o f s u p r e m e wisdom, would n o t exist at all. T h e c o n d u c t o f m a n , so
l o n g as his nature r e m a i n e d as it is now, would b e c h a n g e d into m e r e
m e c h a n i s m , where, as in a p u p p e t show, everything would gesticulate well but
2 2
n o life would b e found in the figures.' '
'phenomenon' i n a m o r e r a d i c a l s e n s e o f s o m e t h i n g t h a t is m e a n i n g f u l
o n l y as a n e n t i t y w h i c h appears t o a finite b e i n g e n d o w e d with c o n s c i o u s
ness a n d / o r t h e c a p a c i t y f o r f r e e d o m . P e r h a p s , i f w e a p p r o a c h t h e d i v i n i t y
too closely, this s u b l i m e quality of s u p r e m e Goodness turns into an
excruciating Monstrosity.
H e r e , H e i d e g g e r is fully j u s t i f i e d i n h i s f e r o c i o u s a v e r s i o n t o C a s s i r e r ' s
2 4
reading o f Kant during their famous Davos debate in 1 9 2 9 . Cassirer
simply c o n t r a s t s t h e t e m p o r a l f i n i t u d e o f the human condition ( a t this
level, h u m a n beings are empirical entities whose behaviour can be
e x p l a i n e d b y d i f f e r e n t sets o f c a u s a l l i n k s ) w i t h t h e f r e e d o m o f m a n qua
e t h i c a l a g e n t : i n its s y m b o l i c activity, h u m a n i t y g r a d u a l l y c o n s t r u c t s t h e
universe o f values a n d m e a n i n g s that c a n n o t b e r e d u c e d to ( o r e x p l a i n e d
via a r e f e r e n c e t o ) t h e d o m a i n o f facts a n d t h e i r i n t e r r e l a t i o n s - this
u n i v e r s e o f V a l u e s a n d M e a n i n g s p o s i t e d b y m a n ' s s y m b o l i c a c t i v i t y is t h e
m o d e r n v e r s i o n o f P l a t o ' s r e a l m o f e t e r n a l I d e a s : t h a t is t o say, i n it, a
d i m e n s i o n d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h a t o f t h e d y n a m i c c i r c u i t o f life, o f g e n e r a t i o n
and corruption, breaks through a n d comes into existence - a dimension
w h i c h , a l t h o u g h it d o c s n o t e x i s t o u t s i d e t h e a c t u a l h u m a n l i f e - w o r l d , is
i n i t s e l f ' i m m o r t a l ' a n d ' e t e r n a l ' . I n h i s c a p a c i t y as ' s y m b o l i c a n i m a l ' , m a n
transcends the confines of finitudc a n d temporality. . . . Against this
distinction, H e i d e g g e r demonstrates h o w t h e 'immortality' a n d 'eternity'
of t h e s y m b o l i c s y s t e m o f V a l u e s a n d M e a n i n g s , i r r e d u c i b l e t o t h e l e v e l o f
. . e m p i r i c a l l y g i v e n p o s i t i v e f a c t s , c a n e m e r g e o n l y as part, o f t h e e x i s t e n c e
of a f i n i t e a n d m o r t a l b e i n g w h o is a b l e t o r e l a t e t o h i s f i n i t u d e as s u c h :
.'i: ' i m m o r t a l ' b e i n g s d o n o t e n g a g e i n s y m b o l i c a c t i v i t y , s i n c e , f o r t h e m , t h e
; gap b e t w e e n fact a n d V a l u e disappears. T h e key question, u n a n s w e r e d by
|i C a s s i r e r , is t h e r e f o r e : w h a t is t h e s p e c i f i c s t r u c t u r e o f t h e temporality of
Inhuman e x i s t e n c e , s o t h a t it a l l o w s f o r t h e e m e r g e n c e o f meaning - t h a t is
I to say, s o t h a t a human b e i n g is a b l e t o e x p e r i e n c e h i s e x i s t e n c e as
pj e m b e d d e d i n a m e a n i n g f u l W h o l e ?
|; O n e c a n see clearly, now, why H e i d e g g e r focuses o n transcendental
^.imagination: the unique character o f imagination lies i n t h e f a c t t h a t it
! undermines the opposition between receptivity/finitude ( o f m a n as a n
Si e m p i r i c a l b e i n g c a u g h t i n t h e p h e n o m e n a l c a u s a l n e t w o r k ) a n d s p o n t a n -
!
A eity ( i . e . t h e s e l f - o r i g i n a t i n g a c t i v i t y o f m a n a s a f r e e a g e n t , b e a r e r o f
n o u m e n a l f r e e d o m ) : i m a g i n a t i o n is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y r e c e p t i v e a n d p o s i t i n g ,
' p a s s i v e ' ( i n it, w e a r e a f f e c t e d b y s e n s i b l e i m a g e s ) a n d ' a c t i v e ' ( t h e s u b j e c t
h i m s e l f f r e e l y gives b i r t h t o t h e s e i m a g e s , s o t h a t t h i s a f f e c t i o n is s e l l -
a f f e c t i o n ) . A n d H e i d e g g e r ' s e m p h a s i s is o n h o w s p o n t a n e i t y i t s e l f c a n b e
c o n c e i v e d o n l y t h r o u g h t h i s u n i t y w i t h a n i r r e d u c i b l e e l e m e n t o f passive
28 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
T h e T r o u b l e with T r a n s c e n d e n t a l I m a g i n a t i o n
I n t h i s way, we o b t a i n a t h r e e - s t e p p r o c e s s t h a t b r i n g s us to c o g n i t i o n
proper:
l
Jjowever, m s o r a r a s p U r e s y n t h e s i s , r e p r e s e n t e d g e n e r a l l y , g i v e s us t h e
pure conception o f the understanding', 2 8
t h e a m b i g u i t y is c l e a r l y d i s c e r n -
; I b l e : is ' s y n t h e s i s , g e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g . . . t h e m e r e o p e r a t i o n o f i m a g i n
2 9
ation', with U n d e r s t a n d i n g as a s e c o n d a r y c a p a c i t y i n t e r v e n i n g after
i imagination has already done its w o r k , or is i t t h a t 'pure synthesis,
i r e p r e s e n t e d g e n e r a l l y , gives u s t h e p u r e c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e understand
s o t r i
ing'. a t t h e s y n t h e s i s o f i m a g i n a t i o n is m e r e l y t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f
i the synthetic power o f understanding on a lower, m o r e primitive, pre-
c o g n i t i v e l e v e l ? O r , t o p u t it i n t h e t e r m s o f g e n u s a n d s p e c i e s : is t h e f o r c e
v'of i m a g i n a t i o n d i e i m p e n e t r a b l e u l t i m a t e m y s t e r y o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s p o n
taneity, t h e r o o t o f subjectivity, t h e e n c o m p a s s i n g g e n u s o u t o f w h i c h
grows u n d e r s t a n d i n g as its d i s c u r s i v e c o g n i t i v e s p e c i f i c a t i o n , o r is t h e
encompassing genus understanding i t s e l f , w i t h i m a g i n a t i o n as a k i n d o f
. shadow c a s t r e t r o a c t i v e l y by u n d e r s t a n d i n g on to the lower level o f
i n t u i t i o n - o r , t o p u t it i n H e g e l e s e , is t h e s y n t h e s i s o f i m a g i n a t i o n the
underdeveloped 'In-itself of a force posited as s u c h ' , 'for i t s e l f , in
•Understanding? T h e point o f Heidegger's reading is t h a t o n e should
d e t e r m i n e t h e s y n t h e s i s o f i m a g i n a t i o n as t h e f u n d a m e n t a l d i m e n s i o n at
v the r o o t o f discursive understanding, which should thus be analysed
independently o f the categories o f Understanding - Kant recoiled from
- this r a d i c a l s t e p , a n d reduced imagination to a m e r e m e d i a t i n g force
vbetween the pure sensuous manifold o f intuition and the cognitive
^ s y n t h e t i c activity o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g .
I n c o n t r a s t t o this a p p r o a c h , we a r e t e m p t e d t o e m p h a s i z e a d i f f e r e n t
l| a s p e c t : t h e f a c t t h a t K a n t ' s n o t i o n o f i m a g i n a t i o n s i l e n t l y p a s s e s o v e r a
^Crucial 'negative' feature o f imagination: o b s e s s e d as h e is w i t h the
{.endeavour to synthesize, to b r i n g t o g e t h e r the dispersed m a n i f o l d given
' in intuition, K a n t passes over in silence the opposite p o w e r o f i m a g i n a t i o n
" emphasized l a t e r by H e g e l - namely, imagination qua the 'activity o f
/ / . d i s s o l u t i o n ' , w h i c h t r e a t s as a s e p a r a t e e n t i t y w h a t h a s e f f e c t i v e e x i s t e n c e
. only as a p a r t o f s o m e o r g a n i c W h o l e . T h i s n e g a t i v e p o w e r a l s o c o m p r i s e s
'.! U n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d I m a g i n a t i o n , as is c l e a r i f w e r e a d two c r u c i a l p a s s a g e s
from Hegel together. T h e first, less k n o w n , is f r o m his m a n u s c r i p t s o f
Jenaer Realphilosophie, a b o u t the 'night o f the world':
it is n o t h i n g o r is false, and then, having d o n e with it, turn away and pass on to
s o m e t h i n g else; on t h e contrary, Spirit is this power only by l o o k i n g t h e negative
in the face, a n d tarrying with it. This tarrying with the negative is t h e magical
power that converts it into being. T h i s power is identical with what we earlier
called the Subject. . .
r e f u s a l t o b r i n g t o l i g h t I m a g i n a t i o n i n its n e g a t i v e / d i s r u p t i v e a s p e c t , as
t h e f o r c e o f t e a r i n g t h e c o n t i n u o u s f a b r i c o f i n t u i t i o n a p a r t . K a n t is t o o
q u i c k i n a u t o m a t i c a l l y a s s u m i n g t h a t t h e m u l t i t u d e o f i n t u i t i o n is d i r e c t l y
g i v e n , s o t h a t t h e b u l k o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s a c t i v i t y is t h e n constrained to
b r i n g i n g t h i s m u l t i t u d e t o g e t h e r , t o o r g a n i z i n g it i n t o a n i n t e r c o n n e c t e d
Whole, from the m o s t primitive synthesis o f i m a g i n a t i o n , t h r o u g h the
s y n t h e t i c activity o f t h e c a t e g o r i e s o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g , u p t o t h e r e g u l a t i v e
I d e a o f R e a s o n , the i m p o s s i b l e task o f u n i t i n g o u r e n t i r e e x p e r i e n c e o f
t h e u n i v e r s e i n t o a r a t i o n a l o r g a n i c s t r u c t u r e . W h a t K a n t n e g l e c t s is t h e
f a c t t h a t t h e p r i m o r d i a l f o r m o f i m a g i n a t i o n is t h e e x a c t o p p o s i t e o f t h i s
s y n t h e t i c activity: i m a g i n a t i o n e n a b l e s us to tear the t e x t u r e o f reality
a p a r t , t o t r e a t as e f f e c t i v e l y e x i s t i n g s o m e t h i n g t h a t is m e r e l y a c o m p o n e n t
o f a living W h o l e .
How, then, does the opposition between imagination a n d understand
ing relate to that b e t w e e n synthesis a n d analysis (in t h e s e n s e o f disrupt
ing, d e c o m p o s i n g , the primordial immediate unity o f intuition)? This
relation can be c o n c e i v e d as w o r k i n g both ways: o n e can determine
i m a g i n a t i o n as t h e s p o n t a n e o u s s y n t h e s i s o f t h e s e n s u o u s m a n i f o l d i n t o a
perception o f unified objects a n d processes, which are then torn apart,
d e c o m p o s e d , a n a l y s e d by d i s c u r s i v e u n d e r s t a n d i n g ; o r o n e c a n d e t e r m i n e
i m a g i n a t i o n as t h e p r i m o r d i a l p o w e r o f d e c o m p o s i t i o n , o f t e a r i n g - a p a r t ,
while the role o f understanding is t h e n t o b r i n g t o g e t h e r t h e s e membra
disjecta, into a new rational W h o l e . In b o t h cases, the continuity b e t w e e n
imagination and understanding is d i s r u p t e d : t h e r e is a n i n h e r e n t antag
o n i s m b e t w e e n t h e two - it is e i t h e r U n d e r s t a n d i n g that heals the wound
i n f l i c t e d b y i m a g i n a t i o n , s y n t h e s i z i n g its membra disjecta, or Understanding
m o r t i f i e s , tears the s p o n t a n e o u s s y n t h e t i c unity o f i m a g i n a t i o n i n t o bits
and pieces.
A t t h i s p o i n t , a n a i v e q u e s t i o n is q u i t e a p p r o p r i a t e : w h i c h o f t h e two
a x e s , o f t h e two r e l a t i o n s , is m o r e f u n d a m e n t a l ? T h e u n d e r l y i n g structure
h e r e , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t o f a v i c i o u s c y c l e o r m u t u a l implication: 'the
w o u n d c a n b e h e a l e d o n l y b y t h e s p e a r t h a t i n f l i c t e d it' - t h a t is to say,
the multitude that the synthesis o f imagination endeavours to bring
t o g e t h e r is a l r e a d y t h e r e s u l t o f i m a g i n a t i o n itself, o f its d i s r u p t i v e power.
T h i s m u t u a l i m p l i c a t i o n n o n e t h e less g i v e s p r e c e d e n c e t o t h e ' n e g a t i v e ' ,
disruptive aspect o f i m a g i n a t i o n - n o t only for the obvious c o m m o n - s e n s e
r e a s o n t h a t e l e m e n t s m u s t first b e d i s m e m b e r e d i n o r d e r t o o p e n u p the
space for the endeavour to bring t h e m t o g e t h e r again, but for a m o r e
radical reason: because of the subject's irreducible finitude, the very
e n d e a v o u r o f ' s y n t h e s i s ' is always m i n i m a l l y ' v i o l e n t ' a n d d i s r u p t i v e . That
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 33
real q u e s t i o n is, r a t h e r , h o w t h e s u b j e c t is a b l e t o c l i m b o u t o f m a d n e s s
a n d reach ' n o r m a l i t y ' . T h a t is t o say: t h e w i t h d r a w a l - i n t o - s e l f , t h e c u t t i n g -
off o f the links to t h e e n v i r o n s , is f o l l o w e d b y t h e construction of a
s j r n b o l i c universe w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t p r o j e c t s o n t o r e a l i t y as a k i n d o f
tfSgteuTe^rjro^tion, d e s t i n e d t o r e c o m p e n s e us f o r t h e l o s s o f t h e i m m e
diate, p r e - s y m b o l i c R e a l . H o w e v e r , as F r e u d h i m s e l f a s s e r t e d in h i s a n a l y s i s
ofTJaniel P a u l S c h r e b e r , is n o t t h e m a n u f a c t u r i n g o f a substitute-formation,
which r e c o m p e n s e s t h e s u b j e c t f o r t h e loss o f r e a l i t y , t h e m o s t s u c c i n c t
definition o f p a r a n o i a c construction as t h e subject's attempt to cure
himself of t h e d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f h i s u n i v e r s e ?
I n s h o r t , t h e o n t o l o g i c a l n e c e s s i t y o f ' m a d n e s s ' l i e s i n t h e f a c t t h a t it is
not p o s s i b l e t o p a s s d i r e c t l y f r o m t h e p u r e l y ' a n i m a l s o u l ' i m m e r s e d i n its
natural l i f e - w o r l d t o ' n o r m a l ' s u b j e c t i v i t y d w e l l i n g in its s y m b o l i c u n i v e r s e .
The ' v a n i s h i n g m e d i a t o r ' b e t w e e n t h e two is t h e ' m a d ' g e s t u r e o f r a d i c a l
withdrawal from reality which opens up the space for its symbolic
(re)constitution. Hegel already e m p h a s i z e d the radical ambiguity o f the
statement ' W h a t I t h i n k , t h e p r o d u c t o f m y t h o u g h t , is o b j e c t i v e l y t r u e . '
T h i s s t a t e m e n t is a s p e c u l a t i v e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t e x p r e s s e s s i m u l t a n e o u s l y
the ' l o w e s t ' , t h e e r r a t i c a t t i t u d e o f t h e m a d m a n c a u g h t i n h i s s e l f - e n c l o s e d
universe, unable to relate to reality, and the 'highest', the truth of
s p e c u l a t i v e i d e a l i s m , t h e i d e n t i t y o f t h o u g h t a n d b e i n g . If, t h e r e f o r e , i n
this p r e c i s e s e n s e - as L a c a n put it - normality i t s e l f is a m o d e , a
s u b s p e c i e s o f p s y c h o s i s - t h a t is, i f t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n ' n o r m a l i t y ' and
madness is i n h e r e n t to m a d n e s s - o f what, then, d o e s this difference
between t h e 'mad' (paranoiac) construction and the 'normal' (social)
construction o f r e a l i t y c o n s i s t ? Is ' n o r m a l i t y ' ultimately merely a more
' m e d i a t e d ' f o r m o f m a d n e s s ? O r , as S c h e l l i n g p u t it, is n o r m a l Reason
merely ' r e g u l a t e d m a d n e s s ' ?
Does not Hegel's brief description - 'here shoots a bloody head, there
a n o t h e r white ghastly apparition' - c h i m e perfectly with L a c a n ' s n o t i o n o f
the ' d i s m e m b e r e d b o d y ' [k corps morcele]? W h a t H e g e l calls t h e ' n i g h t o f
the w o r l d ' (the p h a n t a s m a g o r i c a l , pre-symbolic d o m a i n o f partial drives)
is an u n d e n i a b l e c o m p o n e n t o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s m o s t r a d i c a l s e l f - e x p e r i e n c e ,
exemplified, a m o n g others, by H i e r o n y m u s B o s c h ' s c e l e b r a t e d paintings.
I n a way, t h e e n t i r e p s y c h o a n a l y t i c e x p e r i e n c e f o c u s e s o n t h e t r a c e s o f t h e
t r a u m a t i c passage f r o m this ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' i n t o o u r 'daily' universe
of logos. T h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n t h e n a r r a t i v e f o r m a n d t h e ' d e a t h d r i v e ' , as
the w i t h d r a w a l - i n t o - s e l f c o n s t i t u t i v e o f t h e s u b j e c t , is t h u s t h e m i s s i n g l i n k
t h a t h a s to b e p r e s u p p o s e d if we are to a c c o u n t for the passage from
n a t u r a l ' to ' s y m b o l i c ' s u r r o u n d i n g s .
36 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
w i t h o u t a g a p , we w o u l d o b t a i n p e r f e c t s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t a n d s e l f - e n c l o s e d
a u t o - a f f e c t i o n . H o w e v e r , t h e s y n t h e s i s o f i m a g i n a t i o n n e c e s s a r i l y fails; it
g e t s c a u g h t i n a n i n c o n s i s t e n c y i n t w o d i f f e r e n t ways:
• t h e n , i n a n e x t e r n a l way, t h r o u g h t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f t h e ( m o r a l ) L a w
that a n n o u n c e s a n o t h e r dimension, that o f the n o u m e n a l : the (moral)
Law is n e c e s s a r i l y e x p e r i e n c e d b y t h e s u b j e c t a s a v i o l e n t intrusion
disturbing the s m o o t h self-sufficient run o f t h e auto-affection o f his
imagination.
I n t h e s e two c a s e s o f t h e v i o l e n c e t h a t e m e r g e s a s a k i n d o f a n s w e r t o t h e
preceding violence o f the transcendental imagination itself, wc thus
e n c o u n t e r t h e m a t r i x o f m a t h e m a t i c a l a n d d y n a m i c a n t i n o m i e s . T h i s is
t h e e x a c t l o c u s at w h i c h t h e a n t a g o n i s m b e t w e e n ( p h i l o s o p h i c a l ) m a t e r i
a l i s m a n d i d e a l i s m is d i s c e r n i b l e i n K a n t ' s p h i l o s o p h y : i t c o n c e r n s the
question o f primacy in the relationship between the two antinomies.
I d e a l i s m gives p r i o r i t y t o t h e d y n a m i c a n t i n o m y , t o t h e way t h e suprasen-
sible Law transcends a n d / o r suspends f r o m t h e outside the phenomenal
c a u s a l c h a i n : f r o m this p e r s p e c t i v e , p h e n o m e n a l i n c o n s i s t e n c y is m e r e l y
t h e way i n w h i c h t h e n o u m e n a l B e y o n d i n s c r i b e s i t s e l f i n t o t h e phenom
enal domain. M a t e r i a l i s m , in contrast, gives priority to mathematical
a n t i n o m y , to t h e i n h e r e n t i n c o n s i s t e n c y o f t h e p h e n o m e n a l d o m a i n : the
u l t i m a t e o u t c o m e o f m a t h e m a t i c a l a n t i n o m y is t h e d o m a i n o f a n ' i n c o n
sistent All', o f a multitude that lacks the ontological consistency o f
'reality'. F r o m this p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e d y n a m i c a n t i n o m y itself a p p e a r s as a n
a t t e m p t t o r e s o l v e t h e i n h e r e n t d e a d l o c k o f m a t h e m a t i c a l a n t i n o m y by-
t r a n s p o s i n g it i n t o t h e c o e x i s t e n c e o f two distinct o r d e r s , t h e p h e n o m e n a l
and the noumenal. In other words, mathematical antinomy (i.e. the
i n h e r e n t failure or collapse o f i m a g i n a t i o n ) 'dissolves' p h e n o m e n a l reality
in the direction o f the m o n s t r o u s Real, while dynamic a n t i n o m y tran
s c e n d s p h e n o m e n a l reality in t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e s y m b o l i c L a w - it 'saves
phenomena' by p r o v i d i n g a k i n d o f e x t e r n a l g u a r a n t e e o f t h e phenom
4 1
enal domain.
As L e n i n h a d a l r e a d y e m p h a s i z e d , t h e h i s t o r y o f p h i l o s o p h y c o n s i s t s o f
an incessant, repetitive tracing o f the difference between materialism and
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L IMAGINATION 39
i d e a l i s m ; w h a t o n e h a s t o a d d is t h a t , as a r u l e , t h i s l i n e o f d e m a r c a t i o n
d o e s n o t r u n w h e r e o n e w o u l d o b v i o u s l y e x p e c t it t o r u n - often, the
materialist choice hinges o n how we d e c i d e between seemingly secondary
a l t e r n a t i v e s . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e p r e d o m i n a n t p h i l o s o p h i c a l c l i c h e , t h e last
v e s t i g e o f K a n t ' s m a t e r i a l i s m is t o b e s o u g h t in his i n s i s t e n c e o n the
Thing-in-itself, t h e e x t e r n a l O t h e r t h a t f o r e v e r resists b e i n g dissolved in
t h e s u b j e c t ' s activity o f r e f l e x i v e ( s e l f - ) p o s i t i n g . T h u s F i c h t e , i n h i s r e j e c
t i o n o f t h e K a n t i a n T h i n g - i n - i t s e l f - t h a t is t o say, i n h i s n o t i o n o f t h e
absolute act o f the subject's self-positing - e l i m i n a t e s t h e last trace o f
m a t e r i a l i s m f r o m K a n t ' s e d i f i c e , o p e n i n g u p t h e way f o r H e g e l ' s ' p a n l o g i -
cist' r e d u c t i o n o f all reality to a n e x t e r n a l i z a t i o n o f the a b s o l u t e s u b j e c t ' s
notional self-mediation . . . C o n t r a r y to this p r e d o m i n a n t cliche, incor
r e c t l y s u s t a i n e d by L e n i n h i m s e l f , K a n t ' s ' m a t e r i a l i s m ' c o n s i s t s , r a t h e r , i n
asserting the primacy of mathematical antinomy, a n d in c o n c e i v i n g d y n a m i c
a n t i n o m y as s e c o n d a r y , as a n a t t e m p t t o 'save p h e n o m e n a ' through the
h o u m e n a l L a w as t h e i r c o n s t i t u t i v e e x c e p t i o n .
I n o t h e r w o r d s , it is o n l y t o o e a s y t o l o c a t e t h e g r e a t e s t e f f o r t a n d s c o p e
o f i m a g i n a t i o n - a n d , s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , its u l t i m a t e f a i l u r e - in its i n a b i l i t y
to m a k e the n o u m e n a l d i m e n s i o n p r e s e n t ( t h e r e i n lies the lesson o f the
Sublime: the attempt to r e p r e s e n t the n o u m e n a l - i . e . t o fill t h e gap
between the n o u m e n a l and the imagined p h e n o m e n a l - fails, s o that
i m a g i n a t i o n c a n r e v e a l t h e n o u m e n a l d i m e n s i o n o n l y i n a n e g a t i v e way,
via its f a i l u r e , as t h a t w h i c h e l u d e s e v e n t h e g r e a t e s t e f f o r t o f i m a g i n a t i o n ) .
P r i o r to this e x p e r i e n c e o f gap a n d failure, 'imagination' is a l r e a d y a
n a m e for the violent gesture that opens up and sustains t h e very gap
between the n o u m e n a l and the p h e n o m e n a l . T h e true problem is n o t
h o w t o b r i d g e t h e g a p s e p a r a t i n g t h e two b u t , r a t h e r , h o w t h i s g a p c a m e
t o e m e r g e i n t h e first p l a c e .
T h u s H e i d e g g e r was r i g h t , in a way, i n h i s e m p h a s i s o n transcendental
i m a g i n a t i o n as p r e c e d i n g a n d g r o u n d i n g t h e d i m e n s i o n o f t h e c o n s t i t u
tive c a t e g o r i e s o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g , a n d this s a m e priority h o l d s e v e n for
t h e S u b l i m e as t h e i m p o s s i b l e s c h e m e o f t h e I d e a s o f R e a s o n . T h e g e s t u r e
t o b e a c c o m p l i s h e d h e r e is s i m p l y t o i n v e r t a n d / o r d i s p l a c e t h e s t a n d a r d
n o t i o n , a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h s u b l i m e p h e n o m e n a , by t h e i r very failure,
b e a r w i t n e s s i n a n e g a t i v e way t o a n o t h e r d i m e n s i o n , t h a t o f t h e n o u m c n a l
d i m e n s i o n o f R e a s o n . R a t h e r , i t is t h e o t h e r way r o u n d : t h e S u b l i m e , i n
its e x t r e m e , i n its a p p r o a c h i n g t h e M o n s t r o u s , i n d i c a t e s a n a b y s s w h i c h is
a l r e a d y c o n c e a l e d , ' g e n t r i f i e d ' , b y t h e I d e a s o f R e a s o n . I n o t h e r w o r d s , it
is n o t t h a t , i n t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e S u b l i m e , i m a g i n a t i o n fails p r o p e r l y t o
s c h e m a t i z e / t e m p o r a l i z e t h e s u p r a s e n s i b l e d i m e n s i o n o f R e a s o n ; r a t h e r , it
40 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
1. K a n t h i m s e l f , a l b e i t i m p l i c i t l y , d i d a l r e a d y s e x u a l i z e t h e two a n t i n o m i e s ,
i n s o f a r as h e l i n k e d t h e t o t a l i t y o f p h e n o m e n a g e n e r a t i n g t h e first
( m a t h e m a t i c a l ) type o f a n t i n o m i e s to t h e ' f e m i n i n e ' p r i n c i p l e o f t h e
m o n s t r o u s p u r e c h a o t i c m u l t i t u d e , a n d t h e s e c o n d ( d y n a m i c ) type o f
a n t i n o m i e s to the ' m a s c u l i n e ' principle o f the moral Law.
2 . T h e s h i f t o f p a i n i n t o p l e a s u r e i n t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e S u b l i m e is a l s o
i m p l i c i t l y s e x u a l i z e d ; it o c c u r s w h e n w e b e c o m e a w a r e o f h o w , b e n e a t h
t h e h o r r o r o f t h e c h a o t i c a g g r e g a t e o f p h e n o m e n a , t h e r e is t h e m o r a l
L a w - t h a t is, it i n v o l v e s t h e ' m a g i c ' shift f r o m t h e f e m i n i n e m o n s t r o s i t y
to t h e m a s c u l i n e Law.
A g a i n , e v e r y t h i n g h i n g e s h e r e o n w h e r e w e p u t t h e a c c e n t : is - i n the
idealist o p t i o n - the monstrosity o f t h e c h a o t i c a g g r e g a t e o f p h e n o m e n a
j u s t t h e e x t r e m e o f o u r i m a g i n a t i o n , w h i c h still fails t o c o n v e y t h e proper
n o u m e n a l d i m e n s i o n o f t h e m o r a l L a w ? O r - t h e m a t e r i a l i s t o p t i o n - is i t
t h e o t h e r way r o u n d , a n d is t h e m o r a l L a w i t s e l f , i n its v e r y sublime
quality, 'the last veil c o v e r i n g the Monstrous', the (already minimally
' g e n t r i f i e d ' , d o m e s t i c a t e d ) way w e , f i n i t e s u b j e c t s , a r e a b l e t o p e r c e i v e
(and endure) the unimaginable Thing?
T h e Violence o f Imagination
n o u m e n a l . B u t is t h i s t h e o n l y way t o b r e a k o u t o f t h e c l o s u r e o f self-
affection t h a t c o n s t i t u t e s s y n t h e t i c i m a g i n a t i o n ? W h a t i f it is t h e very
i n s i s t e n c e o n s y n t h e t i c i m a g i n a t i o n as t h e u n s u r p a s s a b l e h o r i z o n o f t h e
a p p e a r a n c e / d i s c l o s u r e o f b e i n g w h i c h , by r e t a i n i n g us within t h e c l o s u r e
o f t e m p o r a l a u t o - a f f e c t i o n , s c r e e n s t h e abyss o f t h e u n i m a g i n a b l e w h i c h is
not eo ipso t h e m e t a p h y s i c a l d i m e n s i o n o f n o u m e n a ? T h a t is t o say: w h e n
Kant claims that, without the m i n i m a l synthesis o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l imagin
ation, t h e r e w o u l d b e n o ' p h e n o m e n a ' in t h e p r o p e r s e n s e o f t h e t e r m ,
o n l y ' a b l i n d p l a y o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s , t h a t is t o say, less t h a n a dream',
d o e s h e n o t t h e r e b y e v o k e t h e m o n s t r o u s ' c h a o t i c a g g r e g a t e ' , t h e 'not-yet-
world', the p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l chora, which forms the background of the
experience o f the Sublime?
T h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e S u b l i m e r e a c h e s t h e very b o r d e r o f this ' c h a o t i c
a g g r e g a t e ' o f t h e s e n s e s i n o r d e r t o r e t r e a t f r o m it i n t o t h e s u p r a s e n s i b l e
d i m e n s i o n o f t h e n o u m e n a l L a w . I s n o t t h e M o n s t r o u s w h i c h is explicitly-
r e n d e r e d t h e m a t i c i n t h e d i a l e c t i c s o f t h e S u b l i m e in t h e t h i r d Critique
t h u s a l r e a d y a t w o r k a t t h e v e r y h e a r t o f t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l a e s t h e t i c s in
the first Critique} Is n o t t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i m a g i n a t i o n ( i n its s y n t h e t i c
function) already a d e f e n c e against this c h a o t i c a g g r e g a t e ? A r e n o t the
spectral a p p e a r a n c e s o f partial objects m e n t i o n e d by H e g e l in the q u o t e d
passage a b o u t the 'night o f the world' precisely such a pre-synthetic, pre-
o n t o l o g i c a l ' b l i n d p l a y o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s ' , w h i c h is ' l e s s t h a n a d r e a m ' ?
T h e w a g e r o f t h e K a n t i a n S u b l i m e is t h a t a n o t h e r s y n t h e s i s , n o t that
o f t h e o n t o l o g i c a l synthesis a c c o m p l i s h e d by t h e t e m p o r a l self-affection o f
transcendental i m a g i n a t i o n , c a n save us f r o m t h i s abyss o f t h e failure
of imagination.
T h e v i o l e n c e o f i m a g i n a t i o n i n t h e S u b l i m e is t w o f o l d : i t is t h e v i o l e n c e
of i m a g i n a t i o n i t s e l f ( o u r s e n s e s a r e s t r e t c h e d t o t h e i r u t m o s t a n d bom
b a r d e d w i t h i m a g e s o f e x t r e m e c h a o s ) , as w e l l as t h e v i o l e n c e done to
i m a g i n a t i o n by R e a s o n ( w h i c h c o m p e l s o u r faculty o f i m a g i n a t i o n to e x e r t
all its p o w e r s a n d t h e n t o fail m i s e r a b l y , s i n c e it is u n a b l e t o c o m p r e h e n d
R e a s o n ) . E v e r y i m a g i n a t i o n is a l r e a d y v i o l e n t i n i t s e l f , i n t h e g u i s e o f t h e
tension between apprehension [Auffassung] and comprehension [Zusam-
menfassung]: t h e s e c o n d c a n n e v e r fully c a t c h u p w i t h t h e first. Conse
quently, temporality itself, 'as such', involves a gap between the
apprehension o f the dispersed multitude and the synthetic act o f the
c o m p r e h e n s i o n o f the unity o f this m u l t i t u d e . O u r faculty o f i m a g i n a t i o n
fails t o a c h i e v e t h i s u n i t y w h e n t h e o b j e c t is t o o l a r g e - t h a t is, in t h e c a s e
o f t h e ' m a t h e m a t i c a l s u b l i m e ' : ' t h e r e is n o t e n o u g h t i m e ' , t h e r e a r e t o o
m a n y u n i t s f o r us t o a c c o m p l i s h t h e i r s y n t h e s i s . T h i s ' n o t - e n o u g h - t i m e ' is
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 43
n o t a s e c o n d a r y d e f i c i e n c y , it a p p e r t a i n s t o t h e v e r y n o t i o n o f t i m e - t h a t
j s , ' t h e r e is t i m e ' o n l y i n s o f a r as ' t h e r e is n o t e n o u g h t i m e ' , t e m p o r a l i t y
as such is s u s t a i n e d b y t h e g a p b e t w e e n a p p r e h e n s i o n a n d c o m p r e h e n s i o n :
a b e i n g a b l e t o c l o s e t h i s g a p a n d fully t o c o m p r e h e n d t h e apprehended
m u l t i t u d e w o u l d b e a n o u m e n a l archetypus intellectus no longer constrained
by the limitations o f temporality. T h i s v i o l e n c e o f the synthesis o f c o m p r e
h e n s i o n is t h e n f o l l o w e d by t h e v i o l e n c e o f t h e s y n t h e s i s o f r e t e n t i o n
which endeavours to c o u n t e r a c t t h e flow o f t i m e , to r e t a i n w h a t runs
away, t o r e s i s t t h e t e m p o r a l d r a i n a g e .
Rogozinski's c o n c l u s i o n r e g a r d i n g this twofold gap a n d / o r v i o l e n c e ( o f
c o m p r e h e n s i o n o v e r a p p r e h e n s i o n , o f r e t e n t i o n o v e r t h e f l o w o f t i m e ) is
t h a t t i m e i t s e l f a n d t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i m a g i n a t i o n i n its s y n t h e t i c a c t i v i t y
o f auto-affection are n o t directly the same, since the s e c o n d already exerts
a violence o n the p u r e t e m p o r a l dispersal - w i t h o u t this v i o l e n c e , reality
i t s e l f w o u l d n o t r e t a i n its m i n i m a l o n t o l o g i c a l c o n s i s t e n c y . T r a n s c e n d e n t a l
s c h e m a t i s m thus d e s i g n a t e s t h e p r o c e d u r e by w h i c h , already at t h e level
of pre-discursive, purely intuitive temporal e x p e r i e n c e , the pure pre-
synthetic temporal d i s p e r s a l is v i o l e n t l y s u b o r d i n a t e d to the synthetic
activity o f t h e s u b j e c t , w h o s e d e f i n i t i v e f o r m is t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e
discursive categories o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g to intuition. S c h e m a t i s m forges
o u r t e m p o r a l e x p e r i e n c e into a h o m o g e n e o u s linear succession in which
past a n d future are s u b o r d i n a t e d to t h e p r e s e n t (which retains the past
a n d a n n o u n c e s t h e f u t u r e ) : w h a t t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s c h e m a t i s m p r e v e n t s us
f r o m t h i n k i n g is p r e c i s e l y t h e p a r a d o x o f creatio ex nihilo.
I n s c h e m a t i z e d t i m e , n o t h i n g r e a l l y new c a n e m e r g e - e v e r y t h i n g is
4 3
always-already t h e r e , a n d merely deploys its i n h e r e n t potential. The
Sublime, o n the contrary, marks the m o m e n t at which s o m e t h i n g e m e r g e s
out o f Nothing - something new that cannot be accounted f o r by-
r e f e r e n c e to the pre-existing n e t w o r k o f c i r c u m s t a n c e s . W e are dealing
h e r e with a n o t h e r t e m p o r a l i t y , t h e t e m p o r a l i t y o f f r e e d o m , o f a radical
r u p t u r e in t h e c h a i n o f ( n a t u r a l a n d / o r s o c i a l ) c a u s a l i t y . . . . W h e n , f o r
e x a m p l e , d o e s t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e S u b l i m e o c c u r in politics? W h e n ,
'against their better j u d g e m e n t ' , people disregard the balance sheet o f
profits a n d losses a n d 'risk f r e e d o m ' ; at that m o m e n t , s o m e t h i n g that,
l i t e r a l l y , c a n n o t b e ' a c c o u n t e d f o r ' in t h e t e r m s o f ' c i r c u m s t a n c e s ' m i r a c
4 4
ulously ' b e c o m e s possible'. . . . T h e f e e l i n g o f t h e S u b l i m e is a r o u s e d b y
an E v e n t that m o m e n t a r i l y suspends t h e n e t w o r k o f symbolic causality.
I n s o f a r as f r e e d o m is t h e p r o p e r n a m e f o r t h i s s u s p e n s i o n o f c a u s a l i t y ,
o n e is a b l e h e r e to t h r o w a new light o n the Hegelian definition of
freedom as ' c o n c e i v e d n e c e s s i t y ' : t h e consequent notion o f subjective
44 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
i d e a l i s m c o m p e l s us t o i n v e r t t h i s t h e s i s a n d t o c o n c e i v e o f necessity as
(ultimately nothing but) conceived freedom. T h e central tenet o f Kant's tran
s c e n d e n t a l i d e a l i s m is t h a t i t is t h e s u b j e c t ' s ' s p o n t a n e o u s ' (i.e. radically
free) act o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l a p p e r c e p t i o n that c h a n g e s t h e c o n f u s e d flow o f
s e n s a t i o n s i n t o ' r e a l i t y ' , w h i c h o b e y s n e c e s s a r y laws. T h i s p o i n t is e v e n
c l e a r e r i n m o r a l p h i l o s o p h y : w h e n K a n t c l a i m s t h a t m o r a l L a w is t h e ratio
cognoscendi o f o u r t r a n s c e n d e n t a l f r e e d o m , is h e n o t l i t e r a l l y s a y i n g that
n e c e s s i t y is c o n c e i v e d f r e e d o m ? T h a t is t o say: t h e o n l y way f o r us t o g e t
t o k n o w ( t o c o n c e i v e o f ) o u r f r e e d o m is via t h e f a c t o f t h e unbearable
p r e s s u r e o f t h e m o r a l L a w , o f its necessity, which enjoins us to act against
t h e c o m p u l s i o n o f o u r p a t h o l o g i c a l impulses. At t h e m o s t g e n e r a l level,
o n e s h o u l d posit that 'necessity' ( t h e symbolic necessity that regulates o u r
lives) relies on t h e abyssal free act o f the subject, o n his contingent
d e c i s i o n , o n t h e point de capiton that magically turns confusion into a new
O r d e r . I s n o t t h i s f r e e d o m , w h i c h is n o t y e t c a u g h t i n t h e c o b w e b o f
n e c e s s i t y , t h e abyss o f t h e ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' ?
F o r t h i s r e a s o n , F i c h t e ' s r a d i c a l i z a t i o n o f K a n t is c o n s i s t e n t , n o t j u s t a
s u b j e c t i v i s t e c c e n t r i c i t y . F i c h t e was t h e first p h i l o s o p h e r t o f o c u s o n the
u n c a n n y c o n t i n g e n c y at t h e very h e a r t o f subjectivity: t h e F i c h t e a n s u b j e c t
is n o t t h e o v e r b l o w n E g o = E g o as t h e a b s o l u t e O r i g i n o f a l l r e a l i t y , b u t a
finite subject thrown, caught, in a c o n t i n g e n t social situation forever
4 5
eluding mastery. T h e Anstoss, t h e p r i m o r d i a l i m p u l s e t h a t sets in m o t i o n
the gradual self-limitation a n d self-determination o f the initially void
s u b j e c t , is n o t m e r e l y a m e c h a n i c a l e x t e r n a l i m p u l s e ; i t a l s o indicates
a n o t h e r s u b j e c t w h o , i n t h e abyss o f its f r e e d o m , f u n c t i o n s as t h e c h a l
l e n g e [Aufford-erung] c o m p e l l i n g m e t o l i m i t / s p e c i f y m y f r e e d o m , t h a t is,
to a c c o m p l i s h the passage from abstract egotist freedom to concrete
f r e e d o m within the rational e t h i c a l universe - p e r h a p s this i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e
Aufforderung is n o t m e r e l y t h e s e c o n d a r y s p e c i f i c a t i o n o f t h e Anstoss, but
its e x e m p l a r y o r i g i n a l c a s e .
I t is i m p o r t a n t t o b e a r i n m i n d t h e two p r i m a r y m e a n i n g s o f Anstoss in
G e r m a n : c h e c k , o b s t a c l e , h i n d r a n c e , s o m e t h i n g t h a t resists the boundless
expansion o f o u r s t r i v i n g ; and an impetus, a stimulus, s o m e t h i n g that
i n c i t e s o u r activity. Anstoss is n o t s i m p l y t h e o b s t a c l e t h e a b s o l u t e I p o s i t s
t o i t s e l f i n o r d e r t o s t i m u l a t e its a c t i v i t y - s o t h a t , b y o v e r c o m i n g t h e self-
p o s i t e d o b s t a c l e , i t a s s e r t s its c r e a t i v e p o w e r , l i k e t h e g a m e s t h e p r o v e r b i a l
p e r v e r t e d a s c e t i c s a i n t plays w i t h h i m s e l f b y i n v e n t i n g e v e r n e w tempta
t i o n s a n d t h e n , i n s u c c e s s f u l l y r e s i s t i n g t h e m , c o n f i r m i n g his s t r e n g t h . I f
t h e K a n t i a n Ding an sich c o r r e s p o n d s to the F r e u d i a n - L a c a n i a n Thing,
Anstoss is c l o s e r t o objet petit a, t o t h e p r i m o r d i a l f o r e i g n b o d y t h a t ' s t i c k s
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 45
u n i m a g i n a b l e ; it is, o n t h e c o n t r a r y , t h e v e r y h o r i z o n o f o p e n n e s s towards
objectivity within which particular o b j e c t s a p p e a r to a finite subject.
The Monstrous
d w e l l i n g i n t i m e c a n b e a f f e c t e d b y t h e C a l l o f D u t y , e t c . ) , h e is u l t i m a t e l y
>able t o c o n c e i v e t h e f a c t o f f r e e d o m o n l y as s o m e t h i n g p o i n t i n g to a
d o m a i n o u t s i d e t i m e ( t o n o u m e n a l e t e r n i t y ) , n o t as t h e e x t a s i s o f a n o t h e r ,
ignore o r i g i n a l , n o n - l i n e a r m o d e o f t e m p o r a l i t y .
j Is t h e r e n o a c t u a l l i n k b e t w e e n K a n t ' s e t h i c a l d u t y a n d H e i d e g g e r ' s C a l l
o f C o n s c i e n c e ? H e i d e g g e r ' s n o t i o n o f t h e C a l l o f C o n s c i e n c e is u s u a l l y
c r i t i c i z e d f o r its f o r m a l d e c i s i o n i s m : t h i s V o i c e is p u r e l y f o r m a l , it t e l l s
Dasein to make an authentic choice without providing any concrete
criteria e n a b l i n g t h e s u b j e c t to identify a u t h e n t i c c h o i c e . ( T h e l o c a t i o n o f
t h i s C a l l is e x - t i m a t e i n t h e L a c a n i a n s e n s e : as H e i d e g g e r e m p h a s i z e s , t h i s
tCall is n o t p r o n o u n c e d / u t t e r e d b y another Dasein o r d i v i n e A g e n t ; it c o m e s
from outside, but is simultaneously something that emerges from
N o w h e r e , s i n c e it is t h e v o i c e o f t h e v e r y h e a r t o f Dasein, r e m i n d i n g it o f
its o w n u n i q u e p o t e n t i a l i t y . ) H e i d e g g e r l i n k s t h i s C a l l o f C o n s c i e n c e t o
t h e m o t i f o f g u i l t , c o n c e i v e d as a n a p r i o r i ( e x i s t e n t i a l ) f o r m a l f e a t u r e o f
Dasein as s u c h : i t is n o t a c o n c r e t e g u i l t a b o u t s o m e d e t e r m i n a t e act or
non-act but the expression o f the formal act that in the case o f Dasein,
o w i n g t o its f i n i t u d e a n d t h r o w n n e s s , a n d at t h e s a m e t i m e its a n t i c i p a l o r y -
projecting opening towards the future, p o t e n t i a l i t y always a n d a priori
outstrips t h e a c t u a l i z a t i o n o f Dasein s determinate existence. T h e usual
p o i n t h e r e is t h a t H e i d e g g e r ' s e c u l a r i z e s t h e P r o t e s t a n t n o t i o n o f S i n as
c o n s u b s t a n t i a l w i t h h u m a n e x i s t e n c e as s u c h ' , d e p r i v i n g i t o f its p o s i t i v e
t h e o l o g i c a l f o u n d a t i o n by r e d e f i n i n g it i n a p u r e l y f o r m a l way.
H e i d e g g e r s h o u l d n o n e t h e less b e d e f e n d e d h e r e : t h i s c r i t i c i s m is n o
better g r o u n d e d than the standard criticism that the Marxist narrative o f
t h e C o m m u n i s t r e v o l u t i o n l e a d i n g t o t h e c l a s s l e s s s o c i e t y is a s e c u l a r i z e d
v e r s i o n o f t h e r e l i g i o u s n a r r a t i v e o f F a l l a n d S a l v a t i o n ; in b o t h c a s e s , t h e
a n s w e r s h o u l d b e : why s h o u l d n ' t we t u r n t h e criticism a r o u n d a n d claim
that the latter, allegedly 'secularized' version provides the true version o f
w h i c h t h e r e l i g i o u s n a r r a t i v e is m e r e l y a m y s t i f i e d a n d n a i v e a n t i c i p a t i o n ?
Furthermore, do n o t these Heideggerian notions o f Guilt and Call o f
C o n s c i e n c e rely o n the paradigmatically m o d e r n tradition that stretches
f r o m K a n t i a n e t h i c s t o t h e s t r i c t F r e u d i a n n o t i o n o f s u p e r e g o ? T h a t is t o
say: t h e first t h i n g t o n o t e is t h a t t h e f o r m a l c h a r a c t e r o f t h e C a l l o f
C o n s c i e n c e a n d u n i v e r s a l i z e d G u i l t a r e s t r i c t l y i d e n t i c a l , two s i d e s o f t h e
same c o i n : it is p r e c i s e l y b e c a u s e Dasein never receives any positive
injunction from the Call o f C o n s c i e n c e that it c a n never b e sure of
a c c o m p l i s h i n g its p r o p e r d u t y - t h a t G u i l t is c o n s u b s t a n t i a l with it. W h a t
w e a r e d e a l i n g w i t h h e r e is a r e f o r m u l a t i o n o f K a n t ' s c a t e g o r i c a l i m p e r a
tive, w h i c h is a l s o t a u t o l o g i c a l l y e m p t y : i t says t h a t t h e s u b j e c t s h o u l d do
48 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
h i s d u t y w i t h o u t s p e c i f y i n g w h a t t h i s d u t y is, a n d t h u s shifts t h e b u r d e n o f
d e t e r m i n i n g the c o n t e n t o f duty wholly o n to the subject.
H e i d e g g e r was t h u s fully j u s t i f i e d w h e n , a c o u p l e o f y e a r s l a t e r ( i n h i s
1 9 3 0 c o u r s e o n the e s s e n c e o f h u m a n f r e e d o m ) , h e i n d u l g e d in a b r i e f
attempt to save K a n t ' s Critique of Practical Reason by i n t e r p r e t i n g the
K a n t i a n m o r a l i m p e r a t i v e i n t h e t e r m s o f Being and Time, as t h e C a l l o f
C o n s c i e n c e t h a t s h a t t e r s a n d t r a n s p o r t s us f r o m o u r i m m e r s i o n i n t o das
Man, i n t o t h e i n a u t h e n t i c o n t i c m o r a l i t y o f ' t h i s is h o w it is done, h o w one
does it': K a n t i a n practical reason provides a glimpse i n t o t h e abyss o f
freedom beyond (or, rather, b e n e a t h ) the constraints o f traditional meta
physical ontology. T h i s r e f e r e n c e to the Critique of Practical Reason is
founded on an accurate insight into Kant's radical ethical revolution,
w h i c h b r e a k s w i t h t h e m e t a p h y s i c a l e t h i c s o f S u p r e m e G o o d - a n d j u s t as
Heidegger retreated from the abyss o f t h e unimaginable Monstrosity
lurking in the Kantian p r o b l e m a t i c o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l imagination, so h e
also retreated from the Monstrosity discernible in the K a n t i a n 'ethical
f o r m a l i s m ' w h e n , a f t e r h i s Kehre, he no longer reserved an exceptional
r o l e f o r K a n t . F r o m t h e m i d - 1 9 3 0 s o n w a r d s , it is t h e E v e n t o f t h e T r u t h o f
B e i n g , its ( d i s ) c l o s u r e , w h i c h p r o v i d e s t h e h i s t o r i a l / e p o c h a l law/measure
o f w h a t , in o u r e v e r y d a y e x p e r i e n c e , c a n c o u n t as e t h i c a l i n j u n c t i o n . K a n t
is t h e r e b y r e d u c e d t o a figure in t h e l i n e s t r e t c h i n g f r o m P l a t o ' s I d e a o f
S u p r e m e G o o d ( w h i c h a l r e a d y s u b o r d i n a t e s B e i n g t o S u p r e m e G o o d ) to
t h e m o d e r n n i h i l i s t i c b a b b l e a b o u t ' v a l u e s ' ; h e e v e n lays t h e g r o u n d for
the modern t u r n f r o m t h e n o t i o n o f G o o d as i n h e r e n t i n t h e o r d e r o f
B e i n g itself to t h e subjectivist n o t i o n o f 'values' that h u m a n b e i n g s i m p o s e
o n ' o b j e c t i v e ' reality, so that his e t h i c a l r e v o l u t i o n provides a key l i n k in
t h e l i n e f r o m P l a t o n i s m to m o d e r n n i h i l i s m towards values. K a n t was t h e
first t o a s s e r t t h e W i l l as t h e W i l l t o W i l l : i n all its g o a l s , t h e W i l l b a s i c a l l y
wills itself, a n d t h e r e i n lie the roots o f nihilism. T h e a u t o n o m y o f t h e
m o r a l L a w m e a n s t h a t d i i s L a w is self-posited:, w h e n m y will f o l l o w s its C a l l ,
48
it u l t i m a t e l y wills itself.
Heidegger thus d e n i e s any truly subversive p o t e n t i a l o f the Kantian
e t h i c a l r e v o l u t i o n , o f h i s a s s e r t i o n o f L a w as b a r r e d / e m p t y , not deter
m i n e d b y a n y p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t (it is u p o n t h i s f e a t u r e t h a t L a c a n g r o u n d s
his thesis o n Kant's practical philosophy as t h e s t a r t i n g point in the
l i n e a g e c u l m i n a t i n g i n F r e u d ' s i n v e n t i o n o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s ) . As R o g o z i n s k i
demonstrated, w h a t is c r u c i a l h e r e is t h e fate o f the triad Beautiful/
S u b l i m e / M o n s t r o u s : Heidegger ignores the Sublime - t h a t is, h e links
B e a u t y d i r e c t i y to t h e M o n s t r o u s ( m o s t e v i d e n d y i n h i s r e a d i n g o f A n t i
49
g o n e i n An Introduction to Metaphysics ): B e a u t y is t h e m o d e o f a p p a r i t i o n
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 49
o f t h e M o n s t r o u s ; it d e s i g n a t e s o n e o f t h e m o d a l i t i e s o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t
i that shatters o u r a l l e g i a n c e to t h e everyday r u n o f things - t h a t is, i t
d e r a i l s o u r i m m e r s i o n i n das Man ( t h e way ' i t is d o n e ' ) . T h i s p a s s i n g o v e r
t h e S u b l i m e is d i r e c t l y l i n k e d t o t h e i n s e r t i o n o f K a n t i n t h e P l a t o n i c
lineage o f the S u p r e m e G o o d - to H e i d e g g e r ' s dismissal o f the Kantian
e t h i c a l r e v o l u t i o n : i f t h e B e a u t i f u l is, as K a n t p u t it, t h e s y m b o l o f t h e
Good, t h e n t h e S u b l i m e is p r e c i s e l y t h e f a i l e d s c h e m e o f t h e e t h i c a l Law.
T h e stakes in H e i d e g g e r ' s direct linking o f the Beautiful to the M o n s t r o u s
are thus h i g h e r than they m a y seem: the disappearance o f the S u b l i m e
i n H e i d e g g e r ' s r e a d i n g o f K a n t is t h e o b v e r s e o f h i s i g n o r a n c e o f t h e
K a n t i a n m o t i f o f t h e pure form o f Law; the fact that the Kantian moral
L a w is ' e m p t y ' , a p u r e f o r m , r a d i c a l l y a f f e c t s t h e s t a t u s o f t h e M o n s t r o u s .
How?
Heidegger, of course, thematizes the Monstrous (or rather, the
U n c a n n y , das Unheimliche, as h e t r a n s l a t e s t h e ' d a e m o n i c ' f r o m Antigone %
first g r e a t c h o r u s ) : i n h i s d e t a i l e d r e a d i n g o f t h i s c h o r u s i n An Introduction
to Metaphysics, he deploys the contours o f the overpowering violence o f
nature, o f earth, as w e l l as t h e v i o l e n c e o f m a n who, by dwelling in
l a n g u a g e , t h r o w s t h e n a t u r a l c o u r s e o f e v e n t s ' o f f t h e r a i l s ' a n d e x p l o i t s it
f o r his o w n p u r p o s e s . H e insists r e p e a t e d l y o n t h e ' o u t - o f j o i n t ' c h a r a c t e r
o f m a n : n o t o n l y is h i s fight a g a i n s t / w i t h t h e p o w e r s o f n a t u r e ' d e r a i l i n g ' ;
t h e v e r y i n s t i t u t i o n o f polis, o f a c o m m u n a l o r d e r , is c h a r a c t e r i z e d as a n
a c t o f v i o l e n t i m p o s i t i o n , as g r o u n d e d i n a n a b y s s a l d e c i s i o n . S o H e i d e g
g e r is well a w a r e t h a t e v e r y d w e l l i n g i n t h e f a m i l i a r e v e r y d a y u n i v e r s e is
grounded in a v i o l e n t / m o n s t r o u s act o f resolutely deciding/assuming
o n e ' s f a t e : t h a t s i n c e m a n is p r i m o r d i a l l y ' o u t o f j o i n t ' , t h e v e r y i m p o s i t i o n
of a 'home [heim]', o f a c o m m u n a l s i t e o f d w e l l i n g , polis, is unheimlkh,
r e p o s e s o n a n e x c e s s i v e / v i o l e n t d e e d . T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t t h i s d o m a i n o f
UnheimlicJies r e m a i n s for h i m t h e very d o m a i n o f t h e disclosure o f histori
cal s h a p e o f b e i n g , o f a world, g r o u n d e d in i m p e n e t r a b l e e a r t h , in w h i c h
m a n historically dwells, o f t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n e a r t h (natural surround
ings) and t h e s h a p e o f m a n ' s c o m m u n a l b e i n g . A n d , i n s o f a r as the
p a r t i c u l a r s h a p e o f h i s t o r i c a l b e i n g is ' b e a u t y ' , o n e c a n s e e t h e p r e c i s e
sense in which, for Heidegger, Beauty and the Monstrous are co-
dependent.
T h e K a n t i a n / L a c a n i a n M o n s t r o u s , however, involves a n o t h e r dimen
sion: a d i m e n s i o n not-yet-worldly, o n t o l o g i c a l , the d i s c l o s u r e o f a historical
shape o f c o m m u n a l destiny o f being, but a pre-ontological universe o f the
' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' in w h i c h partial o b j e c t s w a n d e r in a state p r e c e d i n g
a n y s y n t h e s i s , l i k e t h a t in H i e r o n y m u s B o s c h ' s p a i n t i n g s ( w h i c h a r e s t r i c t l y
50 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
K a n t with D a v i d L y n c h
5 2
object-libido. O r - t o p u t it i n y e t a n o t h e r way - t h e d e a t h d r i v e is not
t h e p r e - s u b j e c t i v e n o u m e n a l R e a l itself, b u t t h e i m p o s s i b l e m o m e n t o f t h e
'birth o f subjectivity', o f the negative gesture o f c o n t r a c t i o n / w i t h d r a w a l
t h a t r e p l a c e s r e a l i t y w i t h membra disjecta, w i t h a s e r i e s o f o r g a n s as s t a n d -
ins f o r t h e ' i m m o r t a l ' l i b i d o . T h e m o n s t r o u s R e a l c o n c e a l e d by t h e I d e a s
o f R e a s o n is n o t t h e n o u m e n a l , b u t t h i s p r i m o r d i a l s p a c e o f 'wild' pre-
synthetic imagination, the impossible domain o f transcendental freedom/
s p o n t a n e i t y a t its p u r e s t , p r i o r t o its s u b o r d i n a t i o n to any self-imposed
Law, the d o m a i n g l i m p s e d m o m e n t a r i l y in various ' e x t r e m e ' points o f
post-Renaissance art, f r o m Hieronymus Bosch to t h e Surrealists. This
d o m a i n is i m a g i n a r y , b u t n o t y e t t h e I m a g i n a r y qua s p e c u l a r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n
o f t h e s u b j e c t w i t h a fixed i m a g e , t h a t is, p r i o r t o t h e i m a g i n a r y i d e n t i f i
c a t i o n as f o r m a t i v e o f t h e e g o . S o t h e g r e a t i m p l i c i t a c h i e v e m e n t o f K a n t
is t h e assertion not o f the gap between transcendentally constituted
p h e n o m e n a l reality a n d the t r a n s c e n d e n t n o u m e n a l d o m a i n , but o f the
' v a n i s h i n g m e d i a t o r ' b e t w e e n t h e two: i f o n e b r i n g s h i s l i n e o f t h o u g h t t o
its c o n c l u s i o n , o n e has to presuppose, between direct animality and
h u m a n f r e e d o m s u b o r d i n a t e d to Law, the monstrosity o f a pre-synthetic
imagination 'run a m o k ' , g e n e r a t i n g spectral apparitions o f partial objects.
I t is o n l y a t this l e v e l t h a t , in t h e g u i s e o f t h e p a r t i a l l i b i d o - o b j e c t s , w e
encounter the impossible object correlative to the pure void o f the
subject's absolute spontaneity: these partial objects ('here a b l o o d y h e a d
- t h e r e a n o t h e r white ghastly a p p a r i t i o n ' ) are the impossible forms in the
guise o f which t h e s u b j e c t qua absolute spontaneity 'encounters itself
among objects'.
A s f o r L a c a n , it is o f t e n n o t e d t h a t his classic a c c o u n t o f i m a g i n a r y
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n a l r e a d y p r e s u p p o s e s t h e g a p to b e f i l l e d b y it, t h e h o r r i f y i n g
e x p e r i e n c e o f d i s p e r s e d ' o r g a n s w i t h o u t a b o d y ' , o f le corps morcele, o f its
membra disjecta f r e e l y f l o a t i n g a r o u n d - it is a t this l e v e l t h a t w e e n c o u n t e r
t h e d e a t h d r i v e a t its m o s t r a d i c a l . A n d , a g a i n , it is this d i m e n s i o n o f p r e -
phantasmic and pre-synthetic imagination from which Heidegger
r e t r e a t e d w h e n h e a b a n d o n e d t h e i d e a o f m a i n t a i n i n g K a n t as t h e c e n t r a l
p o i n t o f r e f e r e n c e i n h i s d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e a n a l y t i c o f Dasein. Further
m o r e , the s a m e m o v e m e n t s h o u l d b e r e p e a t e d at the level o f i n t e r s u b j e c -
tivity: t h e H e i d e g g e r i a n Mit-Sein, t h e f a c t t h a t Dasein s being-in-the-world
a l w a y s - a l r e a d y r e l a t e s t o o t h e r Daseins, is n o t t h e p r i m a r y phenomenon.
P r i o r t o it, t h e r e is a r e l a t i o n s h i p to a n o t h e r subject who is n o t yet
properly 'subjectivized', a p a r t n e r in a discursive situation, b u t o n e w h o
r e m a i n s t h e ' n e i g h b o u r ' as t h e e x - t i m a t e f o r e i g n b o d y a b s o l u t e l y c l o s e t o
5 3
us. F o r F r e u d a n d L a c a n , ' n e i g h b o u r ' is d e f i n i t e l y o n e o f t h e n a m e s o f
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 53
a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h G e r m a n I d e a l i s t s p l e a d e d t h e ' p a n - l o g i c i s t ' r e d u c t i o n
o f a l l r e a l i t y t o t h e p r o d u c t o f t h e N o t i o n ' s s e l f - m e d i a t i o n ) . K a n t was t h e
first t o d e t e c t t h i s c r a c k i n t h e o n t o l o g i c a l e d i f i c e o f r e a l i t y , i f ( w h a t w e
' e x p e r i e n c e a s ) ' o b j e c t i v e r e a l i t y ' is n o t s i m p l y g i v e n ' o u t t h e r e ' , w a i t i n g t o
be perceived by the subject, but an artificial composite constituted
; t h r o u g h the subject's active participation - t h a t is, t h r o u g h t h e a c t o f
transcendental synthesis - t h e n the question crops up s o o n e r o r later:
w h a t is t h e s t a t u s o f t h e u n c a n n y X t h a t precedes the transcendentally
c o n s t i t u t e d reality? F.W.J. S c h e l l i n g gave t h e m o s t d e t a i l e d a c c o u n t o f this
X in his n o t i o n o f t h e G r o u n d o f E x i s t e n c e - o f that which 'in God
H i m s e l f is n o t y e t G o d ' : t h e ' d i v i n e m a d n e s s ' , t h e o b s c u r e p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l
d o m a i n o f 'drives', t h e pre-logical R e a l that forever r e m a i n s t h e elusive
G r o u n d o f R e a s o n t h a t c a n n e v e r b e g r a s p e d 'as s u c h ' , m e r e l y g l i m p s e d
i n t h e v e r y g e s t u r e o f its w i t h d r a w a l . . . A l t h o u g h tliis d i m e n s i o n may
a p p e a r t o b e u t t e r l y f o r e i g n t o H e g e l ' s ' a b s o l u t e i d e a l i s m ' , it was n e v e r t h e
less H e g e l h i m s e l f w h o p r o v i d e d its m o s t p o i g n a n t d e s c r i p t i o n i n the
q u o t e d p a s s a g e f r o m t h e Jenaer RealphUosophie: is n o t t h e p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l
s p a c e o f ' t h e n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' , in w h i c h ' h e r e s h o o t s a b l o o d y h e a d -
t h e r e a n o t h e r w h i t e g h a s t l y a p p a r i t i o n , s u d d e n l y h e r e b e f o r e it, a n d j u s t
so disappears', t h e m o s t s u c c i n c t d e s c r i p t i o n o f L y n c h ' s universe?
T h i s p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l d i m e n s i o n is b e s t d i s c e r n e d t h r o u g h t h e c r u c i a l
Hegelian gesture o f transposing epistemological limitation into ontologi
c a l f a u l t . T h a t is t o say: all H e g e l d o e s is, i n a way, t o s u p p l e m e n t K a n t ' s
well-known motto o f the transcendental constitution o f reality ('the
conditions o f possibility o f o u r knowledge are at the same time the
c o n d i t i o n s o f p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e o b j e c t o f o u r k n o w l e d g e ' ) b y its n e g a t i v e -
t h e l i m i t a t i o n o f o u r k n o w l e d g e (its f a i l u r e t o g r a s p t h e W h o l e o f B e i n g ,
t h e way o u r k n o w l e d g e g e t s i n e x o r a b l y e n t a n g l e d i n c o n t r a d i c t i o n s a n d
i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s ) is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h e l i m i t a t i o n o f t h e v e r y o b j e c t o f o u r
k n o w l e d g e , t h a t is, t h e g a p s a n d v o i d s i n o u r k n o w l e d g e o f r e a l i t y a r e
s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h e g a p s a n d v o i d s in t h e ' r e a l ' o n t o l o g i c a l e d i f i c e i t s e l f . I t
m a y s e e m t h a t h e r e H e g e l is t h e v e r y o p p o s i t e o f K a n t : d o e s h e n o t , i n
c l e a r c o n t r a s t t o K a n t ' s a s s e r t i o n t h a t it is i m p o s s i b l e t o c o n c e i v e o f t h e
u n i v e r s e as a W h o l e , d e p l o y t h e l a s t a n d m o s t a m b i t i o u s g l o b a l o n t o l o g i c a l
e d i f i c e o f t h e t o t a l i t y o f B e i n g ? T h i s i m p r e s s i o n , h o w e v e r , is m i s l e a d i n g :
w h a t i t fails t o t a k e n o t e o f is t h e w a y t h e i n n e r m o s t 'motor' o f the
d i a l e c t i c a l p r o c e s s is t h e i n t e r p l a y b e t w e e n e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l o b s t a c l e a n d
ontological deadlock. In the course o f a dialectical reflexive turn, the
s u b j e c t is c o m p e l l e d t o a s s u m e t h a t t h e i n s u f f i c i e n c y o f h i s knowledge
with r e g a r d to reality signals the m o r e radical insufficiency o f reality itself
56 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
shudders or stiffens - like the father who, upon learning that his
unmarried innocent daughter is p r e g n a n t , first c a l m l y r e m a r k s 'OK,
what's the big deal?', a n d only later, after a c o u p l e o f s e c o n d s , turns pale
a n d starts t o s h o u t . . . ) . W h a t we a r e d e a l i n g w i t h h e r e is - i n H e g e l e s e -
t h e m i n i m a l g a p b e t w e e n I n - i t s e l f a n d F o r - i t s e l f ; D e r r i d a d e s c r i b e d this
g a p a p r o p o s o f t h e n o t i o n o f gift: as l o n g as a gift is n o t r e c o g n i z e d , it ' i s '
n o t fully a gift; t h e m o m e n t it is r e c o g n i z e d , i t is n o l o n g e r a p u r e gift,
s i n c e it is a l r e a d y c a u g h t i n t h e c y c l e o f e x c h a n g e . A n o t h e r e x e m p l a r y
case w o u l d b e t h e t e n s i o n in a n e m e r g i n g love r e l a t i o n s h i p : we all know
the charm o f the situation j u s t before t h e m a g i c s i l e n c e is b r o k e n -
t h e two p a r t n e r s are already assured o f their mutual attraction, erotic
t e n s i o n h a n g s in t h e a i r , t h e s i t u a t i o n i t s e l f s e e m s t o b e ' p r e g n a n t ' with
m e a n i n g , to p r e c i p i t a t e itself towards t h e W o r d , to wait for t h e W o r d , to
b e i n s e a r c h o f t h e W o r d w h i c h will n a m e it - y e t o n c e t h e W o r d is
pronounced, it n e v e r fully fits, it n e c e s s a r i l y b r i n g s a b o u t t h e e f f e c t o f
disappointment, the charm is lost, every birth of meaning is an
abortion. . . .
T h i s p a r a d o x points towards the key feature o f dialectical materialism
w h i c h is m o s t c l e a r l y p e r c e p t i b l e i n c h a o s t h e o r y a n d q u a n t u m p h y s i c s
( a n d w h i c h , p e r h a p s , d e f i n e s w h a t we call ' p o s t m o d e r n i s m ' ) : a c u r s o r y
approach ignorant o f details reveals (or even generates) the features
w h i c h r e m a i n o u t o f r e a c h to a d e t a i l e d , e x c e e d i n g l y close a p p r o a c h . As
is w e l l k n o w n , c h a o s t h e o r y was b o r n out o f the imperfection o f the
m e a s u r i n g apparatus: w h e n t h e s a m e data, repetitively p r o c e s s e d by the
same computer program, led to radically different results, scientists
b e c a m e aware that a difference in data t o o small to b e n o t e d can p r o d u c e
a gargantuan d i f f e r e n c e in t h e final o u t c o m e . . . . T h e s a m e p a r a d o x is
o p e r a t i v e in t h e very f o u n d a t i o n o f q u a n t u m physics: t h e d i s t a n c e towards
the 'thing itself ( t h e c o n s t i t u t i v e i m p r e c i s i o n o f o u r m e a s u r i n g , t h a t is,
the b a r r i e r o f ' c o m p l e m e n t a r i t y ' w h i c h prevents us from simultaneously
a c c o m p l i s h i n g d i f f e r e n t m e a s u r i n g s ) is part of the 'thing itself, not merely
o u r e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l d e f e c t : t h a t is, i n o r d e r f o r ( w h a t we p e r c e i v e a s )
' r e a l i t y ' t o a p p e a r , s o m e o f its f e a t u r e s have to remain 'unspecified'.
Is n o t t h e g a p b e t w e e n the level o f q u a n t u m p o t e n t i a l i t i e s a n d the
m o m e n t o f ' r e g i s t r a t i o n ' w h i c h c o n f e r s a c t u a l i t y o n it h o m o l o g o u s i n a
way t o t h e l o g i c o f ' d o u b l e t a k e ' - to the g a p b e t w e e n the e v e n t itself
(a f a t h e r being informed o f his d a u g h t e r ' s pregnancy) and its sym
b o l i c r e g i s t r a t i o n - t h e m o m e n t w h e n t h e p r o c e s s ' a p p e a r s t o i t s e l f , is
registered? O f crucial i m p o r t a n c e here is t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n this
dialectical-materialist n o t i o n o f 'symbolic registration' which, 'after the
THE D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 59
: f a c t ' , c o n f e r s a c t u a l i t y o n t h e f a c t in q u e s t i o n , a n d t h e i d e a l i s t e q u a t i o n
!. esse = percipi: t h e a c t o f ( s y m b o l i c ) r e g i s t r a t i o n , t h e ' s e c o n d t a k e ' , always
: c o m e s after a m i n i m a l delay a n d r e m a i n s forever i n c o m p l e t e , cursorv, a
g a p s e p a r a t i n g it f r o m t h e I n - i t s e l f o f t h e r e g i s t e r e d p r o c e s s - y e t p r e c i s e l y
as s u c h , it is p a r t o f t h e ' t h i n g i t s e l f , as i f t h e ' t h i n g ' i n q u e s t i o n c a n fully
r e a l i z e its o n t o l o g i c a l s t a t u s o n l y b y m e a n s o f a m i n i m a l d e l a y w i t h r e g a r d
to itself.
T h e p a r a d o x t h u s lies in t h e f a c t t h a t 'false' appearance is comprised within
the 'thing itself. And, i n c i d e n t a l l y , therein lies t h e dialectical 'unity of
e s s e n c e a n d a p p e a r a n c e ' c o m p l e t e l y m i s s e d by t h e t e x t b o o k p l a t i t u d e s o n
h o w ' e s s e n c e m u s t a p p e a r ' , a n d so o n : t h e a p p r o x i m a t e 'view f r o m afar'
w h i c h i g n o r e s all t h e d e t a i l s a n d l i m i t s i t s e l f t o t h e ' m e r e a p p e a r a n c e ' , is
nearer the 'essence' than a close gaze; the 'essence' o f a thing thus
paradoxically constitutes itself t h r o u g h t h e very r e m o v a l o f t h e 'false'
r , K
appearance from t h e R e a l i n its i m m e d i a c y . W e thus have three ele
m e n t s , n o t o n l y e s s e n c e a n d its a p p e a r i n g : first, t h e r e is r e a l i t y ; w i t h i n it,
there is t h e 'interface'-screen o f appearances; finally, o n this screen,
'essence' appears. The c a t c h is t h u s that appearance is l i t e r a l l y the
appearing/emerging o f the essence - that is, t h e o n l y p l a c e f o r the
e s s e n c e t o d w e l l . T h e s t a n d a r d I d e a l i s t r e d u c t i o n o f r e a l i t y as s u c h , in its
e n t i r e t y , t o t h e m e r e a p p e a r a n c e o f s o m e h i d d e n E s s e n c e falls s h o r t h e r e :
w i t h i n t h e d o m a i n o f ' r e a l i t y ' itself, a l i n e m u s t b e d r a w n w h i c h s e p a r a t e s
'raw' reality f r o m t h e s c r e e n t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e h i d d e n E s s e n c e o f reality
a p p e a r s , s o t h a t i f w e t a k e away t h i s m e d i u m o f a p p e a r a n c e , we l o s e t h e
v e r y ' e s s e n c e ' w h i c h a p p e a r s in it. . . .
Kant's A c o s m i s m
Its l e s s o n , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t t h e r e is n o a c t i v e f r e e a g e n t w i t h o u t this
phantasmic support, without this O t h e r Scene in which he is totally
manipulated by the O t h e r . In short, the K a n t i a n p r o h i b i t i o n o f direct
access to the n o u m e n a l domain should be reformulated: what should
r e m a i n i n a c c e s s i b l e t o us is n o t t h e n o u m e n a l R e a l , b u t o u r fundamental
fantasy itself - t h e m o m e n t t h e s u b j e c t c o m e s t o o c l o s e to this p h a n t a s m i c
c o r e , h e l o s e s t h e c o n s i s t e n c y o f his e x i s t e n c e .
S o , f o r K a n t , d i r e c t a c c e s s t o t h e n o u m e n a l d o m a i n w o u l d d e p r i v e us o f
t h e v e r y ' s p o n t a n e i t y ' t h a t f o r m s t h e c o r e o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l f r e e d o m : it
w o u l d t u r n us i n t o l i f e l e s s a u t o m a t a o r , t o p u t i t i n t o d a y ' s t e r m s , into
c o m p u t e r s , i n t o ' t h i n k i n g m a c h i n e s ' . B u t is t h i s c o n c l u s i o n r e a l l y u n a v o i d
a b l e ? Is t h e s t a t u s o f c o n s c i o u s n e s s b a s i c a l l y t h a t o f f r e e d o m i n a s y s t e m
o f r a d i c a l d e t e r m i n i s m ? A r e w e f r e e o n l y i n s o f a r as w e fail t o r e c o g n i z e
t h e c a u s e s d e t e r m i n i n g u s ? T o save u s f r o m t h i s p r e d i c a m e n t , w e s h o u l d
again displace the o n t o l o g i c a l o b s t a c l e into a positive o n t o l o g i c a l c o n
d i t i o n . T h a t is t o say: t h e m i s t a k e o f t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f ( s e l f - ) c o n s c i o u s
n e s s with m i s r e c o g n i t i o n , with an e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l o b s t a c l e , is t h a t it
stealthily ( r e ) i n t r o d u c e s the standard, p r e m o d e r n , 'cosmological' notion
o f r e a l i t y as a p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f b e i n g : in s u c h a fully c o n s t i t u t e d p o s i t i v e
'chain of being' there is, o f c o u r s e , n o place for the subject, so the
d i m e n s i o n o f s u b j e c t i v i t y c a n b e c o n c e i v e d o f o n l y as s o m e t h i n g s t r i c t l y
c o - d e p e n d e n t with the e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l m i s r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e true positiv-
ity o f b e i n g . C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e o n l y way t o a c c o u n t e f f e c t i v e l y f o r the
status o f ( s e l f - ) c o n s c i o u s n e s s is t o a s s e r t the ontological incompleteness of
'reality' itself, t h e r e is ' r e a l i t y ' o n l y i n s o f a r as t h e r e is a n o n t o l o g i c a l g a p , a
c r a c k , at its v e r y h e a r t - t h a t is, a t r a u m a t i c e x c e s s , a f o r e i g n b o d y that
cannot be integrated i n t o it. T h i s b r i n g s us b a c k to t h e n o t i o n o f t h e
' n i g h t o f the w o r l d ' : in this m o m e n t a r y s u s p e n s i o n o f t h e positive order
o f r e a l i t y , we c o n f r o n t t h e o n t o l o g i c a l g a p b e c a u s e o f w h i c h ' r e a l i t y ' is
n e v e r a c o m p l e t e , s e l f - e n c l o s e d , p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f b e i n g . I t is o n l y t h i s
e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e p s y c h o t i c w i t h d r a w a l f r o m r e a l i t y , o f t h e a b s o l u t e self-
contraction, which a c c o u n t s for the mysterious 'fact' o f transcendental
f r e e d o m - f o r a ( s e l f - ) c o n s c i o u s n e s s t h a t is a c t u a l l y ' s p o n t a n e o u s ' , whose
s p o n t a n e i t y is n o t a n e f f e c t o f m i s r e c o g n i t i o n o f s o m e ' o b j e c t i v e ' p r o c e s s .
T h a t is o u r u l t i m a t e d i f f e r e n c e f r o m R o g o z i n s k i : i n t h e d i f f e r e n t a n s w e r
t o t h e q u e s t i o n ' W h a t lies b e y o n d t h e s y n t h e t i c i m a g i n a t i o n ? W h a t is t h i s
u l t i m a t e a b y s s ? ' . R o g o z i n s k i is i n s e a r c h o f a n o n - v i o l e n t , pre-synthetic,
p r e - i m a g i n a t i v e unity-in-diversity, o f a ' s e c r e t c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h i n g s ' ,
a Utopian S e c r e t H a r m o n y b e y o n d p h e n o m e n a l c a u s a l l i n k s , a m y s t e r i o u s
L i f e o f t h e U n i v e r s e as t h e t e m p o r a l - s p a t i a l non-violent unity o f pure
d i v e r s i t y , t h e e n i g m a t h a t b o t h e r e d K a n t i n h i s l a s t y e a r s (Opus Posthu-
mum). F r o m o u r p e r s p e c t i v e , h o w e v e r , this S e c r e t H a r m o n y is p r e c i s e l y
t h e t e m p t a t i o n t o b e r e s i s t e d : t h e p r o b l e m f o r u s is h o w w e a r e t o c o n c e i v e
o f t h e f o u n d i n g gesture o f subjectivity, t h e 'passive v i o l e n c e ' , t h e negative
a c t o f ( n o t yet i m a g i n a t i o n , b u t ) a b s t r a c t i o n , self-withdrawal into t h e
'night o f the world'. This 'abstraction' is the a b y s s c o n c e a l e d b y t h e
o n t o l o g i c a l synthesis: by t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i m a g i n a t i o n c o n s t i t u t i v e o f
r e a l i t y - as s u c h , i t is t h e p o i n t o f t h e m y s t e r i o u s e m e r g e n c e o f t r a n s c e n
dental 'spontaneity'.
T h e p r o b l e m w i t h H e i d e g g e r , t h e r e f o r e , is t h a t h e limits t h e a n a l y s i s o f
s c h e m a t i s m to t r a n s c e n d e n t a l analytics ( t o U n d e r s t a n d i n g , to t h e categor
ies constitutive o f reality), n e g l e c t i n g to c o n s i d e r h o w t h e p r o b l e m a t i c o f
s c h e m a t i s m r e - e m e r g e s i n t h e Critique of Judgement, where Kant conceives
o f t h e S u b l i m e p r e c i s e l y as a n attempt t o schematize the Ideas o f Reason
t h e m s e l v e s : t h e S u b l i m e c o n f r o n t s us with t h e failure o f i m a g i n a t i o n , with
t h a t w h i c h r e m a i n s forever a n d a p r i o r i u n - i m a g i n a b l e — a n d it is h e r e
t h a t w e e n c o u n t e r t h e s u b j e c t qua t h e v o i d o f n e g a t i v i t y . I n short, i t is
precisely b e c a u s e o f t h e limitation o f H e i d e g g e r ' s analysis o f s c h e m a t i s m
to t r a n s c e n d e n t a l analytics that h e is u n a b l e t o address the excessive
d i m e n s i o n o f s u b j e c t i v i t y , its i n h e r e n t m a d n e s s .
F r o m o u r p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e p r o b l e m w i t h H e i d e g g e r is t h u s , i n t h e last
62 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
analysis, t h e following o n e : t h e L a c a n i a n r e a d i n g e n a b l e s us to u n e a r t h in
C a r t e s i a n s u b j e c t i v i t y its i n h e r e n t t e n s i o n b e t w e e n t h e m o m e n t o f e x c e s s
( ' d i a b o l i c a l Evil' in K a n t , the ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' in H e g e l . . .) a n d the
s u b s e q u e n t a t t e m p t to gentrify-domesticate-normalize this e x c e s s . A g a i n
a n d again, post-Cartesian p h i l o s o p h e r s are c o m p e l l e d , by the inherent
logic of their philosophical project, to articulate a certain excessive
m o m e n t o f 'madness' i n h e r e n t t o cogito, w h i c h t h e y t h e n immediately
e n d e a v o u r t o ' r e n o r m a l i z e ' . A n d t h e p r o b l e m w i t h H e i d e g g e r is t h a t h i s
n o t i o n o f m o d e r n subjectivity d o e s n o t s e e m to a c c o u n t for this i n h e r e n t
e x c e s s . I n s h o r t , t h i s n o t i o n s i m p l y d o e s n o t ' c o v e r ' t h a t a s p e c t o f cogito
t h a t l e a d s L a c a n t o c l a i m t h a t cogito is t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e u n c o n s c i o u s .
Or - t o p u t it i n y e t a n o t h e r way - the paradoxical achievement o f
L a c a n , w h i c h u s u a l l y p a s s e s u n n o t i c e d e v e n a m o n g h i s a d v o c a t e s , is t h a t ,
on t h e very b e h a l f o f psychoanalysis, h e returns to the Modern Age,
' d c c o n t e x t u a l i z e d ' r a t i o n a l i s t n o t i o n o f s u b j e c t . T h a t is t o say: o n e o f t h e
c l i c h e s o f t o d a y ' s A m e r i c a n a p p r o p r i a t i o n o f H e i d e g g e r is t o e m p h a s i z e
h o w h e , a l o n g with W i t t g e n s t e i n , M e r l e a u - P o n t y , a n d o t h e r s , e l a b o r a t e d
the conceptual framework that e n a b l e s us to get rid o f t h e rationalist
n o t i o n o f s u b j e c t as a n a u t o n o m o u s a g e n t w h o , e x c l u d e d f r o m t h e w o r l d ,
p r o c e s s e s d a t a p r o v i d e d b y t h e s e n s e s in a c o m p u t e r - l i k e way. H e i d e g g e r ' s
notion o f 'being-in-the-world' indicates o u r irreducible a n d unsurpassable
' e m b e d d e d n e s s ' in a c o n c r e t e a n d u l t i m a t e l y c o n t i n g e n t life-world: we are
a l w a y s - a l r e a d y in t h e w o r l d , e n g a g e d i n a n e x i s t e n t i a l p r o j e c t a g a i n s t a
background that eludes our grasp and forever remains the opaque
h o r i z o n i n t o w h i c h w e a r c ' t h r o w n ' as f i n i t e b e i n g s . A n d i t is c u s t o m a r y t o
interpret the opposition between consciousness and the Unconscious
along the same lines: the d i s e m b o d i e d E g o stands for rational conscious
ness, whereas the ' U n c o n s c i o u s ' is s y n o n y m o u s w i t h t h e o p a q u e back
g r o u n d t h a t w e c a n n e v e r fully m a s t e r , s i n c e w e a r e a l w a y s - a l r e a d y p a r t o f
it, c a u g h t i n it.
Lacan, however, in an unprecedented gesture, claims the exact
o p p o s i t e : t h e F r e u d i a n ' U n c o n s c i o u s ' has n o t h i n g w h a t s o e v e r to d o with
the structurally necessary a n d irreducible o p a q u e n e s s o f the b a c k g r o u n d ,
o f the l i f e - c o n t e x t in which we, the always-already e n g a g e d a g e n t s , a r e
embedded; the 'Unconscious' is, rather, the disembodied rational
m a c h i n e t h a t f o l l o w s its p a t h i r r e s p e c t i v e o f t h e d e m a n d s o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s
l i f e - w o r l d ; it s t a n d s f o r t h e r a t i o n a l s u b j e c t i n s o f a r as i t is o r i g i n a l l y ' o u t
o f j o i n t ' , in d i s c o r d with its c o n t e x t u a l i z e d s i t u a t i o n : t h e ' U n c o n s c i o u s ' is
the crack that makes the subject's primordial stance s o m e t h i n g o t h e r than
' b e i n g-i n-tb e-wo r i d ' .
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 63
I n t h i s way, o n e c a n a l s o p r o v i d e a n e w , u n e x p e c t e d s o l u t i o n t o t h e o l d
p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m o f h o w the subject can disengage itself from
its c o n c r e t e l i f e - w o r l d a n d ( m i s ) p e r c e i v e i t s e l f as a d i s e m b o d i e d rational
a g e n t : t h i s d i s e n g a g e m e n t c a n o c c u r o n l y b e c a u s e t h e r e is f r o m t h e v e r y
o u t s e t s o m e t h i n g i n t h e s u b j e c t t h a t r e s i s t s its full i n c l u s i o n i n t o its l i f e -
w o r l d c o n t e x t , a n d t h i s ' s o m e t h i n g ' , o f c o u r s e , is t h e u n c o n s c i o u s as t h e
psychic m a c h i n e which disregards the r e q u i r e m e n t s o f the 'reality prin
c i p l e ' . T h i s shows how, in t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n o u r i m m e r s i o n in the
w o r l d as e n g a g e d a g e n t s a n d t h e m o m e n t a r y c o l l a p s e o f t h i s i m m e r s i o n
i n a n x i e t y , t h e r e is n o p l a c e f o r t h e U n c o n s c i o u s . T h e p a r a d o x is t h a t
o n c e we t h r o w o u t t h e C a r t e s i a n r a t i o n a l s u b j e c t o f s e l f - c o n s c i o u s n e s s , we
lose the U n c o n s c i o u s .
P e r h a p s t h i s is a l s o t h e m o m e n t o f t r u t h i n H u s s e r l ' s r e s i s t a n c e a g a i n s t
e m b r a c i n g Being and Time - i n h i s i n s i s t e n c e t h a t H e i d e g g e r m i s s e s t h e
p r o p e r t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s t a n c e o f p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l epohe a n d ultimately
a g a i n c o n c e i v e s Dasein as a w o r l d l y e n t i t y : a l t h o u g h t h i s r e p r o a c h slricto
sensu m i s s e s its m a r k , it d o e s express the apprehension o f how, in
Heidegger's notion o f being-in-the-world, the point o f 'madness' that
c h a r a c t e r i z e s the C a r t e s i a n subjectivity, t h e self-withdrawal o f the cogito
i n t o itself, t h e e c l i p s e o f t h e w o r l d , d i s a p p e a r s . . . . I t is w e l l k n o w n how-
H e i d e g g e r turned a r o u n d the famous Kantian statement that the great
s c a n d a l o f p h i l o s o p h y is t h a t t h e p a s s a g e f r o m our representations of
o b j e c t s t o o b j e c t s t h e m s e l v e s was n o t p r o p e r l y p r o v e n . F o r H e i d e g g e r , t h e
t r u e s c a n d a l is t h a t t h i s p a s s a g e is p e r c e i v e d as a p r o b l e m a t a l l , s i n c e t h e
fundamental situation o f Dasein as b e i n g - m - t h e - w o r l d , as always-already
e n g a g e d with o b j e c t s , r e n d e r s t h e v e r y f o r m u l a t i o n o f s u c h a 'problem'
meaningless. F r o m o u r perspective, however, the 'passage' (i.e. the sub
j e c t ' s e n t r y i n t o t h e w o r l d , h i s o r h e r c o n s t i t u t i o n as a n a g e n t engaged
i n r e a l i t y , i n t o w h i c h s h e / h e is t h r o w n ) is n o t o n l y a l e g i t i m a t e p r o b l e m ,
5 9
but even the p r o b l e m o f psychoanalysis. In short, I intend to read
F r e u d ' s s t a t e m e n t t h a t ' t h e U n c o n s c i o u s is o u t s i d e t i m e ' a g a i n s t t h e b a c k
g r o u n d o f H e i d e g g e r ' s t h e s i s o n t e m p o r a l i t y as t h e o n t o l o g i c a l h o r i z o n o f
t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f B e i n g : p r e c i s e l y i n s o f a r as it is ' o u t s i d e t i m e ' , the
s t a t u s o f d i e U n c o n s c i o u s ( d r i v e ) is (as L a c a n p u t it in Seminar XT] ' p r e -
o n t o l o g i c a l ' . T h e p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l is t h e d o m a i n o f t h e ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d '
i n w h i c h t h e v o i d o f s u b j e c t i v i t y is c o n f r o n t e d b y t h e s p e c t r a l p r o t o - r c a l i t y
o f ' p a r t i a l o b j e c t s ' , b o m b a r d e d w i t h t h e s e a p p a r i t i o n s o f le corps morcele.
W h a t we e n c o u n t e r h e r e is t h e d o m a i n o f p u r e , r a d i c a l f a n t a s y as p r e -
t e m p o r a l spatiality.
Husserl's distinction between eidetic and phenomenologico-transcenderital
64 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
Kant's looking at the world j u s t as o n e sees it [wie man ilin sieht] is an absolute,
radical formalism that entertains n o notion o f r e f e r e n c e o r semiosis . . . the
radical formalism that animates aesthetic j u d g m e n t in the dynamics o f the
sublime is what is called materialism.
T o p u t it in H e i d e g g e r ' s t e r m s , t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e S u b l i m e involves
the suspension of our engagement in the world, o f o u r dealing with
o b j e c t s as ' r c a d y - a t - h a n d ' , c a u g h t in a c o m p l e x n e t w o r k o f m e a n i n g s a n d
uses which forms the texture o f our life-world. D e M a n ' s paradoxical
c l a i m t h u s c o u n t e r s t h e s t a n d a r d t h e s i s a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h m a t e r i a l i s m is
to b e l o c a t e d o n the level o f s o m e positive a n d d e t e r m i n a t e c o n t e n t w h i c h
fills i n t h e e m p t y f o r m a l f r a m e (in materialism, c o n t e n t generates and
d e t e r m i n e s t h e f o r m , while idealism posits a f o r m a l a priori i r r e d u c i b l e to
t h e c o n t e n t i t e m b r a c e s ) , as well a s t h e l e v e l o f t h e p r a c t i c a l e n g a g e m e n t
w i t h o b j e c t s as o p p o s e d t o t h e i r p a s s i v e c o n t e m p l a t i o n . O n e is t e m p t e d t o
s u p p l e m e n t t h i s p a r a d o x w i t h a n o t h e r : K a n t ' s m a t e r i a l i s m is u l t i m a t e l y the
materialism of imagination, o f an Einbildungskraft which precedes every
ontologically c o n s t i t u t e d reality.
W h e n w e t a l k a b o u t t h e w o r l d we s h o u l d , o f c o u r s e , b e a r i n m i n d that
w e a r e d e a l i n g w i t h two d i s t i n c t n o t i o n s o f it: ( 1 ) t h e t r a d i t i o n a l m e t a p h y s
i c a l n o t i o n o f t h e w o r l d as t h e t o t a l i t y o f all e n t i t i e s , t h e o r d e r e d 'Great
C h a i n o f B e i n g ' , w i t h i n w h i c h m a n o c c u p i e s a s p e c i f i c p l a c e as o n e o f t h e
beings; (2) the properly Heideggerian phenomenologically grounded
n o t i o n o f t h e w o r l d as t h e finite h o r i z o n o f t h e d i s c l o s u r e o f b e i n g , o f t h e
way e n t i t i e s o f f e r t h e m s e l v e s t o a h i s t o r i c a l Dasein t h a t p r o j e c t s its f u t u r e
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 65
D o e s all this m e a n , t h e n , t h a t t h e K a n t i a n d e s t r u c t i o n o f t h e n o t i o n o f
t h e w o r l d v i a a n t i n o m i e s o f p u r e r e a s o n d o e s n o t a f f e c t w o r l d as t h e finite
h o r i z o n o f t h e d i s c l o s u r e o f e n t i t i e s t o a n e n g a g e d a g e n t ? O u r w a g e r is
t h a t i t d o e s : t h e d i m e n s i o n d e s i g n a t e d b y F r e u d as t h a t o f t h e U n c o n
scious, o f the d e a t h drive, a n d s o o n , is p r e c i s e l y t h e pre-ontological
d i m e n s i o n that i n t r o d u c e s a g a p i n t o o n e ' s e n g a g e d i m m e r s i o n in the
w o r l d . O f c o u r s e , H e i d e g g e r ' s n a m e f o r t h e way t h e e n g a g e d agent's
i m m e r s i o n i n h i s w o r l d c a n b e s h a t t e r e d is ' a n x i e t y ' : o n e o f t h e c e n t r a l
m o t i f s o f Being and Time is t h a t a n y c o n c r e t e w o r l d - e x p e r i e n c e is u l t i m a t e l y
c o n t i n g e n t a n d , as s u c h , always u n d e r t h r e a t ; i n c o n t r a s t t o a n animal,
Damn n e v e r fully fits its s u r r o u n d i n g s ; its i m m e r s i o n i n its d e t e r m i n a t e
Life-World is always p r e c a r i o u s , a n d can be undermined by a sudden
e x p e r i e n c e o f its fragility a n d c o n t i n g e n c y . T h e k e y q u e s t i o n , therefore,
66 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
Notes
she should sell n o t only h e r body but also h e r soul - that she should p r e t e n d that she is
giving h e r s e l f t o him o u t o f love. Yet a n o t h e r way to put it would be t o say that o n e pays a
prostitute to have sex with h e r , whereas one's wife is a prostitute w h o m o n e has to pay even
m o r e if o n e doesn't have s e x with h e r (since in this case she is n o t satisfied, a n d o n e has to
a p p e a s e h e r in a n o t h e r way, with g e n e r o u s gifts).
13. Mark P o s t e r , The Second Media Age, C a m b r i d g e : Polity Press 1 9 9 5 , p. 8 1 .
14. See W a l t e r B e n j a m i n , 'Theses on t h e Philosophy o f History', in Illuminations, New
York: S c h o c k e n B o o k s 1 9 6 9 .
15. F r e d r i c J a m e s o n was already b a n g o n target with his controversial claim that Heideg
ger's o p e n political e n g a g e m e n t in 1 9 3 3 , far from p r e s e n t i n g a d e p l o r a b l e a n o m a l y , is his
only sympathetic public g e s t u r e .
16. O n e should also take into a c c o u n t h e r e t h e level o f style: H e i d e g g e r I is t e c h n i c a l ' ,
'non-musical', i n t r o d u c i n g new difficult t e c h n i c a l distinctions, c o i n i n g new t e r m s , depriving
ethically c o n n o t e d c a t e g o r i e s o f their c o n c r e t e e n g a g e m e n t , etc.; while H e i d e g g e r II is
'musical', a b a n d o n i n g strict c o n c e p t u a l distinctions for poetic mediations, r e p l a c i n g long
systematic d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e line o f t h o u g h t (simply recall the use o f p a r a g r a p h s in Being
and T i m e ) with short, c i r c u l a r poetic r u m i n a t i o n s . O n e should, o f c o u r s e , focus a t t e n t i o n on
what is e x c l u d e d in b o t h t e r m s o f this alternative: they a r e b o t h 'deadly serious', o n e in a
c o m p u l s o r y t e c h n i c a l way, piling u p newly c o i n e d t e r m s to deal with c o n c e p t u a l distinctions;
the o t h e r in poetic s u r r e n d e r to the mystery o f Destiny. W h a t is missing in b o t h cases is joyful
irony, t h e very f u n d a m e n t a l feature o f Nietzsche's style. ( R e m e m b e r how t h o r o u g h l y a n d
obviously H e i d e g g e r misses t h e p r o f o u n d irony a n d ambiguity o f Nietzsche's seemingly
brutal rejection o f W a g n e r - in The Case of Wagner- when h e praises this r e j e c t i o n as crucial
for Nietzsche's m a t u r a t i o n as a t h i n k e r . )
17. See Martin H e i d e g g e r , Kant and the Problem of Metap/tysics, B l o o m i n g t o n : University o f
Indiana Press 1 9 9 7 .
18. O n a m o r e g e n e r a l level, it would b e interesting to e l a b o r a t e the c o n c e p t o f
unfinished philosophical projects, from t h e early H e g e l to Michel F o u c a u l t (whose first
v o l u m e o f t h e History of Sexuality a n n o u n c e s a global p r o j e c t fundamentally different f r o m
what was later actually published as volumes II a n d I I I ) ; this n o n - a c c o m p l i s h m e n t is the
obverse o f the p r o c e d u r e o f those p h i l o s o p h e r s (from F i c h t e to H u s s e r l ) who never got
f u r t h e r than t h e establishment o f t h e f o u n d i n g principles o f their edifice - that is, who
repeatedly ( r e ) w r o t e t h e s a m e g r o u n d i n g a n d / o r i n t r o d u c t o r y text.
19. See C o r n e l i u s Castoriadis, ' T h e Discovery o f t h e I m a g i n a t i o n ' , Constellations, vol. 1,
no. 2 ( O c t o b e r 1 9 9 4 ) .
2 0 . Ibid., pp. 1 8 5 - 6 .
2 1 . Ibid., p. 2 1 2 .
22. I m m a n u e l Kant, Critique of Practical Reason, New York: Macmillan 1 9 5 6 , pp. 1 5 2 - 3 .
2 3 . As R o b e r t Pippin d e m o n s t r a t e d in C h a p t e r 1 o f Idealism as Modernism.
2 4 . See A p p e n d i x V: Davos Disputation', in H e i d e g g e r , Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics,
pp. 1 9 3 - 2 0 7 .
2 5 . I m m a n u e l Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, L o n d o n : E v e r y m a n ' s Library 1 9 8 8 , p. 7 8 .
2 6 . Ibid.
27. Ibid.
2 8 . Ibid.
2 9 . Ibid.
3 0 . G.W.F. Hegel, J e n a e r Realphilosophie'. in I'riihe polilische Systeme, Frankfurt: Ullstein
1 9 7 4 , p. 2 0 4 ; translation emoted, from D o n a l d Phillip V e r e n e , Hegel's Recollection, Albany, NY:
S U N Y Press 1 9 8 5 , pp. 7 - 8 .
3 1 . H e g e l , J e n a e r Realphilosophie', p p . 2 0 4 - 5 .
3 2 . G.W.F. H e g e l , Phenomenology of Spirit, trans. A.V. Miller, O x f o r d : O x f o r d University
Press 1 9 7 7 , p p . 1 8 - 1 9 .
3 3 . T o which I myself have r e f e r r e d repeatedly in almost all my books.
68 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
W h a t Is ' N e g a t i o n o f N e g a t i o n ' ?
T h e l o g i c o f t h e p a s s a g e f r o m I n - i t s e l f t o F o r - i t s e l f is c r u c i a l h e r e . W h e n
a l o v e r d r o p s h i s / h e r p a r t n e r , i t is always t r a u m a t i c f o r t h e abandoned
s u b j e c t t o l e a r n a b o u t t h e t h i r d p e r s o n w h o c a u s e d t h e b r e a k ; is i t n o t
e v e n w o r s e , h o w e v e r , i f t h e p a r t n e r l e a r n s t h a t there was nobody, t h a t t h e
p a r t n e r d r o p p e d h i m / h e r f o r n o e x t e r n a l r e a s o n ? I n s u c h s i t u a t i o n s , is
the infamous 'third person' the cause on account o f which the lover
d r o p p e d h i s / h e r erstwhile p a r t n e r , o r d i d this third p e r s o n m e r e l y serve
as a p r e t e x t , g i v i n g b o d y t o t h e d i s c o n t e n t i n t h e l i a i s o n w h i c h was a l r e a d y
t h e r e ? ' I n i t s e l f , t h e l i a i s o n was o v e r b e f o r e t h e l o v e r e n c o u n t e r e d a n e w
p a r t n e r , b u t this fact b e c a m e ' f o r i t s e l f , t u r n e d i n t o t h e a w a r e n e s s that
t h e l i a i s o n was o v e r , o n l y t h r o u g h e n c o u n t e r i n g a n e w p a r t n e r . S o , i n a
sense, the new partner is a ' n e g a t i v e m a g n i t u d e ' , giving b o d y to the
d i s c o n t e n t in t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p - p r e c i s e l y as s u c h , h o w e v e r , s h e / h e is
n e c e s s a r y i f t h i s d i s c o n t e n t is t o b e c o m e ' f o r i t s e l f , i f i t is t o a c t u a l i z e
itself. T h e p a s s a g e f r o m I n - i t s e l f to F o r - i t s e l f t h u s i n v o l v e s t h e l o g i c o f
r e p e t i t i o n : w h e n a t h i n g b e c o m e s ' f o r i t s e l f , n o t h i n g actually c h a n g e s in
6
it; it j u s t r e p e a t e d l y asserts ('re-marks') what it a l r e a d y was i n i t s e l f .
' N e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' is t h u s n o t h i n g b u t r e p e t i t i o n a t its p u r e s t : i n t h e
first m o v e , a c e r t a i n g e s t u r e is a c c o m p l i s h e d a n d fails; t h e n , i n t h e s e c o n d
m o v e , this s a m e g e s t u r e is s i m p l y repeated. R e a s o n is n o t h i n g but the
repetition o f Understanding t h a t d e p r i v e s it o f t h e e x c e s s b a g g a g e o f
s u p r a s e n s i b l e i r r a t i o n a l B e y o n d , j u s t as C h r i s t is n o t o p p o s e d t o A d a m b u t
merely the second Adam.
T h e s e l f - r e f e r e n t i a l i t y o f t h i s p a s s a g e is b e s t c a p t u r e d b y W . C . F i e l d s ' s
great o n e - l i n e r w h i c h provides his own version o f H e g e l ' s d i c t u m that the
s e c r e t s o f t h e E g y p t i a n s w e r e s e c r e t s a l s o f o r t h e E g y p t i a n s t h e m s e l v e s : you
can deceive only a crook; t h a t is, y o u r d e c e p t i o n will s u c c e e d o n l y i f it
THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT 75
T h i s , t h e n , is h o w t h e H e g e l i a n ' c u n n i n g o f R e a s o n ' w o r k s : it c o u n t s o n
t h e e g o t i s t i c / d e c e i t f u l i m p e t u s e s i n its v i c t i m s - t h a t is to say, t h e H e g e l i a n
' R e a s o n i n H i s t o r y ' is l i k e t h e p r o v e r b i a l A m e r i c a n c o n - a r t i s t w h o s w i n d l e s
h i s v i c t i m s b y m a n i p u l a t i n g t h e i r o w n s n e a k y f e a t u r e s . T h e r e d e f i n i t e l y is
a k i n d o f p o e t i c j u s t i c e i n t h i s r e v e r s a l : t h e s u b j e c t , as i t w e r e , r e c e i v e s
f r o m t h e s w i n d l e r h i s o w n m e s s a g e i n its t r u e / i n v e r t e d f o r m - t h a t is, h e
is n o t t h e v i c t i m o f t h e e x t e r n a l d a r k m a c h i n a t i o n s o f t h e t r u e s w i n d l e r
b u t , r a t h e r , t h e v i c t i m o f his own c r o o k e d n e s s . Y e t a n o t h e r e x a m p l e o f
t h e s a m e r e v e r s a l is p r o v i d e d b y t h e w a y t h e o u t r i g h t moralization of politics
n e c e s s a r i l y e n d s u p i n its v e r y o p p o s i t e : i n t h e n o l e s s r a d i c a l politicization
of morals. T h o s e w h o d i r e c t l y t r a n s l a t e t h e p o l i t i c a l a n t a g o n i s m i n w h i c h
they participate into moral terms (the struggle o f G o o d and Evil, o f
honesty against c o r r u p t i o n ) are s o o n e r or later c o m p e l l e d to p e r f o r m the
political i n s t r u m e n t a l i z a t i o n o f t h e d o m a i n o f m o r a l s : to s u b o r d i n a t e t h e i r
m o r a l assessments to t h e actual needs o f their political struggle - T
s u p p o r t X b e c a u s e h e is m o r a l l y g o o d ' i m p e r c e p t i b l y drifts i n t o ' X m u s t
b e g o o d b e c a u s e I s u p p o r t h i m ' . A n a l o g o u s l y , t h e leftist d i r e c t p o l i t i c i z a
t i o n o f s e x u a l i t y ( ' t h e p e r s o n a l is p o l i t i c a l ' , t h a t is, t h e n o t i o n o f s e x u a l i t y
as t h e a r e n a f o r t h e p o l i t i c a l p o w e r s t r u g g l e ) u n a v o i d a b l y c h a n g e s i n t o
the sexualization o f politics (the direct g r o u n d i n g o f political oppression
in t h e fact o f sexual difference, w h i c h s o o n e r o r later ends u p in s o m e
version o f the New Age transformation o f politics into the struggle
between Feminine and Masculine Principles . .. ) .
76 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
T h e Dialectical Anamorphosis
T h e l a s t two e x a m p l e s c l e a r l y d i s p l a y h o w H e g e l ' s b e h e s t t o c o n c e i v e t h e
A b s o l u t e ' n o t o n l y as S u b s t a n c e , b u t a l s o as S u b j e c t ' d e n o t e s t h e e x a c t
o p p o s i t e o f w h a t it s e e m s t o m e a n (the absolute S u b j e c t ' s 'swallowing' -
i n t e g r a t i n g - t h e e n t i r e s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t e n t t h r o u g h its a c t i v i t y o f m e d i a -
d o n ) : d o e s n o t H e g e l ' s Phenomenology of Spirit t e l l us a g a i n a n d a g a i n t h e
s a m e story o f the r e p e a t e d failure o f the s u b j e c t ' s e n d e a v o u r to realize his
p r o j e c t in social S u b s t a n c e , t o i m p o s e his vision o n t h e social u n i v e r s e -
t h e story o f h o w the 'big O t h e r ' , the social s u b s t a n c e , again a n d again
t h w a r t s h i s p r o j e c t a n d t u r n s it u p s i d e - d o w n ? L a c a n c a n t h u s b e a t l e a s t
partially e x c u s e d f o r his slip in c o n f o u n d i n g two s e p a r a t e 'figures o f
c o n s c i o u s n e s s ' f r o m Phenomenology (the 'Law o f the Heart' and the 'Beau
tiful S o u l ' ) ; w h a t t h e y s h a r e is t h e s a m e m a t r i x w h i c h , p e r h a p s e v e n m o r e
than the 'Unhappy Consciousness', condenses the basic operation of
Phenomenology: in b o t h cases, the subject endeavours to assert his particular
r i g h t e o u s a t t i t u d e , b u t t h e a c t u a l s o c i a l p e r c e p t i o n o f h i s a t t i t u d e is t h e
exact opposite o f his self-perception - for the social Substance, the
subject's righteousness equals crime.
T h i s c r u c i a l a s p e c t c o u l d also b e c l a r i f i e d via r e f e r e n c e t o o n e o f t h e
m o s t i m p o r t a n t aspects o f David L y n c h ' s r e v o l u t i o n in c i n e m a : in c o n t r a s t
to t h e e n t i r e history o f c i n e m a , in w h i c h o n e d o m i n a n t subjective p e r s p e c
tive o r g a n i z e s t h e n a r r a t i v e s p a c e (in film noir, f o r e x a m p l e , t h e p e r s p e c t i v e
o f the h e r o himself, whose voice-over c o m m e n t s on the a c t i o n ) , L y n c h
endeavours to p r e s e n t m u l t i p l e points o f view. I n Dune, he applies a
p r o c e d u r e ( u n f a i r l y d i s m i s s e d b y m a n y c r i t i c s as a r e c o u r s e t o a n o n - f i l m i c
n a i v e t y b o r d e r i n g o n t h e r i d i c u l o u s ) o f u s i n g a multiple voice-over com
mentary on the action which, in addition, does not speak from an
i m a g i n e d future p l a c e (the h e r o r e m e m b e r i n g past events in a f l a s h b a c k ) ,
b u t is c o n t e m p o r a n e o u s w i t h t h e e v e n t o n w h i c h it c o m m e n t s , e x p r e s s i n g
the s u b j e c t ' s doubts, a n x i e t i e s , a n d so on. T h e h e r o ' s voice-over d o e s n o t
e n c o m p a s s t h e d e p i c t e d s i t u a t i o n , b u t is i t s e l f e m b e d d e d in it, is a p a r t o f
it, e x p r e s s e s t h e s u b j e c t ' s e n g a g e m e n t in it.
No wonder, then, that this procedure strikes today's spectator as
r i d i c u l o u s - it is u n c a n n i l y c l o s e t o a n o t h e r s t a p l e H o l l y w o o d gesture:
when a person o n screen hears or sees something which takes h i m a b a c k
(as s t u p i d , u n b e l i e v a b l e , e t c . ) , h i s g a z e u s u a l l y s t i f f e n s , h e i n c l i n e s h i s
h e a d s l i g h t l y a n d l o o k s d i r e c t l y i n t o t h e c a m e r a , a c c o m p a n y i n g it w i t h
'What?' o r s o m e similar r e m a r k - i f the s c e n e o c c u r s in a television series,
this g e s t u r e is as a r u l e a c c o m p a n i e d b y c a n n e d l a u g h t e r , as w a s r e g u l a r l y
t h e c a s e in / Love Lucy. T h i s idiotic gesture signals the reflexive m o m e n t
o f r e g i s t r a t i o n : t h e a c t o r s ' d i r e c t i m m e r s i o n i n t h e i r n a r r a t i v e r e a l i t y is
momentarily perturbed; t h e a c t o r , as it w e r e , e x t r a c t s h i m s e l f f r o m the
narrative c o n t e x t and a s s u m e s t h e p o s i t i o n o f a n o b s e r v e r o f his own
78 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
On a p h i l o s o p h i c a l l e v e l , t h i s d e l i c a t e d i s t i n c t i o n a l l o w s us t o grasp
H e g e l ' s b r e a k with K a n t i a n idealism. H e g e l , o f c o u r s e , l e a r n e d the lesson
o f K a n t ' s t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i d e a l i s m ( t h e r e is n o r e a l i t y p r i o r t o a s u b j e c t ' s
'positing' activity); however, he refused to elevate the subject into a
n e u t r a l - u n i v e r s a l a g e n t w h o d i r e c t l y c o n s t i t u t e s r e a l i t y . T o p u t it i n K a n
t i a n t e r m s : w h i l e h e a d m i t t e d t h a t t h e r e is n o r e a l i t y w i t h o u t t h e s u b j e c t ,
H e g e l i n s i s t e d t h a t subjectivity is inherently 'pathological' (biased, limited to a
distorting, u n b a l a n c e d perspective o n the W h o l e ) . H e g e l ' s a c h i e v e m e n t
was t h u s to combine, in a n u n p r e c e d e n t e d way, the analogically constitutive
character of the subject's activity with the subject's irreducible pathological bias:
w h e n t h e s e two f e a t u r e s a r e t h o u g h t t o g e t h e r , c o n c e i v e d as c o - d e p e n d e n t ,
we o b t a i n t h e n o t i o n o f a pathological bias constitutive of 'reality' itself.
T h e L a c a n i a n n a m e f o r t h i s p a t h o l o g i c a l b i a s c o n s t i t u t i v e o f r e a l i t y is,
o f c o u r s e , anamorphosis. W h a t d o e s a n a m o r p h o s i s a c t u a l l y a m o u n t t o , say,
i n H o l b e i n ' s Ambassadors} A p a r t o f t h e p e r c e i v e d s c e n e is d i s t o r t e d in
s u c h a way t h a t it a c q u i r e s its p r o p e r contours only from the specific
v i e w p o i n t f r o m w h i c h t h e r e m a i n i n g r e a l i t y is b l u r r e d : w h e n w e c l e a r l y
p e r c e i v e t h e s t a i n as a s k u l l , a n d t h u s r e a c h t h e p o i n t o f ' t h e S p i r i t is a
b o n e ' , t h e r e s t o f r e a l i t y is n o l o n g e r d i s c e r n i b l e . W e t h u s b e c o m e a w a r e
t h a t r e a l i t y a l r e a d y i n v o l v e s o u r g a z e , t h a t t h i s g a z e is included in t h e s c e n e
we a r e o b s e r v i n g , that this s c e n e a l r e a d y ' r e g a r d s us' in t h e p r e c i s e s e n s e
in w h i c h , i n K a f k a ' s The Trial, t h e d o o r o f t h e L a w is t h e r e o n l y f o r t h e
' m a n f r o m t h e c o u n t r y ' . O n e c a n a g a i n d i s c e r n t h e tiny, i m p e r c e p t i b l e ,
but none the less c r u c i a l g a p that forever separates L a c a n from the
standard Idealist n o t i o n o f 'subjective constitution' (according to which
r e a l i t y as such, t h e w h o l e o f it, is ' a n a m o r p h o t i c ' i n t h e g e n e r a l s e n s e o f
THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT 79
3, 4 , 5
T h e H e g e l i a n n o t i o n o f ' S u b s t a n c e as S u b j e c t ' is as a r u l e i d e n t i f i e d w i t h
the triadic form o f the dialectical process: 'the S u b s t a n c e is Subject'
m e a n s t h a t it is a s e l f - d e v e l o p i n g e n t i t y , e x t e r n a l i z i n g i t s e l f , p o s i t i n g its
O t h e r n e s s , a n d t h e n r e u n i t i n g i t s e l f w i t h it. . . . I n c o n t r a s t t o t h i s c o m
m o n p l a c e , o n e c o u l d a s s e r t t h a t t h e a c t u a l d i m e n s i o n o f s u b j e c t i v i t y is
d i s c e r n i b l e precisely in the d e a d l o c k s o f triplicity, in t h o s e p l a c e s w h e r e
H e g e l oscillates a n d proposes a form o f quadruplicity, even o f quintuplic-
ity. H o w pertinent, then, is t h e form o f triad, that is, t h e infamous
tripartite 'rhythm' o f the Hegelian process? Although they may appear
purely formal in the worst sense o f d i e term, these c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i m m e d i
ately c o n f r o n t us with t h e i n n e r m o s t t e n s i o n a n d instability o f the H e g e
l i a n s y s t e m as t h e s y s t e m o f subjectivity.
Let us t a k e as t h e starting point the well-known passage from the
c o n c l u d i n g ' m e t h o d o l o g i c a l ' r e m a r k s o f h i s g r e a t e r Logic, i n w h i c h H e g e l
h i m s e l f s p e a k s o f t r i p l i c i t y or q u a d r u p l i c i t y : the m i d d l e moment of a
process, between the starting i m m e d i a c y a n d the concluding mediated
i m m e d i a c y - t h a t is t o say, t h e m o m e n t o f negation — c a n b e c o u n t e d t w i c e ,
as i m m e d i a t e n e g a t i o n a n d / o r as s e l f - r e l a t i n g n e g a t i o n , s o t h a t t h e e n t i r e
p r o c e s s consists o f t h r e e o r f o u r m o m e n t s . In his p h i l o s o p h y o f n a t u r e ,
Hegel seems t o give a p o s i t i v e o n t o l o g i c a l g r o u n d i n g to this formal
a l t e r n a t i v e w h e n h e a s s e r t s t h a t t h e b a s i c f o r m o f t h e s p i r i t is t r i p l i c i t y a n d
t h a t o f n a t u r e is q u a d r u p l i c i t y : s i n c e n a t u r e is t h e k i n g d o m o f e x t e r n a l i t y ,
e a c h o f t h e l o g i c a l m o m e n t s h a s t o a c q u i r e s e p a r a t e d p o s i t i v e e x i s t e n c e in
it. ( I n s o f a r a s , i n H e g e l ' s s t a n d a r d m a l e - d o m i n a t e d p e r s p e c t i v e , m a n a n d
w o m a n a r e r e l a t e d as c u l t u r e a n d n a t u r e , o n e is e v e n t e m p t e d t o c l a i m
that Hegel's allocation o f quadruplicity to nature points towards the
traditional opposition o f 3 and 4 as t h e masculine' and 'feminine'
7
n u m b e r s in o r i e n t a l t h o u g h t . )
80 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
p h i l o s o p h y o f N a t u r e ( c h e m i s m , o r g a n i s m ) o r to the p h i l o s o p h y o f finite
s p i r i t ( e x t e r n a l t e l e o l o g y ) - H e g e l has to a c c o m p l i s h t h i s g e s t u r e o f ' e x t e r
nalizing' the subjective logic p r o p e r i n t o objectivity, so that h e c a n then
p r o p o s e as t h e t h i r d m o m e n t t h e a b s o l u t e I d e a , t h e s y n t h e s i s o f s u b j e c t i v e
logic with objectivity.
It would thus have b e e n m u c h m o r e c o n s i s t e n t to posit 'subjective l o g i c '
( n o t i o n - j u d g e m e n t - s y l l o g i s m ) as t h e second p a r t o f a n o v e r a l l t r i a d i c s t r u c
t u r e , a n d t o a d d to ' s u b j e c t i v e l o g i c ' p r o p e r ( t h e first p a r t o f t h e l o g i c o f
N o t i o n ) a third logic, a synthesis o f 'objective' logic (which describes the
categorial structure o f pre-subjective reality f r o m B e i n g t h r o u g h E s s e n c e ,
c o n c l u d i n g i n t h e n o t i o n o f A c t u a l i t y , o f S u b s t a n c e as causa sui a n d its
passage into subject) a n d o f 'subjective' logic (which describes the cate
g o r i a l s t r u c t u r e o f t h e f i n i t e s u b j e c t ' s r e a s o n i n g - it is p r e c i s e l y h e r e that
we find t h e c o n t e n t o f t r a d i t i o n a l ' l o g i c ' ) . T h i s t h i r d l o g i c w o u l d d e s c r i b e
t h e c a t e g o r i a l s t r u c t u r e o f ' s e c o n d n a t u r e ' , o f s p i r i t u a l S u b s t a n c e as t h e
u n i t y o f o b j e c t i v e a n d s u b j e c t i v e m o m e n t - t h a t is, it w o u l d d e f i n e the
c a t e g o r i a l s t r u c t u r e o f m t o s u b j e c t i v i t y . A n d - o n e is t e m p t e d t o a d d , i n a n
a n a c h r o n i s t i c p r o l e p s i s - i n s o f a r as L a c a n d e f i n e s t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r as
n e i t h e r o b j e c t i v e n o r s u b j e c t i v e , b u t p r e c i s e l y as t h e o r d e r o f i n t e r s u b j e c -
tivity, is n o t t h e p e r f e c t c a n d i d a t e f o r t h i s t h i r d l o g i c o f i n t e r s u b j e c t i v i t y
the psychoanalytic 'logic o f the signifier' that deploys the strange structure
o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e O t h e r qua h i s s y m b o l i c S u b s t a n c e , t h e
s p a c e in w h i c h h e i n t e r a c t s with o t h e r subjects? D o we n o t already possess
f r a g m e n t s o f this l o g i c in a m u l t i t u d e o f d o m a i n s a n d guises: t h e l o g i c a l
s t r u c t u r e o f a t o m i c p h y s i c s , w h i c h i n c l u d e s i n its s t r u c t u r e s u b j e c t i v i t y ( t h e
position o f the observer, the passage from q u a n t u m virtuality to actual
existence); the 'autopoiesis' o f life, w h i c h already displays an internal
teleology; L a c a n ' s notion o f 'logical time'; up to H e g e l ' s own i n t e r s u b j e c -
tive d i a l e c t i c o f C r i m e ( a g a i n s t t h e e t h i c a l S u b s t a n c e ) a n d its P a r d o n , the
C r i m i n a l ' s r e c o n c i l i a t i o n with the e s t r a n g e d C o m m u n i t y , in w h i c h Haber-
mas discerned the m o d e l o f the intersubjective communicational process?
f o o t i n g i n t h e first n a t u r e , c a n n e v e r f e e l fully at e a s e i n t h e s e c o n d : w h a t
F r e u d c a l l e d das Unbehagen in der Kultur, t h e d i f f e r e n t way t h e s u b j e c t ' s
passage from first to second nature can go wrong (psychosis, neur
o s i s . . . ) ? T h e r e is thv\s a c o r e t h a t r e s i s t s t h e s u b j e c t ' s f u l l r e c o n c i l i a t i o n
w i t h h i s s e c o n d n a t u r e : t h e F r e u d i a n n a m e f o r t h i s k e r n e l is d r i v e , the
H e g e l i a n n a m e f o r it is ' a b s t r a c t n e g a t i v i t y ' ( o r , i n t h e m o r e p o e t i c t e r m s
o f the young Hegel, the ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' ) . Is t h i s n o t w h y Hegel
insists o n t h e n e c e s s i t y o f war w h i c h , f r o m t i m e to t i m e , m u s t allow t h e
s u b j e c t t o r e g a i n t h e t a s t e f o r a b s t r a c t n e g a t i v i t y a n d s h a k e o f f his full
i m m e r s i o n i n t h e c o n c r e t e t o t a l i t y o f t h e s o c i a l S u b s t a n c e qua h i s ' s e c o n d
nature'?
B e c a u s e o f this g a p , t h e o v e r a l l s t r u c t u r e o f L o g i c s h o u l d , r a t h e r , have
b e e n quadruple: 'objective logic' (describing the categorial structures o f
prc-subjective reality) a n d 'subjective logic' (describing the structure of
the finite subject's reasoning, from n o t i o n to syllogism) should be fol
l o w e d by ' i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e l o g i c ' , a n d , f u r t h e r m o r e (since the intersubjec-
tive S u b s t a n c e still d o e s n o t fill t h e g a p b e t w e e n itself a n d objectivity,
between first and second nature), 'absolute logic'. In Lacanian terms,
i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e l o g i c is t h e l o g i c o f t h e s i g n i f i e r d e a l i n g w i t h t h e structure
o f desire, w h i l e a b s o l u t e l o g i c is t h e l o g i c o f t h e R e a l , t h e l o g i c o f drive.
A n d i n f a c t , a t t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f h i s L o g i c , i n his s e a r c h f o r a s y n t h e s i s
b e t w e e n t h e I d e a o f t h e T r u e a n d t h e I d e a o f t h e G o o d , H e g e l s e e m s to
d e s c r i b e t h e c e n t r a l p a r a d o x o f drive: t h e solution o f t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n
passivity ( c o n t e m p l a t i o n o f t h e T r u e ) a n d activity ( e f f o r t t o r e a l i z e the
G o o d ) is f o r t h e s u b j e c t to g r a s p t h e f a c t t h a t , i n h i s e t h i c a l e f f o r t , h e is
n o t s t r i v i n g i n v a i n t o r e a l i z e a n i m p o s s i b l e I d e a l , b u t is r e a l i z i n g s o m e
t h i n g t h a t is a l r e a d y a c t u a l t h r o u g h h i s v e r y r e p e a t e d e f f o r t s t o r e a l i z e it.
Is t h i s n o t t h e p a r a d o x l a t e r d e f i n e d b y L a c a n i n h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between
t h e d r i v e ' s asm a n d goal ( t h e d r i v e ' s t r u e a i m is r e a l i z e d i n its v e r y r e p e a t e d
f a i l u r e t o r e a l i z e its g o a l ) ?
W i t h r e g a r d to the relationship b e t w e e n L o g i c itself a n d Realphilosophie,
H o s l e a g a i n p o i n t s o u t h o w t h e i r p a r a l l e l is n e v e r p e r f e c t a n d s t a b l e : i n
the standard f o r m o f H e g e l ' s system ( L o g i c - N a t u r e - S p i r i t ) , the triad o f
L o g i c ( B e i n g - E s s e n c e - N o t i o n ) is n o t a d e q u a t e l y r e f l e c t e d in t h e mere
d u a l i t y o f Realphilosophie ( N a t u r e - S p i r i t ) ; if, h o w e v e r , w e t r a n s f o r m Real
philosophie into the triad o f N a t u r e - finite Spirit - objective/naturalized
S p i r i t , t h e o v e r a l l s t r u c t u r e o f t h e s y s t e m is n o l o n g e r a t r i a d , b u t b e c o m e s
q u a d r u p l e . S o we have e i t h e r the overall triad, b u t without the perfect
p a r a l l e l b e t w e e n L o g i c a n d Realphilosophie, o r the perfect triadic parallel,
b u t with t h e o v e r a l l d y a d i c s p l i t b e t w e e n L o g i c a n d Realphilosophie. . .
THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT 83
A n d - 1 a m f u r t h e r t e m p t e d to a d d - this failure o f H e g e l to a c c o m p l i s h ,
in an additional turn o f the screw, t h e r e c o n c i l i a t i o n o f t h e Spirit qua
' r e t u r n t o i t s e l f o f t h e I d e a f r o m N a t u r e with N a t u r e itself, c a n also b e
d i s c e r n e d i n h i s r e d u c t i o n i s t n o t i o n o f s e x u a l i t y . T h a t is t o say, H e g e l
c o n c e i v e s t h e ' c u l t u r a l i z a t i o n ' o f s e x u a l i t y as its s i m p l e ' s u b l a t i o n ' i n t o t h e
civilized, s o c i o - s y m b o l i c f o r m o f m a r r i a g e . H e g e l treats sexuality in his
p h i l o s o p h y o f n a t u r e as a m e r e n a t u r a l f o u n d a t i o n a n d p r e s u p p o s i t i o n o f
h u m a n s o c i e t y , i n w h i c h n a t u r a l c o p u l a t i o n is ' s u b l a t e d ' i n t h e spiritual
l i n k o f m a r r i a g e , b i o l o g i c a l p r o c r e a t i o n is ' s u b l a t e d ' in s y m b o l i c d e s c e n -
d a n c y m a r k e d by the family N a m e , a n d so o n . A l t h o u g h H e g e l is, o f
c o u r s e , well aware t h a t this ' s u b l a t i o n ' also affects a n d c h a n g e s the f o r m
o f satisfying n a t u r a l needs (copulation is p r e c e d e d by t h e process o f
s e d u c t i o n ; it is u s u a l l y d o n e i n t h e m i s s i o n a r y p o s i t i o n a n d n o t a tergo, as
w i t h a n i m a l s , e t c . ) , h e l e a v e s o u t o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e way t h i s s y m b o l i c -
c u l t u r a l ' s u b l a t i o n ' n o t o n l y c h a n g e s the f o r m o f satisfying n a t u r a l n e e d s ,
b u t s o m e h o w affects t h e i r very s u b s t a n c e : in a s e x u a l o b s e s s i o n like courtly
l o v e , t h e u l t i m a t e a i m , s a t i s f a c t i o n i t s e l f , is d i s c o n n e c t e d f r o m its n a t u r a l
g r o u n d ; it c h a n g e s i n t o a l e t h a l p a s s i o n t h a t persists b e y o n d t h e natural
c y c l e o f n e e d a n d its s a t i s f a c t i o n .
T h e p o i n t is n o t o n l y t h a t h u m a n s h a v e s e x i n a m o r e c u l t i v a t e d way
( o r , o f c o u r s e , in a n i n c o m p a r a b l y m o r e c r u e l way) t h a n a n i m a l s , b u t that
they are able to elevate sexuality into an absolute Aim to which they
s u b o r d i n a t e t h e i r e n t i r e life - H e g a l s e e m s t o i g n o r e t h i s c h a n g e o f t h e
b i o l o g i c a l n e e d t o c o p u l a t e i n t o s e x u a l d r i v e as a p r o p e r l y ' m e t a p h y s i c a l
p a s s i o n ' . L e t us t a k e T r i s t a n a n d I s o l d e : w h e r e , i n H e g e l ' s s y s t e m , is t h e
p l a c e f o r t h i s d e a d l y p a s s i o n , f o r t h i s will t o d r o w n o n e s e l f in t h e n i g h t o f
puissance, t o leave b e h i n d t h e daily u n i v e r s e o f s y m b o l i c o b l i g a t i o n s - for
t h i s u n c o n d i t i o n a l d r i v e w h i c h is n e i t h e r C u l t u r e n o r N a t u r e ? Although
this passion strives to suspend the domain o f Culture ( o f symbolic
o b l i g a t i o n s , e t c . ) , it c l e a r l y h a s n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h a r e t u r n t o i n s t i n c t u a l
Nature - rather, it involves t h e m o s t radical perversion o f the natural
i n s t i n c t , s o t h a t , p a r a d o x i c a l l y , it is t h e v e r y r e c o u r s e t o t h e o r d e r o f
C u l t u r e t h a t e n a b l e s us t o e s c a p e t h e d e a d l y v o r t e x o f t h i s 'unnatural'
passion, a n d to r e g a i n t h e pacifying n a t u r a l b a l a n c e o f instinctual n e e d s
1
i n t h e i r s y m b o l i z e d f o r m . ' T o p u t it i n y e t a n o t h e r way: w h a t H e g e l l e a v e s
o u t o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n is t h e f a c t t h a t 'there is n o sexual relationship':
culture n o t only confers a cultivated form o n sexuality, b u t thoroughly
d e r a i l s it, s o t h a t t h e o n l y way f o r a h u m a n b e i n g t o b e a b l e t o ' d o i t ' , t o
e n j o y it, is t o r e l y o n s o m e ' p e r v e r s e ' i d i o s y n c r a t i c p h a n t a s m i c s c e n a r i o -
t h e u l t i m a t e h u m a n p e r v e r s i o n is t h a t so-called 'natural' instinctual sexual
84 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
W h a t w e h a v e h e r e is t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c c a s e o f d i a l e c t i c a l ' p r o g r e s s ' : w e
pass f r o m L o g i c ( d e a l i n g with e x t e r n a l r e f l e x i v e o p p o s i t i o n s , with r e a s o n
i n g as o p p o s e d t o its o b j e c t , B e i n g ) t o M e t a p h y s i c s ( d i r e c t l y d e s c r i b i n g
t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e A b s o l u t e ) n o t by any k i n d o f ' p r o g r e s s ' , o f a m a j o r
transmutation of Logic, but by becoming aware of how what we
( m i s ) p e r c e i v e d as a m e r e organon, introductory tools, preparatory step, to
our grasping the Absolute - that is, t o M e t a p h y s i c s p r o p e r - already
describes t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e A b s o l u t e . I n o t h e r w o r d s , w e fail t o g r a s p t h e
A b s o l u t e precisely in so far as toe continue to presuppose that, above and beyond
the domain of our finite reflected reasoning, there is an Absolute to be grasped - w e
actually o v e r c o m e the limitation o f e x t e r n a l reflection by simply b e c o m i n g
a w a r e o f h o w t h i s e x t e r n a l r e f l e c t i o n is i n h e r e n t t o t h e A b s o l u t e i t s e l f .
This is H e g e l ' s f u n d a m e n t a l criticism o f Kant: n o t that K a n t fails to
o v e r c o m e t h e e x t e r n a l r e f l e c t i o n o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g , b u t t h a t h e still t h i n k s
THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT 85
t h a t t h e r e is s o m e B e y o n d w h i c h e l u d e s its g r a s p . W h a t K a n t d o e s n o t s e e
is t h a t h i s Critique of Pure Reason, as t h e c r i t i c a l ' p r o l e g o m e n a ' t o a f u t u r e
m e t a p h y s i c s , already is t h e o n l y p o s s i b l e m e t a p h y s i c s .
O v e r l a p p i n g with t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n is t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n ' L o g i c ' in
t h e ( t r a d i t i o n a l A r i s t o t e l i a n ) s e n s e o f organon, providing the conceptual
t o o l s t h a t h e l p us t o g r a s p t h e o n t o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f r e a l i t y ( t h e r u l e s o f
our formation o f Notions and forms o f j u d g e m e n t and reasoning), and
' M e t a p h y s i c s ' ( w h i c h d i r e c t l y d e s c r i b e s t h e o n t o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e ) : t h e first
triad o f Phenomenology remains at the level o f ' L o g i c ' , providing the
p h e n o m e n a l s e q u e n c e o f the different m o d e s w h e r e b y the finite, isolated
subject can grasp society; while the s e c o n d triad direcUy describes the
p h e n o m e n a l s e q u e n c e o f the actual historical shapes/figurations o f the
A b s o l u t e i t s e l f . ( T h e ' l o g i c ' o f t h e e a r l y H e g e l t h u s l o o s e l y fits t h e first
p a r t o f t h e m a t u r e H e g e l ' s 'subjective l o g i c ' , w h i c h follows t h e ' o b j e c t i v e '
logic d e p l o y i n g the o n t o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f pre-subjective reality.) In this
precise sense, o n e c a n argue with justification that H e g e l ' s Phenomenology
is a w o r k o f p a s s a g e - t h a t its s t r u c t u r e still b e t r a y s t r a c e s o f t h e early-
H e g e l , e s p e c i a l l y i n its f a s c i n a t i o n w i t h t h e ' m a d d a n c e ' o f r e f l e x i v i t y , o f
d i a l e c t i c r e v e r s a l s , as t h e ( s t i l l ) i n t r o d u c t o r y p r e l u d e t o t h e S y s t e m p r o p e r ,
with its s a t i s f i e d s p e c u l a t i v e s e l f - d e p l o y m e n t . I n o t h e r w o r d s , Phenomenology
is n o t y e t ' t r u l y H e g e l i a n ' p r e c i s e l y in s o f a r as it still c o n c e i v e s o f its r o l e
as that o f the 'introduction' to the System proper (although simul
t a n e o u s l y as its first p a r t - t h a t is t h e s o u r c e o f its u l t i m a t e unresolved
ambiguity).
H i m s e l f - G o d H i m s e l f is e m b e d d e d i n a s e t o f c o n d i t i o n s w h i c h f o r e v e r
r e m a i n a n i m p e n e t r a b l e O t h e r . F o r t h i s r e a s o n , S c h e l l i n g is t h e e n i g m a t i c
'vanishing m e d i a t o r ' between absolute Idealism a n d post-Hegelian histor-
i c i s m . T h i s p a s s a g e f r o m I d e a l i s m t o h i s t o r i c i s m is p e r h a p s b e s t e x p r e s s e d
b y t h e f a m o u s s t a t e m e n t f r o m t h e b e g i n n i n g o f M a r x ' s Eighteenth Brumaire
a b o u t h o w m e n c r e a t e history, b u t n o t o u t o f n o t h i n g o r in t h e c o n d i t i o n s
t h e y h a v e c h o s e n t h e m s e l v e s - t h e y c r e a t e h i s t o r y in t h e c o n d i t i o n s w h i c h
w e r e f o u n d a n d i m p o s e d o n t h e m . H e r e t h e r e is a c l e a r c o n t r a s t w i t h ( a
c e r t a i n i m a g e o f ) H e g e l i a n I d e a l i s m , i n w h i c h t h e a b s o l u t e I d e a a c t s as
t h e S u b j e c t t h a t p o s i t s its e n t i r e c o n t e n t a n d t h u s a c t u a l i z e s i t s e l f o n l y o u t
o f itself, r e l y i n g o n n o e x t e r n a l c o n t i n g e n t p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s - t h a t is, i t is
n o t b o u n d by t h e c o n f i n e s o f t e m p o r a l i t y - c o n t i n g e n c y - f i n i t u d e . H o w e v e r ,
w h a t c o m e s i n b e t w e e n a b s o l u t e I d e a l i s m a n d p o s t - I d e a l i s t h i s t o r i c i s m is
t h e u n i q u e p o s i t i o n o f S c h e l l i n g as t h e ' v a n i s h i n g m e d i a t o r ' : S c h e l l i n g
r e t a i n s t h e A b s o l u t e as S u b j e c t ( i . e . h e s p e a k s o f G o d , n o t o f m a n ) , b u t
he none the l e s s applies to Him the fundamental postulate of temporality-
contingency-fnitude, s o t h a t w h a t h e u l t i m a t e l y a s s e r t s is t h a t G o d c r e a t e d
t h e u n i v e r s e , b u t n o t o u t o f n o t h i n g - H e c r e a t e d it in t h e conditions
which were found and imposed on H i m (these 'conditions', o f course, are
t h e u n f a t h o m a b l e Real o f the G r o u n d o f G o d , that which in G o d H i m s e l f
is n o t y e t G o d ) . "
T a y l o r ' s m i s t a k e h e r e is t h a t h e r e d o u b l e s t h e n o t i o n o f s u b j e c t i n t o
h u m a n subjectivity (finite, c a u g h t in t h e g a p b e t w e e n p r e s u p p o s i t i o n and
expression) and a spectral m o n s t e r called 'Absolute Subject', the Spirit
[Geist], G o d - o r , as T a y l o r c a l l s it (in a t h o r o u g h l y u n - H e g e l i a n f a s h i o n )
' c o s m i c spirit', w h o s e m e r e ' v e h i c l e ' is t h e (self-)consciousness o f the
finite h u m a n subject. W e thus finish w i t h a s p l i t b e t w e e n two s u b j e c t s ,
the infinite absolute Subject a n d the finite h u m a n subject, instead o f the
properly dialectical speculative identity between the infinite Substance
a n d t h e S u b j e c t as t h e a g e n t o f f i n i t u d e / a p p e a r a n c e / s p l i t - ' S u b s t a n c e is
Subject' m e a n s that t h e split w h i c h s e p a r a t e s S u b j e c t f r o m Substance,
f r o m t h e i n a c c e s s i b l e I n - i t s e l f b e y o n d p h e n o m e n a l r e a l i t y , is i n h e r e n t t o
t h e S u b s t a n c e itself. I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e k e y p o i n t is t o r e a d Hegel's
p r o p o s i t i o n ' S u b s t a n c e is S u b j e c t ' n o t as a d i r e c t a s s e r t i o n o f i d e n t i t y , b u t
as a n e x a m p l e ( p e r h a p s the e x a m p l e ) o f ' i n f i n i t e j u d g e m e n t ' , l i k e 'the
S p i r i t is a b o n e ' . T h e p o i n t is n o t that the Substance (the ultimate
foundation o f all e n t i t i e s , t h e A b s o l u t e ) is n o t a p r e - s u b j e c t i v e Ground
b u t a S u b j e c t , a n a g e n t o f s e l f - d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , w h i c h p o s i t s its o t h e r n e s s
and then reappropriates it, a n d so o n : 'Subject' stands for the non-
substantial agency o f phenomenalization, appearance, 'illusion', split,
THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT 89
f i n i t u d e , U n d e r s t a n d i n g , a n d s o o n , a n d t o c o n c e i v e S u b s t a n c e as S u b j e c t
m e a n s p r e c i s e l y t h a t split, p h e n o m e n a l i z a t i o n , a n d s o f o r t h , a r e i n h e r e n t
t o t h e life o f t h e A b s o l u t e i t s e l f . T h e r e is n o ' a b s o l u t e S u b j e c t ' - s u b j e c t
' a s s u c h ' is r e l a t i v e , c a u g h t i n s e l f - d i v i s i o n , a n d it is as such t h a t t h e S u b j e c t
is i n h e r e n t t o t h e S u b s t a n c e .
I n c o n t r a s t t o this speculative identity o f S u b s t a n c e and Subject, the
notion o f their direct i d e n t i t y t h u s i n v o l v e s t h e r e d o u b l i n g of subjects,
w h i c h again r e d u c e s subjectivity p r o p e r to a n a c c i d e n t ( ' v e h i c l e ' ) o f the
substantial Absolute, o f an O t h e r who speaks 'through' finite human
subjects. T h i s also o p e n s up the false, pseudo-Hegelian notion of a
d i a l e c t i c a l p r o c e s s i n w h i c h its S u b j e c t ( ' c o s m i c s p i r i t ' ) p o s i t s its e x t e r n a l
ity, a l i e n a t e s i t s e l f f r o m i t s e l f , i n o r d e r t o r e g a i n its i n t e g r i t y o n a h i g h e r
level: t h e m i s l e a d i n g p r e s u p p o s i t i o n at w o r k h e r e is t h a t t h e S u b j e c t o f
t h e p r o c e s s is s o m e h o w g i v e n f r o m t h e o u t s e t , n o t e n g e n d e r e d b y t h e v e r y
process o f the S u b s t a n c e ' s splitting.
A n o t h e r way t o m a k e t h e s a m e p o i n t is w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e two d i f f e r e n t
ways o f r e a d i n g t h e s i t u a t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t c o n f r o n t e d w i t h t h e unfath
o m a b l e excess of a T h i n g w h i c h eludes his reflexive symbolic grasp. T h e
' s u b s t a n t i a l i s t ' way t o r e a d it is s i m p l y t o c l a i m t h a t o u r ( f i n i t e s u b j e c t ' s )
capacity to grasp the O b j e c t we are confronting always a n d a priori
s u r p a s s e s u s : t h e r e is s o m e t h i n g i n t h e o b j e c t t h a t f o r e v e r r e s i s t s b e i n g
translated into our conceptual network (the point about the 'preponder
a n c e o f t h e o b j e c t i v e ' m a d e r e g u l a r l y b y A d o r n o i n h i s Negative Dialectics).
O f what, h o w e v e r , d o e s this e x c e s s c o n s i s t ? W h a t i f w h a t e l u d e s o u r grasp,
w h a t is ' i n t h e o b j e c t m o r e t h a n t h e o b j e c t i t s e l f , a r e t h e t r a c e s o f w h a t ,
i n p a s t h i s t o r y , t h i s ' o b j e c t ' (say, a h i s t o r i c a l s i t u a t i o n t h e s u b j e c t e n d e a v
ours to analyse) might have b e c o m e , b u t failed to d o so? T o grasp a
h i s t o r i c a l s i t u a t i o n ' i n its b e c o m i n g ' ( a s K i e r k e g a a r d w o u l d h a v e p u t i t ) is
n o t t o p e r c e i v e it as a p o s i t i v e s e t o f f e a t u r e s ( ' t h e way t h i n g s a c t u a l l y
a r e ' ) , b u t t o d i s c e r n i n it t h e t r a c e s o f f a i l e d ' e m a n c i p a t o r y ' a t t e m p t s a t
liberation. ( H e r e I am, o f c o u r s e , alluding to W a l t e r B e n j a m i n ' s n o t i o n o f
t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y g a z e w h i c h p e r c e i v e s t h e a c t u a l r e v o l u t i o n a r y ' a c t as t h e
redemptive repetition o f past failed e m a n c i p a t o r y attempts.) I n this case,
however, the 'preponderance o f the objective', that which eludes our
g r a s p i n t h e T h i n g , is n o l o n g e r t h e e x c e s s o f its p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t o v e r o u r
c o g n i t i v e c a p a c i t i e s b u t , o n t h e c o n t r a r y , its lack, t h a t is, t h e t r a c e s o f
failures, t h e absences i n s c r i b e d i n its p o s i t i v e e x i s t e n c e : t o g r a s p t h e O c t o b e r
R e v o l u t i o n ' i n its b e c o m i n g ' m e a n s t o d i s c e r n t h e t r e m e n d o u s emancipa
t o r y p o t e n t i a l t h a t was s i m u l t a n e o u s l y a r o u s e d a n d c r u s h e d b y its h i s t o r i c a l
a c t u a l i t y . C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h i s e x c e s s / l a c k is n o t t h e p a r t o f t h e ' o b j e c t i v e
90 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
t h a t is i n e x c e s s o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s c o g n i t i v e c a p a c i t i e s : r a t h e r it c o n s i s t s o f
the traces o f the s u b j e c t h i m s e l f (his c r u s h e d h o p e s a n d desires) in the
object, so that what is p r o p e r l y 'unfathomable' in the object is the
objective counterpart/correlative o f the i n n e r m o s t kernel o f the subject's
own desire.
o n t h e o n e h a n d , t h e r e was t h e z e a l o t r y o f t h e r a d i c a l g r o u p s w h i c h saw
n o way o f c o m b i n i n g t h e t r u e C h r i s t i a n a t t i t u d e w i t h t h e e x i s t i n g s p a c e o f
p r e d o m i n a n t social r e l a t i o n s , a n d thus p o s e d a s e r i o u s t h r e a t to the social
order; o n the o t h e r h a n d , there were the attempts to r e c o n c i l e Christianity
with the existing structure o f d o m i n a t i o n , so t h a t y o u c o u l d participate in
s o c i a l life, o c c u p y y o u r d e t e r m i n a t e p l a c e i n it ( a s a s e r v a n t , peasant,
artisan, feudal l o r d . . .) a n d r e m a i n a g o o d C h r i s t i a n - accomplishing
y o u r d e t e r m i n a t e s o c i a l r o l e was n o t o n l y s e e n as c o m p a t i b l e w i t h b e i n g a
C h r i s t i a n , it was e v e n p e r c e i v e d as a s p e c i f i c w a y o f f u l f i l l i n g t h e u n i v e r s a l
duty o f b e i n g a Christian.
On a first approach, things thus seem clear and unambiguous: the
p h i l o s o p h e r o f a b s t r a c t u n i v e r s a l i t y is K a n t ( a n d , i n K a n t ' s s t e p s , F i c h t e ) :
in Kant's philosophy, the Universal (the moral Law) functions as the
a b s t r a c t Sollen, t h a t w h i c h ' o u g h t t o b e ' a n d w h i c h , as s u c h , p o s s e s s e s a
terrorist/subversive potential - the Universal stands for an impossible/
u n c o n d i t i o n a l d e m a n d , w h o s e p o w e r o f n e g a t i v i t y is d e s t i n e d t o u n d e r
mine a n y c o n c r e t e totality; a g a i n s t this tradition of abstract/negative
u n i v e r s a l i t y o p p o s e d t o its p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t , H e g e l e m p h a s i z e s h o w t r u e
u n i v e r s a l i t y is a c t u a l i z e d i n t h e s e r i e s o f c o n c r e t e d e t e r m i n a t i o n s per
c e i v e d b y t h e a b s t r a c t p o i n t o f view o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g as t h e o b s t a c l e t o
the full r e a l i z a t i o n o f t h e U n i v e r s a l (say, t h e universal moral D u t y is
actualized, b e c o m e s effective, t h r o u g h the c o n c r e t e wealth o f particular
human passions and strivings devalued by Kant as 'pathological'
obstacles).
However, are things really so simple? In o r d e r not to m i s r e a d the
properly H e g e l i a n flavour o f the o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n abstract a n d con
c r e t e u n i v e r s a l i t y , o n e s h o u l d ' c r o s s b r e e d ' it w i t h a n o t h e r o p p o s i t i o n , t h a t
b e t w e e n p o s i t i v e U n i v e r s a l i t y as a m e r e i m p a s s i v e / n e u t r a l m e d i u m o f t h e
c o e x i s t e n c e o f its p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t ( t h e ' m u t e u n i v e r s a l i t y ' o f a s p e c i e s
defined by w h a t all m e m b e r s o f the species have in common), and
U n i v e r s a l i t y i n its a c t u a l e x i s t e n c e , w h i c h is individuality, the assertion o f
t h e s u b j e c t as u n i q u e a n d i r r e d u c i b l e t o t h e p a r t i c u l a r c o n c r e t e t o t a l i t y
i n t o w h i c h h e is i n s e r t e d . I n K i e r k e g a a r d e s e , t h i s d i f f e r e n c e is t h e one
b e t w e e n the positive B e i n g o f the Universal a n d universality-in-becoming:
t h e o b v e r s e o f t h e U n i v e r s a l as t h e p a c i f y i n g n e u t r a l medium/container
o f its p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t is t h e U n i v e r s a l as t h e p o w e r o f n e g a t i v i t y t h a t
undermines t h e fixity o f e v e r y p a r t i c u l a r c o n s t e l l a t i o n , a n d t h i s power
c o m e s i n t o e x i s t e n c e in t h e guise o f the individual's a b s o l u t e egotist sell-
c o n t r a c t i o n , h i s n e g a t i o n o f all d e t e r m i n a t e c o n t e n t . T h e d i m e n s i o n oi
U n i v e r s a l i t y b e c o m e s a c t u a l ( o r , in H e g e l e s e , ' f o r i t s e l f ) o n l y b y ' e n t e r i n g
92 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
T h e depth which t h e Spirit brings forth from within - but only as far as its
picture-thinking consciousness where it lets it r e m a i n - a n d the ignorance o f this
consciousness a b o u t what it really is saying, are the same c o n j u n c t i o n o f t h e
high a n d the low which, in the living being, Nature naively expresses when it
c o m b i n e s the organ o f its highest fulfilment, t h e organ o f g e n e r a t i o n , with t h e
organ o f urination. T h e infinite j u d g e m e n t , c/ua i n f i n i t e , would be the fulfilment
o f life that c o m p r e h e n d s itself; t h e consciousness o f the infinite j u d g e m e n t that
15
remains at the level o f picture-thinking behaves as u r i n a t i o n .
A c l o s e r e a d i n g o f t h i s p a s s a g e m a k e s it c l e a r t h a t H e g e l ' s p o i n t is not
that, in c o n t r a s t t o t h e vulgar e m p i r i c i s t m i n d w h i c h sees o n l y u r i n a t i o n ,
the p r o p e r speculative attitude has to c h o o s e i n s e m i n a t i o n . T h e p a r a d o x
is t h a t the direct choice of insemination is the infallible way to miss it it is n o t
p o s s i b l e to c h o o s e t h e t r u e m e a n i n g ' d i r e c t l y - t h a t is t o sav, o n e has t o
b e g i n by m a k i n g t h e ' w r o n g ' c h o i c e ( o f u r i n a t i o n ) : t h e t r u e s p e c u l a t i v e
m e a n i n g e m e r g e s o n l y t h r o u g h r e p e a l e d r e a d i n g , as t h e a f t e r - e f f e c t ( o r
b y - p r o d u c t ) o f t h e first, ' w r o n g ' reading."'
T h e s a m e g o e s f o r social life, in w h i c h t h e d i r e c t c h o i c e o f t h e ' c o n c r e t e
universality' o f a p a r t i c u l a r e t h i c a l life-world c a n e n d only in a r e g r e s s i o n
to p r e m o d e r n o r g a n i c society w h i c h d e n i e s the infinite right o f subjectivity
as t h e f u n d a m e n t a l feature o f modernity. S i n c e the subject-citizen o f a
modern state can n o l o n g e r a c c e p t his i m m e r s i o n in s o m e particular
social role that confers o n h i m a d e t e r m i n a t e place within the organic
s o c i a l W h o l e , t h e o n l y way t o t h e r a t i o n a l t o t a l i t y o f t h e m o d e r n state
leads through the h o r r o r o f revolutionary T e r r o r : o n e should ruthlessly
tear up the constraints o f p r e m o d e r n o r g a n i c ' c o n c r e t e universality', a n d
fullv a s s e r t t h e i n f i n i t e r i g h t o f s u b j e c t i v i t y i n its a b s t r a c t n e g a t i v i t y . I n
o t h e r words, the point o f Hegel's deservedly famous analysis o f the
r e v o l u t i o n a r y T e r r o r in h i s Phenomenology is n o t t h e r a t h e r o b v i o u s i n s i g h t
into how the revolutionary p r o j e c t involved the unilateral direct assertion
o f a b s t r a c t U n i v e r s a l R e a s o n , a n d was as s u c h d o o m e d t o p e r i s h in self-
d e s t r u c t i v e fury, s i n c e it was u n a b l e t o o r g a n i z e t h e t r a n s p o s i t i o n o f its
revolutionary e n e r g y into a c o n c r e t e stable a n d differentiated social order;
H e g e l ' s p o i n t , r a t h e r , is t h e e n i g m a o f why, d e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t r e v o l
u t i o n a r y T e r r o r was a h i s t o r i c a l d e a d l o c k , w e h a v e t o p a s s t h r o u g h it in
o r d e r to attain t h e m o d e r n r a t i o n a l state. . . . W e c a n n o w see h e r e how
wrong were the late-nineteenth-century conservative British Hegelians
94 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
t h e U n i v e r s a l is t h e P o w e r t h a t e x p r e s s e s itself i n t h e i n c e s s a n t p r o d u c t i o n
o f t h e w e a l t h o f its p a r t i c u l a r m o m e n t s , r e m a i n s a ' d y n a m i z e d s u b s t a n c e ' ,
it d o e s n o t yet involve subjectivity p r o p e r . I n T a y l o r ' s t e r m s ( n o t q u i t e
a d e q u a t e ) , we a r e d e a l i n g h e r e with t h e o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n the ' c x p r e s -
s i v i s t ' / p r o d u c t i v e a s p e c t o f t h e A b s o l u t e ( L i f e as a causa sui t h a t r e p r o
duces a n d 'expresses' itself t h r o u g h the infinite process o f the g e n e r a t i o n
a n d c o r r u p t i o n o f its m o m e n t s ) a n d its ' c o g n i t i v e ' a s p e c t ( t h e A b s o l u t e
t h a t a c t u a l i z e s itself o n l y t h r o u g h its full s e l f - k n o w l e d g e ) - h o w a r e w e t o
r e c o n c i l e t h e two?
The first p a r a d o x is t h a t a c t i v i t y is o n the side o f S u b s t a n c e (the
' e x p r e s s i v i s t ' g e n e r a t i v e P o w e r ) a n d passivity o n t h e s i d e o f S u b j e c t (the
s u b j e c t qua c o n s c i o u s n e s s ' p a s s i v e l y ' t a k e s i n t o a c c o u n t w h a t t a k e s p l a c e ) :
S u b s t a n c e is praxis, a c t i v e i n t e r v e n t i o n ; w h i l e S u b j e c t is theoria, passive
i n t u i t i o n . W h a t w e h a v e h e r e is t h e o p p o s i t i o n o f Sein a n d Sollen, o f the
T r u e a n d t h e G o o d ; h o w e v e r , c o n t r a r y t o t h e s t a n d a r d way o f c o n c e p t u a l
izing diis o p p o s i t i o n (the S p i n o z a n passive i n t u i t i o n o f S u b s t a n c e versus
the F i c h t e a n active S u b j e c t w h o s p o n t a n e o u s l y a n d a u t o n o m o u s l y posits
t h e e n t i r e o b j e c t i v e c o n t e n t ) , H e g e l c o n n e c t s t h e four t e r m s in a crisscross
way: e x p r e s s i v e p r o d u c t i v i t y is o n the side o f t h e S p i n o z a n Substance
w h i c h p e r m a n e n t l y realizes t h e G o o d by actively s h a p i n g reality; while t h e
Subject's fundamental a t t i t u d e is t h a t o f K n o w i n g - t h e S u b j e c t e n d e a v
o u r s t o e s t a b l i s h w h a t is T r u e , t o d i s c e r n t h e c o n t o u r s o f o b j e c t i v i t y .
H e g e l ' s s o l u t i o n as a G e r m a n I d e a l i s t , o f c o u r s e , is a k n o w l e d g e w h i c h
is ' s p o n t a n e o u s , ' - t h a t is, i n i t s e l f a praxis g e n e r a t i v e o f its o b j e c t , b u t not
in t h e ( F i c h t e a n ) s e n s e o f ' i n t e l l e c t u a l i n t u i t i o n ' , o f a k n o w l e d g e d i r e c t l y
p r o d u c t i v e o f its o b j e c t s , a n d n o t e v e n i n t h e s o m e w h a t w e a k e r K a n t i a n
s e n s e o f k n o w l e d g e as t r a n s c e n d e n t a l l y c o n s t i t u t i v e o f its o b j e c t s . O n e is
e v e n t e m p t e d t o say t h a t H e g e l o p t s f o r p r e c i s e l y t h e o p p o s i t e s o l u t i o n : a t
t h e level o f substantial c o n t e n t , ' e v e r y t h i n g h a s already t a k e n p l a c e ' , so
t h a t k n o w l e d g e m e r e l y t a k e s it i n t o a c c o u n t - t h a t is t o say, it is a purely-
f o r m a l a c t w h i c h r e g i s t e r s t h e s t a t e o f t h i n g s ; p r e c i s e l y as s u c h , h o w e v e r -
as t h e p u r e l y f o r m a l g e s t u r e o f ' t a k i n g i n t o a c c o u n t ' w h a t ' i n i t s e l f is
a l r e a d y t h e r e - k n o w l e d g e is ' p e r f o r m a t i v e ' , a n d b r i n g s a b o u t t h e a c t u a l i
z a t i o n o f t h e A b s o l u t e . S o w e a r e not. d e a l i n g w i t h a n e w v e r s i o n o f t h e
m y s t i c a l U n i o n in w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t ' s a c t i v i t y o v e r l a p s w i t h t h e activity o f
t h e A b s o l u t e - G o d i t s e l f - i n w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t e x p e r i e n c e s h i m s e l f as t h e
' v e h i c l e o f t h e A b s o l u t e ' ( i n h i s g r e a t e s t activity h e is p a s s i v e , s i n c e it is
t h e A b s o l u t e w h o is e f f e c t i v e l y a c t i v e t h r o u g h h i m ) ; s u c h a m y s t i c a l U n i o n
remains the summit o f Schelling's 'dynamized Spinozism'. Hegel's point
is, r a t h e r , t h e o p p o s i t e o n e : in my greatest passivity, I am already active. - t h a t
98 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
' C o n c r e t e Universality'
W e c a n n o w s e e in w h a t p r e c i s e s e n s e H e g e l ' s l o g i c r e m a i n s 'transcenden
t a l ' in t h e s t r i c t K a n t i a n s e n s e - t h a t is, in w h a t s e n s e its n o t i o n a l n e t w o r k
is n o t m e r e l y f o r m a l , b u t c o n s t i t u t i v e o f r e a l i t y itself, w h o s e categorial
structure it d e s c r i b e s . W h a t sets in m o t i o n the dialectical progress in
H e g e l ' s Logic is t h e i n h e r e n t t e n s i o n i n t h e s t a t u s o f e v e r y d e t e r m i n a t e /
THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT 99
l i m i t e d c a t e g o r y : e a c h c o n c e p t is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y necessary ( i . e . i n d i s p e n s
a b l e i f w e a r e t o c o n c e i v e r e a l i t y , its u n d e r l y i n g o n t o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e ) and
impossible ( i . e . s e l f - r e f u t i n g , i n c o n s i s t e n t : t h e m o m e n t w e fully a n d c o n s e
q u e n t l y ' a p p l y ' it t o r e a l i t y , it d i s i n t e g r a t e s a n d / o r t u r n s i n t o its o p p o s i t e ) .
T h i s n o t i o n a l t e n s i o n / ' c o n t r a d i c t i o n ' is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h e u l t i m a t e spiri-
tus movens o f ' r e a l i t y ' itself: f a r f r o m s i g n a l l i n g t h e f a i l u r e o f o u r thought
t o g r a s p r e a l i t y , t h e i n h e r e n t i n c o n s i s t e n c y o f o u r n o t i o n a l a p p a r a t u s is
t h e u l t i m a t e p r o o f t h a t o u r t h o u g h t is n o t m e r e l y a l o g i c a l g a m e w e p l a y ,
but is a b l e to reach r e a l i t y itself, e x p r e s s i n g its i n h e r e n t structuring
principle.
W h a t a c c o u n t s f o r this p a r a d o x i c a l o v e r l a p p i n g o f n e c e s s i t y a n d i m p o s
s i b i l i t y is, o f c o u r s e , t h e n o t i o n o f t h e s e l f - r e l a t i n g U n i v e r s a l i t y grounded
i n its c o n s t i t u t i v e e x c e p t i o n . W h y a r e f i v e - c e n t c o i n s l a r g e r t h a n t e n - c e n t
c o i n s ; why this e x c e p t i o n to t h e g e n e r a l rule a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h v o l u m e
follows value? K a r c l van het Reve, the famous Dutch linguist, literary
scientist a n d P o p p e r i a n criticist o f psychoanalysis a n d d e c o n s t r u c t i o n , has
formulated t h e l o g i c o f r u l e a n d its e x c e p t i o n i n t h e g u i s e o f w h a t he
2 1
ironically calls 'Reve's C o n j e c t u r e ' : in t h e d o m a i n o f symbolic rules,
P o p p e r ' s l o g i c o f f a l s i f i c a t i o n h a s t o b e inverted — t h a t is t o say, f a r from
falsifying t h e r u l e , t h e e x c e p t i o n o n e h a s t o s e a r c h f o r confirms it. B e s i d e s
enumerating examples from a multitude o f symbolic, rule-regulated,
a c t i v i t i e s ( i n c h e s s , we h a v e rocade as t h e e x c e p t i o n , a m o v e t h a t v i o l a t e s
the fundamental l o g i c o f o t h e r p o s s i b l e m o v e s ; in c a r d g a m e s , t h e r e is
often an exceptional lower c o m b i n a t i o n that can overrule the highest
o n e ; e t c . ) , R e v e focuses o n linguistics: in g r a m m a r , a p a r t i c u l a r e x c e p t i o n
is n e e d e d in o r d e r to r e v e a l (and thus to m a k e us sensitive t o ) the
u n i v e r s a l r u l e t h a t w e o t h e r w i s e f o l l o w : A r u l e c a n n o t e x i s t i f t h e r e is n o
2 2
e x c e p t i o n a g a i n s t w h i c h it c a n d i s t i n g u i s h i t s e l f . ' T h e s e exceptions are
usually dismissed as s o - c a l l e d deponentia, 'irrational' irregularities due
e i t h e r to the i n f l u e n c e o f s o m e n e i g h b o u r i n g foreign language or to
r e m a i n d e r s o f earlier linguistic forms. In Latin, for e x a m p l e , w h e n a verb
f o r m e n d s i n -or, it u s u a l l y d e s i g n a t e s a p a s s i v e f o r m : laudo is ' I p r a i s e ' ,
laudor'l a m p r a i s e d ' , a n d s o o n - h o w e v e r , s u r p r i s i n g l y , loquor is n o t ' I a m
s p o k e n ' b u t 'I s p e a k ' !
t h e m t o b e c o m e effective, h o w e v e r , t h e y h a v e to fulfil s o m e i n h e r e n t n e e d
i n t h e present s y s t e m ( a s w i t h t h e u n f o r t u n a t e ' r e m a i n d e r s o f t h e b o u r g e o i s
p a s t ' e v o k e d i n t h e e x - C o m m u n i s t c o u n t r i e s as a n e x c u s e f o r all t h e w o e s
o f t h e S o c i a l i s t p r e s e n t ; as i f t h e s e ' r e m a i n d e r s ' d i d n o t p l a y a n e c e s s a r y
role in - a n d w e r e n o t k e p t alive by - the inconsistency o f that very
Socialist p r e s e n t ) . E x a m p l e s a b o u n d h e r e : b o u r g e o i s utilitarian society
n e e d s a n a r i s t o c r a c y as t h e e x c e p t i o n t o r e v e a l its b a s i c u t i l i t a r i a n s t a n c e ,
a n d s o o n ; u p t o erection ( o f t h e p e n i s ) , w h i c h c a n s e r v e as t h e p r o o f a n d
sign o f p o t e n c y precisely o n a c c o u n t o f t h e i m m a n e n t d a n g e r o f failure:
2 4
o f t h e p r o s p e c t t h a t it will not o c c u r .
T h e r e are three m a i n versions o f the relationship between the Universal
a n d its p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t .
1. T h e s t a n d a r d n o t i o n o f n e u t r a l u n i v e r s a l i t y , i n d i f f e r e n t t o its p a r t i c u
l a r c o n t e n t : t h e C a r t e s i a n cogito is t h e n e u t r a l t h i n k i n g s u b s t a n c e , c o m m o n
t o all h u m a n s , indifferent to gender, and as s u c h the philosophical
foundation o f t h e political e q u a l i t y o f t h e sexes. F r o m this p e r s p e c t i v e ,
t h e f a c t t h a t , i n d e s c r i p t i o n s o f cogito in m o d e r n p h i l o s o p h y , o n e a c t u a l l y
finds a p r e d o m i n a n c e o f m a l e f e a t u r e s is u l t i m a t e l y a n i n c o n s i s t e n c y d u e
t o h i s t o r i c a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s : w i t h D e s c a r t e s , K a n t , H e g e l , a n d o t h e r s , cogito
r e m a i n e d a n ' u n f i n i s h e d p r o j e c t ' ; its c o n s e q u e n c e s w e r e n o t t h o u g h t out
to the end. (When post-Cartesians like Malebranche, for example,
repeated that w o m e n c a n n o t think clearly and are m u c h m o r e susceptible
t h a n m e n to t h e i m p r e s s i o n s o f t h e i r senses, they w e r e simply following
t h e prejudices o f the social reality o f t h e i r times.)
3 . T h e r e is, h o w e v e r , a t h i r d v e r s i o n , e l a b o r a t e d i n d e t a i l b y E r n e s t o
2
Laclau:' "' t h e U n i v e r s a l is e m p t y , yet p r e c i s e l y as s u c h a l w a y s - a l r e a d y filled
in, t h a t is, h e g e m o n i z e d b y s o m e c o n t i n g e n t , p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t t h a t a c t s
THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT 101
as its s t a n d - i n - i n s h o r t , e a c h U n i v e r s a l is t h e b a t t l e g r o u n d o n w h i c h t h e
multitude o f particular contents fight for hegemony. ( I f cogito s i l e n t l y
p r i v i l e g e s m e n as o p p o s e d to w o m e n , t h i s is n o t a n e t e r n a l f a c t i n s c r i b e d
i n its v e r y n a t u r e , b u t s o m e t h i n g t h a t c a n b e c h a n g e d t h r o u g h h e g e m o n i c
s t r u g g l e . ) T h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t h i s t h i r d v e r s i o n a n d t h e first is t h a t
t h e t h i r d version allows f o r n o c o n t e n t o f t h e U n i v e r s a l w h i c h w o u l d b e
e f f e c t i v e l y n e u t r a l a n d , as s u c h , c o m m o n t o all its s p e c i e s ( w e c a n n e v e r
d e f i n e a n y f e a t u r e s w h i c h a r e c o m m o n t o all h u m a n s i n a b s o l u t e l y t h e
s a m e m o d a l i t y ) : all p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t o f t h e U n i v e r s a l is t h e contingent
r e s u l t o f h e g e m o n i c s t r u g g l e - in i t s e l f , t h e U n i v e r s a l is a b s o l u t e l y e m p t y .
u l t i m a t e m u s i c a l e n d e a v o u r to e x p r e s s what G e r m a n I d e a l i s m c a l l e d t h e
i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n S u b j e c t a n d S u b s t a n c e ; Mozart's failure bears witness
to t h e fact that his universe was n o t y e t t h a t o f r a d i c a l assertion of
subjectivity, w h i c h o c c u r r e d only with B e e t h o v e n . W i t h B e e t h o v e n ' s o n e
v i o l i n c o n c e r t o , h o w e v e r , t h i n g s a g a i n b e c a m e r a t h e r p r o b l e m a t i c ; h e was
a c c u s e d , n o t unfairly, o f a c c e n t u a t i n g t h e m a i n m e l o d i c l i n e in t h e first
m o v e m e n t in a n e x c e s s i v e l y r e p e t i t i v e way t h a t b o r d e r s o n m u s i c a l kitsch -
in s h o r t , t h e b a l a n c e b e t w e e n v i o l i n a n d o r c h e s t r a , b e t w e e n S u b j e c t and
Substance, is a l r e a d y disturbed by t h e subjective excess. T h e proper
counterpoint t o t h i s e x c e s s is t h e n (again the o n e ) violin c o n c e r t o o f
B r a h m s , w h i c h was q u i t e appropriately c h a r a c t e r i z e d as t h e 'concerto
against t h e v i o l i n ' : it is t h e m a s s i v e s y m p h o n i c w e i g h t o f t h e orchestra
which ultimately engulfs the solo voice o f the violin, fighting and squash
i n g its e x p r e s s i v e t h r u s t , r e d u c i n g i t t o o n e a m o n g t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h e
s y m p h o n i c t e x t u r e . P e r h a p s t h e l a s t l i n k i n t h i s d e v e l o p m e n t was B a r t o k ' s
' c o n c e r t o f o r o r c h e s t r a ' ( t h a t is, o n l y f o r o r c h e s t r a , w i t h n o s i n g l e i n s t r u
m e n t b e i n g a l l o w e d t o s t a n d o u t as t h e b e a r e r o f a s o l o v o i c e ) , a t r u e
c o u n t e r p o i n t to S c h u m a n n ' s ' c o n c e r t w i t h o u t o r c h e s t r a ' ( t h e m o s t a c c u
rate formula o f his slide into madness, i.e. i n t o psychotic seclusion
gradually bereft o f t h e s u p p o r t in t h e 'big O t h e r ' , t h e substantial s y m b o l i c
o r d e r ) . W h a t all t h e s e e x a m p l e s h a v e in c o m m o n is t h a t e a c h o f t h e m is
n o t just a p a r t i c u l a r case o f the universal c o n c e p t o f 'violin c o n c e r t o ' , b u t
a desperate attempt to h a m m e r o u t a position with r e g a r d to t h e very
u n i v e r s a l i t y o f t h i s c o n c e p t : e a c h t i m e , t h i s u n i v e r s a l c o n c e p t is ' d i s t u r b e d '
i n a s p e c i f i c way - d i s a v o w e d , t u r n e d a r o u n d , t h r o w n o f f b y t h e e x c e s s i v e
e m p h a s i s o n o n e o f its p o l e s . I n s h o r t , t h e r e never has b e e n a violin
concerto that fully 'realized its c o n c e p t ' (a dialogue engendering a
productive tension a n d reconciliation between violin a n d orchestra, Sub
ject and S u b s t a n c e ) : every time s o m e invisible h i n d r a n c e prevents the
c o n c e p t ' s fulfilment. (This i n h e r e n t h i n d r a n c e preventing the i m m e d i a t e
a c t u a l i z a t i o n o f t h e c o n c e p t is a n o t h e r n a m e f o r t h e L a c a n i a n R e a l . ) H e r e
we have an e x a m p l e o f H e g e l i a n ' c o n c r e t e universality': a p r o c e s s o r a
s e q u e n c e o f particular attempts that d o n o t simply exemplify the neutral
universal notion but struggle with it, give a s p e c i f i c twist t o i t - the
U n i v e r s a l is t h u s fully e n g a g e d in t h e p r o c e s s o f its p a r t i c u l a r e x e m p l i f i
c a t i o n ; t h a t is t o say, t h e s e p a r t i c u l a r c a s e s i n a way, d e c i d e t h e f a t e o f t h e
21
universal n o t i o n itself. '
T o t h o s e w h o still r e m e m b e r A l t h u s s e r ' s a n t i - H e g e l i a n e l a b o r a t i o n o f
t h e n o t i o n o f overdeterminatwn as t h e k e y c a t e g o r y o f t h e M a r x i s t d i a l e c t i c ,
it will c o m e as n o s u r p r i s e t h a t A l t h u s s e r ' s p o l e m i c s a g a i n s t H e g e l ' s n o t i o n
THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT 103
o f u n i v e r s a l i t y is m i s d i r e c t e d : t h e f e a t u r e t h a t A l d i u s s e r e m p h a s i z e d as t h e
m a i n characteristic o f o v e r d e t e r m i n a t i o n (in e a c h particular constellation,
t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y i n q u e s t i o n is ' o v e r d e t e r m i n e d ' , g i v e n a s p e c i f i c f l a v o u r o r
s p i n , by t h e u n i q u e s e t o f c o n c r e t e c o n d i t i o n s - t h a t is t o say, in the
M a r x i s t d i a l e c t i c , the exception is the ruler, w e n e v e r e n c o u n t e r t h e a p p r o p r i
a t e e m b o d i m e n t o f u n i v e r s a l i t y as s u c h ) is t h e v e r y f u n d a m e n t a l feature
of H e g e l i a n c o n c r e t e universality. S o it is n o t enough to claim that
concrete u n i v e r s a l i t y is a r t i c u l a t e d i n t o a t e x t u r e o f p a r t i c u l a r c o n s t e l
lations, o f situations in which a specific c o n t e n t h e g e m o n i z e s the universal
n o t i o n ; o n e s h o u l d a l s o b e a r i n m i n d t h a t all t h e s e p a r t i c u l a r e x e m p l i f i
c a t i o n s o f t h e universality in q u e s t i o n are b r a n d e d by t h e sign o f t h e i r
u l t i m a t e f a i l u r e : e a c h o f t h e h i s t o r i c a l f i g u r e s o f t h e v i o l i n c o n c e r t o is
a b o v e all t h e failure t o a c t u a l i z e t h e ' n o t i o n ' o f t h e v i o l i n c o n c e r t o fully
and adequately. T h e Hegelian ' c o n c r e t e universality' thus involves the
R e a l o f s o m e c e n t r a l i m p o s s i b i l i t y : u n i v e r s a l i t y is ' c o n c r e t e ' , s t r u c t u r e d as
a texture o f particular figurations, p r e c i s e l y b e c a u s e it is f o r e v e r p r e v e n t e d
f r o m a c q u i r i n g a figure t h a t w o u l d b e a d e q u a t e t o its n o t i o n . T h i s is w h y
- as H e g e l p u t s it — t h e U n i v e r s a l g e n u s is always one of its own species: t h e r e
is u n i v e r s a l i t y o n l y i n s o f a r as t h e r e is a g a p , a h o l e , i n t h e m i d s t o f t h e
p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t o f t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y i n q u e s t i o n , t h a t is, i n s o f a r as.
a m o n g t h e s p e c i e s o f a g e n u s , t h e r e is always o n e s p e c i e s m i s s i n g : n a m e l y ,
t h e s p e c i e s t h a t w o u l d a d e q u a t e l y e m b o d y t h e g e n u s itself.
' R a t h e r t h a n w a n t n o t h i n g . . .'
m o r a l s t a n d a r d s , w h i c h c o u l d l e g i t i m i z e us t o p a s s j u d g e m e n t o n e v e r y
a c t i v e s u b j e c t i v i t y , is t h e u l t i m a t e f o r m o f E v i l .
As for the t e n s i o n b e t w e e n e t h n i c particularity a n d universalism, 'stub
b o r n a t t a c h m e n t ' d e s c r i b e s s i m u l t a n e o u s l y the s u b j e c t ' s c l i n g i n g to his
p a r t i c u l a r e t h n i c i d e n t i t y , w h i c h h e is n o t r e a d y t o a b a n d o n u n d e r any
c i r c u m s t a n c e s , a n d a d i r e c t r e f e r e n c e t o a b s t r a c t u n i v e r s a l i t y as t h a t w h i c h
r e m a i n s t h e s a m e , t h e u n c h a n g e a b l e s t a b l e f r a m e w o r k in t h e universal
c h a n g e o f all p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t . T h e properly dialectical paradox, of
c o u r s e , is t h a t i f t h e s u b j e c t is t o e x t r a c t h i m s e l f f r o m t h e substantial
c o n t e n t o f his p a r t i c u l a r e t h n i c totality, h e c a n d o so o n l y by c l i n g i n g to
s o m e radically c o n t i n g e n t idiosyncratic c o n t e n t . F o r that reason, 'stub
b o r n a t t a c h m e n t ' is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h e r e s i s t a n c e t o c h a n g e - m e d i a l i o n -
u n i v e r s a l i z a t i o n and t h e v e r y o p e r a t o r o f this c h a n g e : w h e n , i r r e s p e c t i v e
o f circumstances, I stubbornly attach myself to s o m e a c c i d e n t a l particular
feature to w h i c h I a m b o u n d by n o i n n e r necessity, this ' p a t h o l o g i c a l '
a t t a c h m e n t e n a b l e s m e to d i s e n g a g e m y s e l f f r o m i m m e r s i o n in m y particu
l a r l i f e - c o n t e x t . T h a t is w h a t H e g e l c a l l s t h e ' i n f i n i t e r i g h t o f s u b j e c t i v i t y ' :
t o risk e v e r y t h i n g , m y e n t i r e s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t e n t , f o r t h e s a k e o f s o m e
trifling, idiosyncratic f e a t u r e that m a t t e r s m o r e to m e t h a n a n y t h i n g else.
T h e p a r a d o x , t h e r e f o r e , lies i n t h e f a c t t h a t I c a n a r r i v e at t h e U n i v e r s a l -
for-itself only t h r o u g h a s t u b b o r n a t t a c h m e n t to s o m e c o n t i n g e n t particu
lar c o n t e n t , which functions as a ' n e g a t i v e magnitude', as something
wholly i n d i f f e r e n t in itself w h o s e m e a n i n g resides e n t i r e l y in t h e fact that
it gives b o d y t o t h e s u b j e c t ' s a r b i t r a i y will ( T w a n t t h i s b e c a u s e 1 w a n t i t ! ' ,
a n d t h e m o r e t r i f l i n g this c o n t e n t , t h e m o r e m y will is a s s e r t e d . . . ) . T h i s
i d i o s y n c r a t i c f e a t u r e , o f c o u r s e , is i n i t s e l f c o n t i n g e n t a n d u n i m p o r t a n t : a
m e t o n y m y o f v o i d , o f n o t h i n g n e s s - w i l l i n g t h i s X is a way o f ' w i l l i n g
Nothingness'.
The immediate opposite o f 'stubborn attachment' as t h e supreme
e x p r e s s i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s o b s t i n a t e self-will is, o f c o u r s e , discipline. The
n o t i o n o f t h e f o r m a t i v e p o w e r o f d i s c i p l i n e ( p r e c i s e l y i n its ' t r a u m a t i c '
d i m e n s i o n o f o b e y i n g a b l i n d m e a n i n g l e s s ' m e c h a n i c a l ' r i t u a l ) was c r u c i a l
f o r t h e H e g e l i a n n o t i o n o f s u b j e c t i v i t y . I n h i s Gymnasialreden, d e l i v e r e d at
t h e e n d o f t h e s c h o o l y e a r w h e n h e was h e a d o f t h e N u r e m b e r g Gymna
sium, H e g e l insisted o n the n e c e s s i t y o f m e c h a n i c a l d r i l l in military
s e r v i c e , a n d o n l e a r n i n g L a t i n . T h e s t r a n g e s t a t u s o f L a t i n is o f s p e c i a l
i n t e r e s t : w h y d i d L a t i n , n o t G r e e k , b e c o m e t h e lingua franca o f the West?
G r e e k is t h e m y t h i c a l ' l a n g u a g e o f o r i g i n s ' , e n d o w e d w i t h full m e a n i n g ;
w h i l e L a t i n is ' m e c h a n i c a l ' , s e c o n d - h a n d , a l a n g u a g e o f i m i t a t i o n in w h i c h
t h e o r i g i n a l w e a l t h o f m e a n i n g was l o s t ( a s H e i d e g g e r e m p h a s i z e s a g a i n
THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT 105
a n d a g a i n ) - so it is all t h e m o r e s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t L a t i n , n o t G r e e k , b e c a m e
2 7
the universal m e d i u m o f W e s t e r n civilization. Why?
I t is n o t m e r e l y t h a t this m e c h a n i c a l d r i l l , t h e c a p a c i t y t o o b e y m e a n i n g
less r u l e s , p r o v i d e s t h e g r o u n d f o r l a t e r m e a n i n g f u l a u t o n o m o u s s p i r i t u a l
a c t i v i t y ( o n e m u s t first l e a r n , g e t a c c u s t o m e d t o , t h e r u l e s o f g r a m m a r
a n d s o c i a l e t i q u e t t e , in o r d e r t o b e a b l e t o i n d u l g e freely in 'higher'
c r e a t i v e a c t i v i t y ) a n d is t h u s s u b s e q u e n t l y ' s u b l a t e d [aufgehoberi]', reduced
to a m e r e invisible G r o u n d f o r a h i g h e r activity. T h e c r u c i a l p o i n t is,
r a t h e r , t h a t w i t h o u t t h i s r a d i c a l e x t e r n a l i z a t i o n , this s a c r i f i c e o f all i n n e r
substantial spiritual c o n t e n t , t h e s u b j e c t r e m a i n s e m b e d d e d in his S u b
stance, and c a n n o t e m e r g e as p u r e self-relating negativity - the true
speculative m e a n i n g o f t h e m e a n i n g l e s s e x t e r n a l drill resides in the radical
a b a n d o n m e n t o f all ' i n n e r ' s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t e n t o f m y s p i r i t u a l life; it is
o n l y t h r o u g h s u c h a n a b a n d o n m e n t t h a t I e m e r g e as t h e p u r e s u b j e c t o f
enunciation, no longer attached to a n y positive o r d e r , r o o t e d in any
particular life-world. S o , like F o u c a u l t , H e g e l insists o n a close link
between discipline a n d subjectivization, although he gives it a s l i g h t l y
d i f f e r e n t twist: t h e s u b j e c t p r o d u c e d b y d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s is n o t the
s o u l as t h e p r i s o n o f t h e b o d y ' , b u t — i f I m a y risk t h i s f o r m u l a t i o n -
2
precisely a soulless subject, a s u b j e c t d e p r i v e d o f the d e p t h o f his 'soul'. "
H e g e l ' s p o i n t is t h u s t h e very o p p o s i t e o f w h a t is u s u a l l y a t t r i b u t e d to
h i m : t h e ' m e c h a n i c a l ' activity o f m e a n i n g l e s s drill a n d b l i n d o b e d i e n c e
c a n n e v e r b e fully s u b l a t e d i n t o t h e ' h i g h e r ' s p i r i t u a l e x e r c i s e o f S e n s e -
not because o f the irreducible r e m a i n d e r o f material inertia but, on the
c o n t r a r y , p r e c i s e l y t o g u a r a n t e e t h e a u t o n o m y o f t h e s u b j e c t with r e g a r d
to his substantial c o n t e n t : t h e c o m p l e t e ' s u b l a t i o n ' o f m e c h a n i c a l drill
i n t o Spiritual c o n t e n t (in L a c a n e s e : o f t h e s y m b o l i c m a c h i n e into M e a n
i n g ) w o u l d e q u a l t h e s u b j e c t ' s c o m p l e t e i m m e r s i o n in S u b s t a n c e . I n so
far as m e a n i n g l e s s m e c h a n i c a l drill compels the subject to distance
h i m s e l f f r o m e v e r y s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t e n t , t h e s u b j e c t h a s f r o m t i m e to t i m e
to b e shaken out o f his s e l f - c o m p l a c e n t i m m e r s i o n in t h e substantial
totality o f M e a n i n g , a n d c o n f r o n t e d with t h e void o f p u r e negativity -
t h a t , a c c o r d i n g t o H e g e l , is t h e r o l e o f w a r , w h i c h h e c o n s i d e r s n e c e s s a r y
p r e c i s e l y in s o f a r as it i n v o l v e s a m e a n i n g l e s s s a c r i f i c e a n d destruction
that u n d e r m i n e s t h e c o m p l a c e n c y o f o u r daily r o u t i n e . A n d , again, H e g e l
has to b e s u p p l e m e n t e d h e r e with L a c a n : w h a t m a k e s the s u b j e c t e n d u r e
t h i s m e a n i n g l e s s d r i l l o f s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e is t h e s u r p l u s - e n j o y m e n t produced
b y it. I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e s u p p l e m e n t o f m e a n i n g l e s s d r i l l t o t h e s p i r i t u a l
t o t a l i t y is n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e s u p p l e m e n t o f objet petit a t o t h e field of
Meaning: it bears witness to the fact that Hcgcl was no 'semantic
106 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
i d e a l i s t ' , t h a t h e was w e l l a w a r e o f h o w t h e v e r y d o m a i n o f M e a n i n g c a n
never achieve closure a n d g r o u n d itself in a self-referential circle - it has
to rely o n an 'indivisible r e m a i n d e r ' o f puissance provided by blind
m e c h a n i c a l e x e r c i s e . T h i s is a l s o , par excellence, the case o f religion in
r e l a t i o n t o p h i l o s o p h i c a l r e a s o n i n g : is n o t p r a y e r t h e ' h i g h e s t ' e x a m p l e o f
m e c h a n i c a l - r e p e t i t i v e activity d e s t i n e d t o p r o v i d e its o w n s a t i s f a c t i o n -
t h a t is, e n j o y m e n t - as H e g e l h i m s e l f e m p h a s i z e s i n h i s Lectures on the
Philosophy of Religion?
T h e advantage o f H e g e l ' s a c c o u n t o f disciplinary practices over Fou-
c a u l t ' s is t h a t H e g e l , as i t w e r e , p r o v i d e s t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l g e n e s i s o f
d i s c i p l i n e b y a n s w e r i n g t h e q u e s t i o n : h o w a n d w h y d o e s ( t h a t w h i c h will
b e c o m e ) t h e s u b j e c t ( t h e A l t h u s s e r i a n ' i n d i v i d u a l ' ) willingly s u b j e c t itself
t o t h e f o r m a t i v e d i s c i p l i n e o f P o w e r ? H o w a n d w h y d o e s it l e t i t s e l f b e
c a u g h t i n it? H e g e l ' s a n s w e r , o f c o u r s e , is t h e f e a r o f D e a t h , t h e a b s o l u t e
M a s t e r : s i n c e m y b o d i l y e x i s t e n c e is s u b j e c t t o n a t u r a l corruption, and
s i n c e I c a n n o t g e t r i d o f t h e b o d y a n d t h o r o u g h l y n e g a t e it, t h e o n l y t h i n g
I c a n d o is e m b o d y n e g a t i v i t y : i n s t e a d o f d i r e c t l y n e g a t i n g m y b o d y , I live
m y b o d i l y e x i s t e n c e as t h e p e r m a n e n t n e g a t i v i z a t i o n , s u b o r d i n a t i o n , m o r
t i f i c a t i o n , d i s c i p l i n i n g , o f t h e b o d y . . • • T h e life o f f o r m a t i v e d i s c i p l i n e -
w h a t H e g e l c a l l s Bildung- is t h u s a n e n d e a v o u r t o n e u t r a l i z e t h e e x c e s s i v e
l i f e - s u b s t a n c e i n m e , t o live m y a c t u a l life as i f I a m a l r e a d y d e a d , t o w a r d
off desire w h i c h ' m a k e s m e feel alive'. T h e positive figure o f the M a s t e r
who effectively oppresses me is u l t i m a t e l y a s t a n d - i n for the radical
negativity o f D e a t h , t h e a b s o l u t e M a s t e r - this e x p l a i n s the d e a d l o c k o f
t h e o b s e s s i o n a l n e u r o t i c w h o o r g a n i z e s h i s e n t i r e life as t h e e x p e c t a t i o n
o f t h e m o m e n t w h e n h i s M a s t e r will d i e , s o t h a t h e will d i e n finally be
a b l e t o b e c o m e fully a l i v e , t o ' e n j o y l i f e ' ; w h e n t h e o b s e s s i o n a l ' s M a s t e r
a c t u a l l y d i e s , t h e i m p a c t o f h i s d e a t h is, o f c o u r s e , e x a c t l y t h e o p p o s i t e :
t h e o b s e s s i o n a l is c o n f r o n t e d w i t h t h e v o i d o f D e a t h , t h e a b s o l u t e M a s t e r ,
w h i c h was l u r k i n g b e n e a t h t h e a c t u a l M a s t e r .
W h a t H e g e l a l r e a d y h i n t s at, a n d L a c a n e l a b o r a t e s , is h o w t h i s r e n u n c i
a t i o n o f t h e b o d y , o f b o d i l y p l e a s u r e s , p r o d u c e s a p l e a s u r e o f its o w n -
w h i c h is p r e c i s e l y w h a t L a c a n c a l l s s u r p l u s - e n j o y m e n t . T h e fundamental
' p e r v e r s i o n ' o f t h e h u m a n l i b i d i n a l e c o n o m y is t h a t w h e n s o m e p l e a s u r
a b l e activity is p r o h i b i t e d a n d ' r e p r e s s e d ' , w e d o n o t s i m p l y g e t a life o f
s t r i c t o b e d i e n c e t o t h e L a w d e p r i v e d o f all p l e a s u r e s - t h e e x e r c i s e o f t h e
L a w itself b e c o m e s libidinally c a t h e c t e d , so t h a t t h e p r o h i b i t o r y activity
i t s e l f p r o v i d e s a p l e a s u r e o f its o w n . A p r o p o s o f t h e a s c e t i c , f o r e x a m p l e ,
H e g e l e m p h a s i z e s h o w his e n d l e s s m o r t i f i c a t i o n o f his b o d y b e c o m e s a
s o u r c e o f p e r v e r s e excessive e n j o y m e n t : t h e very r e n u n c i a t i o n o f libidinal
THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT 107
s a t i s f a c t i o n b e c o m e s a n a u t o n o m o u s s o u r c e o f s a t i s f a c t i o n , a n d t h i s is t h e
2 9
' b r i b e ' which m a k e s the servant a c c e p t his servitude.
The key p r o b l e m is t h u s t h e uncanny possibility o f the dialectical
r e v e r s a l o f negating the body i n t o embodied negation, o f r e p r e s s i n g a l i b i d i n a l
u r g e i n t o o b t a i n i n g l i b i d i n a l satisfaction f r o m this very a c t o f r e p r e s s i o n .
T h i s m y s t e r y is t h a t o f masochism: h o w c a n t h e very v i o l e n t d e n i a l and
repudiation o f erotic satisfaction b e c o m e eroticized? H o w can libidinal
i n v e s t m e n t n o t o n l y d e t a c h i t s e l f f r o m its d i r e c t g o a l , b u t e v e n s h i f t f r o m
it to t h e very activity o p p o s i n g this g o a l ? T h e F r e u d i a n n a m e for this
o r i g i n a l ' d e t a c h a b i l i t y ' o f t h e e r o t i c i m p u l s e f r o m its ' n a t u r a l ' o b j e c t , f o r
t h i s o r i g i n a l p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e e r o t i c i m p u l s e s h i f t i n g its a t t a c h m e n t f r o m
o n e o b j e c t t o a n o t h e r , is, o f c o u r s e , n o n e o t h e r t h a n death drive. I n o r d e r
t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e n i h i l i s t i c d e n i a l o f t h e a s s e r t i v e will t o life, N i e t z s c h e ,
in On the Genealogy of Morals, introduced the well-known distinction
b e t w e e n n o t w i l l i n g at all a n d w i l l i n g N o t h i n g itself: n i h i l i s t i c h a t r e d o f
life is ' a r e v o l t a g a i n s t t h e m o s t f u n d a m e n t a l p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s o f life; y e t it
is a n d r e m a i n s a will! . . . r a t h e r t h a n w a n t n o t h i n g , man even wants
3 0
nothingness.' H e r e o n e should recall that L a c a n (who otherwise ignores
N i e t z s c h e ) implicitly refers to t h e s a m e distinction in his definition o f
hysterical a n o r e x i a : the a n o r e x i c s u b j e c t d o e s n o t simply refuse f o o d a n d
n o t e a t ; r a t h e r , s h e eats Nothing itself. F o r L a c a n , h u m a n d e s i r e ( i n c o n t r a s t
to animal i n s t i n c t ) is always, c o n s t i t u t i v e l y , m e d i a t e d by r e f e r e n c e to
N o t h i n g n e s s : t h e t r u e o b j e c t - c a u s e o f d e s i r e (as o p p o s e d t o t h e o b j e c t s
t h a t satisfy o u r n e e d s ) is, b y d e f i n i t i o n , a ' m e t o n y m y o f l a c k ' , a s t a n d - i n
f o r N o t h i n g n e s s . ( W h i c h is w h y , f o r L a c a n , objet petit a as t h e o b j e c t - c a u s e
o f d e s i r e is t h e o r i g i n a l l y l o s t o b j e c t : it is n o t o n l y t h a t w e d e s i r e it i n s o
3 1
f a r as it is l o s t - t h i s o b j e c t is n o t h i n g b u t a l o s s p o s i t i v i z e d . )
S o w e a r e b a c k a t t h e p r o b l e m a t i c o f ' s t u b b o r n a t t a c h m e n t ' , s i n c e it is
absolutely c r u c i a l to b e a r in m i n d the c o - d e p e n d e n c e b e t w e e n d e t a c h a b i l
ity f r o m a n y d e t e r m i n a t e c o n t e n t a n d e x c e s s i v e a t t a c h m e n t t o a p a r t i c u l a r
o b j e c t t h a t m a k e s us i n d i f f e r e n t t o all o t h e r o b j e c t s - s u c h a n o b j e c t is
w h a t L a c a n , f o l l o w i n g K a n t , c a l l s ' n e g a t i v e m a g n i t u d e ' , t h a t is, a n o b j e c t
w h i c h , i n its v e r y p o s i t i v e p r e s e n c e , a c t s as a s t a n d - i n f o r t h e v o i d o f N o t h
i n g n e s s ( o r f o r t h e abyss o f t h e i m p o s s i b l e T h i n g ) , s o t h a t wanting litis
particular object, maintaining one's 'stubborn, attachment' to it come what may, is
the very concrete form of 'wanting Nothingness'. Excess and lack o f attachment
thus stricto sensu coincide, since excessive attachment to a particular
c o n t i n g e n t o b j e c t is t h e v e r y o p e r a t o r o f l e t h a l d i s - a t t a c h m e n t : t o t a k e a
r a t h e r p a t h e t i c e x a m p l e , T r i s t a n ' s u n c o n d i t i o n a l , excessive a t t a c h m e n t to
Isolde (and vice versa) was the very f o r m o f his dis-attachment, of
108 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
h i s c u t t i n g - o f f o f all h i s l i n k s w i t h t h e w o r l d a n d i m m e r s i o n i n t o N o t h i n g
n e s s . ( A b e a u t i f u l w o m a n a s t h e i m a g e o f d e a t h is a s t a n d a r d f e a t u r e o f
male phantasmic space.)
O n e c a n s e e h o w t h i s p a r a d o x p e r f e c t l y fits L a c a n ' s n o t i o n o f s u b l i m a
t i o n as t h e e l e v a t i o n o f s o m e p a r t i c u l a r p o s i t i v e o b j e c t t o ' t h e d i g n i t y o f
t h e T h i n g ' : t h e s u b j e c t b e c o m e s excessively a t t a c h e d to an o b j e c t in so far
as t h i s o b j e c t starts to f u n c t i o n as a s t a n d - i n for Nothingness. Here,
Nietzsche o n the o n e hand, and F r e u d and Lacan on the other, part
c o m p a n y : w h a t N i e t z s c h e d e n o u n c e s as t h e ' n i h i l i s t i c ' g e s t u r e t o c o u n t e r
act life-asserting instincts, F r e u d a n d L a c a n c o n c e i v e as t h e v e r y b a s i c
s t r u c t u r e o f h u m a n d r i v e as o p p o s e d t o n a t u r a l i n s t i n c t s . I n o t h e r w o r d s ,
w h a t N i e t z s c h e c a n n o t a c c e p t is t h e r a d i c a l d i m e n s i o n o f t h e d e a t h d r i v e
- the fact that the e x c e s s o f the Will o v e r a m e r e s e l f - c o n t e n d e d satisfac
tion is always m e d i a t e d b y t h e ' n i h i l i s t i c ' s t u b b o r n a t t a c h m e n t t o N o t h i n g
n e s s . T h e d e a t h d r i v e is n o t m e r e l y a d i r e c t n i h i l i s t i c o p p o s i t i o n t o a n y
life-asserting a t t a c h m e n t ; r a t h e r , it is t h e v e r y f o r m a l s t r u c t u r e of the
r e f e r e n c e t o N o t h i n g n e s s t h a t e n a b l e s us to o v e r c o m e the stupid self-
contended life-rhythm, in order to become 'passionately attached' to
some Cause - b e it l o v e , a r t , k n o w l e d g e o r p o l i t i c s - f o r w h i c h w e a r e
r e a d y t o r i s k e v e r y t h i n g . I n t h i s p r e c i s e s e n s e , it is m e a n i n g l e s s t o t a l k
a b o u t t h e s u b l i m a t i o n o f d r i v e s , s i n c e d r i v e as s u c h i n v o l v e s t h e s t r u c t u r e
o f s u b l i m a t i o n : we pass f r o m i n s t i n c t to drive w h e n , i n s t e a d o f a i m i n g
d i r e c t l y a t t h e g o a l t h a t w o u l d satisfy u s , s a t i s f a c t i o n is b r o u g h t a b o u t b y
c i r c u l a t i n g a r o u n d t h e v o i d , by r e p e a t e d l y m i s s i n g t h e o b j e c t w h i c h is t h e
stand-in for the central void. S o , w h e n a s u b j e c t desires a series o f positive
o b j e c t s , t h e t h i n g t o d o is t o d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n o b j e c t s w h i c h a r e a c t u a l l y
d e s i r e d as p a r t i c u l a r o b j e c t s , a n d the o b j e c t w h i c h is d e s i r e d a s t h e s t a n d -
in for Nothingness: which functions as a ' n e g a t i v e m a g n i t u d e ' in the
Kantian sense o f the term.
'Include m e out!'
b y t h e a n a l y s t ( K r i s ) n o t , in r e a l i t y , t o h a v e s t o l e n a n y t h i n g , t h i s d o e s n o t
y e t p r o v e t h a t h e is s i m p l y i n n o c e n t . W h a t t h e p a t i e n t is a c t u a l l y s t e a l i n g
is ' n o t h i n g ' i t s e l f , j u s t as a n a n o r e x i c is n o t s i m p l y e a t i n g n o t h i n g ( i n t h e
sense o f 'not eating anything') but, rather, eating Nothingness itself. . . .
W h a t , exactly, d o these passages, so often referred to, m e a n ? Darian
3 2
Leader linked this case to another in which a patient evokes the
a n e c d o t e o f a m a n s u s p e c t e d by h i s e m p l o y e r o f s t e a l i n g s o m e t h i n g : as h e
leaves t h e factory where h e works every evening, his w h e e l b a r r o w is
s e a r c h e d s y s t e m a t i c a l l y - n o t h i n g is f o u n d , u n t i l a t l a s t i t is u n d e r s t o o d
t h a t h e is s t e a l i n g w h e e l b a r r o w s t h e m s e l v e s . . . . A l o n g t h e s a m e l i n e s , as
Lacan emphasizes, when Kris's patient displays h i s o b s e s s i o n w i t h the
' p a t h o l o g i c a l ' f e e l i n g o f p l a g i a r i z i n g , t h e c r u c i a l p o i n t is n o t t o t a k e t h i s
self-accusation at face value, a n d e n d e a v o u r to prove t o t h e p a t i e n t that in
r e a l i t y h e is n o t s t e a l i n g a n y t h i n g f r o m h i s c o l l e a g u e s - w h a t t h e p a t i e n t
( a s w e l l as h i s a n a l y s t ) fails t o s e e is t h a t ' t h e r e a l p l a g i a r i s m is i n t h e f o r m
o f t h e o b j e c t itself, in t h e f a c t t h a t f o r t h i s m a n s o m e t h i n g c a n o n l y h a v e
3 3
a v a l u e i f it b e l o n g s t o s o m e o n e e l s e ' : the patient's apprehension that
everything he p o s s e s s e s is s t o l e n c o n c e a l s t h e profound satisfaction -
jouissance — h e d e r i v e s f r o m t h e v e r y f a c t o f not h a v i n g a n y t h i n g t h a t t r u l y
b e l o n g s t o h i m - t h a t is truly ' h i s ' .
On t h e l e v e l o f d e s i r e , t h i s a t t i t u d e o f s t e a l i n g m e a n s t h a t d e s i r e is
always t h e d e s i r e o f t h e O t h e r , n e v e r i m m e d i a t e l y ' m i n e ' (I desire an
o b j e c t o n l y i n s o f a r as it is d e s i r e d b y t h e O t h e r ) - s o t h e o n l y way f o r m e
a u t h e n t i c a l l y t o ' d e s i r e ' is t o r e j e c t all p o s i t i v e o b j e c t s o f d e s i r e , a n d d e s i r e
N o t h i n g n e s s i t s e l f ( a g a i n , i n all t h e s e n s e s o f t h i s t e r m , u p t o d e s i r i n g t h a t
s p e c i f i c f o r m o f N o t h i n g n e s s w h i c h is d e s i r e i t s e l f - f o r t h i s r e a s o n , h u m a n
d e s i r e is always d e s i r e t o d e s i r e , d e s i r e t o b e t h e o b j e c t o f t h e Other's
d e s i r e ) . A g a i n , we c a n easily s e e t h e h o m o l o g y w i t h N i e t z s c h e : a W i l l c a n
b e a ' W i l l t o W i l l ' , a w i l l i n g w h i c h w a n t s w i l l i n g itself, o n l y i n s o f a r as it is
a W i l l w h i c h a c t i v e l y wills N o t h i n g n e s s . ( A n o t h e r w e l l - k n o w n f o r m o f t h i s
r e v e r s a l is t h e c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o f R o m a n t i c l o v e r s as a c t u a l l y b e i n g i n l o v e
n o t with t h e b e l o v e d p e r s o n , b u t with L o v e itself.)
C r u c i a l h e r e is t h e s e l f - r e f l e x i v e t u r n b y m e a n s o f w h i c h t h e ( s y m b o l i c )
f o r m i t s e l f is c o u n t e d a m o n g its e l e m e n t s : t o W i l l t h e W i l l i t s e l f is t o W i l l
n o t h i n g , j u s t as t o s t e a l t h e w h e e l b a r r o w i t s e l f ( t h e v e r y f o r m - c o n t a i n e r
o f s t o l e n g o o d s ) is t o s t e a l N o t h i n g n e s s i t s e l f ( t h e v o i d w h i c h p o t e n t i a l l y
contains stolen g o o d s ) . This 'nothing' ultimately stands for the subject
i t s e l f - t h a t is, it is t h e e m p t y s i g n i f i e r w i t h o u t s i g n i f i e d , w h i c h r e p r e s e n t s
t h e s u b j e c t . T h u s t h e s u b j e c t is n o t d i r e c t l y i n c l u d e d in t h e s y m b o l i c
o r d e r : it is i n c l u d e d as t h e v e r y p o i n t a t w h i c h s i g n i f i c a t i o n b r e a k s d o w n .
no THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
S a m G o l d w y n ' s f a m o u s r e t o r t w h e n h e was c o n f r o n t e d w i t h a n u n a c c e p t
able business proposition, 'Include me out!', perfecdy expresses this
i n t e r m e d i a t e status o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e s y m b o l i c order,
between direct inclusion and direct exclusion: the signifier which 'repre
s e n t s t h e s u b j e c t f o r o t h e r s i g n i f i e r s ' is t h e e m p t y s i g n i f i e r , t h e ' s i g n i f i e r
without signified', the signifier by m e a n s o f (in the guise of) which
'nothing ( t h e s u b j e c t ) is c o u n t e d as s o m e t h i n g ' - in this signifier, the
s u b j e c t is n o t s i m p l y i n c l u d e d i n t o t h e s i g n i f i e r ' s n e t w o r k ; r a t h e r , h i s v e r y
e x c l u s i o n f r o m i t ( s i g n a l l e d b y t h e f a c t t h a t t h e r e is n o s i g n i f i e d t o t h i s
s i g n i f i e r ) is ' i n c l u d e d ' i n it, m a r k e d , r e g i s t e r e d by it.
T h i s s i t u a t i o n is t h e s a m e as t h a t o f t h e w e l l - k n o w n c h i l d i s h n o n s e n s e
also often quoted by L a c a n : 'I have t h r e e brothers, Ernest, Paul and
myself - the third term, 'myself, designates the way the s u b j e c t is
s i m u l t a n e o u s l y i n c l u d e d in t h e s e r i e s (as ' m y s e l f ' ) , a n d e x c l u d e d f r o m it
(as t h e absent 'subject o f the enunciation' who has three brothers,
i n c l u d i n g h i m s e l f ) - t h a t is t o say, t h i s t e r m , p r e c i s e l y , ' i n c l u d e s m e o u t ' .
T h u s reflexivity sustains the gap b e t w e e n t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e e n u n c i a t i o n
and the subject o f the s t a t e m e n t / e n u n c i a t e d : w h e n - to take the old
n o t o r i o u s F r e u d i a n e x a m p l e - t h e p a t i e n t says: ' I d o n o t k n o w w h o that
[ p e r s o n i n m y d r e a m ] was, b u t it was not m y m o t h e r ! ' , t h e e n i g m a is: why-
did h e deny s o m e t h i n g that n o b o d y suggested to h i m ? In o t h e r words,
t h e r e a l m e s s a g e o f t h e p a t i e n t ' s ' I t was not m y m o t h e r ! ' lies n o t i n its
e n u n c i a t e d c o n t e n t , b u t i n t h e v e r y f a c t t h a t this m e s s a g e was u t t e r e d at
a l l - t h e r e a l m e s s a g e c o n s i s t s in t h e very a c t o f d e l i v e r i n g this m e s s a g e
(like a person who, when nobody is a c c u s i n g h i m o f theft, already
vehemently defends himself: 'I did not s t e a l it!' - w h y d o e s h e defend
h i m s e l f , w h e n n o b o d y was e v e n t h i n k i n g o f a c c u s i n g h i m ? ) . T h e f a c t t h a t
t h e m e s s a g e was d e l i v e r e d a t all is t h u s l i k e t h e w h e e l b a r r o w w h i c h s h o u l d
b e ' e x c l u d e d i n ' t h e c o n t e n t r a t h e r t h a n ' i n c l u d e d o u t ' o f it: it tells us a
lot, p r o v i d i n g t h e crucial e l e m e n t with r e g a r d to t h e c o n t e n t (theft).
This formula, 'include m e out', provides the most succinct definition o f
t h e obsessional^ s u b j e c t i v e a t t i t u d e . T h a t is t o say: w h a t is t h e g o a l o f t h e
obsessional attitude? T o achieve the position o f a p u r e invisible m e d i a t o r
- t h a t is, t o play, in i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e r e l a t i o n s , t h e r o l e o f w h a t , i n c h e m i s t r y ,
o n e calls a 'catalyst': the substance which speeds up, o r e v e n sets in
m o t i o n , a p r o c e s s o f c h e m i c a l r e a c t i o n without itself c h a n g i n g o r b e i n g
a f f e c t e d in a n y w a y . F r o m m y p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e , I r e c a l l t h e c a t a s t r o p h i c
c o n s e q u e n c e s o f o n e o f m y b e n e v o l e n t i n t e r v e n t i o n s . I was s l e e p i n g in a
f r i e n d ' s a p a r t m e n t i n a r o o m i n w h i c h m y f r i e n d , a n analyst, r e c e i v e d h i s
p a t i e n t s ; c l o s e t o t h i s r o o m was a n o t h e r r o o m i n w h i c h a n o t h e r a n a l y s t
THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT 111
a l s o r e c e i v e d p a t i e n t s . S o o n c e , i n t h e m i d d l e o f t h e day, I r e t u r n e d b r i e f l y
to t h e a p a r t m e n t to leave a p a c k a g e t h e r e ; s i n c e voices told m e that t h e
o t h e r a n a l y s t was r e c e i v i n g p a t i e n t s i n h i s r o o m , I t i p t o e d s i l e n t l y i n t o m v
r o o m a n d p u t t h e p a c k a g e i n t o a c h e s t . W h i l e I was d o i n g t h i s , I n o t i c e d
a b o o k o n t h e t a b l e w h i c h d i d n o t b e l o n g t h e r e ; I a l s o saw a g a p in t h e
b o o k s h e l v e s w h e r e this b o o k obviously fitted - so, u n a b l e to resist t h e
compulsive temptation, I put t h e b o o k b a c k i n its p r o p e r place, then
tiptoed out o f the apartment. Later 1 learned from my friend that bv
d o i n g t h i s , b y s i m p l y p u t t i n g a n o b j e c t b a c k i n its p r o p e r p l a c e , I h a d
c a u s e d the analyst f r o m t h e a d j a c e n t r o o m to have a nervous breakdown.
T h e b o o k I f o u n d o n t h e t a b l e was t o b e r e t u r n e d by t h i s a n a l y s t t o t h e
f r i e n d i n w h o s e r o o m I was s l e e p i n g . J u s t b e f o r e I a r r i v e d , this a n a l y s t
e n t e r e d m v r o o m a n d , s i n c e h e was l a t e a n d a p a t i e n t was a l r e a d y w a i t i n g
f o r h i m , j u s t t h r e w t h e b o o k o n t h e t a b l e . I m m e d i a t e l y a f t e r I left, t h e
p a t i e n t h a d to g o to t h e toilet, so t h e analyst u s e d t h e o p p o r t u n i t y o f t h e
s h o r t b r e a k t o e n t e r m y r o o m a g a i n a n d p u t t h e b o o k b a c k i n its p r o p e r
place - o n e c a n i m a g i n e his s h o c k w h e n h e n o t i c e d t h a t the book xuas
already back in its proper place on the shelf. O n l y two o r t h r e e m i n u t e s p a s s e d
b e t w e e n h i s two visits t o t h e r o o m , a n d h e h a d n o t h e a r d n o i s e s ( s i n c e 1
t i p t o e d in a n d o u t ) , so h e was c o n v i n c e d t h a t h e h i m s e l f m u s t h a v e put
t h e b o o k t h e r e . H o w e v e r , s i n c e h e c l e a r l y r e m e m b e r e d at t h e s a m e time-
that only a short while ago h e had j u s t thrown the b o o k on the table, h e
t h o u g h t h e was h a v i n g h a l l u c i n a t i o n s a n d l o s i n g c o n t r o l o v e r h i s a c t s -
even m y friend, to w h o m t h e analyst later told t h e story, t h o u g h t t h e latter
was l o s i n g h i s m i n d . . . .
I n b o t h t h e s e c a s e s , t h e m i s t a k e o f t h o s e c o n c e r n e d is t h a t i n their
s e a r c h f o r t h e d a n g e r o u s m u r d e r e r , t h e y f o r g e t to i n c l u d e i n t h e s e r i e s o f
s u s p e c t s t h e w h e e l b a r r o w i t s e l f - t h a t is, t h o s e e n g a g e d i n t h e e f f o r t t o
solve o r p r e v e n t the crime. Again, the link between the 'impossible'
inscription o f subjectivity i n t o the series a n d the empty form ( o f the
' s i g n i f i e r w i t h o u t s i g n i f i e d ' ) is c r u c i a l h e r e : t h e s e r i e s is ' s u b j e c t i v i z e d '
w h e n a n d o n l y w h e n o n e o f its e l e m e n t s is a n e m p t y e l e m e n t - t h a t is, a n
e l e m e n t w h i c h i n s c r i b e s i n t h e s e r i e s its v e r y f o r m a l p r i n c i p l e : t h i s e l e m e n t
does n o t simply ' m e a n n o t h i n g ' ; rather, it ' m e a n s N o t h i n g n e s s i t s e l f and,
as s u c h , r e p r e s e n t s t h e s u b j e c t .
W e a r e t h e r e f o r e b a c k a t t h e m y s t e r y o f reflection, o f t h e s e l f - r e f e r e n t i a l
reflexive turn that is c o n s u b s t a n t i a l with subjectivity. R e p r e s s i o n first
e m e r g e s as a n a t t e m p t t o regulate desires c o n s i d e r e d ' i l l i c i t ' b y t h e p r e d o m
i n a n t s o c i o - s y m b o l i c o r d e r ; h o w e v e r , this p o w e r o f r e p r e s s i o n c a n m a i n
t a i n i t s e l f i n t h e p s y c h i c e c o n o m y o n l y i f i t is s u s t a i n e d b y t h e desire for
regulation - if, t h a t is, t h e v e r y f o r m a l a c t i v i t y o f r e g u l a t i o n / r e p r e s s i o n /
subjection b e c o m e s libidinally invested a n d turns into an autonomous
source o f libidinal satisfaction. T h i s satisfaction provided by t h e very
regulatory activity, t h i s desire for regulation, plays exactly the same
s t r u c t u r a l r o l e as t h e w h e e l b a r r o w i n t h e s t o r y q u o t e d b y L e a d e r : w e c a n
c l o s e l y i n s p e c t all t h e d e s i r e s t h e s u b j e c t e n d e a v o u r s t o r e g u l a t e , b u t w e
THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT 113
T o w a r d s a Materialist T h e o r y o f G r a c e
H e g e l i a n ' c o n c r e t e u n i v e r s a l i t y ' is t h u s m u c h m o r e p a r a d o x i c a l t h a n it
m a y a p p e a r : it h a s n o t h i n g w h a t s o e v e r t o d o w i t h a n y k i n d o f a e s t h e t i c
o r g a n i c t o t a l i t y , s i n c e it r e f l e x i v e l y ' i n c l u d e s o u t ' t h e v e r y e x c e s s a n d / o r
gap that forever spoils such a totality - the irreducible and ultimately
u n a c c o u n t a b l e g a p b e t w e e n a s e r i e s a n d its e x c e s s , b e t w e e n t h e W h o l e
a n d t h e O n e o f its e x c e p t i o n , is t h e v e r y terrain o f ' c o n c r e t e u n i v e r s a l i t y ' .
F o r this r e a s o n , the true politico-philosophical heirs o f Hegel are not
a u t h o r s w h o e n d e a v o u r to rectify t h e e x c e s s e s o f m o d e r n i t y via t h e r e t u r n
to s o m e new form o f organic substantial O r d e r (like the c o m m u n i t a r i a n s )
b u t , r a t h e r , a u t h o r s w h o fully e n d o r s e the political logic o f the excess
c o n s t i t u t i v e o f e v e r y e s t a b l i s h e d O r d e r . T h e e x e m p l a r y c a s e , o f c o u r s e , is
C a r l S c h m i t t ' s c l e c i s i o n i s t c l a i m t h a t t h e r u l e o f law u l t i m a t e l y h i n g e s o n
a n abyssal a c t o f v i o l e n c e ( v i o l e n t i m p o s i t i o n ) g r o u n d e d o n l y in itself:
114 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
every p o s i t i v e s t a t u t e t o w h i c h t h i s a c t r e f e r s i n o r d e r t o l e g i d m i z e i t s e l f is
34
self-referentially p o s i t e d by this a c t itself.
T h e b a s i c p a r a d o x o f S c h m i t t ' s p o s i t i o n is t h a t h i s very p o l e m i c s a g a i n s t
l i b e r a l - d e m o c r a t i c f o r m a l i s m i n e x o r a b l y g e t c a u g h t in t h e f o r m a l i s t trap.
S c h m i t t targets the utilitarian-enlightened g r o u n d i n g o f the political in
s o m e p r e s u p p o s e d set o f neutral-universal n o r m s or strategic rules which
(should) regulate the interplay o f individual interests ( e i t h e r in the guise
o f l e g a l n o r m a t i v i s m a la K e l s e n , o r i n t h e g u i s e o f e c o n o m i c u t i l i t a r i a n
i s m ) : it is n o t p o s s i b l e t o p a s s d i r e c t l y f r o m a p u r e n o r m a t i v e o r d e r t o t h e
a c t u a l i t y o f s o c i a l life - t h e n e c e s s a r y m e d i a t o r b e t w e e n t h e t w o is a n a c t
o f W i l l , a d e c i s i o n , g r o u n d e d o n l y i n i t s e l f , w h i c h imposes a c e r t a i n o r d e r
o r legal h e r m e n e u t i c s ( r e a d i n g o f abstract rules). A n y n o r m a t i v e order,
t a k e n in itself, r e m a i n s s t u c k i n a b s t r a c t f o r m a l i s m ; it c a n n o t b r i d g e the
g a p t h a t s e p a r a t e s it f r o m a c t u a l life. H o w e v e r - a n d t h i s is t h e c o r e o f
S c h m i t t ' s a r g u m e n t a t i o n - t h e d e c i s i o n w h i c h b r i d g e s t h i s g a p is n o t a
decision for some c o n c r e t e order, but primarily the decision for the
f o r m a l p r i n c i p l e o f o r d e r as s u c h . T h e c o n c r e t e c o n t e n t o f t h e imposed
o r d e r is a r b i t r a r y , d e p e n d e n t o n t h e S o v e r e i g n ' s will, l e f t t o h i s t o r i c a l
c o n t i n g e n c y - t h e principle of order, t h e Dass-Sein o f O r d e r , h a s p r i o r i t y o v e r
its c o n c r e t e c o n t e n t , o v e r its Was-Sein. T h a t is t h e m a i n f e a t u r e o f m o d e r n
c o n s e r v a t i v i s m , w h i c h s h a r p l y d i s t i n g u i s h e s it f r o m e v e r y k i n d o f t r a d i t i o n
alism: m o d e r n conservativism, even m o r e than liberalism, assumes the
lesson o f the dissolution o f the traditional set o f values a n d / o r authorities
- t h e r e is n o l o n g e r a n y p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t w h i c h c o u l d b e p r e s u p p o s e d as
the universally accepted frame of reference. (Hobbes was the first
explicitly to posit this d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n the p r i n c i p l e o f o r d e r a n d any
c o n c r e t e o r d e r . ) T h e p a r a d o x t h u s l i e s i n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e o n l y way t o
o p p o s e l e g a l n o r m a t i v e f o r m a l i s m is t o r e v e r t t o d e c i s i o n i s t f o r m a l i s m -
t h e r e is n o way o f e s c a p i n g f o r m a l i s m w i t h i n t h e h o r i z o n o f m o d e r n i t y .
A n d d o e s n o t this g a p also provide t h e implicit political b a c k g r o u n d for
L a c a n ' s l o g i c o f t h e u n i v e r s a l a n d its c o n s t i t u t i v e e x c e p t i o n ? I t is e a s y t o
translate Schmitt's critique o f liberalism into L a c a n e s e : what liberalism
m i s r e c o g n i z e s is t h e c o n s t i t u t i v e r o l e o f t h e e x c e p t i o n a l / e x c e s s i v e M a s t e r -
S i g n i f i e r . T h i s r e f e r e n c e t o L a c a n a l s o e n a b l e s us t o a c c o u n t f o r the
necessary ambiguity o f Schmitt's notion o f e x c e p t i o n : it stands simul
taneously for the intrusion o f the Real (of the pure contingency that
p e r t u r b s t h e u n i v e r s e o f s y m b o l i c automaton) and f o r t h e g e s t u r e o f t h e
Sovereign who (violently, without foundation in the symbolic norm)
i m p o s e s a s y m b o l i c n o r m a t i v e o r d e r : i n L a c a n e s e , it s t a n d s f o r objet petit a
as well as f o r S , , t h e M a s t e r - S i g n i f i e r .
THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT 115
T
W hy, t h e n , d i d G o d c r e a t e t h e w o r l d i n t h e first p l a c e ? F o r t h e s a k e o f
C h r i s t ' s a r r i v a l - i n o r d e r , t h a t is, f o r t h e w o r l d t o b e d e l i v e r e d by C h r i s t .
Here M a l e b r a n c h e inverts 'God so loved the world, that he gave his
only son' into 'It would be unworthy o f G o d t o love t h e world, i f this
work were not inseparable from his s o n ' . From this inversion, Male
b r a n c h e is n o t a f r a i d t o d r a w t h e o n l y l o g i c a l , a l b e i t m o r b i d , c o n c l u s i o n
that G o d the F a t h e r ' n e v e r h a d a m o r e a g r e e a b l e sight t h a n that o f his
3 7
o n l y son f a s t e n e d to t h e cross to re-establish o r d e r in t h e u n i v e r s e ' . As
s u c h , C h r i s t is t h e o c c a s i o n a l c a u s e o f G r a c e : i n c o n t r a s t to G o d the
F a t h e r , C h r i s t t h e S o n d i s p e n s e s G r a c e with r e g a r d to individual merits,
b u t s i n c e h e is c o n s t r a i n e d b y t h e finite h o r i z o n o f a h u m a n soul, h e acts
and makes his choices following his p a r t i c u l a r will, a n d is p r o n e to
mistakes.
M a l e b r a n c h e t h u s g i v e s a t h e o l o g i c a l twist t o t h e s t a n d a r d Cartesian
epistemological occasionalism: for him, occasionalism is n o t only or
p r i m a r i l y a t h e o r y o f p e r c e p t i o n a n d v o l i t i o n ( w e d o n o t s e e b o d i e s , 'we
s e e all t h i n g s i n G o d ' ; o u r m i n d is n o t c a p a b l e o f d i r e c t l y m o v i n g even
the smallest b o d y ) , but also the theory o f Salvation, since the h u m a n soul
o f C h r i s t is t h e o c c a s i o n a l c a u s e o f t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f G r a c e t o p a r t i c u l a r
persons. Here M a l e b r a n c h e relies o n a h o m o l o g y with the domain of
N a t u r e i n w h i c h , i f w e a r e t o e x p l a i n e v e n t X , w e n e e d g e n e r a l laws t h a t
r e g u l a t e p h y s i c a l p r o c e s s e s as w e l l as t h e t e x t u r e o f p r i o r p a r t i c u l a r e v e n t s
w h i c h , i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h g e n e r a l laws, g e n e r a t e e v e n t X - g e n e r a l laws
b e c o m e effective only t h r o u g h the t e x t u r e o f particular e x i s t e n c e s that
a c t u a l i z e t h e m . I n a s i m i l a r way, G o d t h e F a t h e r s u s t a i n s t h e g e n e r a l laws
o f G r a c e , w h i l e C h r i s t a c t s a s its o c c a s i o n a l c a u s e a n d d e t e r m i n e s w h o will
3 8
a c u t a l l y b e t o u c h e d by G r a c e . I n t h i s way, M a l e b r a n c h e e n d e a v o u r s to
a v o i d t h e t w o e x t r e m e s : b e f o r e t h e F a l l , G o d d i d p l a n t o p r o v i d e G r a c e to
all men (in contrast to Calvinism, which advocates predestination -
s e l e c t i o n o f t h e few - b e f o r e t h e F a l l ) ; b e c a u s e o f A d a m ' s Fall, however,
sin is u n i v e r s a l ; all m e n d e s e r v e t o b e l o s t , a n d i n o r d e r t o r e d e e m the
w o r l d , G o d s e n t H i s S o n , C h r i s t , s o t h a t it is C h r i s t a l o n e w h o c a n furnish
118 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
Notes
1
' T h e b e g i n n i n g is t h e n e g a t i o n o f t h a t w h i c h b e g i n s w i t h i t ' - S c h e l l i n g ' s
statement applies perfectly to the itinerary o f the four contemporary
p o l i t i c a l p h i l o s o p h e r s w h o b e g a n as A l t h u s s e r i a n s a n d t h e n elaborated
t h e i r own distinctive position by distancing themselves f r o m t h e i r starting
point. T h e cases that immediately spring to m i n d are, o f course, those o f
Etienne Balibar and J a c q u e s Ranciere.
B a c k i n t h e 1 9 6 0 s , B a l i b a r was A l t h u s s e r ' s f a v o u r e d p u p i l a n d p r i v i l e g e d
c o l l a b o r a t o r ; all h i s w o r k i n t h e l a s t d e c a d e , h o w e v e r , is s u s t a i n e d b y a
kind o f avoidance o f (and silence about) the n a m e 'Althusser' (signifi
L
c a n t l y , h i s k e y e s s a y o n A l t h u s s e r b e a r s t h e t i t l e Tais-toi, Althusserf: 'Shut
up [remain silent], Althusser!'). In a revealing commemorative essay,
B a l i b a r d e s c r i b e s t h e last p h a s e o f A l t h u s s c r ' s t h e o r e t i c a l a c t i v i t y ( e v e n
p r i o r t o h i s u n f o r t u n a t e m e n t a l h e a l t h p r o b l e m s ) as a s y s t e m a t i c p u r s u i t
o f ( o r e x e r c i s e i n ) s e l f - d e s t r u c t i o n , as i f A l t h u s s e r was c a u g h t i n t h e v o r t e x
o f a systematic u n d e r m i n i n g a n d subverting o f his own previous t h e o r e t i
cal p r o p o s i t i o n s . A g a i n s t t h e b a c k g r o u n d o f this d e b r i s o f t h e A l t h u s s e r i a n
theoretical edifice, B a l i b a r painfully e n d e a v o u r s to f o r m u l a t e his own
p o s i t i o n , n o t always i n a fully c o n s i s t e n t way, o f t e n c o m b i n i n g t h e s t a n d a r d
Althusserian references ( S p i n o z a ) with r e f e r e n c e s to Althusser's arch
enemies (note the growing importance o f Hegel in Balibar's recent
essays).
R a n c i e r e , w h o a l s o b e g a n as a s t r i c t A l t h u s s e r i a n ( w i t h a c o n t r i b u t i o n
t o Lire le Capital), then ( i n La lecon d'Allhusser), accomplished a violent
gesture o f distancing, which e n a b l e d h i m to follow his own p a t h , focusing
o n w h a t h e p e r c e i v e d as t h e m a i n n e g a t i v e a s p e c t o f A l t h u s s e r ' s thought:
his t h e o r e t i c i s t elitism, his i n s i s t e n c e o n t h e g a p f o r e v e r s e p a r a t i n g the
universe o f scientific c o g n i t i o n from that o f ideological ( m i s ) r e c o g n i t i o n
in w h i c h t h e c o m m o n m a s s e s are i m m e r s e d . A g a i n s t this s t a n c e , w h i c h
128 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
The Truth-Event. . .
T h e a x i s o f B a d i o u ' s t h e o r e t i c a l e d i f i c e is - as t h e title o f h i s m a i n w o r k
indicates - the gap between B e i n g and Event.'- B e i n g ' stands for the
positive o n t o l o g i c a l o r d e r accessible to K n o w l e d g e , for the infinite multi
tude o f w h a t ' p r e s e n t s i t s e l f in o u r e x p e r i e n c e , c a t e g o r i z e d in g e n u s e s
a n d s p e c i e s in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h its p r o p e r t i e s . A c c o r d i n g t o B a d i o u , t h e
o n l y p r o p e r s c i e n c e o f B e i n g - a s - B c i n g is m a t h e m a t i c s - h i s first p a r a d o x i
c a l c o n c l u s i o n is t h u s t o i n s i s t o n t h e g a p t h a t s e p a r a t e s p h i l o s o p h y f r o m
ontology: ontology is mathematical science, not philosophy, which
THE POLITICS OF TRUTH 129
involves a d i f f e r e n t d i m e n s i o n . B a d i o u p r o v i d e s an e l a b o r a t e d analysis o f
B e i n g . A t t h e b o t t o m , as it w e r e , is t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e p u r e m u l t i p l e ,
t h e n o t y e t s y m b o l i c a l l y s t r u c t u r e d m u l t i t u d e o f e x p e r i e n c e , t h a t w h i c h is
g i v e n ; this m u l t i t u d e is n o t a m u l t i t u d e o f ' O n e s ' , s i n c e c o u n t i n g h a s n o t
yet t a k e n p l a c e . B a d i o u calls a n y p a r t i c u l a r c o n s i s t e n t m u l t i t u d e (French
s o c i e t y ; m o d e r n a r t . . . ) a ' s i t u a t i o n ' ; a s i t u a t i o n is s t r u c t u r e d , a n d it is its
s t r u c t u r e t h a t a l l o w s us t o ' c o u n t [ t h e s i t u a t i o n ] as O n e ' . H e r e , h o w e v e r ,
t h e first c r a c k s i n t h e o n t o l o g i c a l e d i f i c e o f B e i n g a l r e a d y a p p e a r : f o r us
to 'count [the situation] as O n e ' , the 'reduplication' proper to the
symbolization (symbolic i n s c r i p t i o n ) o f a situation m u s t b e at work: that
is, in o r d e r f o r a s i t u a t i o n to b e ' c o u n t e d as O n e ' , its s t r u c t u r e must
always-already be a meta-structure that designates it as o n e (i.e. the
signified structure o f the situation m u s t b e r e d o u b l e d in the symbolic
n e t w o r k o f s i g n i f i e r s ) . W h e n a s i t u a t i o n is t h u s ' c o u n t e d as O n e ' , i d e n t i
fied b y its s y m b o l i c s t r u c t u r e , w e h a v e t h e ' s t a t e o f t h e s i t u a t i o n ' . Here
B a d i o u is p l a y i n g o n t h e a m b i g u i t y o f t h e t e r m s t a t e : ' s t a t e o f t h i n g s ' as
well as S t a t e ( i n t h e p o l i t i c a l s e n s e ) - t h e r e is n o ' s t a t e o f s o c i e t y ' w i t h o u t
a ' s t a t e ' i n w h i c h t h e s t r u c t u r e o f s o c i e t y is r e - p r e s e n t e d / r e d o u b l e d .
T h i s s y m b o l i c reduplicatio already involves the m i n i m a l dialectic o f V o i d
a n d E x c e s s . T h e p u r e m u l t i p l e o f B e i n g is n o t y e t a m u l t i t u d e o f O n e s ,
s i n c e , as w e h a v e j u s t s e e n , t o h a v e O n e , t h e p u r e m u l t i p l e must be
' c o u n t e d as O n e ' ; f r o m the standpoint o f the state o f a situation, the
p r e c e d i n g m u l t i p l e c a n o n l y a p p e a r as nothing, s o n o t h i n g is t h e 'proper
n a m e o f B e i n g as B e i n g ' p r i o r t o its s y m b o l i z a t i o n . T h e V o i d is t h e c e n t r a l
category o f ontology from Democritus' atomism onwards: 'atoms' are
n o t h i n g b u t c o n f i g u r a t i o n s o f t h e V o i d . T h e e x c e s s c o r r e l a t i v e to this V o i d
t a k e s two f o r m s . O n t h e o n e h a n d , e a c h s t a t e o f t h i n g s i n v o l v e s a t l e a s t
o n e excessive e l e m e n t w h i c h , a l t h o u g h it c l e a r l y b e l o n g s to t h e s i t u a t i o n ,
is n o t ' c o u n t e d ' b y it, p r o p e r l y i n c l u d e d i n it ( t h e ' n o n - i n t e g r a t e d ' rabble
i n a s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n , e t c . ) : t h i s e l e m e n t is p r e s e n t e d , b u t n o t r e - p r e s e n t e d .
O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e r e is t h e e x c e s s o f r e - p r e s e n t a t i o n o v e r p r e s e n t a
t i o n : t h e a g e n c y t h a t b r i n g s a b o u t t h e p a s s a g e f r o m s i t u a t i o n t o its s t a t e
( S t a t e i n s o c i e t y ) is always i n e x c e s s w i t h r e g a r d t o w h a t it s t r u c t u r e s : S t a t e
power is n e c e s s a r i l y ' e x c e s s i v e ' , it n e v e r simply a n d transparently re
presents society ( t h e i m p o s s i b l e liberal d r e a m o f a state r e d u c e d to the
s e r v i c e o f civil s o c i e t y ) , b u t a c t s as a v i o l e n t i n t e r v e n t i o n in w h a t it r e
presents.
T h i s , t h e n , is t h e s t r u c t u r e o f B e i n g . F r o m t i m e t o t i m e , h o w e v e r , i n a
wholly c o n t i n g e n t , u n p r e d i c t a b l e way, o u t o f reach for Knowledge o f
B e i n g , an Event takes place that b e l o n g s to a wholly different dimension
130 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
- t h a t , p r e c i s e l y , o f n o n - B e i n g . L e t us t a k e F r e n c h s o c i e t y i n t h e late
eighteenth c e n t u r y : t h e s t a t e o f s o c i e t y , its s t r a t a , e c o n o m i c , p o l i t i c a l ,
ideological conflicts, a n d so o n , are accessible to knowledge. However, n o
a m o u n t o f K n o w l e d g e will e n a b l e u s t o p r e d i c t o r a c c o u n t f o r t h e p r o p e r l y
u n a c c o u n t a b l e E v e n t c a l l e d t h e ' F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n ' . I n this p r e c i s e s e n s e ,
t h e E v e n t e m e r g e s ex nihilo: i f it c a n n o t b e a c c o u n t e d f o r i n t e r m s o f t h e
s i t u a d o n , t h i s d o e s n o t m e a n t h a t i t is s i m p l y a n i n t e r v e n t i o n f r o m O u t s i d e
o r B e y o n d - i t a t t a c h e s i t s e l f p r e c i s e l y t o t h e V o i d o f e v e r y s i t u a t i o n , t o its
i n h e r e n t i n c o n s i s t e n c y a n d / o r its e x c e s s . T h e E v e n t is t h e T r u t h o f t h e
situation that m a k e s visible/legible what the 'official' situation had to
' r e p r e s s ' , b u t i t is a l s o always l o c a l i z e d - t h a t is t o say, t h e T r u t h is always
t h e T r u t h of a s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n . T h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n , f o r e x a m p l e , is
the Event which makes visible/legible the excesses and inconsistencies,
the 'lie', o f the ancien regime, and it is t h e T r u t h of t h e ancien regime
s i t u a t i o n , l o c a l i z e d , a t t a c h e d t o it. A n E v e n t t h u s i n v o l v e s its o w n s e r i e s o f
determinations: the E v e n t itself; its n a m i n g (the designation 'French
R e v o l u t i o n ' is n o t a n o b j e c t i v e c a t e g o r i z i n g b u t p a r t o f t h e E v e n t i t s e l f ,
t h e way its f o l l o w e r s p e r c e i v e d a n d s y m b o l i z e d t h e i r a c t i v i t y ) ; its u l t i m a t e
Goal ( t h e s o c i e t y o f fully r e a l i z e d e m a n c i p a t i o n , o f freedom-equality-
fraternity); its ' o p e r a t o r ' (the political m o v e m e n t s struggling for the
R e v o l u t i o n ; a n d , l a s t b u t n o t l e a s t , its subject, t h e a g e n t w h o , o n b e h a l f o f
the Truth-Event, intervenes in the historical multiple o f the situation a n d
discerns/identifies in it s i g n s - e f f e c t s o f t h e Event. W h a t defines the
s u b j e c t is h i s fidelity t o t h e E v e n t : t h e s u b j e c t c o m e s after t h e E v e n t a n d
p e r s i s t s i n d i s c e r n i n g its t r a c e s w i t h i n h i s s i t u a t i o n .
T h e s u b j e c t is t h u s , f o r B a d i o u , a finite c o n t i n g e n t e m e r g e n c e : n o t o n l y
is T r u t h n o t ' s u b j e c t i v e ' i n t h e s e n s e o f b e i n g s u b o r d i n a t e d t o h i s w h i m s ,
b u t t h e s u b j e c t h i m s e l f ' s e r v e s t h e T r u t h ' t h a t t r a n s c e n d s h i m ; h e is n e v e r
fully a d e q u a t e t o t h e i n f i n i t e o r d e r o f T r u t h , s i n c e t h e s u b j e c t always h a s
t o o p e r a t e w i t h i n a finite m u l t i p l e o f a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h h e d i s c e r n s t h e
signs o f T r u t h . T o m a k e this c r u c i a l p o i n t clear, l e t us take the e x a m p l e
o f t h e C h r i s t i a n r e l i g i o n ( w h i c h p e r h a p s p r o v i d e s the e x a m p l e o f a T r u t h -
E v e n t ) : t h e E v e n t is C h r i s t ' s i n c a r n a t i o n a n d d e a t h ; its u l t i m a t e G o a l is
t h e L a s t J u d g e m e n t , t h e f i n a l R e d e m p t i o n ; its ' o p e r a t o r ' i n t h e m u l t i p l e
of the historical situation is t h e C h u r c h ; its ' s u b j e c t ' is t h e c o r p u s o f
believers who intervene in their situation on b e h a l f o f the Truth-Event,
s e a r c h i n g i n it f o r s i g n s o f G o d . ( O r , t o t a k e t h e e x a m p l e o f l o v e : w h e n I
fall p a s s i o n a t e l y i n l o v e , I b e c o m e ' s u b j e c t i v i z e d ' b y r e m a i n i n g f a i t h f u l t o
this E v e n t a n d f o l l o w i n g it i n m y l i f e . )
T o d a y , however, w h e n even t h e m o s t radical i n t e l l e c t u a l s u c c u m b s to
T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H 131
T h e l a t e s t v e r s i o n o f t h e d i s a v o w a l o f T r u t h is p r o v i d e d b y t h e N e w A g e
o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e hubris o f s o - c a l l e d C a r t e s i a n s u b j e c t i v i t y a n d its m e c h a n -
icist d o m i n a t i n g a t t i t u d e towards n a t u r e . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e N e w A g e c l i c h e ,
t h e o r i g i n a l sin o f m o d e r n W e s t e r n civilization (as, i n d e e d , o f t h e J u d a e o -
Christian tradition) is m a n ' s hubris, his a r r o g a n t assumption that he
o c c u p i e s t h e c e n t r a l p l a c e in t h e universe a n d / o r t h a t h e is endowed
w i t h t h e d i v i n e r i g h t t o d o m i n a t e all o t h e r b e i n g s a n d e x p l o i t t h e m for
his profit. This hubris, which disturbs the rightful balance o f cosmic
powers, s o o n e r o r later forces N a t u r e to re-establish that b a l a n c e : today's
e c o l o g i c a l , s o c i a l a n d p s y c h i c c r i s i s is i n t e r p r e t e d as t h e u n i v e r s e ' s j u s t i f i e d
answer to m a n ' s p r e s u m p t i o n . O u r o n l y s o l u t i o n thus lies in t h e shift o f
the global paradigm, in a d o p t i n g t h e n e w h o l i s t i c a t t i t u d e in w h i c h w e
will humbly assume our constrained place in the global Order of
Being. . . .
I n c o n t r a s t to this c l i c h e , o n e s h o u l d a s s e r t t h e e x c e s s o f s u b j e c t i v i t y
( w h a t H e g e l c a l l e d t h e ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' ) as t h e o n l y h o p e o f r e d e m p
t i o n : t r u e evil lies n o t i n t h e e x c e s s o f s u b j e c t i v i t y as s u c h , b u t i n its
' o n t o l o g i z a t i o n ' , i n its r e i n s c r i p t i o n i n t o s o m e g l o b a l c o s m i c f r a m e w o r k .
Already in de S a d e , e x c e s s i v e c r u e l t y is o n t o l o g i c a l l y ' c o v e r e d ' b y the
o r d e r o f N a t u r e as t h e ' S u p r e m e B e i n g o f E v i l ' ; b o t h N a z i s m a n d S t a l i n i s m
involved t h e r e f e r e n c e to s o m e g l o b a l O r d e r o f B e i n g (in t h e c a s e o f
Stalinism, the dialectical organization o f the m o v e m e n t o f m a t t e r ) .
T r u e a r r o g a n c e is t h u s t h e v e r y o p p o s i t e o f t h e a c c e p t a n c e o f t h e hubris
o f s u b j e c t i v i t y : it l i e s i n f a l s e h u m i l i t y - t h a t is to say, it e m e r g e s w h e n the
s u b j e c t p r e t e n d s to s p e a k a n d act o n b e h a l f o f t h e G l o b a l C o s m i c O r d e r ,
T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H 133
p r o m i s e o f i m p o s s i b l e F u l l n e s s is a c t u a l l y r e a l i z e d - t h a t , t o paraphrase
D e r r i d a , d e m o c r a c y is n o l o n g e r m e r e l y a venir b u t h a s a c t u a l l y a r r i v e d ;
from this, deconstructionists draw the conclusion that the principal
e t h i c o - p o l i t i c a l d u t y is t o m a i n t a i n t h e g a p b e t w e e n t h e V o i d o f t h e c e n t r a l
i m p o s s i b i l i t y and e v e r y p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t g i v i n g b o d y t o it - t h a t is, n e v e r
fully t o s u c c u m b t o t h e e n t h u s i a s m o f h a s t y i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f a p o s i t i v e
E v e n t with the redemptive Promise that is always 'to c o m e ' . In this
deconstructionist stance, admiration f o r t h e R e v o l u t i o n i n its Utopian
enthusiastic aspect g o e s h a n d in h a n d with the conservative m e l a n c h o l i c
i n s i g h t t h a t e n t h u s i a s m i n e v i t a b l y t u r n s i n t o its o p p o s i t e , i n t o t h e w o r s t
t e r r o r , the m o m e n t we e n d e a v o u r to t r a n s p o s e it i n t o t h e positive struc
t u r i n g p r i n c i p l e o f social reality.
It m a y s e e m that B a d i o u r e m a i n s within this framework: does n o t h e
a l s o w a r n a g a i n s t t h e desastre o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y t e m p t a t i o n t o c o n f o u n d
t h e T r u t h - E v e n t with the o r d e r o f B e i n g : o f the a t t e m p t to ' o n t o l o g i z e '
Truth into the ontological principle o f the order of Being? However,
t h i n g s a r e m o r e c o m p l e x : B a d i o u ' s p o s i t i o n is t h a t a l t h o u g h t h e u n i v e r s a l
O r d e r has t h e status o f a s e m b l a n c e , f r o m time to time, in a c o n t i n g e n t
a n d u n p r e d i c t a b l e way, a ' m i r a c l e ' c a n h a p p e n i n t h e g u i s e o f a T r u t h -
E v e n t that deservedly s h a m e s a p o s t m o d e r n i s t s c e p t i c . W h a t h e h a s in
m i n d is a v e r y p r e c i s e p o l i t i c a l e x p e r i e n c e . F o r e x a m p l e , i n F r a n c e , d u r i n g
the first Mitterrand government in the early 1980s, all well-meaning
Leftists were sceptical a b o u t M i n i s t e r o f J u s t i c e R o b e r t B a d i n t e r ' s inten
tion to abolish the d e a t h p e n a l t y a n d i n t r o d u c e o t h e r progressive r e f o r m s
o f t h e p e n a l c o d e . T h e i r s t a n c e was ' Y e s , o f c o u r s e w e s u p p o r t h i m ; b u t is
t h e s i t u a t i o n y e t r i p e f o r it? W i l l t h e p e o p l e , t e r r i f i e d b y t h e r i s i n g c r i m e
r a t e , b e w i l l i n g t o s w a l l o w it? I s n ' t t h i s a c a s e o f i d e a l i s t i c o b s t i n a c y t h a t
c a n o n l y w e a k e n o u r g o v e r n m e n t , a n d d o us m o r e h a r m than good?'.
B a d i n t e r simply i g n o r e d the catastrophic p r e d i c t i o n s o f the o p i n i o n polls,
a n d p e r s i s t e d - w i t h t h e s u r p r i s i n g r e s u l t t h a t , all o f a s u d d e n , it was t h e
majority o f the p e o p l e who c h a n g e d their m i n d s a n d started to support
him.
A s i m i l a r e v e n t h a p p e n e d i n I t a l y i n t h e m i d 1 9 7 0 s , w h e n t h e r e was a
r e f e r e n d u m o n divorce. In private, the Left, even the C o m m u n i s t s - who,
of course, supported the right to divorce - were sceptical about the
o u t c o m e , fearing that the majority o f p e o p l e were n o t yet m a t u r e e n o u g h ,
that they would b e f r i g h t e n e d by the i n t e n s e C a t h o l i c p r o p a g a n d a depict
ing a b a n d o n e d children and m o t h e r s , a n d so on. T o the great surprise o f
e v e r y o n e , h o w e v e r , the r e f e r e n d u m was a g r e a t s e t b a c k f o r t h e Church
and the Right, since a considerable majority o f 6 0 p e r c e n t voted for the
T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H 135
. . . a n d Its Undecidability
W e c a n n o w s e e t h e s e n s e i n w h i c h t h e T r u t h - E v e n t is ' u n d e c i d a b l e ' : i t is
u n d e c i d a b l e f r o m the s t a n d p o i n t o f t h e System, o f the o n t o l o g i c a l 'state
o f t h i n g s ' . A n E v e n t is t h u s c i r c u l a r i n t h e s e n s e t h a t its i d e n t i f i c a t i o n is
possible only from the standpoint o f what B a d i o u calls ' a n interpreting
,(i
intervention - if, t h a t is, o n e s p e a k s f r o m a s u b j e c t i v e l y e n g a g e d p o s i t i o n ,
o r - t o p u t it m o r e f o r m a l l y - i f o n e i n c l u d e s i n t h e d e s i g n a t e d s i t u a t i o n
t h e a c t o f n a m i n g itself: t h e c h a o t i c events in F r a n c e at t h e e n d o f t h e
e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y c a n b e i d e n t i f i e d as t h e ' F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n ' o n l y f o r
those w h o a c c e p t the 'wager' that s u c h an E v e n t exists. B a d i o u formally
d e f i n e s intervention as ' e v e r y p r o c e d u r e b y m e a n s o f w h i c h a m u l t i p l e is
7
r e c o g n i z e d as a n e v e n t ' - s o 'it will r e m a i n f o r e v e r d o u b t f u l if t h e r e was
a n e v e n t a t a l l , e x c e p t f o r t h e i n t e r v e n o r [I'intervenant] who d e c i d e d that
8
he belonged to the situation'. Fidelity to the Event designates the
c o n t i n u o u s effort o f traversing the field o f knowledge from the standpoint
o f E v e n t , i n t e r v e n i n g i n it, s e a r c h i n g f o r t h e s i g n s o f T r u t h . A l o n g t h e s e
lines, B a d i o u also interprets the P a u l i n e triad o f Faith, H o p e a n d Love:
F a i t h is f a i t h i n t h e E v e n t ( t h e b e l i e f t h a t t h e E v e n t - C h r i s t ' s r i s i n g f r o m
t h e d e a d - r e a l l y t o o k p l a c e ) ; H o p e is t h e h o p e t h a t t h e final r e c o n c i l i a
t i o n a n n o u n c e d b y t h e E v e n t ( t h e L a s t J u d g e m e n t ) will a c t u a l l y o c c u r ;
L o v e is t h e p a t i e n t s t r u g g l e f o r t h i s t o h a p p e n , t h a t is, t h e l o n g and
a r d u o u s w o r k t o a s s e r t o n e ' s fidelity t o t h e E v e n t .
B a d i o u calls t h e l a n g u a g e that e n d e a v o u r s to n a m e t h e T r u t h - E v e n t t h e
136 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
W i t h i n t h e M a r x i s t t r a d i t i o n , t h i s n o t i o n o f p a r t i a l i t y as n o t o n l y n o t a n
o b s t a c l e t o b u t a p o s i t i v e c o n d i t i o n o f T r u t h was m o s t c l e a r l y a r t i c u l a t e d
b y G e o r g L u k a c s i n h i s e a r l y w o r k History and Class Consciousness, a n d in a
more directly messianic, proto-religious mode by W a l t e r B e n j a m i n in
'Theses on the Philosophy o f History': 'truth' e m e r g e s when a victim,
from his p r e s e n t catastrophic position, gains a s u d d e n insight into the
e n t i r e p a s t as a s e r i e s o f c a t a s t r o p h e s t h a t l e d t o h i s c u r r e n t predicament.
S o , w h e n we r e a d a t e x t o n T r u t h , w e s h o u l d b e c a r e f u l n o t t o c o n f u s e
t h e level o f K n o w l e d g e with t h e level o f T r u t h . F o r e x a m p l e , although
Marx himself used 'proletariat' as s y n o n y m o u s w i t h ' t h e w o r k i n g class'
n o r m a l l y , o n e c a n n o n e t h e less d i s c e r n in his w o r k a c l e a r t e n d e n c y to
c o n c e i v e ' t h e w o r k i n g c l a s s ' as a d e s c r i p t i v e t e r m b e l o n g i n g t o t h e d o m a i n
o f K n o w l e d g e (the o b j e c t o f ' n e u t r a l ' s o c i o l o g i c a l study, a social s t r a t u m
subdivided into c o m p o n e n t s , etc.); whereas 'proletariat' designates the
o p e r a t o r o f T r u t h , t h a t is, t h e e n g a g e d a g e n t o f d i e r e v o l u t i o n a r y s t r u g g l e .
it is always r e c o g n i z e d as s u c h r e t r o a c t i v e l y , t h r o u g h t h e a c t o f D e c i s i o n
t h a t d i s s o l v e s i t - t h a t is, b y m e a n s o f w h i c h w e a l r e a d y p a s s o v e r it. F o r
e x a m p l e , N a z i s m as a p s e u d o - E v e n t c o n c e i v e s o f i t s e l f as t h e D e c i s i o n f o r
social H a r m o n y a n d O r d e r against the C h a o s o f m o d e r n liberal-Jewish-
class-warfare society - h o w e v e r , m o d e r n society n e v e r p e r c e i v e s itself in
t h e first p e r s o n as f u n d a m e n t a l l y ' c h a o t i c ' , it p e r c e i v e s ' c h a o s ' ( o r 'dis
o r d e r ' o r ' d e g e n e r a t i o n ' ) as a l i m i t e d , c o n t i n g e n t d e a d l o c k , a t e m p o r a r y
c r i s i s - m o d e r n s o c i e t y a p p e a r s as f u n d a m e n t a l l y ' c h a o t i c ' o n l y f r o m the
s t a n d p o i n t o f t h e D e c i s i o n f o r O r d e r , t h a t is, o n c e t h e D e c i s i o n is already
made. O n e s h o u l d t h e r e f o r e resist t h e retroactive illusion a c c o r d i n g to
w h i c h D e c i s i o n follows the insight into the o p e n undecidability o f the
s i t u a t i o n : i t is o n l y t h e D e c i s i o n i t s e l f t h a t r e v e a l s t h e p r e v i o u s S t a t e as
' u n d e c i d a b l e ' . P r i o r t o D e c i s i o n , w e i n h a b i t a S i t u a t i o n w h i c h is e n c l o s e d
i n its h o r i z o n ; f r o m w i t h i n this h o r i z o n , the V o i d constitutive o f this
S i t u a t i o n is b y d e f i n i t i o n i n v i s i b l e ; t h a t is t o say, u n d e c i d a b i l i t y is r e d u c e d
t o - a n d a p p e a r s as - a m a r g i n a l d i s t u r b a n c e o f t h e g l o b a l S y s t e m . A f t e r
t h e D e c i s i o n , u n d e c i d a b i l i t y is o v e r , s i n c e w e i n h a b i t t h e n e w d o m a i n o f
Truth. T h e gesture that c l o s e s / d e c i d e s the Situation (again) thus absol
u t e l y c o i n c i d e s w i t h t h e g e s t u r e t h a t ( r e t r o a c t i v e l y ) o p e n s it u p .
T h e E v e n t is t h u s t h e V o i d o f a n i n v i s i b l e l i n e s e p a r a t i n g o n e c l o s u r e
f r o m a n o t h e r : p r i o r t o it, t h e S i t u a t i o n was c l o s e d ; t h a t is, f r o m w i t h i n its
h o r i z o n , ( w h a t will b e c o m e ) t h e E v e n t n e c e s s a r i l y a p p e a r s as skandalon, as
an u n d e c i d a b l e , c h a o t i c intrusion that has n o place in the State o f the
S i t u a t i o n ( o r , t o p u t it i n m a t h e m a t i c a l t e r m s , t h a t is 'supernumerary');
o n c e t h e E v e n t t a k e s p l a c e a n d is a s s u m e d as s u c h , t h e very previous
Situation appears as u n d e c i d a b l e Chaos. F o r an established political
O r d e r , t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y t u r m o i l t h a t t h r e a t e n s t o o v e r t h r o w it is a c h a o t i c
d i s l o c a t i o n , w h i l e f r o m t h e v i e w p o i n t o f t h e R e v o l u t i o n , ancien regime i t s e l f
is a n a m e f o r d i s o r d e r , f o r a n i m p e n e t r a b l e a n d u l t i m a t e l y 'irrational'
d e s p o t i s m . H e r e B a d i o u is c l e a r l y o p p o s e d to the D e r r i d e a n ethics o f
o p e n n e s s t o t h e E v e n t i n its u n p r e d i c t a b l e a l t e r i t y : s u c h a n e m p h a s i s o n
u n p r e d i c t a b l e A l t e r i t y as t h e u l t i m a t e h o r i z o n r e m a i n s w i t h i n t h e c o n f i n e s
o f a S i t u a t i o n , a n d s e r v e s o n l y t o d e f e r o r b l o c k t h e D e c i s i o n - it i n v o l v e s
us i n t h e ' p o s t m o d e r n i s t ' i n d e f i n i t e o s c i l l a t i o n o f ' h o w d o we k n o w t h i s
truly is t h e E v e n t , n o t j u s t a n o t h e r s e m b l a n c e o f t h e E v e n t ? '
H o w are w e t o d r a w a d e m a r c a t i o n l i n e b e t w e e n a t r u e E v e n t a n d its
s e m b l a n c e ? Is n o t B a d i o u c o m p e l l e d to rely h e r e o n a 'metaphysical'
o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n T r u t h a n d its s e m b l a n c e ? A g a i n , t h e a n s w e r i n v o l v e s
t h e way a n E v e n t r e l a t e s t o t h e S i t u a t i o n w h o s e T r u t h it a r t i c u l a t e s : N a z i s m
was a p s e u d o - E v e n t a n d t h e O c t o b e r R e v o l u t i o n was a n a u t h e n t i c E v e n t ,
T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H 139
F r o m this b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n o n e c a n a l r e a d y g e t a p r e s e n t i m e n t o f w h a t
o n e is t e m p t e d t o c a l l , i n all n a i v e t y , t h e i n t u i t i v e p o w e r o f B a d i o u ' s
n o t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t : it e f f e c t i v e l y d e s c r i b e s t h e e x p e r i e n c e e a c h o f us h a s
w h e n h e o r s h e is s u b j e c t i v e l y fully e n g a g e d i n s o m e C a u s e w h i c h is ' h i s
o r h e r o w n ' : i n t h o s e p r e c i o u s m o m e n t s , a m I n o t 'fully a s u b j e c t ' ? B u t
d o e s n o t t h i s v e r y f e a t u r e m a k e it ideological? T h a t is t o say, t h e first t h i n g
t h a t s t r i k e s t h e e y e o f a n y o n e w h o is v e r s e d i n t h e h i s t o r y o f F r e n c h
M a r x i s m is h o w B a d i o u ' s n o t i o n o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t is u n c a n n i l y c l o s e t o
Althusser's notion o f ideological interpellation. Furthermore, is it not
s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t B a d i o u ' s u l t i m a t e e x a m p l e o f t h e E v e n t is religion ( C h r i s t i
a n i t y f r o m S t P a u l t o P a s c a l ) as t h e p r o t o t y p e o f ideology, and that this
event, precisely, does not fit a n y o f t h e f o u r generiques o f the event he
1 0
e n u m e r a t e s (love, art, s c i e n c e , p o l i t i c s ) ?
S o , p e r h a p s , i f we t a k e B a d i o u ' s t h o u g h t i t s e l f as a ' s i t u a t i o n ' o f B e i n g ,
s u b d i v i d e d i n t o f o u r generiques, ( C h r i s t i a n ) r e l i g i o n i t s e l f is h i s ' s y m p t o m a l
torsion', the e l e m e n t that belongs to the d o m a i n o f T r u t h without b e i n g
o n e o f its a c k n o w l e d g e d p a r t s o r s u b s p e c i e s ? T h i s s e e m s t o i n d i c a t e t h a t
the Truth-Event consists in the e l e m e n t a r y ideological gesture o f interpel
lating individuals (parts o f a 'situation' o f B e i n g ) into subjects ( b e a r e r s /
followers of Truth). One is t e m p t e d to go even a step further: the
p a r a d i g m a t i c e x a m p l e o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t is n o t o n l y r e l i g i o n i n g e n e r a l
b u t , s p e c i f i c a l l y , Christian r e l i g i o n c e n t r e d o n the E v e n t o f Christ's arrival
a n d d e a t h (as K i e r k e g a a r d h a d already p o i n t e d out, Christianity inverts
t h e s t a n d a r d m e t a p h y s i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n E t e r n i t y a n d T i m e : in a
142 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
way, E t e r n i t y i t s e l f h i n g e s o n t h e t e m p o r a l E v e n t o f C h r i s t ) . S o p e r h a p s
B a d i o u c a n a l s o b e r e a d as t h e l a s t g r e a t a u t h o r i n t h e F r e n c h t r a d i t i o n o f
Catholic dogmaticists from Pascal and Malebranche on (we n e e d only
r e c a l l t h a t two o f h i s k e y r e f e r e n c e s a r e P a s c a l a n d C l a u d e l ) . F o r y e a r s t h e
p a r a l l e l b e t w e e n r e v o l u t i o n a r y M a r x i s m a n d M e s s i a n i c C h r i s t i a n i t y was a
c o m m o n topic a m o n g liberal critics like B e r t r a n d Russell, who dismissed
M a r x i s m as a s e c u l a r i z e d v e r s i o n o f M e s s i a n i c r e l i g i o u s i d e o l o g y ; B a d i o u ,
in contrast (following a line from the later E n g e l s to F r e d r i c J a m e s o n ) ,
fully e n d o r s e s t h i s h o m o l o g y .
T h i s r e a d i n g is f u r t h e r c o n f i r m e d b y B a d i o u ' s p a s s i o n a t e d e f e n c e o f S t
Paul as t h e one who articulated the Christian Truth-Event - Christ's
R e s u r r e c t i o n - as t h e ' u n i v e r s a l s i n g u l a r ' ( a s i n g u l a r e v e n t t h a t interpel
lates individuals into subjects universally, irrespectively o f their race, sex,
social class . . .) a n d t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f t h e followers' fidelity to i t . " Of
c o u r s e , h e r e B a d i o u is w e l l a w a r e t h a t t o d a y , i n o u r e r a o f m o d e r n s c i e n c e ,
o n e c a n n o l o n g e r a c c e p t t h e f a b l e o f t h e m i r a c l e o f R e s u r r e c t i o n as t h e
form o f the Truth-Event. Although the Truth-Event does designate the
o c c u r r e n c e o f s o m e t h i n g which, from within the horizon o f the predomi
n a n t o r d e r o f K n o w l e d g e , a p p e a r s i m p o s s i b l e ( t h i n k o f the l a u g h t e r with
which the Greek philosophers greeted St Paul's assertion of Christ's
R e s u r r e c t i o n o n his visit t o A t h e n s ) , t o d a y , a n y l o c a t i o n o f t h e Truth-
E v e n t at t h e level o f s u p e r n a t u r a l m i r a c l e s necessarily entails regression
i n t o o b s c u r a n t i s m , s i n c e t h e e v e n t o f S c i e n c e is i r r e d u c i b l e a n d c a n n o t b e
u n d o n e . T o d a y , o n e c a n a c c e p t as t h e T r u t h - E v e n t , as t h e i n t r u s i o n o f t h e
traumatic Real that shatters the predominant symbolic texture, only-
occurrences which take place in a universe c o m p a t i b l e with scientific
k n o w l e d g e , e v e n i f t h e y m o v e a t its b o r d e r s a n d q u e s t i o n its p r e s u p p o s i
tions - the 'sites' of the Event today are scientific discovery itself,
the political act, artistic invention, the psychoanalytic confrontation
with love. . . .
T h a t is t h e p r o b l e m with G r a h a m Greene's drama The Potting Shed,
which endeavours to resuscitate t h e C h r i s t i a n version o f t h e shattering
i m p a c t o f t h e i m p o s s i b l e R e a l : t h e life o f t h e f a m i l y o f a g r e a t p o s i t i v i s t
p h i l o s o p h e r who d e d i c a t e d his w h o l e effort to fighting religious supersti
t i o n s is t h o r o u g h l y s h a t t e r e d by a n u n e x p e c t e d m i r a c l e : h i s s o n , t h e o b j e c t
o f t h e p h i l o s o p h e r ' s g r e a t e s t l o v e , is m o r t a l l y ill a n d a l r e a d y p r o c l a i m e d
d e a d w h e n , m i r a c u l o u s l y , h e is b r o u g h t b a c k t o life b y m e a n s o f w h a t ,
evidently, c a n n o t b e anything b u t a d i r e c t intervention o f Divine G r a c e .
T h e s t o r y is t o l d i n r e t r o s p e c t f r o m t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f a f a m i l y f r i e n d w h o ,
a f t e r t h e p h i l o s o p h e r ' s d e a t h , w r i t e s h i s b i o g r a p h y a n d is p u z z l e d b y a n
T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H 143
e n i g m a i n t h e l a t t e r ' s life: w h y , a c o u p l e o f y e a r s b e f o r e h i s d e a t h , d i d t h e
p h i l o s o p h e r s u d d e n l y s t o p w r i t i n g ; w h y d i d h e l o s e h i s will t o live, as i f h i s
life was s u d d e n l y d e p r i v e d o f m e a n i n g , a n d e n t e r a p e r i o d o f r e s i g n a t i o n ,
passively awaiting his d e a t h ? I n t e r v i e w i n g the surviving family m e m b e r s ,
h e s o o n d i s c o v e r s t h a t t h e r e is a d a r k f a m i l y s e c r e t n o b o d y w a n t s t o t a l k
a b o u t , until, finally, o n e o f t h e family b r e a k s d o w n a n d c o n f e s s e s to h i m
t h a t t h e s h a t t e r i n g s e c r e t is t h e m i r a c u l o u s r e s u s c i t a t i o n o f t h e p h i l o s
opher's son, which rendered his e n t i r e theoretical work, his lifelong
engagement, meaningless. . . . Intriguing as i t is, s u c h a story cannot
e f f e c t i v e l y e n g a g e us t o d a y .
A p r o p o s o f S t Paul, B a d i o u tackles the p r o b l e m o f l o c a t i n g his position
w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e f o u r generiques that g e n e r a t e effective truths (science,
p o l i t i c s , a r t , l o v e ) - t h a t is, w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e f a c t t h a t ( t o d a y , at l e a s t )
Christianity, based o n a fabulous event o f Resurrection, c a n n o t b e c o u n t e d
as a n e f f e c t i v e T r u t h - E v e n t , b u t m e r e l y as its s e m b l a n c e . H i s proposed
s o l u t i o n is t h a t S t P a u l is t h e a n t i - p h i l o s o p h i c a l theoretician of the formal
conditions of the truth-procedure, what he provides is t h e first detailed
articulation o f how fidelity to a T r u t h - E v e n t o p e r a t e s i n its universal
d i m e n s i o n : t h e e x c e s s i v e , surnumeraire Real o f a Truth-Event ('Resurrec
t i o n ' ) that e m e r g e s by G r a c e (i.e. c a n n o t b e a c c o u n t e d for in t h e terms
o f the c o n s t i t u e n t s o f t h e given s i t u a t i o n ) sets in m o t i o n , in t h e s u b j e c t s
w h o r e c o g n i z e t h e m s e l v e s i n its c a l l , t h e m i l i t a n t ' w o r k o f L o v e ' , t h a t is,
the struggle to disseminate, with persistent fidelity, t h i s T r u t h in its
u n i v e r s a l s c o p e , as c o n c e r n i n g e v e r y o n e . S o a l t h o u g h S t P a u l ' s p a r t i c u l a r
message is n o longer operative for us, the very terms in which he
formulates the operative m o d e o f the Christian religion do possess a
u n i v e r s a l s c o p e as r e l e v a n t f o r e v e r y T r u t h - E v e n t : e v e r y T r u t h - E v e n t l e a d s
t o a k i n d o f ' R e s u r r e c t i o n , ' - t h r o u g h f i d e l i t y t o it a n d a l a b o u r o f L o v e
o n its b e h a l f , o n e e n t e r s a n o t h e r d i m e n s i o n i r r e d u c i b l e t o m e r e service des
biens, t o t h e s m o o t h r u n n i n g o f a f f a i r s i n t h e d o m a i n o f B e i n g , t h e d o m a i n
o f Immortality, o f Life u n e n c u m b e r e d by d e a t h . . . . N o n e t h e less, the
problem remains o f how i t was p o s s i b l e f o r the first and still most
pertinent description o f the m o d e o f operation o f the fidelity to a T r u t h -
E v e n t t o o c c u r a p r o p o s o f a T r u t h - E v e n t t h a t is a m e r e s e m b l a n c e , n o t a n
actual Truth.
F r o m a H e g e l i a n s t a n d p o i n t t h e r e is a d e e p n e c e s s i t y i n t h i s , c o n f i r m e d
by t h e fact that in o u r c e n t u r y t h e p h i l o s o p h e r w h o p r o v i d e d t h e definitive
d e s c r i p t i o n o f a n a u t h e n t i c p o l i t i c a l act ( H e i d e g g e r i n Being and Time) was
s e d u c e d b y a p o l i t i c a l a c t t h a t was u n d o u b t e d l y a fake, n o t an actual
Truth-Event ( N a z i s m ) . S o it is as if, i f o n e is to e x p r e s s the formal
144 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
s t r u c t u r e o f f i d e l i t y t o t h e T r u t h - E v e n t , o n e h a s t o d o it a p r o p o s o f a n
E v e n t t h a t is m e r e l y its o w n s e m b l a n c e . P e r h a p s t h e l e s s o n o f all t h i s is
m o r e r a d i c a l t h a n it a p p e a r s : w h a t i f w h a t B a d i o u c a l l s t h e T r u t h - E v e n t is,
a t its m o s t r a d i c a l , a p u r e l y f o r m a l a c t o f d e c i s i o n , n o t o n l y n o t b a s e d o n
a n a c t u a l t r u t h , b u t u l t i m a t e l y indifferent t o t h e p r e c i s e status ( a c t u a l o r
fictitious) o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t it refers to? W h a t i f we a r e d e a l i n g h e r e with
a n i n h e r e n t key c o m p o n e n t o f the T r u t h - E v e n t - what i f t h e true fidelity
t o t h e E v e n t is ' d o g m a t i c ' i n t h e p r e c i s e s e n s e o f u n c o n d i t i o n a l F a i t h , o f
an attitude which does n o t ask for g o o d r e a s o n s a n d w h i c h , for that very
reason, c a n n o t b e refuted by any ' a r g u m e n t a t i o n ' ?
S o , b a c k t o o u r m a i n l i n e o f a r g u m e n t : B a d i o u d e f i n e s as ' g e n e r i c ' t h e
m u l t i p l e within a situation t h a t has n o p a r t i c u l a r p r o p e r t i e s , r e f e r e n c e to
w h i c h w o u l d e n a b l e us t o classify i t as its s u b s p e c i e s : t h e ' g e n e r i c ' m u l t i p l e
b e l o n g s t o t h e s i t u a t i o n , b u t is n o t p r o p e r l y i n c l u d e d i n it as its s u b s p e c i e s
(the ' r a b b l e ' in H e g e l ' s philosophy o f law, f o r example). A multiple
e l e m e n t / p a r t o f t h e s i t u a t i o n w h i c h d o e s n o t fit i n t o it, w h i c h s t i c k s o u t ,
is g e n e r i c p r e c i s e l y i n s o f a r as i t d i r e c t l y g i v e s b o d y t o t h e b e i n g o f t h e
situation as s u c h . It subverts the situation by directly e m b o d y i n g its
universality. A n d , with r e g a r d t o B a d i o u ' s own classification o f g e n e r i c
p r o c e d u r e s i n f o u r s p e c i e s ( p o l i t i c s , art, s c i e n c e , l o v e ) , d o e s n o t r e l i g i o u s
i d e o l o g y o c c u p y p r e c i s e l y t h i s g e n e r i c p l a c e ? I t is n o n e of them, yet
1 2
p r e c i s e l y as s u c h it gives b o d y t o t h e g e n e r i c as s u c h .
Is n o t t h i s i d e n t i t y o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t a n d i d e o l o g y f u r t h e r confirmed
b y futur anterieur as t h e s p e c i f i c t e m p o r a l i t y o f g e n e r i c p r o c e d u r e s ? S t a r t
ing from the n a m i n g o f the Event (Christ's death, R e v o l u t i o n ) , generic
p r o c e d u r e s e a r c h e s f o r its s i g n s i n t h e m u l t i t u d e w i t h a v i e w t o t h e final
g o a l t h a t will b r i n g full p l e n i t u d e ( t h e L a s t J u d g e m e n t , C o m m u n i s m , o r ,
i n M a l l a r m e , le Livre). G e n e r i c p r o c e d u r e s thus involve a t e m p o r a l l o o p :
fidelity to the E v e n t e n a b l e s t h e m to j u d g e t h e h i s t o r i c m u l t i p l e f r o m t h e
s t a n d p o i n t o f p l e n i t u d e to c o m e , b u t t h e arrival o f this p l e n i t u d e already
i n v o l v e s t h e s u b j e c t i v e a c t o f D e c i s i o n — o r , i n P a s c a l i a n , t h e ' w a g e r ' o n it.
A r e w e t h u s n o t c l o s e t o w h a t L a c l a u d e s c r i b e s as h e g e m o n y ? L e t u s t a k e
the democratic-egalitarian political Event: reference to the D e m o c r a t i c
R e v o l u t i o n e n a b l e s us t o r e a d h i s t o r y as a c o n t i n u o u s d e m o c r a t i c s t r u g g l e
a i m i n g at total e m a n c i p a t i o n ; the present situation is e x p e r i e n c e d as
fundamentally 'dislocated', 'out o f j o i n t ' (the corruption of the ancien
regime, c l a s s s o c i e t y , f a l l e n t e r r e s t r i a l l i f e ) w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e p r o m i s e o f a
redeemed future. F o r the language-subject, 'now' is always a t i m e of
a n t a g o n i s m , split b e t w e e n t h e c o r r u p t 'state o f t h i n g s ' a n d t h e p r o m i s e o f
Truth.
THE POLITICS OF TRUTH 145
S o , a g a i n , is n o t B a d i o u ' s n o t i o n o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t u n c a n n i l y c l o s e t o
Althusser's notion o f (ideological) interpellation? Isn't the process Badiou
is d e s c r i b i n g t h a t o f a n i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r p e l l a t e d i n t o a s u b j e c t b y a C a u s e ?
( S i g n i f i c a n t l y , i n o r d e r t o d e s c r i b e t h e f o r m a l s t r u c t u r e o f fidelity t o t h e
T r u t h - E v e n t , h e u s e s t h e s a m e e x a m p l e as A l t h u s s e r i n h i s d e s c r i p t i o n o f
t h e p r o c e s s o f i n t e r p e l l a t i o n . ) Is n o t t h e c i r c u l a r r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e
E v e n t a n d t h e s u b j e c t ( t h e s u b j e c t serves t h e E v e n t in his fidelity, but the
E v e n t i t s e l f is v i s i b l e as s u c h o n l y t o a n a l r e a d y e n g a g e d s u b j e c t ) t h e v e r y
circle o f ideology? P r i o r to c o n s t r a i n i n g t h e notion o f the s u b j e c t to
ideology - t o i d e n t i f y i n g t h e s u b j e c t as s u c h as i d e o l o g i c a l - Althusser
e n t e r t a i n e d for a s h o r t time t h e idea o f t h e f o u r m o d a l i t i e s o f subjectivity:
t h e i d e o l o g i c a l s u b j e c t , the s u b j e c t in art, t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e U n c o n s c i o u s ,
t h e s u b j e c t o f s c i e n c e . Is t h e r e n o t a c l e a r p a r a l l e l b e t w e e n B a d i o u ' s f o u r
g e n e r i c s o f t r u t h (love, art, s c i e n c e , p o l i t i c s ) a n d t h e s e f o u r m o d a l i t i e s o f
subjectivity ( w h e r e love c o r r e s p o n d s to t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e U n c o n s c i o u s ,
the topic o f psychoanalysis, a n d politics, o f course, to the subject o f
i d e o l o g y ) ? T h e p a r a d o x is t h u s t h a t B a d i o u ' s o p p o s i t i o n o f k n o w l e d g e
a n d truth s e e m s to turn exactly a r o u n d Althusser's opposition o f ideology
a n d s c i e n c e : ' n o n - a u t h e n t i c ' k n o w l e d g e is l i m i t e d t o t h e p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f
B e i n g , b l i n d t o its s t r u c t u r a l v o i d , t o its s y m p t o m a l torsion; while the
engaged Truth that subjectivizes provides authentic insight into a
situation.
St P a u l with B a d i o u
A c c o r d i n g to a d e e p - a l b e i t u n e x p e c t e d - logic, t h e t o p i c o f P a u l i n e
C h r i s t i a n i t y is a l s o c r u c i a l f o r B a d i o u ' s c o n f r o n t a t i o n w i t h p s y c h o a n a l y s i s .
W h e n B a d i o u adamantly o p p o s e s the ' m o r b i d obsession with d e a t h ' , w h e n
h e o p p o s e s t h e T r u t h - E v e n t t o t h e d e a t i i d r i v e , a n d s o o n , h e is a t h i s
w e a k e s t , s u c c u m b i n g t o t h e temptation of the non-thought. I t is s y m p t o m a t i c
t h a t B a d i o u is c o m p e l l e d t o i d e n t i f y t h e l i b e r a l - d e m o c r a t i c service des biens,
t h e s m o o t h r u n n i n g o f t h i n g s in t h e positivity o f B e i n g w h e r e 'nothing
a c t u a l l y h a p p e n s ' , with t h e ' m o r b i d o b s e s s i o n w i t h d e a t h ' . A l t h o u g h one
c a n e a s i l y s e e t h e e l e m e n t o f t r u t h i n t h i s e q u a t i o n ( m e r e service d£s biens,
d e p r i v e d o f t h e d i m e n s i o n o f T r u t h , f a r f r o m b e i n g a b l e t o f u n c t i o n as
' h e a l t h y ' everyday life, n o t b o t h e r e d by ' e t e r n a l ' q u e s t i o n s , n e c e s s a r i l y
r e g r e s s e s i n t o n i h i l i s t i c m o r b i d i t y - as C h r i s t i a n s w o u l d p u t it, t h e r e is t r u e
L i f e o n l y i n C h r i s t , a n d life o u t s i d e t h e E v e n t o f C h r i s t s o o n e r o r l a t e r
t u r n s i n t o its o p p o s i t e , a m o r b i d d e c a d e n c e ; w h e n w e d e d i c a t e o u r life t o
146 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
excessive p l e a s u r e s , t h e s e very p l e a s u r e s a r e s o o n e r o r l a t e r s p o i l e d ) , o n e
s h o u l d n o n e t h e less insist h e r e o n w h a t L a c a n calls t h e s p a c e o r d i s t a n c e
between the two deaths: t o p u t it i n B a d i o u ' s C h r i s t i a n t e r m s , i n o r d e r t o b e
a b l e to o p e n o n e s e l f u p to t h e life o f t r u e E t e r n i t y , o n e h a s to suspend
o n e ' s a t t a c h m e n t t o ' t h i s ' life a n d e n t e r t h e d o m a i n o f ate, t h e domain
b e t w e e n t h e two d e a t h s , t h e d o m a i n o f t h e ' u n d e a d ' .
T h i s p o i n t is w o r t h y o f m o r e d e t a i l e d e x a m i n a t i o n , s i n c e i t c o n d e n s e s
t h e gap t h a t s e p a r a t e s B a d i o u f r o m L a c a n a n d psychoanalysis in g e n e r a l .
B a d i o u , o f c o u r s e , is a l s o w e l l a w a r e o f t h e o p p o s i t i o n o f two d e a t h s (and
two L i v e s ) : w h e n S t P a u l o p p o s e s L i f e a n d D e a t h ( S p i r i t is L i f e , w h i l e
F l e s h b r i n g s D e a t h ) , this o p p o s i t i o n o f Life a n d D e a t h has n o t h i n g to d o
w i t h t h e b i o l o g i c a l o p p o s i t i o n o f life a n d d e a t h as p a r t s o f t h e c y c l e o f
g e n e r a t i o n a n d c o r r u p t i o n , o r with t h e s t a n d a r d P l a t o n i c o p p o s i t i o n o f
Soul a n d Body: for St Paul, 'Life' and ' D e a t h ' , Spirit a n d Flesh, designate
two s u b j e c t i v e s t a n c e s , t w o ways t o live o n e ' s life. S o w h e n S t P a u l s p e a k s
o f D e a t h a n d R e s u r r e c t i o n - rising i n t o t h e e t e r n a l Life in C h r i s t - this
h a s n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h b i o l o g i c a l life a n d d e a t h b u t , r a t h e r , p r o v i d e s t h e
c o - o r d i n a t e s o f t h e two f u n d a m e n t a l 'existential attitudes' (to use this
m o d e r n t e r m anachronistically). T h i s leads B a d i o u to a specific interpre
t a t i o n o f C h r i s t i a n i t y w h i c h radically dissociates Death, and Resurrection: they
are n o t the same, they are n o t even dialectically i n t e r c o n n e c t e d in the
sense o f gaining access to eternal Life by paying the price o f suffering
w h i c h r e d e e m s us f r o m o u r s i n s . F o r B a d i o u , C h r i s t ' s d e a t h o n t h e C r o s s
s i m p l y s i g n a l s t h a t ' G o d b e c a m e m a n ' , t h a t e t e r n a l T r u t h is s o m e t h i n g
i m m a n e n t to h u m a n life, a c c e s s i b l e to every h u m a n b e i n g . T h e m e s s a g e
o f the fact that G o d h a d to b e c a m e m a n a n d to die (to suffer the fate o f
all f l e s h ) in o r d e r t o r e s u r r e c t is t h a t E t e r n a l L i f e is s o m e t h i n g a c c e s s i b l e
t o h u m a n i t y , t o all m e n as f i n i t e m o r t a l b e i n g s : e a c h o f us c a n b e t o u c h e d
by the G r a c e o f the T r u t h - E v e n t a n d e n t e r the d o m a i n o f E t e r n a l Life.
H e r e B a d i o u is o p e n l y a n t i - H e g e l i a n : t h e r e is n o d i a l e c t i c s o f L i f e and
D e a t h , i n t h e s e n s e o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t o f R e s u r r e c t i o n e m e r g i n g as t h e
m a g i c r e v e r s a l o f n e g a t i v i t y i n t o p o s i t i v i t y w h e n w e a r e fully r e a d y t o ' t a r r y
with the negative', to assume our mortality and suffering a t its most
r a d i c a l . T h e T r u t h - E v e n t is s i m p l y a r a d i c a l l y N e w B e g i n n i n g ; i t d e s i g n a t e s
the violent, traumatic a n d c o n t i n g e n t intrusion o f a n o t h e r d i m e n s i o n not
' m e d i a t e d ' by the d o m a i n o f terrestrial finitude a n d corruption.
O n e m u s t t h u s avoid t h e pitfalls o f t h e m o r b i d m a s o c h i s t m o r a l i t y that
p e r c e i v e s s u f f e r i n g as i n h e r e n t l y r e d e e m i n g : t h i s m o r a l i t y r e m a i n s w i t h i n
the c o n f i n e s o f the L a w (which d e m a n d s from us a p r i c e for the a d m i s s i o n
t o E t e r n a l L i f e ) , a n d is t h u s n o t y e t at t h e l e v e l o f t h e p r o p e r l y C h r i s t i a n
T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H 147
n o t i o n o f L o v e . As B a d i o u p u t s it, C h r i s t ' s d e a t h is n o t i n i t s e l f t h e T r u t h -
E v e n t , it s i m p l y p r e p a r e s t h e s i t e f o r t h e E v e n t ( R e s u r r e c t i o n ) b y a s s e r t i n g
the identity o f G o d a n d M a n - the fact that the infinite d i m e n s i o n o f
I m m o r t a l T r u t h is a l s o a c c e s s i b l e t o a h u m a n finite m o r t a l ; w h a t u l t i m a t e l y
m a t t e r s is o n l y t h e R e s u r r e c t i o n o f t h e d e a d (i.e. h u m a n - m o r t a l ) Christ,
signalling that each h u m a n b e i n g can be r e d e e m e d and can enter the
d o m a i n o f E t e r n a l L i f e , t h a t is, p a r t i c i p a t e in t h e T r u t h - E v e n t .
T h e r e i n lies t h e m e s s a g e o f Christianity: t h e positivity o f B e i n g , the
O r d e r o f t h e c o s m o s r e g u l a t e d b y its L a w s , w h i c h is t h e d o m a i n o f finitude
and mortality (from the standpoint o f the cosmos, o f the totality o f
positive B e i n g , we a r e m e r e l y p a r t i c u l a r b e i n g s d e t e r m i n e d by o u r specific
p l a c e in t h e g l o b a l o r d e r - t h e L a w is u l t i m a t e l y a n o t h e r n a m e f o r the
O r d e r o f c o s m i c J u s t i c e , w h i c h a l l o c a t e s t o e a c h o f us h i s o r h e r proper
p l a c e ) , is n o t ' a l l t h e r e i s ' ; t h e r e is a n o t h e r d i m e n s i o n , t h e d i m e n s i o n o f
T r u e L i f e i n L o v e , a c c e s s i b l e t o all o f us t h r o u g h D i v i n e G r a c e , s o t h a t w e
c a n all p a r t i c i p a t e i n it. C h r i s t i a n R e v e l a t i o n is t h u s a n e x a m p l e (although
p r o b a b l y the e x a m p l e ) o f h o w w e , h u m a n b e i n g s , a r e n o t c o n s t r a i n e d t o
the positivity o f B e i n g ; o f how, f r o m t i m e to time, in a c o n t i n g e n t and
unpredictable way, a T r u t h - E v e n t c a n o c c u r that opens up t o us the
p o s s i b i l i t y o f p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n A n o t h e r L i f e by r e m a i n i n g f a i t h f u l to the
Truth-Event. T h e interesting thing to n o t e is h o w Badiou here turns
a r o u n d t h e s t a n d a r d o p p o s i t i o n o f t h e L a w as u n i v e r s a l a n d G r a c e (or
c h a r i s m a ) as p a r t i c u l a r , t h e i d e a t h a t w e a r e all s u b j e c t e d t o t h e u n i v e r s a l
D i v i n e L a w , w h e r e a s o n l y s o m e o f us a r e t o u c h e d b y G r a c e , a n d c a n t h u s
b e r e d e e m e d : i n B a d i o u ' s r e a d i n g o f S t P a u l , o n t h e c o n t r a r y , i t is L a w
i t s e l f w h i c h , ' u n i v e r s a l ' as i t m a y a p p e a r , is u l t i m a t e l y ' p a r t i c u l a r i s t ' (a
l e g a l o r d e r always i m p o s e s s p e c i f i c d u t i e s a n d r i g h t s o n u s , i t is always a
Law defining a specific c o m m u n i t y at the expense o f excluding the
m e m b e r s o f o t h e r e t h n i c , e t c . , c o m m u n i t i e s ) , w h i l e D i v i n e G r a c e is t r u l y
u n i v e r s a l , t h a t is, n o n - e x c l u s i v e , a d d r e s s i n g all h u m a n s i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f
their r a c e , sex, social status, a n d so o n .
T h i s p a s s a g e , o f c o u r s e , m u s t b e s e e n i n its c o n t e x t : i n t h e w h o l e o f t h i s
p a r t o f t h e E p i s t l e , t h e p r o b l e m S t P a u l s t r u g g l e s w i t h is h o w t o a v o i d t h e
t r a p o f perversion, t h a t is, o f a L a w t h a t g e n e r a t e s its t r a n s g r e s s i o n , s i n c e i t
n e e d s it i n o r d e r to a s s e r t i t s e l f as L a w . F o r e x a m p l e , i n R o m a n s 3 : 5 - 8 ,
St P a u l fires o f f a b a r r a g e o f d e s p e r a t e q u e s t i o n s :
u l t i m a t e R e d e m p t i o n ? I f t h i s is h o w t h i n g s a r e , t h e n t h e a n s w e r t o t h e
question 'Should we continue to sin in order that grace may
a b o u n d ? ' ( R o m a n s 6: I ) is a f f i r m a t i v e : i t is o n l y a n d p r e c i s e l y b y i n d u l g i n g
i n S i n t h a t w e e n a b l e G o d to p l a y H i s p a r t as o u r S a v i o u r . B u t S t P a u l ' s
e n t i r e e f f o r t is t o b r e a k o u t o f t h i s v i c i o u s c y c l e i n w h i c h t h e p r o h i b i t i v e
L a w a n d its t r a n s g r e s s i o n g e n e r a t e a n d s u p p o r t e a c h o t h e r .
I n h i s Philosophical Notebooks, L e n i n m a d e t h e w e l l - k n o w n s t a t e m e n t t h a t
e v e r y o n e w h o a i m s a t r e a l l y u n d e r s t a n d i n g M a r x ' s Capital s h o u l d r e a d t h e
w h o l e o f H e g e l ' s Logic in d e t a i l . H e t h e n d i d it h i m s e l f , supplementing
q u o t e s f r o m H e g e l w i t h h u n d r e d s o f 'sirs' a n d m a r g i n a l c o m m e n t s l i k e :
' T h e first p a r t o f t h i s s e n t e n c e c o n t a i n s a n i n g e n i o u s d i a l e c t i c a l i n s i g h t ;
t h e s e c o n d p a r t is t h e o l o g i c a l r u b b i s h ! ' A t a s k a w a i t i n g t r u e L a c a n i a n
d i a l e c t i c a l m a t e r i a l i s t s is t o r e p e a t t h e s a m e g e s t u r e w i t h S t P a u l , s i n c e ,
a g a i n , e v e r y o n e w h o a i m s a t r e a l l y u n d e r s t a n d i n g L a c a n ' s Ecrils should
r e a d the e n t i r e t e x t o f R o m a n s a n d C o r i n t h i a n s in detail: o n e c a n n o t wait
f o r a L a c a n i a n v o l u m e o f Theological Notebooks, w i t h q u o t e s a c c o m p a n i e d
b y h u n d r e d s o f 'sics a n d c o m m e n t s l i k e : ' T h e first p a r t o f t h i s s e n t e n c e
p r o v i d e s t h e d e e p e s t i n s i g h t i n t o L a c a n i a n e t h i c s , w h i l e t h e s e c o n d p a r t is
1 4
j u s t theological rubbish!' . . ,
S o , b a c k to t h e long quote from Romans: the direct result o f the
i n t e r v e n t i o n o f t h e L a w is t h u s t h a t it divides the subject a n d introduces a
m o r b i d c o n f u s i o n b e t w e e n life a n d d e a t h : t h e s u b j e c t is d i v i d e d b e t w e e n
( c o n s c i o u s ) o b e d i e n c e t o t h e L a w a n d ( u n c o n s c i o u s ) d e s i r e f o r its t r a n s
g r e s s i o n g e n e r a t e d b y t h e l e g a l p r o h i b i t i o n itself. I t is n o t I , t h e s u b j e c t ,
who transgress the L a w , i t is n o n - s u b j e c t i v i z e d ' S i n ' itself, t h e sinful
i m p u l s e s in w h i c h I d o n o t r e c o g n i z e myself, a n d w h i c h I even hate.
B e c a u s e o f this split, m y ( c o n s c i o u s ) S e l f is u l t i m a t e l y e x p e r i e n c e d as
' d e a d ' , as d e p r i v e d o f l i v i n g i m p e t u s ; w h i l e ' l i f e ' , e c s t a t i c a f f i r m a t i o n o f
living e n e r g y , c a n a p p e a r only in the guise o f ' S i n ' , o f a transgression t h a t
gives rise to a m o r b i d s e n s e o f guilt. M y a c t u a l life-impulse, m y d e s i r e ,
a p p e a r s t o m e as a f o r e i g n a u t o m a t i s m t h a t p e r s i s t s i n f o l l o w i n g its p a t h
i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f m y c o n s c i o u s W i l l a n d i n t e n t i o n s . S t P a u l ' s p r o b l e m is
thus not the standard m o r b i d moralistic o n e ( h o w to crush transgressive
impulses, how finally to purify myself o f sinful urges), but its exact
o p p o s i t e : h o w c a n I b r e a k o u t o f this vicious cycle o f t h e L a w a n d desire,
o f t h e P r o h i b i t i o n a n d its t r a n s g r e s s i o n , w i t h i n w h i c h I c a n a s s e r t my
l i v i n g p a s s i o n s o n l y i n t h e g u i s e o f t h e i r o p p o s i t e , as a m o r b i d death
d r i v e ? H o w w o u l d it b e p o s s i b l e f o r m e t o e x p e r i e n c e m y l i f e - i m p u l s e n o t
as a f o r e i g n a u t o m a t i s m , as a b l i n d ' c o m p u l s i o n t o r e p e a t ' m a k i n g me
150 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
D o you not know, b r o t h e r s and sisters - for I am speaking to those who know
the law - that the law is b i n d i n g on a person only during that person's lifetime?
T h u s a married woman is b o u n d by the law to h e r h u s b a n d as l o n g as h e lives;
but if her husband dies, s h e is discharged from t h e law c o n c e r n i n g the husband.
Accordingly, she will b e called an adulteress if she lives with a n o t h e r m a n while
h e r husband is alive. B u t if h e r h u s b a n d dies, she is free from the law, and if
she marries a n o t h e r man, she is not an adulteress.
In the s a m e way, my friends, you have died to the law t h r o u g h the body o f
Christ, so that you may b e l o n g to a n o t h e r , to him who has h e e n raised from the
dead in o r d e r that we may b e a r fruit for G o d . W h i l e we were living in the flesh,
o u r sinful passions, a r o u s e d by the law, were at work in o u r m e m b e r s to b e a r
fruit for death. But now we are discharged from the law. dead to that which
held us captive. ( R o m a n s 7: 1 - 6 )
T o b e c o m e a t r u e C h r i s t i a n a n d e m b r a c e L o v e , o n e s h o u l d thus 'die to
t h e l a w ' , t o b r e a k u p t h e v i c i o u s c y c l e o f ' s i n f u l p a s s i o n s , a r o u s e d by t h e
l a w ' . A s L a c a n w o u l d h a v e p u t it, o n e h a s t o u n d e r g o t h e s e c o n d , s y m b o l i c
death, which involves t h e s u s p e n s i o n o f t h e big O t h e r , the symbolic Law
t h a t h i t h e r t o d o m i n a t e d a n d r e g u l a t e d o u r lives. S o t h e c r u c i a l p o i n t is
t h a t we h a v e two ' d i v i s i o n s o f t h e s u b j e c t ' w h i c h s h o u l d n o t b e c o n f u s e d .
O n t h e o n e h a n d , we have t h e division o f t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e L a w b e t w e e n
his c o n s c i o u s E g o , w h i c h adheres to the letter o f the Law, and his
d e c e n t r e d desire which, operating 'automatically', against the subject's
c o n s c i o u s will, c o m p e l s h i m t o ' d o w h a t h e h a t e s ' , t o t r a n s g r e s s t h e L a w
a n d i n d u l g e i n i l l i c i t jouissance. O n the o t h e r h a n d , we have the more
radical division b e t w e e n this e n t i r e d o m a i n o f the Law/desire, o f the
p r o h i b i t i o n g e n e r a t i n g its t r a n s g r e s s i o n , a n d t h e p r o p e r l y C h r i s t i a n way
of Love which marks a New Beginning, breaking out o f the deadlock o f
L a w a n d its t r a n s g r e s s i o n .
152 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
Is the Law the T h i n g ? Certainly not. Yet I can only know o f the T h i n g by m e a n s
o f the Law. In effect, I would n o t have h a d t h e idea to covet it if the Law h a d n ' t
said: ' T h o u shalt not covet it.' B u t the T h i n g finds a way by p r o d u c i n g in m e all
kinds o f covetousness thanks to the c o m m a n d m e n t , for without the Law t h e
T h i n g is dead. B u t even without the Law, I was o n c e alive. B u t when the
c o m m a n d m e n t appeared, the T h i n g flared up, returned o n c e again, and I m e t
my death. A n d for me, the c o m m a n d m e n t that was supposed to lead to life
T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H 153
T h e c r u c i a l t h i n g h e r e is t h e l a s t p h r a s e , w h i c h c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e s t h a t , f o r
L a c a n , t h e r e is ' a way o f d i s c o v e r i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p t o das Ding some
1 1
w h e r e b e y o n d the Law' ' - the whole p o i n t o f the ethics o f psychoanalysis
is t o f o r m u l a t e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a r e l a t i o n s h i p t h a t a v o i d s t h e pitfalls o f
t h e s u p e r e g o i n c u l p a t i o n that a c c o u n t s for the ' m o r b i d ' e n j o y m e n t o f sin,
w h i l e s i m u l t a n e o u s l y a v o i d i n g w h a t K a n t c a l l e d Schwdrrnerei, the obscurant
ist c l a i m t o g i v e v o i c e t o ( a n d thus to legitimize o n e ' s position by a
r e f e r e n c e to) a spiritual illumination, a direct insight into the impossible
R e a l T h i n g . W h e n L a c a n f o r m u l a t e s his m a x i m o f psychoanalytic ethics,
' ne pas ceder sur son desir, t h a t is, ' d o n ' t c o m p r o m i s e , d o n ' t give way o n
y o u r d e s i r e ' , t h e d e s i r e i n v o l v e d h e r e is n o l o n g e r t h e t r a n s g r e s s i v e d e s i r e
generated by the prohibitory Law, a n d thus involved in a 'morbid'
d i a l e c t i c w i t h t h e L a w ; r a t h e r , it is fidelity t o o n e ' s d e s i r e i t s e l f t h a t is
e l e v a t e d t o t h e l e v e l o f e t h i c a l d u t y , s o t h a t 'ne pas ceder sur son desir is
1 7
u l t i m a t e l y a n o t h e r way o f s a y i n g ' D o y o u r d u t y ! '
It would t h e r e f o r e b e t e m p t i n g to risk a B a d i o u i a n - P a u l i n e r e a d i n g o f
t h e e n d o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s , d e t e r m i n i n g i t as a N e w B e g i n n i n g , a s y m b o l i c
' r e b i r t h ' - t h e r a d i c a l r e s t r u c t u r i n g o f t h e a n a l y s a n d ' s s u b j e c t i v i t y in s u c h
a way t h a t t h e v i c i o u s c y c l e o f t h e s u p e r e g o is s u s p e n d e d , left behind.
D o e s n o t L a c a n h i m s e l f provide a n u m b e r o f hints that t h e e n d o f analysis
o p e n s u p t h e d o m a i n o f Love beyond Law, u s i n g t h e v e r y P a u l i n e t e r m s t o
w h i c h B a d i o u r e f e r s ? N e v e r t h e l e s s , L a c a n ' s way is n o t t h a t o f S t P a u l o r
B a d i o u : p s y c h o a n a l y s i s is n o t ' p s y c h o s y n t h e s i s ' ; it d o e s n o t a l r e a d y posit a
' n e w h a r m o n y ' , a n e w T r u t h - E v e n t ; it - as it w e r e - m e r e l y w i p e s t h e s l a t e
c l e a n for o n e . H o w e v e r , this ' m e r e l y ' s h o u l d b e p u t in q u o t a t i o n marks,
b e c a u s e it is L a c a n ' s c o n t e n t i o n t h a t , i n t h i s n e g a t i v e g e s t u r e o f ' w i p i n g
the slate clean', something (a void) is c o n f r o n t e d which is already
154 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
I t is c l e a r t h a t w e a r e d e a l i n g h e r e w i t h t h e d o m a i n ' i n b e t w e e n t h e two
d e a t h s ' , t h e s y m b o l i c a n d t h e r e a l : t h e u l t i m a t e o b j e c t o f h o r r o r is t h e
sudden emergence o f this 'life beyond death' later (in Seminar XT)
theorized by Lacan as lamella, the undead-indestructible object, Life
d e p r i v e d o f s u p p o r t i n t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r . T h i s , p e r h a p s , is c o n n e c t e d
with today's p h e n o m e n o n o f cyberspace: the m o r e o u r (experience of)
r e a l i t y is ' v i r t u a l i z e d ' , c h a n g e d i n t o a s c r e e n - p h e n o m e n o n encountered
o n an interface, the m o r e the 'indivisible r e m a i n d e r ' t h a t resists b e i n g
integrated into the interface appears as t h e horrifying remainder of
u n d e a d Life - n o w o n d e r images o f such a formless ' u n d c a d ' substance
o f L i f e a b o u n d i n t o d a y ' s s c i e n c e - f i c t i o n h o r r o r n a r r a t i v e s , f r o m Alien on.
L e t u s r e c a l l t h e w e l l - k n o w n s c e n e f r o m T e r r y G i l l i a m ' s Brazil, t o w h i c h
I have often referred - t h e s c e n e in w h i c h t h e w a i t e r in a h i g h - c l a s s
restaurant r e c o m m e n d s to his c u s t o m e r s the best suggestions f r o m the
day's m e n u ( ' T o d a y , o u r t o u r n e d o s is r e a l l y s p e c i a l ! ' , e t c . ) . Y e t w h a t t h e
c u s t o m e r s g e t o n m a k i n g t h e i r c h o i c e is a d a z z l i n g c o l o u r p h o t o g r a p h o f
the m e a l o n a stand above the plate, a n d o n the plate itself a l o a t h s o m e ,
20
e x c r e m c n t a l , paste-like lump:' this split b e t w e e n the i m a g e o f the food
a n d t h e R e a l o f its f o r m l e s s e x c r e m e n t a l r e m n a n t exemplifies perfectly
the disintegration o f reality into the ghostlike, substanccless a p p e a r a n c e
156 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
any idiot can bring a b o u t simple stupid miracles like walking on water o r
m a k i n g f o o d fall d o w n f r o m h e a v e n - t h e t r u e m i r a c l e , as H e g e l p u t it, is
t h a t o f t h e u n i v e r s a l t h o u g h t , a n d it t o o k S t P a u l t o p e r f o r m it, t h a t is, t o
translate the idiosyncratic Christ-Event into the f o r m o f universal thought.
T h e Lacanian Subject
W h a t , t h e n , is t h e s u b j e c t h e r e ? T h e s u b j e c t is s t r i c t l y c o r r e l a t i v e w i t h t h e
o n t o l o g i c a l g a p b e t w e e n t h e universal a n d t h e p a r t i c u l a r - with o n t o l o g i
c a l u n d e c i d a b i l i t y , w i t h t h e f a c t t h a t it is n o t p o s s i b l e t o d e r i v e H e g e m o n y
o r T r u t h d i r e c t l y f r o m t h e g i v e n p o s i t i v e o n t o l o g i c a l s e t : t h e ' s u b j e c t ' is
t h e act, t h e decision b y m e a n s o f w h i c h w e p a s s f r o m t h e p o s i t i v i t y o f t h e
given m u l t i t u d e to t h e T r u t h - E v e n t a n d / o r to H e g e m o n y . T h i s p r e c a r i o u s
status o f t h e subject relies o n t h e K a n t i a n a n t i - c o s m o l o g i c a l insight that
r e a l i t y is ' n o n - a l l ' , o n t o l o g i c a l l y n o t fully c o n s t i t u t e d , s o it n e e d s the
s u p p l e m e n t o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s c o n t i n g e n t g e s t u r e to o b t a i n a s e m b l a n c e o f
o n t o l o g i c a l c o n s i s t e n c y . ' S u b j e c t ' is n o t a n a m e f o r t h e g a p o f f r e e d o m
a n d c o n t i n g e n c y that infringes u p o n the positive o n t o l o g i c a l o r d e r , active
i n its i n t e r s t i c e s ; r a t h e r , ' s u b j e c t ' is t h e c o n t i n g e n c y t h a t g r o u n d s t h e v e r y
p o s i t i v e o n t o l o g i c a l o r d e r , t h a t is, t h e ' v a n i s h i n g m e d i a t o r ' w h o s e self-
effacing gesture transforms the pre-ontological chaotic multitude into the
s e m b l a n c e o f a positive ' o b j e c t i v e ' o r d e r o f reality. I n this p r e c i s e s e n s e ,
e v e r y o n t o l o g y is ' p o l i t i c a l ' : b a s e d o n a d i s a v o w e d c o n t i n g e n t ' s u b j e c t i v e '
2 3
act o f decision. S o K a n t was r i g h t : t h e v e r y i d e a o f t h e u n i v e r s e , o f t h e
All o f r e a l i t y , as a t o t a l i t y w h i c h e x i s t s i n i t s e l f , h a s t o b e r e j e c t e d as a
p a r a l o g i s m - t h a t is t o say, w h a t l o o k s l i k e a n epistemological limitation of
o u r capacity to grasp reality ( t h e fact that we a r e f o r e v e r p e r c e i v i n g reality
f r o m o u r f i n i t e t e m p o r a l s t a n d p o i n t ) is t h e p o s i t i v e ontological condition of
r e a l i t y itself.
H e r e , h o w e v e r , o n e s h o u l d a v o i d t h e fatal t r a p o f c o n c e i v i n g t h e s u b j e c t
as t h e a c t , t h e g e s t u r e , w h i c h i n t e r v e n e s a f t e r w a r d s i n o r d e r t o fill i n t h e
o n t o l o g i c a l gap, a n d insist o n t h e i r r e d u c i b l e vicious cycle o f subjectivity:
' t h e w o u n d is h e a l e d o n l y by t h e s p e a r w h i c h s m o t e i t ' , t h a t is, t h e s u b j e c t
'is' t h e very g a p filled in by t h e g e s t u r e o f s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n ( w h i c h , i n
L a c l a u , e s t a b l i s h e s a n e w h e g e m o n y ; w h i c h , i n R a n c i e r e , gives v o i c e t o t h e
'part o f n o part'; w h i c h , in B a d i o u , a s s u m e s fidelity to the Truth-Event;
e t c . ) . In short, the L a c a n i a n answer to the question asked ( a n d answered
in a n e g a t i v e w a y ) b y s u c h d i f f e r e n t p h i l o s o p h e r s as A l t h u s s e r , Derrida
and Badiou - 'Can the gap, the o p e n i n g , the Void which precedes the
T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H 159
universality with s o m e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t t h a t h e g e m o n i z e s i t ) , w h i l e t h e
s u b j e c t is t h e n e g a t i v e g e s t u r e o f b r e a k i n g o u t o f t h e c o n s t r a i n t s o f B e i n g
that o p e n s up the space o f possible subjectivization.
I n L a c a n e s e , t h e s u b j e c t p r i o r t o s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n is t h e p u r e n e g a t i v i t y
o f t h e d e a t h d r i v e p r i o r t o its r e v e r s a l i n t o t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h s o m e
2 7
new Master-Signifier. O r - t o p u t it i n a n o t h e r w a y - L a c a n ' s p o i n t is n o t
t h a t t h e s u b j e c t is i n s c r i b e d i n t o t h e v e r y o n t o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f the
u n i v e r s e as its c o n s t i t u t i v e v o i d , b u t t h a t 'subject' designates the contingency of
an Act that sustains the very ontological order of being. ' S u b j e c t ' d o e s n o t o p e n
u p a h o l e i n t h e full o r d e r o f B e i n g : ' s u b j e c t ' is t h e c o n t i n g e n t - e x c e s s i v e
g e s t u r e that constitutes the very universal o r d e r o f B e i n g . T h e o p p o s i t i o n
b e t w e e n t h e s u b j e c t qua o n t o l o g i c a l f o u n d a t i o n o f t h e o r d e r o f B e i n g a n d
t h e s u b j e c t qua c o n t i n g e n t p a r t i c u l a r e m e r g e n c e is t h e r e f o r e f a l s e : the
s u b j e c t is t h e c o n t i n g e n t e m e r g e n c e / a c t t h a t s u s t a i n s t h e v e r y u n i v e r s a l
o r d e r o f B e i n g . T h e s u b j e c t is n o t s i m p l y t h e e x c e s s i v e hubris through
which a particular e l e m e n t disturbs the global o r d e r o f B e i n g by positing
itself - a particular element - as its c e n t r e ; t h e s u b j e c t is, r a t h e r , the
p a r a d o x o f a p a r t i c u l a r e l e m e n t that sustains t h e very universal f r a m e .
L a c a n ' s n o t i o n o f t h e a c t as r e a l is t h u s o p p o s e d t o b o t h L a c l a u a n d
B a d i o u . I n L a c a n , a c t is a p u r e l y negative c a t e g o r y : t o p u t it i n B a d i o u ' s
t e r m s , it s t a n d s f o r t h e g e s t u r e o f b r e a k i n g o u t o f t h e c o n s t r a i n t s o f B e i n g ,
f o r t h e r e f e r e n c e t o t h e V o i d a t its c o r e , prior to filling this Void. I n this
p r e c i s e s e n s e , t h e act involves t h e d i m e n s i o n o f d e a t h drive that g r o u n d s
a decision (to a c c o m p l i s h a h e g e m o n i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ; to e n g a g e in a
fidelity to a T r u t h ) , b u t c a n n o t b e r e d u c e d to it. T h e L a c a n i a n death
drive (a category Badiou adamandy opposes) is t h u s a g a i n a k i n d of
'vanishing mediator' between Being and Event: there is a 'negative'
g e s t u r e c o n s t i t u t i v e o f t h e s u b j e c t w h i c h is t h e n o b f u s c a t e d i n ' B e i n g ' ( t h e
a s
e s t a b l i s h e d o n t o l o g i c a l o r d e r ) a n d in fidelity t o t h e E v e n t .
This minimal distance between the death drive and sublimation,
between the negative gesture o f suspension-withdrawal-contraction and
t h e p o s i t i v e g e s t u r e o f filling its v o i d , is n o t j u s t a t h e o r e t i c a l d i s t i n c t i o n
b e t w e e n t h e two a s p e c t s , w h i c h a r e i n s e p a r a b l e i n o u r a c t u a l e x p e r i e n c e :
as w e h a v e a l r e a d y s e e n , t h e w h o l e o f L a c a n ' s e f f o r t is p r e c i s e l y f o c u s e d
o n t h o s e l i m i t - e x p e r i e n c e s in w h i c h the s u b j e c t finds h i m s e l f c o n f r o n t e d
w i t h t h e d e a t h d r i v e a t its p u r e s t , p r i o r t o its r e v e r s a l i n t o s u b l i m a t i o n . Is
n o t L a c a n ' s analysis o f A n t i g o n e f o c u s e d o n t h e m o m e n t w h e n s h e finds
h e r s e l f i n t h e s t a t e 'in b e t w e e n t h e two d e a t h s ' , r e d u c e d t o a l i v i n g d e a t h ,
e x c l u d e d f r o m t h e s y m b o l i c d o m a i n ? - " ' Is t h i s n o t s i m i l a r t o t h e u n c a n n y
figure of Oedipus a t C o l o n n u s w h o , a f t e r f u l f i l l i n g h i s d e s t i n y , is a l s o
THE POLITICS OF TRUTH 161
T h e M a s t e r o r t h e Analyst?
t h e Mystic. T h e M a s t e r p r e t e n d s to n a m e , a n d t h u s d i r e c d y translate i n t o
s y m b o l i c fidelity, t h e d i m e n s i o n o f t h e a c t - t h a t is, t h e d e f i n i n g feature
o f t h e M a s t e r ' s g e s t u r e is t o c h a n g e t h e a c t i n t o a n e w M a s t e r - S i g n i f i e r , t o
g u a r a n t e e the c o n t i n u i t y a n d c o n s e q u e n c e s o f t h e E v e n t . In c o n t r a s t to
the Master, the Hysteric maintains the ambiguous attitude o f division
towards the act, insisting o n the s i m u l t a n e o u s necessity a n d impossibility
(ultimate failure) o f its s y m b o l i z a t i o n : t h e r e was a n Event, but each
s y m b o l i z a t i o n o f t h e E v e n t a l r e a d y b e t r a y s its t r u e t r a u m a t i c i m p a c t - t h a t
is t o say, t h e H y s t e r i c r e a c t s t o e a c h s y m b o l i z a t i o n o f t h e E v e n t w i t h a ' ce
nest pas ca\ t h a t ' s n o t it. I n c o n t r a s t t o b o t h o f t h e m , t h e p e r v e r s e a g e n t
o f U n i v e r s i t y d i s c o u r s e d i s a v o w s t h a t t h e r e was t h e e v e n t o f a n a c t i n t h e
first place - with his chain o f knowledge, he wants to reduce the
c o n s e q u e n c e s o f t h e a c t t o j u s t a n o t h e r t h i n g t h a t c a n b e e x p l a i n e d away
as p a r t o f t h e n o r m a l r u n o f t h i n g s ; i n o t h e r w o r d s , i n c o n t r a s t t o the
Master, who wants to ensure the continuity b e t w e e n the Event a n d its
consequences, and the Hysteric, who insists o n the gap that forever
s e p a r a t e s a n E v e n t f r o m its ( s y m b o l i c ) c o n s e q u e n c e s , U n i v e r s i t y d i s c o u r s e
aims at 'suturing' the field o f c o n s e q u e n c e s by e x p l a i n i n g t h e m away
without any r e f e r e n c e to the E v e n t ('Love? It's n o t h i n g but the result o f a
series o f o c c u r r e n c e s in your n e u r o n a l network!', etc.).
T h e f o u r t h a t t i t u d e B a d i o u a d d s is t h a t o f t h e M y s t i c , w h i c h is t h e e x a c t
o b v e r s e o f perverse University d i s c o u r s e ; i f t h e latter wants to isolate t h e
symbolic chain o f c o n s e q u e n c e s from their founding Event, t h e Mystic
w a n t s t o i s o l a t e t h e E v e n t f r o m t h e n e t w o r k o f its s y m b o l i c c o n s e q u e n c e s :
h e insists o n t h e i n e f f a b i l i t y o f t h e E v e n t , a n d disregards its s y m b o l i c
c o n s e q u e n c e s . F o r t h e M y s t i c , w h a t m a t t e r s is t h e bliss o f o n e ' s i m m e r s i o n
in t h e Event, w h i c h o b l i t e r a t e s t h e e n t i r e s y m b o l i c reality. L a c a n , h o w e v e r ,
i n c o n t r a s t t o B a d i o u , a d d s as t h e f o u r t h term to the triad o f Master,
Hysteric a n d University pervert the discourse o f the analyst: f o r him,
m y s t i c i s m is t h e i s o l a t e d p o s i t i o n o f t h e p s y c h o t i c i m m e r s e d i n his/her
puissance and, as s u c h , n o t a d i s c o u r s e (a s o c i a l l i n k ) at all. S o the
consistency o f L a c a n ' s entire edifice hinges on the fact that a fourth
discursive p o s i t i o n is p o s s i b l e , w h i c h is n o t t h a t o f a M a s t e r , t h a t o f t h e
Hysteric, o r that o f the University. T h i s position, while m a i n t a i n i n g the
g a p b e t w e e n t h e E v e n t a n d its s y m b o l i z a t i o n , a v o i d s t h e h y s t e r i c a l t r a p
and, instead o f b e i n g c a u g h t in the vicious cycle o f p e r m a n e n t failure,
a f f i r m s t h i s g a p as p o s i t i v e a n d p r o d u c t i v e : it a s s e r t s t h e R e a l o f t h e E v e n t
as t h e ' g e n e r a t o r ' , t h e g e n e r a t i n g c o r e t o b e e n c i r c l e d r e p e a t e d l y b y t h e
subject's symbolic productivity.
Notes
pre-scientific wisdom; politics (with all t h e passion o r struggle that this n o t i o n involves) is
r e d u c e d to an i m m a t u r e ideological version o r f o r e r u n n e r o f t h e a r t o f social gestion. . . .
1 1 . S e e Alain B a d i o u , Saint Paul. La fondation de I'universalisme, Paris: Presses Universitaires
de F r a n c e 1 9 9 7 .
12. O f c o u r s e , B a d i o u simultaneously mobilizes t h e association of ' g e n e r i c ' with 'generat
ing': it is this ' g e n e r i c ' e l e m e n t that enables us to ' g e n e r a t e ' propositions o f t h e subject-
l a n g u a g e in which T r u t h resonates.
1 3 . R o m a n s 7: 7 to 7: 1 8 ( q u o t e d from The. Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version,
Nashville, T N : T h o m a s Nelson Publishers 1 9 9 0 ) .
14. F o r B a d i o u , St Paul's f u n d a m e n t a l p r o b l e m was that o f t h e a p p r o p r i a t e discourse: to
assert a u t h e n t i c Christian universalism, St P a u l has to b r e a k with G r e e k philosophical
sophistry as well as with Jewish p r o p h e t i c o b s c u r a n t i s m , which is still t h e p r e d o m i n a n t
discursive m o d e o f the Gospels. H e r e , however, o n e should p e r h a p s c o m p l i c a t e the p i c t u r e
a little: m a y b e Christ's o b s c u r e parables in t h e Gospels a r e m o r e subversive than they a p p e a r ;
maybe they a r e t h e r e precisely t o p e r p l e x a n d frustrate t h e disciples w h o a r e u n a b l e to
d i s c e r n a c l e a r m e a n i n g in t h e m ; maybe the well-known s t a t e m e n t from Matthew 19: 12 -
'Let a n y o n e a c c e p t [or, as it is also translated: u n d e r s t a n d ] this who c a n ' - is to be r e a d
literally, as a signal that t h e s e a r c h for a d e e p e r m e a n i n g is misleading; m a y b e they a r e to be
taken like t h e p a r a b l e o f the D o o r o f the Law in Kafka's Trial, s u b m i t t e d to an e x a s p e r a t i n g
literal r e a d i n g by the priest, a r e a d i n g that yields n o d e e p e r m e a n i n g . So maybe these
parables a r e not the r e m a i n d e r o f the old Jewish p r o p h e t i c discourse but, r a t h e r , its
i m m a n e n t m o c k i n g subversion. A n d , incidentally, isn't it striking that this 'Let a n y o n e a c c e p t
this who c a n ' is p r o n o u n c e d by Christ r e g a r d i n g t h e p r o b l e m o f castration? H e r e is t h e full
q u o t e : 'Not everyone c a n a c c e p t / u n d e r s t a n d this t e a c h i n g , b\rt only t h o s e l o w h o m it is
given. F o r t h e r e a r e e u n u c h s who have b e e n so from birth, a n d t h e r e a r e e u n u c h s w h o have
b e e n m a d e e u n u c h s by others, a n d t h e r e a r e e u n u c h s for t h e sake o f the k i n g d o m o f heaven.
L e t a n y o n e a c c e p t / u n d e r s t a n d this who c a n ' ( M a t t h e w 19: 1 1 - 1 2 ) . W h a t is ultimately
u n g r a s p a b l e , beyond c o m p r e h e n s i o n , is the fact o f c a s t r a t i o n in its different modalities.
15. J a c q u e s L a c a n , The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, L o n d o n : Rorrtledge 1 9 9 2 , pp. 8 3 - 4 .
16. Ibid., p. 8 4 .
17. A n o t h e r p r o b l e m h e r e is the status o f t h e r e f e r e n c e to Kant: in so far as K a n t is
c o n c e i v e d o f as t h e p h i l o s o p h e r o f the Law in B a d i o u ' s Pauline sense, Lacarr's 'Kant avec
Sade' retains its full validity - that is, t h e statirs o f t h e Kantian m o r a l Law r e m a i n s that o f a
s u p e r e g o - f o r m a t i o n , so that its 'truth' is the Sadeian universe o f m o r b i d perversion. However,
t h e r e is a n o t h e r way o f c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g the Kantian m o r a l injunction which delivers it from
s u p e r e g o c o n s t r a i n t s . (See A p p e n d i x III o f Slavoj Zizek, The Plague of Fantasies, L o n d o r r :
Verso 1997.)
18. S e c j a c q u e s L a c a n , The Foul Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis, New York: N o r t o n
1 9 7 9 , pp. 1 9 7 - 8 .
19. J a c q u e s L a c a n , The Seminar, Book II: The Ego in Freud's Theory arid in the Technique, of
Psychoanalysis, New York: N o r t o n 1 9 9 1 , pp. 2 3 1 - 2 .
2 0 . This s c e n e from Brazil is psychotic, since it involves t h e d i s a p p e a r a n c e o f t h e Symbolic
- that is to say, what h a p p e n s in it is what L a c a n describes as t h e psychotic torsion o f t h e
' s c h e m e L ' o f symbolic c o m m u n i c a t i o n : symbolic reality falls apart into, on the o n e side, the
p u r e Real o f the e x c r e m e n t a n d , o n the o t h e r , t h e p u r e I m a g i n a r y o f t h e substanceless
h a l l u c i n a t o r y i m a g e . . . . ( S e e J a c q u e s L a c a n , 'On a Question P r e l i m i n a r y t o Any Possible
T r e a t m e n t o f Psychosis', in Enils: A Selection, New York: N o r t o n 1 9 7 7 . ) In short, what takes
p l a c e in this s c e n e is t h e dissolution o f the B o r r o m e a n knot in which, irr the intricate
i n t e r c o n n e c t i o n between t h e t h r e e dimensions, e a c h c o u p l e o f t h e m is linked t h r o u g h the
third: when the efficiency o f the Symbolic is s u s p e n d e d , t h e lirrk between the o t h e r two
d i m e n s i o n s ( I m a g i n a r y a n d R e a l ) that sustains o u r 'sense o f reality' is cut.
2 1 . T h e other famous quip o f t h e e m b i t t e r e d O e d i p u s is p r o n o u n c e d by t h e C h o r u s ,
which claims that the greatest b o o n g r a n t e d lo a m o r t a l h u m a n being is n o t to be b o r n at
T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H 169
• Is n o t B a d i o u t h e a n t i - c o m m u n i t a r i a n c o m m u n i t a r i a n ? D o e s h e not
i n t r o d u c e a split in t h e n o t i o n o f c o m m u n i t y , a split b e t w e e n positive
c o m m u n i t i e s g r o u n d e d in t h e o r d e r o f B e i n g (nation-state, e t c . ) , a n d
t h e ' i m p o s s i b l e ' c o m m u n i t y - t o - c o m e g r o u n d e d i n fidelity t o t h e T r u t h -
E v e n t , like t h e c o m m u n i t y o f believers in C h r i s t o r t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y
community (or, one is tempted to add, the psychoanalytic
community)?
• Is n o t B a l i b a r t h e anli-Habermasian Habermasian, i n s o f a r as he
a c c e p t s u n i v e r s a l i t y as t h e u l t i m a t e h o r i z o n o f p o l i t i c s , b u t n o n e the
less f o c u s e s o n t h e i n h e r e n t s p l i t in t h e u n i v e r s a l i t s e l f b e t w e e n (in
H e g e l e s e ) an abstract a n d a c o n c r e t e universal, between the c o n c r e t e l y
structured universal o r d e r a n d the infinite/unconditional universal
d e m a n d o f egaliberte w h i c h t h r e a t e n s t o u n d e r m i n e it?
• Is n o t R a n c i e r e t h e a n t i - L y o t a r d i a n L y o t a r d i a n ? B y e l a b o r a t i n g t h e g a p
b e t w e e n t h e p o s i t i v e g l o b a l o r d e r ( w h a t h e c a l l s la politique/police) and
p o l i t i c a l i n t e r v e n t i o n s w h i c h p e r t u r b t h i s o r d e r a n d give w o r d t o le tort
(to t h e W r o n g , to t h o s e w h o a r e n o t i n c l u d e d , w h o s e s t a t e m e n t s a r e
n o t c o m p r e h e n s i b l e in the ruling political/police space), Ranciere
o p t s f o r a political mode o f rebellion against the universal police/
political order.
that describes the working o f the political field, without implying any
specific prise de parti, and the prevalence given to a p a r t i c u l a r leftist
p o l i t i c a l p r a c t i c e . T h i s t e n s i o n was a l r e a d y c l e a r l y d i s c e r n i b l e i n t h e w o r k
o f M i c h e l F o u c a u l t , w h o s e r v e s as t h e p o i n t o f r e f e r e n c e f o r m o s t o f t h e s e
a u t h o r s : h i s n o t i o n o f P o w e r is p r e s e n t e d as a n e u t r a l t o o l t h a t d e s c r i b e s
t h e way t h e e n t i r e field o f e x i s t i n g p o w e r s t r u c t u r e s a n d resistances to
t h e m f u n c t i o n s . F o u c a u l t l i k e d t o p r e s e n t h i m s e l f as a d e t a c h e d p o s i t i v i s t ,
l a y i n g b a r e t h e c o m m o n m e c h a n i s m s t h a t u n d e r l i e t h e activity o f p a s s i o n
ately o p p o s e d political agents; o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , o n e c a n n o t avoid the
impression t h a t F o u c a u l t is s o m e h o w passionately on the side o f the
' o p p r e s s e d ' , o f t h o s e w h o are c a u g h t in the m a c h i n e r y o f ' d i s c i p l i n e a n d
p u n i s h m e n t ' , a n d a i m s t o give t h e m t h e c h a n c e t o u t t e r , t o e n a b l e them
t o s t a r t t o ' s p e a k f o r t h e m s e l v e s ' . . . . D o w e n o t find, o n a d i f f e r e n t l e v e l ,
t h e s a m e t e n s i o n in L a c l a u ? L a c l a u ' s n o t i o n o f h e g e m o n y d e s c r i b e s t h e
universal m e c h a n i s m o f ideological ' c e m e n t ' which binds any social body
t o g e t h e r , a n o t i o n t h a t c a n a n a l y s e all p o s s i b l e s o c i o p o l i t i c a l o r d e r s , f r o m
F a s c i s m t o l i b e r a l d e m o c r a c y ; o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , L a c l a u n o n e t h e less
3
advocates a determinate political option, 'radical d e m o c r a c y ' .
H e g e m o n y a n d Its S y m p t o m s
m o m e n t we p e r c e i v e as ' t y p i c a l ' t h e c a s e o f a b o r t i o n i n a l a r g e l o w e r - c l a s s
family u n a b l e to c o p e e c o n o m i c a l l y with a n o t h e r child, the perspective
5
c h a n g e s radically. . . .
' S i n g l e u n e m p l o y e d m o t h e r ' is t h u s a sintlwme i n t h e .strict L a c a n i a n
s e n s e : a k n o t , a p o i n t at w h i c h all t h e l i n e s o f t h e p r e d o m i n a n t i d e o l o g i c a l
argumentation ( t h e r e t u r n to family values, t h e r e j e c t i o n o f t h e welfare
s t a t e a n d its ' u n c o n t r o l l e d ' s p e n d i n g , e t c . ) m e e t . F o r t h a t r e a s o n , i f w e
'untie' this sinthome, the efficiency o f its e n t i r e i d e o l o g i c a l e d i f i c e is
s u s p e n d e d . W e c a n s e e n o w i n w h a t s e n s e t h e p s y c h o a n a l y d c sinthome is t o
b e o p p o s e d to t h e m e d i c a l s y m p t o m : t h e l a t t e r is a s i g n o f s o m e more
f u n d a m e n t a l p r o c e s s t a k i n g p l a c e o n a n o t h e r l e v e l . W h e n o n e c l a i m s , say,
t h a t f e v e r is a s y m p t o m , t h e i m p l i c a d o n is t h a t w e s h o u l d n o t c u r e o n l y
t h e s y m p t o m , b u t a t t a c k its c a u s e s d i r e c t i y . ( O r , i n s o c i a l s c i e n c e s , w h e n
o n e c l a i m s t h a t a d o l e s c e n t v i o l e n c e is a s y m p t o m o f t h e g l o b a l c r i s i s o f
v a l u e s a n d t h e w o r k e t h i c , t h e i m p l i c a t i o n is t h a t o n e s h o u l d a t t a c k t h e
problem 'at its r o o t ' , by directly addressing problems o f the family,
e m p l o y m e n t , e t c . , n o t o n l y by p u n i s h i n g t h e o f f e n d e r s . ) T h e sinthome, in
c o n t r a s t , is n o t a ' m e r e s y m p t o m ' , b u t that which holds together the
'thing itself - i f o n e u n t i e s it, t h e ' t h i n g i t s e l f disintegrates. F o r that
r e a s o n , p s y c h o a n a l y s i s a c t u a l l y does c u r e b y a d d r e s s i n g t h e sinthome. . ..
T h i s e x a m p l e m a k e s it c l e a r i n w h a t s e n s e ' t h e u n i v e r s a l r e s u l t s f r o m a
constitutive split in w h i c h t h e n e g a t i o n o f a p a r t i c u l a r identity transforms
this identity into the symbol o f identity and fullness as such':'' the
Universal e m e r g e s within the Particular when some particular content
s t a r t s t o f u n c t i o n as t h e s t a n d - i n f o r t h e a b s e n t U n i v e r s a l - t h a t is t o say,
t h e u n i v e r s a l is o p e r a t i v e o n l y t h r o u g h t h e s p l i t i n t h e p a r t i c u l a r . A c o u p l e
o f y e a r s a g o , t h e E n g l i s h y e l l o w p r e s s f o c u s e d o n s i n g l e m o t h e r s as t h e
s o u r c e o f all t h e evils o f m o d e r n s o c i e t y , f r o m t h e b u d g e t c r i s i s t o j u v e n i l e
d e l i n q u e n c y - in this i d e o l o g i c a l s p a c e , the universality o f t h e 'modern
s o c i a l E v i l ' was o p e r a t i v e o n l y t h r o u g h t h e s p l i t o f t h e f i g u r e o f ' s i n g l e
m o t h e r ' i n t o i t s e l f i n its p a r t i c u l a r i t y a n d i t s e l f as t h e s t a n d - i n f o r the
'modern social Evil'. Owing to the c o n t i n g e n t c h a r a c t e r o f this link
b e t w e e n t h e U n i v e r s a l a n d t h e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t w h i c h f u n c t i o n s as its
s t a n d - i n ( i . e . t h e f a c t t h a t t h i s l i n k is t h e o u t c o m e o f a political struggle for
hegemony), the existence o f the U n i v e r s a l always r e l i e s o n an empty
signifier: ' P o l i t i c s is p o s s i b l e because the constitutive impossibility o f
society c a n o n l y r e p r e s e n t itself t h r o u g h t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f e m p t y signifi-
7
ers.' S i n c e ' s o c i e t y d o e s n ' t e x i s t ' , its u l t i m a t e u n i t y c a n b e s y m b o l i z e d
only in t h e guise o f a n e m p t y signifier h e g e m o n i z e d by s o m e p a r t i c u l a r
c o n t e n t - t h e s t r u g g l e f o r this c o n t e n t is t h e p o l i t i c a l s t r u g g l e . I n o t h e r
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 177
Signifier ( S , ) .
T h e o n l y t h i n g t o a d d t o L a c l a u ' s f o r m u l a t i o n is t h a t h i s a n t i - H e g e l i a n
twist is p e r h a p s , all t o o s u d d e n :
L e t us r e c a l l t h e g i s t o f M a r x ' s n o t i o n o f e x p l o i t a t i o n : e x p l o i t a t i o n is
not simply o p p o s e d to j u s t i c e - M a r x ' s p o i n t is n o t t h a t w o r k e r s are
e x p l o i t e d b e c a u s e t h e y a r e n o t p a i d t h e full v a l u e o f t h e i r w o r k . The
c e n t r a l t h e s i s o f M a r x ' s n o t i o n o f ' s u r p l u s - v a l u e ' is t h a t a worker is exploited,
even when he is fully paid'; e x p l o i t a t i o n is t h u s n o t o p p o s e d t o t h e just'
e q u i v a l e n t e x c h a n g e ; i t f u n c t i o n s , r a t h e r , as its p o i n t o f i n h e r e n t e x c e p
t i o n - t h e r e is o n e c o m m o d i t y ( t h e w o r k f o r c e ) w h i c h is e x p l o i t e d p r e c i s e l y
w h e n it is ' p a i d its full v a l u e ' . ( T h e f u r t h e r p o i n t n o t to b e m i s s e d is t h a t
t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f t h i s excess is s t r i c t l y e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e universalization of
t h e e x c h a n g e - f u n c t i o n : t h e m o m e n t t h e e x c h a n g e - f u n c t i o n is u n i v e r s a l
i z e d - t h a t is, t h e m o m e n t it b e c o m e s t h e s t r u c t u r i n g principle o f the
w h o l e o f e c o n o m i c life - t h e e x c e p t i o n e m e r g e s , s i n c e at t h i s p o i n t the
w o r k f o r c e i t s e l f b e c o m e s a c o m m o d i t y e x c h a n g e d o n t h e m a r k e t . M a r x in
effect a n n o u n c e s h e r e t h e L a c a n i a n n o t i o n o f t h e Universal w h i c h involves
a c o n s t i t u t i v e e x c e p t i o n . ) T h e b a s i c p r e m i s s o f s y m p t o m a l r e a d i n g is t h u s
t h a t every i d e o l o g i c a l universality n e c e s s a r i l y gives rise to a p a r t i c u l a r ' e x -
t i m a t e ' e l e m e n t , t o a n e l e m e n t w h i c h - p r e c i s e l y as a n i n h e r e n t , n e c e s s a r y
product o f t h e p r o c e s s d e s i g n a t e d by t h e universality - simultaneously
u n d e r m i n e s it: t h e s y m p t o m is a n e x a m p l e w h i c h s u b v e r t s t h e U n i v e r s a l
1 0
w h o s e e x a m p l e it i s .
e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l c o n f u s i o n , a n d is t h u s n e u t r a l i z e d i n t o a p e a c e f u l c o e x i s
t e n c e o f t h e p l u r a l i t y o f m e a n i n g s . W h a t g e t s l o s t i n b o t h c a s e s is t h e f a c t
t h a t t h e struggle for h e g e m o n y ( f o r t h e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t w h i c h will
f u n c t i o n as t h e s t a n d - i n f o r t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y o f t h e p o l i t i c a l ) is g r o u n d l e s s :
t h e u l t i m a t e R e a l w h i c h c a n n o t b e f u r t h e r g r o u n d e d in s o m e o n t o l o g i c a l
structure.
H e r e , h o w e v e r , o n e s h o u l d a d d a g a i n t h a t i f t h e M a r x i s t ' s o p e r a t i o n is
t o b e e f f e c t i v e , it h a s t o i n v o l v e t h e s y m p t o m a l r e a d i n g o f t h e l i b e r a l ' s
position, which endeavours to d e m o n s t r a t e how the liberal's constriction
o f the s c o p e o f t h e 'political' has to disavow - to e x c l u d e violently - the
p o l i t i c a l c h a r a c t e r o f s o m e t h i n g w h i c h , according to the liberal's own definition
of the term, s h o u l d e n t e r t h e s c o p e o f t h e p o l i t i c a l ; a n d , f u r t h e r m o r e , how
this very exclusion of something from the political is a political gesture par
excellence. T h e standard e x a m p l e : the liberal definition o f 'private family
l i f e ' as a p o l i t i c a l n a t u r a l i z e s - a n d / o r c h a n g e s i n t o h i e r a r c h i c a l r e l a t i o n s
g r o u n d e d in pre-political p s y c h o l o g i c a l attitudes, in d i f f e r e n c e s in h u m a n
n a t u r e , in a p r i o r i c u l t u r a l c o n s t a n t s , a n d s o o n - a w h o l e s e t o f r e l a t i o n s
of subordination a n d exclusion that actually d e p e n d o n political power
relations.
H o w d o e s subjectivity e n t e r this p r o c e s s o f h e g e m o n i c u n i v e r s a l i z a t i o n ? F o r
L a c l a u , t h e ' s u b j e c t ' is t h e v e r y a g e n t w h i c h a c c o m p l i s h e s t h e operation
of hegemony - which sutures the Universal to a particular content.
A l t h o u g h L a c l a u ' s a n d B a d i o u ' s n o t i o n s o f t h e s u b j e c t s e e m s to b e very
s i m i l a r ( i n b o t h c a s e s , t h e s u b j e c t is n o t a s u b s t a n t i a l a g e n t b u t e m e r g e s
i n t h e c o u r s e o f a n a c t o f d e c i s i o n / c h o i c e t h a t is n o t g r o u n d e d in a n y
prc-given factual O r d e r ) , t h e y a r e n o n e t h e less s e p a r a t e d bv d i f f e r e n t
stances towards 'deconstruction'.
L a c l a u ' s m o v e is d e c o n s t r u c t i v e - t h a t is why, f o r h i m , t h e o p e r a t i o n o f
h e g e m o n y i n t h e c o u r s e o f w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t e m e r g e s is t h e e l e m e n t a r y
m a t r i x o f ideology: h e g e m o n y involves a kind o f structural s h o r t circuit
between the Particular and the Universal, and the fragility o f every
h e g e m o n i c o p e r a t i o n is g r o u n d e d i n t h e u l t i m a t e l y ' i l l u s o r y ' c h a r a c t e r o f
t h i s s h o r t c i r c u i t ; t h e t a s k o f t h e o r y is p r e c i s e l y t o ' d e c o n s t r u c t ' it, t h a t is,
t o d e m o n s t r a t e h o w e v e r y h e g e m o n i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n is i n h e r e n t l y u n s t a b l e ,
the contingent outcome of a struggle - in short, for L a c l a u , every
h e g e m o n i c o p e r a t i o n is u l t i m a t e l y ' i d e o l o g i c a l ' . F o r B a d i o u , i n c o n t r a s t , a
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 183
T r u t h - E v e n t is t h a t w h i c h c a n n o t b e ' d e c o n s t r u c t e d ' , r e d u c e d t o a n e f f e c t
o f an intricate, overdetermined texture o f ' t r a c e s ' ; h e r e B a d i o u introduces
the tension between the Necessity o f a global situation and the c o n t i n g e n t
e m e r g e n c e o f its T r u t h . F o r B a d i o u ( i n h i s a n t i - P l a t o n i c m o d e , d e s p i t e h i s
l o v e o f P l a t o ) , N e c e s s i t y is a c a t e g o r y o f v e r a c i t y , o f t h e o r d e r o f B e i n g ,
w h i l e T r u t h is i n h e r e n t l y c o n t i n g e n t , i t c a n o c c u r o r n o t . S o if, a g a i n s t t h e
deconstructionist and/or postmodern politics o f 'undecidability' and
' s e m b l a n c e ' , B a d i o u - to paraphrase Saint-Just's well-known c o m m e n t o n
' h a p p i n e s s as a p o l i t i c a l f a c t o r ' - w a n t s t o ( r e ) a s s e r t truth as a political
factor, this d o e s n o t mean that h e wants to r e t u r n to t h e premodern
g r o u n d i n g o f politics in s o m e eternal neutral o r d e r o f T r u t h . F o r B a d i o u ,
Truth itself is a theologico-political notion: t h e o l o g i c a l i n s o f a r as r e l i g i o u s
r e v e l a t i o n is t h e u n a v o w e d paradigm o f his n o t i o n o f t h e Truth-Event;
p o l i t i c a l b e c a u s e T r u t h is n o t a s t a t e t o b e p e r c e i v e d b y m e a n s o f a n e u t r a l
intuition, but a matter o f (ultimately political) e n g a g e m e n t . Consequently,
for B a d i o u , subjectivization designates the event o f T r u t h that disrupts the
closure o f the h e g e m o n i c ideological d o m a i n a n d / o r the existing social
edifice (the O r d e r o f B e i n g ) ; while for Laclau, the gesture o f subjectiviza-
t i o n is t h e v e r y g e s t u r e o f e s t a b l i s h i n g a ( n e w ) h e g e m o n y , a n d is as s u c h
1 2
the elementary gesture o f ideology.
In a way, e v e r y t h i n g seems to hinge on the relationship between
K n o w l e d g e a n d T r u t h . B a d i o u limits K n o w l e d g e to a positive e n c y c l o p a e
d i c g r a s p o f B e i n g w h i c h is, as s u c h , b l i n d t o t h e d i m e n s i o n o f T r u t h as
E v e n t : K n o w l e d g e k n o w s o n l y v e r a c i t y ( a d e q u a t i o n ) , n o t T r u t h , w h i c h is
'subjective' ( n o t in t h e s t a n d a r d s e n s e o f subjectivism, but l i n k e d t o a
' w a g e r ' , t o a d e c i s i o n / c h o i c e w h i c h i n a way t r a n s c e n d s t h e s u b j e c t , s i n c e
t h e s u b j e c t h i m s e l f / h e r s e l f is n o t h i n g b u t t h e activity o f p u r s u i n g the
consequences o f the Decision). I s it n o t a fact, however, that every
c o n c r e t e , socially o p e r a t i v e field o f K n o w l e d g e p r e s u p p o s e s a T r u t h - E v e n t ,
s i n c e it is u l t i m a t e l y a k i n d o f ' s e d i m e n t a t i o n ' o f a n E v e n t , its ' o n t o l o g i z a -
t i o n ' , s o t h a t t h e t a s k o f a n a l y s i s is p r e c i s e l y t o u n e a r t h t h e E v e n t ( t h e
e t h i c o - p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n ) w h o s e s c a n d a l o u s d i m e n s i o n always l u r k s b e h i n d
1 1
' d o m e s t i c a t e d ' knowledge? ' W e c a n also see now the gap which separates
B a d i o u f r o m L a c l a u : f o r B a d i o u , a n E v e n t is a c o n t i n g e n t r a r e o c c u r r e n c e
w i t h i n t h e g l o b a l o r d e r o f B e i n g ; w h i l e f o r L a c l a u ( t o p u t it i n B a d i o u ' s
t e r m s ) , a n y O r d e r o f B e i n g is i t s e l f always a ' s e d i m e n t a t i o n ' o f s o m e p a s t
E v e n t , a ' n o r m a l i z a t i o n ' o f a f o u n d i n g E v e n t ( f o r e x a m p l e , t h e C h u r c h as
the Institution o f Order is s e d i m e n t e d f r o m t h e E v e n t o f C h r i s t , say) -
every positive o n t o l o g i c a l o r d e r already relies o n a disavowed ethico-
political decision.
184 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
O u r c o n c l u s i o n is t h u s t h a t t h e r u l i n g i d e o l o g y , i n o r d e r t o b e o p e r a t i v e ,
h a s to i n c o r p o r a t e a s e r i e s o f f e a t u r e s i n w h i c h t h e exploited/dominated
1 4
m a j o r i t y will b e a b l e t o r e c o g n i z e its a u t h e n t i c l o n g i n g s . In short, every
h e g e m o n i c u n i v e r s a l i t y h a s t o i n c o r p o r a t e at least two p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t s :
the 'authentic' popular c o n t e n t a n d its ' d i s t o r t i o n ' by t h e r e l a t i o n s o f
domination and exploitation. O f course Fascist ideology 'manipulates'
authentic popular longing for a true community and social solidarity
against fierce competition and e x p l o i t a t i o n ; o f c o u r s e it 'distorts' the
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 185
e x p r e s s i o n o f t h i s l o n g i n g in o r d e r t o l e g i t i m i z e t h e c o n t i n u a d o n o f t h e
relations o f social d o m i n a t i o n a n d e x p l o i t a t i o n . I n o r d e r to b e a b l e to
a c h i e v e t h i s e f f e c t , h o w e v e r , it n o n e t h e l e s s h a s t o i n c o r p o r a t e authentic
popular l o n g i n g . I d e o l o g i c a l h e g e m o n y is t h u s not the case of some
particular c o n t e n t d i r e c t l y f i l l i n g in the void o f the empty Universal;
rather, the very f o r m o f ideological universality bears witness to the
s t r u g g l e b e t w e e n ( a t l e a s t ) two p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t s : t h e ' p o p u l a r ' c o n t e n t
expressing the secret longings o f the d o m i n a t e d majority, a n d the specific
c o n t e n t expressing the interests o f the forces o f domination.
O n e is t e m p t e d t o r e f e r h e r e t o t h e F r e u d i a n d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n the
latent dream-thought a n d t h e u n c o n s c i o u s desire e x p r e s s e d in a d r e a m :
t h e two a r e n o t t h e s a m e , s i n c e t h e u n c o n s c i o u s d e s i r e a r t i c u l a t e s i t s e l f ,
i n s c r i b e s itself, t h r o u g h the very ' w o r k i n g - t h r o u g h ' , translation, o f the
l a t e n t d r e a m - t h o u g h t i n t o t h e e x p l i c i t t e x t o f a d r e a m . I n t h e s a m e way,
t h e r e is n o t h i n g ' F a s c i s t ' ( ' r e a c t i o n a r y ' , e t c . ) i n t h e ' l a t e n t dream-thought'
o f the Fascist ideology (the longing for authentic c o m m u n i t y a n d social
solidarity, e t c . ) ; what a c c o u n t s for the p r o p e r l y Fascist c h a r a c t e r o f the
F a s c i s t i d e o l o g y is t h e way t h i s ' l a t e n t d r e a m - t h o u g h t ' is transformed/
e l a b o r a t e d by the ideological 'dream-work' into the explicit ideological
text which continues to l e g i t i m i z e social r e l a t i o n s o f e x p l o i t a t i o n and
d o m i n a t i o n . A n d is it n o t t h e s a m e w i t h t o d a y ' s r i g h t - w i n g p o p u l i s m ? A r e
n o t liberal critics t o o q u i c k in dismissing t h e very values p o p u l i s m refers
t o as i n h e r e n t l y ' f u n d a m e n t a l i s t ' o r ' p r o t o - F a s c i s t ' ?
N o n - i d e o l o g y ( w h a t F r e d r i c J a m e s o n calls t h e U t o p i a n m o m e n t present
e v e n i n t h e m o s t a t r o c i o u s i d e o l o g y ) is t h u s a b s o l u t e l y i n d i s p e n s a b l e : i n a
way, i d e o l o g y is n o t h i n g b u t t h e f o r m o f a p p e a r a n c e , t h e f o r m a l d i s t o r t i o n /
displacement, o f non-ideology. T o return to the worst i m a g i n a b l e case -
was not Nazi anti-Semitism grounded in the Utopian longing for an
a u t h e n t i c c o m m u n i t y l i f e , i n t h e fully j u s t i f i e d r e j e c t i o n o f t h e i r r a t i o n a l i t y
of capitalist exploitation, and so on? Our point, again, is t h a t it is
t h e o r e t i c a l l y a n d politically w r o n g to c o n d e m n t h e l o n g i n g for a u t h e n t i c
c o m m u n i t y life as s u c h as ' p r o t o - F a s c i s t ' , t o d e n o u n c e it as a ' t o t a l i t a r i a n
fantasy' - to s e a r c h for t h e p o s s i b l e ' r o o t s ' o f F a s c i s m in this very l o n g i n g
(the standard mistake o f the liberal-individualist critique o f F a s c i s m ) : the
n o n - i d e o l o g i c a l U t o p i a n c h a r a c t e r o f t h i s l o n g i n g is t o b e fully a s s e r t e d .
What makes it ' i d e o l o g i c a l ' is its a r t i c u l a t i o n , t h e way this l o n g i n g is
f u n c t i o n a l i z e d as t h e l e g i t i m i z a t i o n o f a v e r y s p e c i f i c n o t i o n o f c a p i t a l i s t
exploitation (the result o f Jewish influence, the p r e d o m i n a n c e o f financial
over 'productive' capital, w h i c h tends towards a h a r m o n i o u s 'partnership
186 THE TICKLISH SLTBJECT
w i t h w o r k e r s . . . ) a n d h o w t o o v e r c o m e it ( b y g e t t i n g r i d o f t h e J e w s , o f
course).
C r u c i a l f o r a s u c c e s s f u l i d e o l o g y is t h u s t h e t e n s i o n within its p a r t i c u l a r
content between the t h e m e s a n d motifs that b e l o n g to the 'oppressed'
a n d t h o s e w h i c h b e l o n g t o t h e ' o p p r e s s o r s ' : r u l i n g i d e a s a r c never d i r e c t l y
t h e i d e a s o f t h e r u l i n g c l a s s . L e t u s t a k e w h a t is a r g u a b l y t h e ultimate
example, Christianity - how did it b e c o m e the ruling ideology? By
i n c o r p o r a t i n g a s c r i e s o f m o t i f s a n d a s p i r a t i o n s o f t h e o p p r e s s e d ( t r u t h is
on the side o f t h e suffering and humiliated; power corrupts . . .) and
r e a r t i c u l a t i n g t h e m i n s u c h a way t h a t t h e y b e c a m e c o m p a t i b l e w i t h the
existing relations o f domination. A n d the same holds even for Fascism.
The fundamental ideological contradiction o f F a s c i s m is t h a t between
o r g a n i c i s m a n d m e c h a n i c i s m : the corporatist-organic aestheticized vision
of the Social B o d y and the extreme 'technologization', mobilization,
destruction, wiping-out, o f the last vestiges o f 'organic' communities
(families, universities, local s e l f - m a n a g e m e n t traditions) at the level o f the
actual 'micro-practices' o f the power exercise. In Fascism, the aestheti
c i z e d o r g a n i c i s t c o r p o r a t e i d e o l o g y is t h u s t h e v e r y f o r m o f an unpre
c e d e n t e d technological mobilization o f society which disrupts 'organic'
links.'"' T h i s p a r a d o x e n a b l e s us t o a v o i d t h e l i b e r a l - m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t trap
o f c o n d e m n i n g e v e r y c a l l f o r a r e t u r n to o r g a n i c ( e t h n i c , e t c . ) l i n k s as
' p r o t o - F a s c i s t ' : w h a t d e f i n e s F a s c i s m is, r a t h e r , a s p e c i f i c c o m b i n a t i o n o f
o r g a n i c i s t c o r p o r a t i s m a n d t h e d r i v e t o r u t h l e s s m o d e r n i z a t i o n . T o p u t it
i n y e t a n o t h e r way: i n e v e r y a c t u a l F a s c i s m , o n e always e n c o u n t e r s ele
m e n t s w h i c h m a k e us say: ' T h i s is n o t y e t f u l l - b l o w n F a s c i s m ; t h e r e a r e still
i n c o n s i s t e n t e l e m e n t s o f leftist t r a d i t i o n s o r l i b e r a l i s m i n i t ' ; h o w e v e r , t h i s
r e m o v a l f r o m — this d i s t a n c e t o w a r d s — t h e p h a n t o m o f ' p u r e ' F a s c i s m is
F a s c i s m tout court. ' F a s c i s m ' , i n its i d e o l o g y a n d p r a c t i c e , is n o t h i n g b u t a
certain formal principle o f distortion o f social antagonism, a certain logic
o f its d i s p l a c e m e n t by a c o m b i n a t i o n a n d c o n d e n s a t i o n o f inconsistent
attitudes.
T h e s a m e d i s t o r t i o n is d i s c e r n i b l e i n t h e f a c t t h a t , t o d a y , t h e o n l y c l a s s
w h i c h , i n its ' s u b j e c t i v e ' s e l f - p e r c e p t i o n , e x p l i c i t l y c o n c e i v e s o f a n d pre
s e n t s i t s e l f as a c l a s s is t h e n o t o r i o u s ' m i d d l e c l a s s ' w h i c h is p r e c i s e l y t h e
'non-class': the allegedly hard-working middle strata o f society which
d e f i n e t h e m s e l v e s n o t o n l y b y t h e i r a l l e g i a n c e t o firm m o r a l a n d r e l i g i o u s
standards, b u t by a d o u b l e o p p o s i t i o n to b o t h ' e x t r e m e s ' o f the social
space - non-patriotic 'deracinated' rich c o r p o r a t i o n s on the o n e side;
poor excluded immigrants and ghetto-members on the other. T h e 'mid
d l e c l a s s ' g r o u n d s its i d e n t i t y in t h e e x c l u s i o n o f b o t h e x t r e m e s w h i c h ,
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 187
T h e P o l i t i c a l a n d I t s Disavowals
If, t h e n , t h e n o t i o n o f h e g e m o n y e x p r e s s e s t h e e l e m e n t a r y s t r u c t u r e o f
i d e o l o g i c a l d o m i n a t i o n , a r e w e c o n d e m n e d t o shifts w i t h i n t h e s p a c e o f
h e g e m o n y , o r is it p o s s i b l e t o s u s p e n d - t e m p o r a r i l y , a t l e a s t - its v e r y
m e c h a n i s m ? J a c q u e s R a n c i e r e ' s c l a i m is t h a t s u c h a s u b v e r s i o n d o e s o c c u r ,
a n d that it even c o n s t i t u t e s t h e very c o r e o f politics, o f a p r o p e r political
event.
1 1
W h a t , f o r R a n c i e r e , is p o l i t i c s p r o p e r ? ' A p h e n o m e n o n w h i c h , f o r t h e
first t i m e , a p p e a r e d i n A n c i e n t G r e e c e w h e n t h e m e m b e r s o f demos ( t h o s e
with n o firmly d e t e r m i n e d place in the hierarchical social edifice) not
only d e m a n d e d t h a t t h e i r v o i c e b e h e a r d a g a i n s t t h o s e in p o w e r , those
w h o e x e r t e d s o c i a l c o n t r o l - t h a t is, t h e y n o t o n l y p r o t e s t e d t h e w r o n g [le
tort] t h e y s u f f e r e d , a n d w a n t e d t h e i r v o i c e t o h e h e a r d , t o b e r e c o g n i z e d
as i n c l u d e d i n t h e p u b l i c s p h e r e , o n a n e q u a l f o o t i n g with t h e ruling
oligarchy and aristocracy - even m o r e , they, t h e e x c l u d e d , those with
188 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , as t h e o p e r a t o r w h i c h will b r i n g a b o u t t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t
17
o f a post-political rational society. S o m e t i m e s t h e shift f r o m p o l i t i c s p r o p e r
to police can be only a matter o f a change from the definite to the
indefinite article, like the East G e r m a n crowds d e m o n s t r a t i n g against the
C o m m u n i s t r e g i m e i n t h e last days o f t h e G D R : first t h e y s h o u t e d ' W e a r e
the p e o p l e ! ' ['Wir sind das V o l k ! ' ] , t h e r e b y p e r f o r m i n g the gesture of
p o l i t i c i z a t i o n at its p u r e s t - t h e y , t h e e x c l u d e d c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n a r y 'scum'
o f the official W h o l e o f the P e o p l e , with n o p r o p e r p l a c e in t h e official
space (or, m o r e precisely, with only tides like 'counter-revolutionaries',
' h o o l i g a n s ' , o r - at best - 'victims o f b o u r g e o i s p r o p a g a n d a ' reserved for
t h e m ) , c l a i m e d t o s t a n d f o r the p e o p l e , f o r ' a l l ' ; a c o u p l e o f days l a t e r ,
h o w e v e r , t h e s l o g a n c h a n g e d i n t o ' W e a r e a/one people!' [ ' W i r s i n d ein
V o l k ! ' ] , clearly signalling the closure o f the m o m e n t a r y authentic political
opening, the reappropriation o f the d e m o c r a t i c i m p e t u s by the thrust
towards the reunification o f Germany, which m e a n t rejoining Western
G e r m a n y ' s liberal-capitalist p o l i c e / p o l i t i c a l order.
In J a p a n , the caste o f u n t o u c h a b l e s is c a l l e d t h e burakumim those
w h o a r e involved in c o n t a c t with d e a d flesh (butchers, leatherworkers,
g r a v e d i g g e r s ) a n d a r e s o m e t i m e s e v e n r e f e r r e d t o as eta ( ' m u c h filth).
E v e n now, in the ' e n l i g h t e n e d ' p r e s e n t , w h e n they are n o l o n g e r o p e n l y
despised, they are silently i g n o r e d - n o t o n l y d o c o m p a n i e s still a v o i d
hiring them, or parents allowing their children to marry them,
but, u n d e r the 'politically c o r r e c t ' p r e t e n c e n o t o f offending them, one
prefers to i g n o r e the issue. H o w e v e r , t h e c r u c i a l p o i n t , a n d t h e p r o o f o f
the pre-political (or, rather, non-political) 'corporate' functioning of
Japanese s o c i e t y , is t h e fact that although voices are heard on their
b e h a l f (we c o u l d simply m e n t i o n t h e g r e a t a n d r e c e n t l y d e a d S u e S u m i i
w h o , i n h e r i m p r e s s i v e s e r i e s o f n o v e l s The River with No Bridge, used the
reference to burakumin to expose the meaninglessness o f the entire
J a p a n e s e caste hierarchy - significantly, h e r primordial traumatic experi
e n c e was t h e s h o c k w h e n , as a c h i l d , s h e w i t n e s s e d how, in o r d e r to
honour the Emperor, a relative o f hers scratched the toilet used by
t h e v i s i t i n g E m p e r o r to p r e s e r v e a p i e c e o f his s h i t as a s a c r e d relic),
t h e burakumin d i d n o t a c t i v e l y politicize their destiny, did n o t constitute
their position as t h a t o f singulier universe!,, claiming that, precisely as
the 'part o f n o part', they stand for the true universality o f J a p a n e s e
8
society. . . . '
T h e r e is a s c r i e s o f d i s a v o w a l s o f this p o l i t i c a l m o m e n t , o f t h e proper
logic o f political conflict:
190 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
W h a t we h a v e i n all t h e s e f o u r c a s e s is t h u s a n a t t e m p t t o g e n t r i f y the
properly traumatic dimension o f the political: s o m e t h i n g emerged in
A n c i e n t G r e e c e u n d e r t h e n a m e o f demos d e m a n d i n g its r i g h t s , a n d , f r o m
t h e very b e g i n n i n g (i.e. f r o m P l a t o ' s Republic) t o t h e r e c e n t revival o f
liberal 'political philosophy', 'political philosophy' was a n attempt to
suspend the destabilizing potential o f the political, to disavow and/or
r e g u l a t e it i n o n e way o r a n o t h e r : b r i n g i n g a b o u t a r e t u r n to a pre-
political social body, fixing the rules o f political c o m p e t i t i o n , and so
2
forth.*
'Political philosophy' is t h u s , in all its different forms, a kind of
'defence-formation', and p e r h a p s its t y p o l o g y c o u l d b e e s t a b l i s h e d via
r e f e r e n c e to the different modalities o f d e f e n c e against s o m e traumatic
e x p e r i e n c e in p s y c h o a n a l y s i s . I t m a y s e e m , h o w e v e r , t h a t p s y c h o a n a l y s i s ,
the psychoanalytic a p p r o a c h to politics, also involves the r e d u c t i o n o f the
p r o p e r p o l i t i c a l d i m e n s i o n . T h a t is t o say, w h e n o n e a p p r o a c h e s p o l i t i c s
th r o u g h the psychoanalytic network, one usually focuses on Freud's
elaboration o f the notion o f the 'crowd' apropos o f the Army a n d the
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 191
T h e (Mis) U s e s o f A p p e a r a n c e
t o t a l i t a r i a n M a s t e r fully a c c e p t s t h e l o g i c o f ' I a m a M a s t e r o n l y i n s o f a r
as y o u t r e a t m e as o n e ' - t h a t is t o say, h i s p o s i t i o n i n v o l v e s n o r e f e r e n c e
t o s o m e t r a n s c e n d e n t g r o u n d ; o n t h e c o n t r a r y , h e e m p h a t i c a l l y tells his
f o l l o w e r s : ' I n m y s e l f , I a m n o t h i n g ; all m y s t r e n g t h d e r i v e s f r o m y o u ; I a m
o n l y t h e e m b o d i m e n t o f y o u r d e e p e s t strivings; t h e m o m e n t I l o s e m v
r o o t s i n y o u , I a m l o s t . . .'. H i s e n t i r e l e g i t i m a c y d e r i v e s f r o m t h i s p o s i t i o n
o f pure servant o f the People: the m o r e he 'modestly' diminishes and
instrumentalizes his role, the more he emphasizes that he merely
e x p r e s s e s a n d realizes t h e strivings o f t h e P e o p l e themselves, w h o a r e t h e
true Master, the m o r e all-powerful a n d u n t o u c h a b l e h e b e c o m e s , s i n c e
a n y a t t a c k o n h i m is e f f e c t i v e l y a n a t t a c k o n t h e P e o p l e t h e m s e l v e s , o n
t h e i r i n n e r m o s t l o n g i n g s . . . . ' T h e P e o p l e ' is t h u s s p l i t i n t o a c t u a l i n d i v i d
u a l s ( p r o n e t o t r e a s o n a n d all k i n d s o f h u m a n w e a k n e s s e s ) a n d the P e o p l e
e m b o d i e d in t h e M a s t e r . T h e s e t h r e e l o g i c s ( t h a t o f t h e t r a d i t i o n a l M a s t e r ,
o f the d e m o c r a t i c regulated fight for the empty place o f Power, o f the
totalitarian Master) fit t h e three modes o f the disavowal o f politics
c o n c e p t u a l i z e d by R a n c i e r e : t h e t r a d i t i o n a l M a s t e r f u n c t i o n s within the
s p a c e o f a r c h e - p o l i t i c s ; d e m o c r a c y i n v o l v e s p a r a - p o l i t i c s , t h a t is, t h e g e n t r i -
fication o f politics p r o p e r in regulated a g o n i s m ( t h e rules o f e l e c t i o n s
a n d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e d e m o c r a c y , e t c . ) ; t h e t o t a l i t a r i a n M a s t e r is p o s s i b l e
only within the space o f meta-politics.
Perhaps the distinction between the Communist and Fascist Master
r e s i d e s i n t h e f a c t t h a t - d e s p i t e all t h e t a l k a b o u t r a c i a l s c i e n c e , a n d s o
o n - t h e i n n e r m o s t l o g i c o f F a s c i s m is n o t m e t a - p o l i t i c a l b u t u l t r a - p o l i t i c a l :
t h e F a s c i s t M a s t e r is a w a r r i o r i n p o l i t i c s . S t a l i n i s m at its ' p u r e s t ' (the
p e r i o d o f g r e a t p u r g e s i n t h e l a t e 1 9 3 0 s ) is a m u c h m o r e paradoxical
p h e n o m e n o n than the Trotskyite narratives o f the alleged betrayal o f the
a u t h e n t i c r e v o l u t i o n by t h e n e w nomenklatura w o u l d like to have us believe:
Stalinism, rather, is t h e point o f radical (self-relating) negativity that
functions as a kind o f 'vanishing mediator' between the 'authentic'
revolutionary phase o f the late 1 9 1 0 s / e a r l y 1920s a n d the stabilization o f
t h e nomenklatura i n t o a N e w C l a s s a f t e r S t a l i n ' s d e a t h . T h a t is t o say: w h a t
c h a r a c t e r i z e s this Stalinist m o m e n t , this effective ' p o i n t o f (revolutionary)
m a d n e s s ' , is t h e i n h e r e n t t e n s i o n b e t w e e n t h e n e w nomenklatura and the
L e a d e r w h o is d r i v e n t o r e p e a t e d ' i r r a t i o n a l ' p u r g e s , s o t h a t t h e nomenkla
tura is u n a b l e to stabilize itself into a New Class: the self-enhancing
( ' b o o t s t r a p ' ) cycle o f T e r r o r potentially involves everyone, n o t only the
e n t i r e ' o r d i n a r y ' p o p u l a t i o n b u t a l s o t h e h i g h e s t nomenklatura - everyone
( w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e O n e , S t a l i n h i m s e l f ) was u n d e r permanent
threat o f liquidation.
194 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
O n e is t h u s l e d t o b e l i e v e t h a t S t a l i n i n f a c t l o s t h i s f i g h t a g a i n s t the
nomenklatura ( a n d t h e r e b y t h e b u l k o f his ' r e a l ' p o w e r ) i n t h e l a t e 1 9 3 0 s ,
with t h e e n d o f the G r e a t P u r g e s (ironically, this m o m e n t c o i n c i d e d with
t h e ridiculous i n c r e a s e in p u b l i c a d u l a t i o n o f the figure o f Stalin, his
c e l e b r a t i o n as t h e g r e a t e s t g e n i u s o f m a n k i n d , a n d s o o n , as i f t h e l o s s o f
' r e a l ' p o w e r was s o m e h o w c o m p e n s a t e d b y t h e g a i n i n s y m b o l i c p o w e r .
W h a t t h e nomenklatura o f f e r e d S t a l i n was a r o l e c o m p a r a b l e t o t h a t o f t h e
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l m o n a r c h w h o d o t s t h e i ' s , b u t is d e p r i v e d o f a c t u a l e x e c u
tive p o w e r ( o r , a t l e a s t , h a s t o s h a r e it w i t h h i s e q u a l s , m e m b e r s o f t h e
s e n i o r i n n e r c i r c l e ) ; Stalin, o f course, could n o t resign h i m s e l f to such a
s y m b o l i c r o l e , a n d his p o s t - W o r l d - W a r - I I activity ( t h e J e w i s h D o c t o r s ' P l o t ,
the planned anti-Semitic purge, e t c . ) betrays his effort to r e g a i n real
power, a n effort w h i c h u l t i m a t e l y r e m a i n e d u n s u c c e s s f u l . S o , in t h e last
y e a r s o f his life, w i t h t h e r e s i s t a n c e o f t h e nomenklatura g r o w i n g , S t a l i n was
m o r e a n d m o r e i s o l a t e d as a p a r a n o i a c m a d m a n w h o s e w o r d s n o l o n g e r -
p o s s e s s e d d i r e c t p e r f o r m a t i v e e f f i c i e n c y - his w o r d s (say, h i s a c c u s a t i o n s
of treason against the senior members o f the nomenklatura) were no
l o n g e r ' a c t e d u p o n ' . I n t h e last C o m m u n i s t Party c o n g r e s s a t t e n d e d by
S t a l i n (in 1 9 5 2 ) , S t a l i n , in h i s s p e e c h , a c c u s e d M o l o t o v a n d Kaganovich
o f b e i n g traitors a n d E n g l i s h spies; after Stalin's s p e e c h , M o l o t o v simply
stood up and claimed that Comrade S t a l i n was w r o n g , since he and
K a g a n o v i c h always h a d b e e n a n d r e m a i n e d g o o d B o l s h e v i k s - a n d , t o t h e
amazement o f the party delegates present, nothing happened: the two
accused m e n retained their s e n i o r posts - something that would have
b e e n u n t h i n k a b l e a c o u p l e o f years before.
Also with r e g a r d to actual social c h a n g e , o r ' c u t in t h e s u b s t a n c e o f the
s o c i a l b o d y ' , t h e t r u e r e v o l u t i o n was n o t t h e O c t o b e r R e v o l u t i o n , b u t t h e
c o l l e c t i v i z a t i o n o f t h e l a t e 1 9 2 0 s . T h e O c t o b e r R e v o l u t i o n left t h e sub
stance o f the social body (the intricate network o f family a n d other
r e l a t i o n s ) i n t a c t ; i n t h i s r e s p e c t it was s i m i l a r t o t h e F a s c i s t r e v o l u t i o n ,
which also merely i m p o s e d a new form of executive power on to the
existing network o f social relations - o r rather, p r e c i s e l y in o r d e r to
maintain this n e t w o r k o f social relations. F o r that reason, the Fascist
r e v o l u t i o n was a f a k e e v e n t , a r e v o l u t i o n - tire s e m b l a n c e o f a radical
c h a n g e - which t o o k place so that ' n o t h i n g would really c h a n g e ' , so that
things (i.e. the f u n d a m e n t a l capitalist relations o f p r o d u c t i o n ) would
b a s i c a l l y r e m a i n t h e s a m e . I t was o n l y t h e f o r c e d c o l l e c t i v i z a t i o n o f t h e
late 1920s which thoroughly subverted and dismembered the 'social
substance' (the inherited network o f relations), perturbing and cutting
2 6
deeply into the most fundamental social fabric.
POLITICAL SUBJECTIVIZATION AND ITS V I C I S S I T U D E S 195
t h e s o c i a l b o d y s u b d i v i d e d i n t o p a r t s . T h e r e is ' a p p e a r a n c e ' i n s o f a r as a
p a r t n o t i n c l u d e d in t h e W h o l e o f t h e S o c i a l B o d y ( o r i n c l u d e d / e x c l u d e d
i n a way a g a i n s t w h i c h i t p r o t e s t s ) s y m b o l i z e s its p o s i t i o n as t h a t o f a
W r o n g , c l a i m i n g , a g a i n s t o t h e r parts, t h a t it stands f o r the universality o f
egaliberte. h e r e we a r e d e a l i n g with a p p e a r a n c e i n c o n t r a s t to t h e 'reality'
o f the structured social body. T h e old conservative m o t t o o f ' k e e p i n g up
a p p e a r a n c e s ' t h u s t a k e s a n e w twist t o d a y : it n o l o n g e r s t a n d s f o r the
' w i s d o m ' a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h it is b e t t e r n o t t o d i s t u r b t h e r u l e s o f s o c i a l
etiquette t o o m u c h , since social c h a o s m i g h t ensue. T o d a y , the effort to
'keep up appearances' stands, rather, for the effort to maintain the
properly political space against the onslaught o f the postmodern all-
2 8
e m b r a c i n g s o c i a l b o d y , w i t h its m u l t i t u d e o f p a r t i c u l a r i d e n t i t i e s .
T h i s is a l s o h o w o n e has to r e a d H e g e l ' s famous dictum from his
Phenomenology: ' t h e S u p r a s e n s i b l e is a p p e a r a n c e qua a p p e a r a n c e ' . In a
s e n t i m e n t a l a n s w e r t o a c h i l d a s k i n g h i m w h a t G o d ' s f a c e is l i k e , a p r i e s t
answers that w h e n e v e r the child e n c o u n t e r s a human face irradiating
b e n e v o l e n c e a n d g o o d n e s s , w h o e v e r this face b e l o n g s to, h e c a t c h e s a
g l i m p s e o f H i s f a c e . . . . T h e t r u t h o f t h i s s e n t i m e n t a l p l a t i t u d e is t h a t t h e
S u p r a s e n s i b l e ( G o d ' s f a c e ) is d i s c e r n i b l e as a m o m e n t a r y , f l e e t i n g a p p e a r
a n c e , t h e ' g r i m a c e ' o f a n e a r t h l y f a c e . I t is this d i m e n s i o n o f ' a p p e a r a n c e '
transubstantiating a p i e c e o f reality i n t o s o m e t h i n g which, for a brief
m o m e n t , i r r a d i a t e s t h e s u p r a s e n s i b l e E t e r n i t y t h a t is m i s s i n g in t h e l o g i c
o f t h e s i m u l a c r u m : in t h e s i m u l a c r u m , w h i c h b e c o m e s i n d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e
f r o m t h e R e a l , e v e r y t h i n g is h e r e , a n d n o o t h e r , t r a n s c e n d e n t dimension
effectively 'appears' in/through it. H e r e we are b a c k at the Kantian
p r o b l e m a t i c o f t h e s u b l i m e : in K a n t ' s f a m o u s r e a d i n g o f t h e enthusiasm
evoked by the French Revolution in the enlightened public around
E u r o p e , t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y e v e n t s f u n c t i o n e d as a s i g n t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e
dimension o f trans-phenomenal Freedom, o f a free society, appeared.
' A p p e a r a n c e ' is t h u s n o t s i m p l y t h e d o m a i n of phenomena, but those
' m a g i c m o m e n t s ' in w h i c h a n o t h e r , noumcnal dimension momentarily
' a p p e a r s ' in ( ' s h i n e s t h r o u g h ' ) s o m e e m p i r i c a l / c o n t i n g e n t p h e n o m e n o n .
S o - b a c k t o H e g e l : ' t h e S u p r a s e n s i b l e is a p p e a r a n c e qua a p p e a r a n c e '
d o e s n o t s i m p l y m e a n t h a t t h e S u p r a s e n s i b l e is n o t a p o s i t i v e e n t i t y beyond
p h e n o m e n a , b u t the i n h e r e n t p o w e r o f negativity which m a k e s appear
a n c e ' m e r e l y a n a p p e a r a n c e ' , t h a t is, s o m e t h i n g t h a t is n o t i n i t s e l f fully
actual, b u t c o n d e m n e d to perish in the p r o c e s s o f self-sublation. It also
m e a n s t h a t t h e S u p r a s e n s i b l e is e f f e c t i v e o n l y as r e d o u b l e d , s e l f - r e f l e c t e d ,
self-related a p p e a r a n c e : the S u p r a s e n s i b l e c o m e s i n t o e x i s t e n c e in the
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 197
• a p p e a r a n c e in t h e s i m p l e s e n s e o f ' i l l u s i o n ' , t h e f a l s e / d i s t o r t e d r e p r e
s e n t a t i o n / i m a g e o f reality ('things are n o t what they s e e m ' platitudes)
- although, o f course, a further distinction n e e d s to b e introduced
h e r e b e t w e e n a p p e a r a n c e qua m e r e s u b j e c t i v e i l l u s i o n ( d i s t o r t i n g t h e
t r a n s c e n d e n t a l l y c o n s t i t u t e d o r d e r o f r e a l i t y ) a n d a p p e a r a n c e qua t h e
t r a n s c e n d e n t a l l y c o n s t i t u t e d o r d e r o f p h e n o m e n a l r e a l i t y itself, w h i c h
is o p p o s e d t o t h e T h i n g - i n - i t s e l f ;
• a p p e a r a n c e i n t h e s e n s e o f s i g n s i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e r e is s o m e t h i n g
b e y o n d (directly accessible p h e n o m e n a l r e a l i t y ) , t h a t is, t h e appear
a n c e o f t h e S u p r a s e n s i b l e : t h e S u p r a s e n s i b l e e x i s t s o n l y i n s o f a r as it
appears as such (as t h e indeterminate presentiment that 'there is
something beneath p h e n o m e n a l reality');
198 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
• f i n a l l y ( a n d it is o n l y h e r e t h a t w e e n c o u n t e r w h a t p s y c h o a n a l y s i s c a l l s
t h e ' f u n d a m e n t a l f a n t a s y ' , as w e l l as t h e m o s t r a d i c a l p h e n o m e n o l o g i -
c a l n o t i o n o f ' p h e n o m e n a ' ) , t h e a p p e a r a n c e w h i c h fills t h e void i n t h e
m i d s t o f r e a l i t y , t h a t is, t h e a p p e a r a n c e w h i c h c o n c e a l s t h e f a c t t h a t ,
b e n e a t h t h e p h e n o m e n a , t h e r e is n o t h i n g t o c o n c e a l .
T h e p r o b l e m w i t h K a n t is t h a t h e t e n d s t o c o n f u s e t h e l a s t two l e v e l s . T h a t
is t o say, t h e paradox t o b e a c c e p t e d is t h a t t h e realm o f noumenal
Freedom, o f the Supreme G o o d , appears as s u c h (as n o u m e n a l ) only
from the p h e n o m e n a l perspective o f the finite s u b j e c t : i n itself, i f w e g e t
t o o c l o s e t o it, it c h a n g e s i n t o t h e m o n s t r o u s R e a l . . . . H e r e Heidegger
was o n t h e r i g h t t r a c k w i t h h i s i n s i s t e n c e o n t e m p o r a l i t y as t h e ultimate
unsurpassable h o r i z o n , t h a t is, o f e t e r n i t y i t s e l f as a c a t e g o r y w h i c h has
meaning only within the temporal experience of a finite subject: in
exactiy the same way, w h a t K a n t was n o t fully aware o f is h o w the
distinction between (our e x p e r i e n c e of) n o u m e n a l freedom and temporal
i m m e r s i o n i n p h e n o m e n a is a d i s t i n c t i o n i n t e r n a l t o o u r finite temporal
experience.
Post-Politics
T o d a y , h o w e v e r , we a r e d e a l i n g with a n o t h e r f o r m o f the d e n e g a t i o n o f
t h e p o l i t i c a l , p o s t m o d e r n post-politics, which n o longer merely 'represses'
t h e p o l i t i c a l , t r y i n g t o c o n t a i n it a n d p a c i f y t h e ' r e t u r n s o f t h e r e p r e s s e d ' ,
b u t m u c h m o r e e f f e c t i v e l y ' f o r e c l o s e s ' it, s o t h a t t h e p o s t m o d e r n f o r m s o f
e t h n i c v i o l e n c e , with t h e i r ' i r r a t i o n a l ' e x c e s s i v e c h a r a c t e r , a r e n o l o n g e r
simple 'returns o f the repressed' but, rather, represent a case o f the
f o r e c l o s e d ( f r o m t h e S y m b o l i c ) w h i c h , as w e k n o w f r o m L a c a n , r e t u r n s i n
t h e Real. I n post-politics, t h e c o n f l i c t o f global i d e o l o g i c a l visions e m b o d
ied in d i f f e r e n t parties which compete for power is r e p l a c e d by the
collaboration o f enlightened technocrats (economists, public opinion
s p e c i a l i s t s . . . ) a n d l i b e r a l m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t s ; via t h e p r o c e s s o f n e g o t i a t i o n
o f interests, a c o m p r o m i s e is r e a c h e d i n the guise o f a m o r e o r less
universal consensus. Post-politics thus emphasizes the n e e d to leave old
ideological divisions b e h i n d and confront n e w issues, a r m e d with the
necessary expert knowledge and free deliberation that takes people's
concrete needs and demands into account.
T h e b e s t f o r m u l a t h a t e x p r e s s e s t h e p a r a d o x o f p o s t - p o l i t i c s is p e r h a p s
T o n y B l a i r ' s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o f N e w L a b o u r as t h e ' R a d i c a l C e n t r e ' : i n
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 199
O n e o f t o d a y ' s c o m m o n w i s d o m s is t h a t w e a r e e n t e r i n g a n e w m e d i e v a l
society in t h e guise o f t h e N e w W o r l d O r d e r - t h e g r a i n o f t r u t h in this
c o m p a r i s o n is t h a t t h e N e w W o r l d O r d e r , as i n m e d i e v a l t i m e s , is g l o b a l ,
b u t n o t u n i v e r s a l , s i n c e i t strives f o r a n e w g l o b a l order w i t h e a c h p a r t i n
its a l l o c a t e d p l a c e . A t y p i c a l a d v o c a t e o f l i b e r a l i s m t o d a y t h r o w s together
workers' protests against r e d u c i n g their rights a n d right-wing insistence
on fidelity t o t h e W e s t e r n c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e : h e p e r c e i v e s b o t h as p i t i f u l
remainders o f the 'age o f ideology' which have n o relevance in today's
post-ideological universe. However, t h e two r e s i s t a n c e s t o g l o b a l i z a t i o n
f o l l o w t o t a l l y i n c o m p a t i b l e l o g i c s : t h e R i g h t insists o n a particular commu
n a l i d e n t i t y (ethnos o r habitat) threatened by the o n s l a u g h t o f globaliza
tion; while for the Left, the dimension under threat is that of
politicization, o f articulating 'impossible' u n / i w a / d e m a n d s ('impossible'
f r o m within the existing s p a c e o f W o r l d O r d e r ) .
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 201
M
he's doing, but he's nevertheless doing i t ' . T h e symbolically efficient
knowledge embedded i n t h e s u b j e c t ' s a c t u a l s o c i a l praxis disintegrates
i n t o , o n t h e o n e h a n d , e x c e s s i v e ' i r r a t i o n a l ' v i o l e n c e with n o i d e o l o g i c o -
political foundation and, on the o t h e r , i m p o t e n t external reflecdon that
leaves t h e s u b j e c t ' s acts intact. I n t h e g u i s e o f this cynically i m p o t e n t
r e f l e c t i n g s k i n h e a d w h o , with a n i r o n i c s m i l e , e x p l a i n s the r o o t s o f his
s e n s e l e s s l y v i o l e n t b e h a v i o u r to t h e p e r p l e x e d j o u r n a l i s t , t h e e n l i g h t e n e d
t o l e r a n t m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t b e n t o n ' u n d e r s t a n d i n g ' f o r m s o f e x c e s s i v e vio
l e n c e g e t s h i s o w n m e s s a g e i n its i n v e r t e d , t r u e f o r m - i n s h o r t , as L a c a n
w o u l d h a v e p u t it, a t t h i s p o i n t t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n h i m a n d t h e
' o b j e c t ' o f h i s study, t h e i n t o l e r a n t s k i n h e a d , is t h o r o u g h l y s u c c e s s f u l .
W h a t s u c h a t o l e r a n t p r o c e d u r e p r e c l u d e s is t h e g e s t u r e o f pohticization
p r o p e r : a l t h o u g h t h e difficulties o f b e i n g a n A f r i c a n - A m e r i c a n u n e m p l o y e d
204 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
l e s b i a n m o t h e r a r e a d e q u a t e l y c a t a l o g u e d r i g h t d o w n t o its m o s t s p e c i f i c
features, t h e c o n c e r n e d s u b j e c t n o n e t h e less s o m e h o w 'feels' that t h e r e
is s o m e t h i n g ' w r o n g ' a n d ' f r u s t r a t i n g ' i n t h i s v e r y e f f o r t to m e t e o u t j u s t i c e
t o h e r s p e c i f i c p r e d i c a m e n t - w h a t s h e is d e p r i v e d o f is t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f
'metaphoric' elevation o f h e r specific 'wrong' into a stand-in for the
universal ' w r o n g ' . T h e o n l y way to a r t i c u l a t e this universality - t h e fact
t h a t I , p r e c i s e l y , a m not m e r e l y t h a t s p e c i f i c i n d i v i d u a l e x p o s e d t o a s e t o f
s p e c i f i c i n j u s t i c e s - c o n s i s t s , t h e n , i n its a p p a r e n t o p p o s i t e , i n t h e thor
o u g h l y ' i r r a t i o n a l ' e x c e s s i v e o u t b u r s t o f v i o l e n c e . T h e o l d H e g e l i a n r u l e is
a g a i n c o n f i r m e d h e r e : t h e o n l y way f o r a u n i v e r s a l i t y t o c o m e i n t o e x i s
t e n c e , t o ' p o s i t ' i t s e l f ' a s s u c h ' , is i n t h e g u i s e o f its v e r y o p p o s i t e , o f w h a t
c a n n o t b u t a p p e a r as a n e x c e s s i v e ' i r r a t i o n a l ' w h i m . T h e s e v i o l e n t passages
a Vacte b e a r w i t n e s s t o s o m e u n d e r l y i n g antagonism that can no longer be
f o r m u l a t e d - s y m b o l i z e d in p r o p e r l y p o l i t i c a l t e r m s . T h e o n l y way to c o u n
t e r a c t t h e s e e x c e s s i v e ' i r r a t i o n a l ' o u t b u r s t s is t o a p p r o a c h t h e q u e s t i o n o f
w h a t n o n e t h e less r e m a i n s f o r e c l o s e d in t h e very a l l - i n c l u s i o n a r y / t o l e r a n t
post-political logic, a n d to actualize this f o r e c l o s e d d i m e n s i o n in some
new m o d e o f political subjectivization.
L e t us r e c a l l t h e s t a n d a r d e x a m p l e o f a p o p u l a r p r o t e s t ( m a s s d e m o n
s t r a t i o n , s t r i k e , b o y c o t t ) d i r e c t e d a t a s p e c i f i c p o i n t , t h a t is, f o c u s i n g o n a
particular d e m a n d ('Abolish that new tax! Justice for the imprisoned!
S t o p exploiting that natural r e s o u r c e ! ' . . .) - the situation b e c o m e s polit
icized when this p a r t i c u l a r d e m a n d s t a r t s t o f u n c t i o n as a metaphoric
c o n d e n s a t i o n o f the g l o b a l o p p o s i t i o n against T h e m , t h o s e in p o w e r , so
t h a t t h e p r o t e s t is n o l o n g e r a c t u a l l y j u s t a b o u t t h a t d e m a n d , b u t about
t h e universal d i m e n s i o n t h a t r e s o n a t e s in t h a t p a r t i c u l a r d e m a n d (for this
reason, protesters often feel s o m e h o w deceived w h e n those in power
a g a i n s t w h o m t h e i r p r o t e s t was a d d r e s s e d s i m p l y a c c e p t t h e i r d e m a n d -
as if, i n t h i s way, t h e y h a v e s o m e h o w f r u s t r a t e d t h e m , d e p r i v i n g t h e m o f
t h e t r u e a i m o f t h e i r p r o t e s t in t h e very guise o f a c c e p t i n g t h e i r d e m a n d ) .
W h a t p o s t - p o l i t i c s t e n d s t o p r e v e n t is p r e c i s e l y t h i s m e l a p h o r i c u n i v e r s a l i -
zation o f p a r t i c u l a r d e m a n d s : post-politics m o b i l i z e s t h e vast a p p a r a t u s o f
experts, social workers, a n d so o n , to r e d u c e the overall d e m a n d (com
plaint) o f a particular group to j u s t this d e m a n d , with its particular
content - no wonder this s u f f o c a t i n g c l o s u r e gives b i r t h to 'irrational'
o u t b u r s t s o f v i o l e n c e as t h e o n l y way t o give e x p r e s s i o n t o t h e d i m e n s i o n
b e y o n d particularity.
T h i s a r g u m e n t a t i o n is n o t t o b e c o n f u s e d w i t h t h e p o i n t , m a d e b y m a n y
a conservative critic, a c c o r d i n g to which violent outbursts signify the
return o f the repressed of our anaemic liberal Western civilization.
POLITICAL SUBJECTIVIZATION AND ITS VICISSITUDES 205
E x e m p l a r y h e r e is M a r i o V a r g a s L l o s a ' s a r g u m e n t a t i o n t h a t ' t h e h o o l i g a n
3 5
is n o b a r b a r i a n : h e is a n e x q u i s i t e a n d t e r r i b l e p r o d u c t o f c i v i l i z a t i o n ' .
L l o s a t a k e s as h i s s t a r t i n g p o i n t t h e o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t t h e t y p i c a l v i o l e n t
s o c c e r f a n is n o t a n u n e m p l o y e d lumpenproletarian but a comfortably off
m i d d l e - c l a s s w o r k e r , t h a t is, t h e v e r y e p i t o m e o f g e n t i e g o o d m a n n e r s a n d
civilized c o m p a s s i o n - his violent outbursts are ' r e t u r n s o f t h e r e p r e s s e d ' ,
the reassertion o f the violent orgy increasingly p r o h i b i t e d by o u r civilized
liberal societies. T h r o u g h a m i s l e a d i n g r e f e r e n c e to F r e u d , L l o s a mystifies
a n d n a t u r a l i z e s c u r r e n t v i o l e n t o u t b u r s t s : as i f t h e r e is a fixed, irreducible
propensity towards violent outbursts in h u m a n n a t u r e , a n d w h e n sacred
o r g i e s a r e n o l o n g e r p e r m i t t e d as its l e g i t i m a t e e x p r e s s i o n , t h i s p r o p e n s i t y
h a s t o find a n o t h e r way t o e x p r e s s itself. . . . I n c l e a r c o n t r a s t t o t h i s l i n e
of argumentation, m y p o i n t is m u c h stronger: the neo-Nazi skinhead's
e t h n i c v i o l e n c e is n o t t h e ' r e t u r n o f t h e r e p r e s s e d ' o f t h e l i b e r a l m u l t i c u l -
t u r a l i s t t o l e r a n c e , b u t directly generated by it, its o w n c o n c e a l e d t r u e f a c e .
Is T h e r e a Progressive ILurocentrism?
T h i s c o n c e p t u a l f r a m e e n a b l e s us t o a p p r o a c h E a s t e r n E u r o p e a n Social
i s m i n a n e w way. T h e p a s s a g e f r o m a c t u a l l y e x i s t i n g S o c i a l i s m t o a c t u a l l y
existing capitalism in E a s t e r n E u r o p e b r o u g h t about a series o f c o m i c
reversals o f sublime democratic enthusiasm into the ridiculous. The
dignified East G e r m a n crowds gathering a r o u n d Protestant c h u r c h e s a n d
h e r o i c a l l y d e f y i n g Stasi t e r r o r s u d d e n l y t u r n e d i n t o v u l g a r c o n s u m e r s o f
bananas and cheap pornography; the civilized C z e c h s m o b i l i z e d by the
appeal o f Havel a n d o t h e r cultural icons suddenly turned into cheap
swindlers o f W e s t e r n tourists. . . . T h e d i s a p p o i n t m e n t was m u t u a l : the
W e s t , w h i c h b e g a n b y i d o l i z i n g t h e E a s t e r n d i s s i d e n t m o v e m e n t as t h e r e
i n v e n t i o n o f its o w n t i r e d d e m o c r a c y , d i s a p p o i n t e d l y d i s m i s s e s t h e p r e s e n t
p o s t - S o c i a l i s t r e g i m e s as a m i x t u r e o f t h e c o r r u p t e x - C o m m u n i s t o l i g a r c h y
a n d / o r ethnic and religious fundamentalists (even the dwindling liberals
a r e m i s t r u s t e d as i n s u f f i c i e n t l y ' p o l i t i c a l l y c o r r e c t ' : w h e r e is t h e i r f e m i n i s t
awareness? etc.); the East, which began b y i d o l i z i n g t h e W e s t as the
e x a m p l e o f a f f l u e n t d e m o c r a c y t o b e f o l l o w e d , finds i t s e l f i n t h e w h i r l p o o l
o f r u t h l e s s c o m m e r c i a l i z a t i o n a n d e c o n o m i c c o l o n i z a t i o n . S o was all t h i s
worth the effort?
of the human rights o f the four a c c u s e d ' . Officially, the goal o f the
C o m m i t t e e was s i m p l y t o g u a r a n t e e f a i r t r e a t m e n t f o r t h e f o u r a c c u s e d ;
however, the Committee turned into the major oppositional political
force, practically t h e S l o v e n e version o f the C z e c h Civic F o r u m o r East
G e r m a n Neues Forum, the body which co-ordinated democratic opposition,
a de facto r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f civil s o c i e t y .
The Committee's programme c o n s i s t e d o f f o u r i t e m s ; t h e first three
directiy c o n c e r n e d the a c c u s e d , while the 'devil in t h e detail', o f c o u r s e ,
was t h e f o u r t h i t e m , w h i c h s a i d t h a t t h e C o m m i t t e e w a n t e d t o c l a r i f y t h e
entire b a c k g r o u n d o f the arrest o f the four accused, a n d thus contribute
to c r e a t i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s in w h i c h such arrests would no longer be
possible - a c o d e d way o f s a y i n g t h a t w e w a n t e d the abolition o f the
existing Socialist regime. O u r demand 'Justice for the four accused!'
s t a r t e d t o f u n c t i o n as t h e m e t a p h o r i c c o n d e n s a t i o n o f t h e d e m a n d for
t h e global o v e r t h r o w o f t h e Socialist r e g i m e . F o r t h a t r e a s o n , in a l m o s t
daily n e g o t i a t i o n s with t h e C o m m i t t e e , C o m m u n i s t Party officials were
always a c c u s i n g u s o f a ' h i d d e n a g e n d a ' , c l a i m i n g t h a t t h e l i b e r a t i o n o f
t h e f o u r a c c u s e d was n o t o u r t r u e g o a l - t h a t w e w e r e ' e x p l o i t i n g a n d
manipulating the arrest and trial f o r o t h e r , d a r k e r political goals'. In
short, the C o m m u n i s t s w a n t e d to play t h e ' r a t i o n a l ' d e p o l i t i c i z e d g a m e :
they wanted to deprive the slogan 'Justice for the four accused!' o f
its e x p l o s i v e g e n e r a l c o n n o t a t i o n , a n d r e d u c e it t o its l i t e r a l meaning,
w h i c h c o n c e r n e d j u s t a m i n o r l e g a l m a t t e r ; t h e y c y n i c a l l y c l a i m e d t h a t it
was w e , t h e Committee, who were behaving 'non-democratically' and
manipulating the fate o f t h e a c c u s e d , using g l o b a l p r e s s u r e a n d black
mailing strategies instead o f focusing o n the particular p r o b l e m o f their
plight.
T h i s is p o l i t i c s p r o p e r : t h e m o m e n t i n w h i c h a p a r t i c u l a r d e m a n d is n o t
simply part o f the negotiation o f interests but aims at s o m e t h i n g more,
and starts to function as t h e metaphoric condensation o f the global
r e s t r u c t u r i n g o f t h e e n t i r e s o c i a l s p a c e . T h e r e is a c l e a r c o n t r a s t b e t w e e n
this subjectivization a n d today's proliferation o f postmodern 'identity
p o l i t i c s ' w h o s e g o a l is t h e e x a c t o p p o s i t e , t h a t is, p r e c i s e l y t h e a s s e r t i o n o f
o n e ' s particular identity, o f o n e ' s p r o p e r p l a c e within t h e social structure.
T h e p o s t m o d e r n i d e n t i t y p o l i t i c s o f p a r t i c u l a r ( e t h n i c , s e x u a l , e t c . ) life
styles p e r f e c t l y fits t h e depoliticized notion o f society, in w h i c h every
p a r t i c u l a r g r o u p is ' a c c o u n t e d f o r ' , h a s its s p e c i f i c s t a t u s ( o f victim)
a c k n o w l e d g e d t h r o u g h affirmative a c t i o n o r o t h e r m e a s u r e s d e s t i n e d to
g u a r a n t e e social justice. T h e fact t h a t this k i n d o f j u s t i c e m e t e d o u t to
victimized m i n o r i t i e s r e q u i r e s an i n t r i c a t e p o l i c e a p p a r a t u s ( f o r identify-
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 209
i n g t h e g r o u p i n q u e s t i o n , f o r p u n i s h i n g o f f e n d e r s a g a i n s t its r i g h t s - h o w
legally to define sexual h a r a s s m e n t o r racial injury?, a n d so o n - for
providing the preferential treatment which should compensate for the
w r o n g t h i s g r o u p h a s s u f f e r e d ) is d e e p l y s i g n i f i c a n t : w h a t is u s u a l l y p r a i s e d
as ' p o s t m o d e r n p o l i t i c s ' ( t h e p u r s u i t o f p a r t i c u l a r i s s u e s w h o s e r e s o l u t i o n
m u s t b e n e g o t i a t e d w i t h i n t h e ' r a t i o n a l ' g l o b a l o r d e r a l l o c a t i n g its p a r t i c u
lar c o m p o n e n t its p r o p e r p l a c e ) is t h u s e f f e c t i v e l y t h e e n d o f p o l i t i c s
proper.
S o while everyone s e e m s to a g r e e that today's post-political liberal-
d e m o c r a t i c g l o b a l c a p i t a l i s t r e g i m e is t h e r e g i m e o f t h e n o n - e v e n t (in
N i e t z s c h e ' s t e r m s , o f t h e L a s t M a n ) , t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e r e we a r e to l o o k
for the Event remains open. T h e o b v i o u s s o l u t i o n is: i n s o f a r as w e
experience contemporary postmodern s o c i a l life as ' n o n - s u b s t a n t i a l ' the
proper a n s w e r is t h e m u l t i t u d e o f p a s s i o n a t e , o f t e n v i o l e n t r e t u r n s to
' r o o t s ' , t o d i f f e r e n t f o r m s o f e t h n i c a n d / o r r e l i g i o u s ' s u b s t a n c e ' . W h a t is
' s u b s t a n c e ' i n s o c i a l e x p e r i e n c e ? I t is t h e v i o l e n t e m o t i o n a l m o m e n t o f
'recognition', when o n e b e c o m e s aware o f o n e ' s 'roots', o f o n e ' s 'true
b e l o n g i n g ' , t h e m o m e n t i n t h e f a c e o f w h i c h l i b e r a l r e f l e x i v e d i s t a n c e is
u t t e r l y i m p o t e n t - all o f a s u d d e n , a d r i f t i n t h e w o r l d , o n e finds oneself
in t h e grip o f a k i n d o f a b s o l u t e l o n g i n g for ' h o m e ' , a n d everything else,
3 8
everyday c o m m o n c o n c e r n s , b e c o m e s u n i m p o r t a n t . . . .
Here, however, one must fully endorse Badiou's point that these
'returns to the S u b s t a n c e ' are themselves i m p o t e n t in the face o f the
global m a r c h o f C a p i t a l : t h e y a r e its i n h e r e n t s u p p l e m e n t , the limit/
c o n d i t i o n o f its f u n c t i o n i n g , s i n c e - as D e l e u z e e m p h a s i z e d y e a r s a g o -
capitalist 'deterritorialization' is always accompanied by re-emerging
' r e t e r r i t o r i a l i z a t i o n s ' . M o r e p r e c i s e l y , t h e r e is a n i n h e r e n t s p l i t i n t h e f i e l d
o f particular identities themselves c a u s e d by the o n s l a u g h t o f capitalist
globalization: o n the o n e hand, the so-called 'fundamentalisms', whose
b a s i c f o r m u l a is t h a t o f t h e I d e n t i t y o f o n e ' s o w n g r o u p , i m p l y i n g the
practice o f excluding the threatening O t h e r ( s ) : F r a n c e for the French
(against Algerian i m m i g r a n t s ) , A m e r i c a for A m e r i c a n s (against the His
panic invasion), Slovenia for Slovenians (against the excessive p r e s e n c e o f
3 3
' S o u t h e r n e r s ' , immigrants f r o m the ex-Yugoslav r e p u b l i c s ) ; on the other
h a n d , t h e r e is p o s t m o d e r n multiculturalist 'identity polities', aiming at
t h e t o l e r a n t c o e x i s t e n c e o f ever-shifting, ' h y b r i d ' lifestyle g r o u p s , divided
into endless subgroups ( H i s p a n i c w o m e n , b l a c k gays, white m a l e AIDS
patients, lesbian m o t h e r s . . . ) .
This ever-growing flowering o f groups a n d subgroups in their hybrid
and fluid, shifting identities, e a c h insisting o n the right to assert its
210 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
s p e c i f i c way o f life a n d / o r c u l t u r e , t h i s i n c e s s a n t d i v e r s i f i c a t i o n , is p o s s i b l e
a n d t h i n k a b l e o n l y a g a i n s t t h e b a c k g r o u n d o f c a p i t a l i s t g l o b a l i z a t i o n ; i t is
t h e v e r y way c a p i t a l i s t g l o b a l i z a t i o n a f f e c t s o u r s e n s e o f e t h n i c a n d o t h e r
forms o f community belonging: the only link c o n n e c t i n g these multiple
groups is t h e l i n k o f C a p i t a l i t s e l f , always r e a d y t o satisfy t h e specific
d e m a n d s o f e a c h g r o u p a n d s u b g r o u p (gay tourism, H i s p a n i c m u s i c . . . ) .
Furthermore, the opposition between fundamentalism and postmodern
p l u r a l i s t i d e n t i t y p o l i t i c s is u l t i m a t e l y a f a k e , c o n c e a l i n g a d e e p e r s o l i d a r i t y
( o r , to p u t it i n H e g e l e s e , s p e c u l a t i v e i d e n t i t y ) : a m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t can
e a s i l y find e v e n t h e m o s t ' f u n d a m e n t a l i s t ' e t h n i c identity attractive, but
o n l y i n s o f a r as it is t h e i d e n t i t y o f t h e s u p p o s e d l y a u t h e n t i c O t h e r (say,
in the U S A , Native A m e r i c a n tribal identity); a f u n d a m e n t a l i s t g r o u p c a n
e a s i l y a d o p t , i n its s o c i a l f u n c t i o n i n g , t h e p o s t m o d e r n s t r a t e g i e s o f i d e n t i t y
politics, presenting i t s e l f as o n e o f the threatened minorities, simply
s t r i v i n g t o m a i n t a i n its s p e c i f i c way o f life a n d c u l t u r a l i d e n t i t y . T h e l i n e
of separation between multiculturalist identity politics a n d fundamental
i s m is t h u s p u r e l y f o r m a l ; it o f t e n depends merely on the different
p e r s p e c t i v e f r o m w h i c h t h e o b s e r v e r views a m o v e m e n t f o r m a i n t a i n i n g a
g r o u p identity.
U n d e r t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s , t h e E v e n t in the guise o f t h e ' r e t u r n to r o o t s '
c a n b e o n l y a s e m b l a n c e t h a t fits t h e c a p i t a l i s t c i r c u l a r m o v e n e n t p e r f e c t l y
o r - in t h e w o r s t c a s e - l e a d s t o a c a t a s t r o p h e l i k e N a z i s m . T h e s i g n o f
t o d a y ' s i d e o l o g i c o - p o l i t i c a l c o n s t e l l a t i o n is t h e f a c t t h a t t h e s e k i n d s o f
pseudo-Events constitute the only a p p e a r a n c e s o f Events which s e e m to
p o p u p (it is o n l y r i g h t - w i n g p o p u l i s m w h i c h t o d a y d i s p l a y s t h e a u t h e n t i c
political p a s s i o n o f a c c e p t i n g t h e struggle, o f o p e n l y admitting that, pre
c i s e l y i n s o f a r as o n e c l a i m s t o s p e a k f r o m a u n i v e r s a l s t a n d p o i n t , one
d o e s n o t a i m t o p l e a s e e v e r y b o d y , b u t is r e a d y t o i n t r o d u c e a division of
' U s ' versus ' T h e m ' ) . It has often b e e n r e m a r k e d that, despite hating the
guts o f B u c h a n a n in t h e U S A , L e P e n in F r a n c e o r H a i d e r in Austria,
e v e n L e f t i s t s f e e l a k i n d o f r e l i e f at t h e i r a p p e a r a n c e - finally, i n t h e m i d s t
o f t h e r e i g n o f t h e a s e p t i c p o s t - p o l i t i c a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f p u b l i c affairs,
t h e r e is s o m e o n e w h o r e v i v e s a p r o p e r p o l i t i c a l p a s s i o n o f d i v i s i o n and
c o n f r o n t a t i o n , a c o m m i t t e d b e l i e f in political issues, a l b e i t in a d e p l o r a b l y
repulsive form. . . . W e are thus m o r e a n d m o r e deeply l o c k e d into a
c l a u s t r o p h o b i c s p a c e within w h i c h we c a n o n l y oscillate b e t w e e n the n o n -
event o f the s m o o t h r u n n i n g o f the liberal-democratic capitalist global
New World O r d e r a n d fundamentalist Events (the rise o f local proto-
Fascisms, e t c . ) , which temporarily disturb the calm surface o f the capitalist
o c e a n - n o w o n d e r t h a t , in t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , H e i d e g g e r m i s t o o k t h e
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 211
T h e T h r e e Universals
T h e s e i m p a s s e s d e m o n s t r a t e h o w t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e U n i v e r s a l is m u c h
4 0
m o r e c o m p l e x t h a n i t a p p e a r s . I t was B a l i b a r who elaborated the three
levels o f universality w h i c h vaguely follow t h e L a c a n i a n triad o f Real,
I m a g i n a r y a n d S y m b o l i c : the 'real' universality o f globalization, with the
s u p p l e m e n t a r y process o f 'internal e x c l u s i o n s ' (the e x t e n t to which, today,
the fate o f e a c h o f us h i n g e s o n the intricate web o f global market
relations); the universality of the fiction that regulates ideological
hegemony ( C h u r c h o r S t a t e as t h e u n i v e r s a l 'imagined communities',
w h i c h allow the s u b j e c t to a c q u i r e a d i s t a n c e towards i m m e r s i o n in his
i m m e d i a t e social g r o u p - class, profession, sex, religion . . . - a n d posit
h i m s e l f as a f r e e s u b j e c t ) ; t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y o f a n I d e a l , as e x e m p l i f i e d b y
t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y d e m a n d f o r egaliberte, w h i c h r e m a i n s a n unconditional
excess, setting in m o t i o n permanent insurrection against the existing
o r d e r , a n d c a n thus n e v e r b e ' g e n t r i f i e d ' , i n c l u d e d in t h e e x i s t i n g o r d e r .
T h e p o i n t , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t t h e b o u n d a r y b e t w e e n t h e s e t h r e e u n i v e r
sals is n e v e r s t a b l e a n d fixed: the notion o f freedom and equality can
serve as the hegemonic idea which enables us to identify with our
particular social role (I a m a poor artisan, but p r e c i s e l y as s u c h I
p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e life o f m y n a t i o n - s t a t e as a n e q u a l a n d f r e e c i t i z e n . . . ) ,
o r as t h e i r r e d u c i b l e e x c e s s w h i c h d e s t a b i l i z e s t h e f i x e d s o c i a l o r d e r . W h a t ,
i n t h e J a c o b i n u n i v e r s e , was t h e d e s t a b i l i z i n g u n i v e r s a l i t y o f t h e Ideal
setting in m o t i o n the incessant process o f social transformation later
b e c a m e the ideological fiction allowing e a c h individual to identify with
his specific p l a c e in the social space. T h e alternative here is: is the
universal 'abstract' (potentially opposed to c o n c r e t e c o n t e n t ) or 'con
c r e t e ' (in the s e n s e that I e x p e r i e n c e m y very p a r t i c u l a r m o d e o f social
life as m y s p e c i f i c way o f p a r t i c i p a t i n g in the universal social order)?
B a l i b a r ' s p o i n t is, o f c o u r s e , t h a t t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n t h e t w o is i r r e
ducible: the excess o f abstract-negative-ideal u n i v e r s a l i t y , its unsetding-
destabilizing force, c a n n e v e r b e fully i n t e g r a t e d into the harmonious
41
whole o f a 'concrete universality'.
H o w e v e r , t h e r e is a n o t h e r t e n s i o n , t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n t h e two m o d e s
o f ' c o n c r e t e u n i v e r s a l i t y ' itself, w h i c h s e e m s m o r e c r u c i a l t o d a y . T h a t is t o
say, the 'real' universality o f today's globalization through the market
i n v o l v e s its o w n hegemonic fiction (or even ideal) of multiculturalist
tolerance, respect for and protection o f h u m a n rights a n d democracy,
a n d s o o n ; it i n v o l v e s its o w n p s e u d o - H e g e l i a n ' c o n c r e t e u n i v e r s a l i t y ' o f a
214 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
two c o n s t i t u e n t parts, t h e t r a n s n a t i o n a l m a r k e t f u n c t i o n a n d t h e r e l a t i o n
4 3
ship to the e t h n i c T h i n g .
I t is t h e r e f o r e o n l y today, in c o n t e m p o r a r y 'fundamentalist' ethnic,
religious, lifestyle, a n d so o n , c o m m u n i t i e s , t h a t t h e split b e t w e e n the
abstract form o f c o m m e r c e and the relationship to t h e particular e t h n i c
T h i n g , i n a u g u r a t e d b y t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t p r o j e c t , is fully r e a l i z e d : t o d a y ' s
postmodern ethnic o r religious 'fundamentalism' and x e n o p h o b i a are not
only n o t 'regressive' but, o n the contrary, offer the s u p r e m e p r o o f o f the
final e m a n c i p a t i o n o f t h e e c o n o m i c l o g i c o f t h e m a r k e t f r o m t h e attach
m e n t t o t h e e t h n i c T h i n g . T h a t is t h e h i g h e s t s p e c u l a t i v e e f f o r t o f t h e
d i a l e c t i c o f s o c i a l life: n o t in d e s c r i b i n g t h e m e d i a t i o n process o f the
p r i m o r d i a l i m m e d i a c y (say, t h e d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f o r g a n i c c o m m u n i t y in
' a l i e n a t e d ' individualist society), b u t in e x p l a i n i n g h o w this very m e d i a t i o n
process characteristic o f modernity can give birth to new forms of
' o r g a n i c ' i m m e d i a c y , like t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y ' c h o s e n ' o r ' i n v e n t e d ' com
4 4
m u n i t i e s ( ' l i f e s t y l e c o m m u n i t i e s ' : gays, e t c . ) .
Multiculturalism
p o w e r is n o l o n g e r a n a t i o n - s t a t e b u t t h e g l o b a l c o m p a n y i t s e l f . I n the
l o n g t e r m , w e s h a l l all n o t o n l y w e a r B a n a n a R e p u b l i c s h i r t s b u t a l s o live
in b a n a n a republics.
A n d , o f c o u r s e , t h e i d e a l f o r m o f i d e o l o g y o f t h i s g l o b a l c a p i t a l i s m is
multiculturalism, the attitude which, from a kind o f empty global position,
t r e a t s each l o c a l c u l t u r e as t h e c o l o n i z e r treats c o l o n i z e d p e o p l e - as
' n a t i v e s ' w h o s e mores a r e t o b e c a r e f u l l y s t u d i e d a n d ' r e s p e c t e d ' . T h a t is t o
say: t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t r a d i t i o n a l i m p e r i a l i s t c o l o n i a l i s m a n d g l o b a l
c a p i t a l i s t s e l f - c o l o n i z a t i o n is e x a c t l y t h e s a m e as t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n
W e s t e r n c u l t u r a l i m p e r i a l i s m a n d m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m - j u s t as g l o b a l c a p i t a l
ism involves the p a r a d o x o f c o l o n i z a d o n without t h e c o l o n i z i n g nation-
s t a t e m e t r o p o l i s , m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m i n v o l v e s a p a t r o n i z i n g E u r o c e n t r i s t dis
tance and/or respect for local cultures without roots in one's own
particular culture. In other words, multiculturalism is a disavowed,
i n v e r t e d , self-referential f o r m o f r a c i s m , a ' r a c i s m with a d i s t a n c e ' - it
' r e s p e c t s ' t h e O t h e r ' s i d e n t i t y , c o n c e i v i n g t h e O t h e r as a s e l f - e n c l o s e d
'authentic' community towards which the multiculturalist maintains a
distance m a d e possible by h i s / h e r privileged universal position. Multicul
t u r a l i s m is a r a c i s m w h i c h e m p t i e s its o w n p o s i t i o n o f all p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t
( t h e m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t is n o t a d i r e c t r a c i s t ; h e o r s h e d o e s n o t o p p o s e to
t h e O t h e r t h e particular values o f his o r h e r o w n c u l t u r e ) ; n o n e t h e less
h e o r s h e r e t a i n s t h i s p o s i t i o n as t h e p r i v i l e g e d empty point of universality
f r o m w h i c h o n e is a b l e t o a p p r e c i a t e (and depreciate) other particular
c u l t u r e s p r o p e r l y - m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t r e s p e c t f o r t h e O t h e r ' s s p e c i f i c i t y is
t h e very f o r m o f asserting o n e ' s own superiority.
From the standpoint o f the post-Marxist anti-essentialist n o t i o n of
p o l i t i c s as t h e field o f h e g e m o n i c struggle with n o pre-established rules
t h a t w o u l d d e f i n e its p a r a m e t e r s i n a d v a n c e , it is e a s y t o r e j e c t t h e v e r y
notion o f the ' l o g i c o f C a p i t a l ' as p r e c i s e l y t h e r e m a i n d e r o f the old
essentialist stance: far from b e i n g r e d u c i b l e to an ideologico-cultural effect
o f the e c o n o m i c process, the passage from standard cultural imperialism
t o t h e m o r e t o l e r a n t m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m w i t h its o p e n n e s s t o w a r d s t h e w e a l t h
o f h y b r i d e t h n i c , s e x u a l , a n d s o o n , i d e n t i t i e s is t h e r e s u l t o f a l o n g a n d
difficult politico-cultural struggle whose final outcome was in no way
g u a r a n t e e d by the a priori co-ordinates o f the 'logic o f Capital'. . . . T h e
crucial point, h o w e v e r , is t h a t this s t r u g g l e for the p o l i t i c i z a t i o n and
a s s e r t i o n o f m u l t i p l e e t h n i c , s e x u a l , a n d o t h e r i d e n t i t i e s always t o o k p l a c e
a g a i n s t t h e b a c k g r o u n d o f a n i n v i s i b l e y e t all t h e m o r e f o r b i d d i n g b a r r i e r :
the g l o b a l c a p i t a l i s t s y s t e m was a b l e to i n c o r p o r a t e the gains o f the
p o s t m o d e r n politics o f identities to t h e e x t e n t that they did n o t disturb
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 217
B u s h i d o c o d e , e t c . ) , o r for t h e reverse c a s e o f t h e W e s t e r n j o u r n a l i s t in
s e a r c h o f t h e p a r t i c u l a r s e c r e t o f J a p a n e s e s u c c e s s : this very r e f e r e n c e t o a
p a r t i c u l a r c u l t u r a l f o r m u l a is a s c r e e n f o r t h e universal anonymity o f
Capital. T h e true h o r r o r lies n o t in t h e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t h i d d e n b e n e a t h
t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y o f g l o b a l C a p i t a l b u t , r a t h e r , i n t h e f a c t t h a t C a p i t a l is
e f f e c t i v e l y a n a n o n y m o u s g l o b a l m a c h i n e b l i n d l y r u n n i n g its c o u r s e ; t h a t
t h e r e is i n f a c t n o p a r t i c u l a r S e c r e t A g e n t a n i m a t i n g it. T h e h o r r o r is n o t
the ( p a r t i c u l a r living) g h o s t in t h e (dead universal) m a c h i n e , but the
( d e a d universal) m a c h i n e in t h e very h e a r t o f e a c h (particular living)
ghost. The conclusion to b e drawn is t h u s that the problematic of
multiculturalism (the hybrid c o e x i s t e n c e o f diverse cultural life-worlds)
w h i c h i m p o s e s i t s e l f t o d a y is t h e f o r m o f a p p e a r a n c e o f its o p p o s i t e , o f
t h e m a s s i v e p r e s e n c e o f c a p i t a l i s m as global w o r l d s y s t e m : it b e a r s w i t n e s s
to the u n p r e c e d e n t e d h o m o g e n i z a t i o n o f today's world.
It is i n f a c t as if, s i n c e t h e h o r i z o n o f s o c i a l i m a g i n a t i o n no longer
a l l o w s us t o e n t e r t a i n t h e i d e a o f a n e v e n t u a l d e m i s e o f c a p i t a l i s m - s i n c e ,
as we m i g h t p u t it, e v e r y b o d y t a c i t l y a c c e p t s t h a t capitalism is here to stay -
c r i t i c a l e n e r g y h a s f o u n d a s u b s t i t u t e o u t l e t i n f i g h t i n g f o r c u l t u r a l dif
ferences which leave the basic h o m o g e n e i t y o f the capitalist world-system
i n t a c t . S o we a r e f i g h t i n g o u r P C b a t t l e s f o r t h e r i g h t s o f e t h n i c m i n o r i t i e s ,
o f gays a n d l e s b i a n s , o f d i f f e r e n t l i f e s t y l e s , a n d s o f o r t h , w h i l e c a p i t a l i s m
p u r s u e s its t r i u m p h a n t m a r c h - a n d t o d a y ' s c r i t i c a l t h e o r y , i n t h e g u i s e o f
' c u l t u r a l s t u d i e s ' , is p e r f o r m i n g t h e u l t i m a t e s e r v i c e f o r t h e unrestrained
development o f capitalism by a c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t i n g in the ideological
e f f o r t t o r e n d e r its m a s s i v e p r e s e n c e i n v i s i b l e : i n t h e p r e d o m i n a n t form
of postmodern 'cultural criticism', the very m e n t i o n o f c a p i t a l i s m as a
w o r l d s y s t e m t e n d s t o give r i s e t o a c c u s a t i o n s o f ' e s s e n t i a l i s m ' , 'fundamen
t a l i s m ' , a n d s o o n . T h e p r i c e o f t h i s d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f t h e e c o n o m y is
t h a t t h e d o m a i n o f p o l i t i c s i t s e l f is i n a way d e p o l i t i c i z e d : p o l i t i c a l struggle-
proper is t r a n s f o r m e d into the cultural struggle for the r e c o g n i t i o n o f
4 6
marginal identities and the tolerance o f differences.
The falsity o f elitist multiculturalist liberalism lies in the tension
between content and form which already characterized the first great
ideological project o f tolerant universalism, that o f Freemasonry: the
d o c t r i n e o f F r e e m a s o n r y (the universal b r o t h e r h o o d o f all m e n b a s e d o n
the light o f R e a s o n ) clearly c l a s h e s with its f o r m o f expression and
organization ( a s e c r e t s o c i e t y w i t h its i n i t i a t i o n r i t u a l s ) ; t h a t is, i t is t h e
v e r y f o r m o f e x p r e s s i o n a n d a r t i c u l a t i o n o f F r e e m a s o n r y w h i c h b e l i e s its
p o s i t i v e d o c t r i n e . I n a s t r i c t l y h o m o l o g o u s way, t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y ' p o l i t i
cally c o r r e c t ' liberal attitude which perceives itself as s u r p a s s i n g the
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 219
• O n t h e o n e h a n d , it t o l e r a t e s t h e O t h e r i n s o f a r as it is n o t t h e real
Other, b u t the aseptic O t h e r o f p r e m o d c r n ecological wisdom, fascinating
r i t e s , a n d s o o n - t h e m o m e n t o n e is d e a l i n g w i t h t h e real O t h e r (say, o f
c l i t o r i d e c t o m y , o f w o m e n c o m p e l l e d t o w e a r t h e veil, o f t o r t u r i n g e n e m i e s
to d e a t h . . . ) , with t h e way t h e O t h e r regulates t h e s p e c i f i c i t y o f its
jouissance, t o l e r a n c e stops. Significantly, t h e s a m e multiculturalists w h o
o p p o s e E u r o c e n t r i s m a l s o , as a r u l e , o p p o s e t h e d e a t h p e n a l t y , d i s m i s s i n g
it as a r e m a i n d e r o f p r i m i t i v e b a r b a r i c c u s t o m s o f v e n g e a n c e - here, t h e i r
h i d d e n true E u r o c e n t r i s m b e c o m e s visible ( t h e i r e n t i r e argumentation
a g a i n s t t h e d e a t h p e n a l t y is s t r i c t l y ' E u r o c e n t r i s t ' , i n v o l v i n g t h e l i b e r a l
notions o f h u m a n dignity a n d penalty, a n d relying o n an evolutionary
s c h e m a from primitive \ i o l e n l sociedes to m o d e r n tolerant societies able
to o v e r c o m e the principle o f v e n g e a n c e ) .
T h e k e y p o i n t is t o a s s e r t t h e c o m p l e m e n t a r i t y o f t h e s e two e x c e s s e s , o f
too much a n d not enough: i f t h e first a t t i t u d e is u n a b l e to perceive the
s p e c i f i c c u l t u r a l jouissance w h i c h e v e n a 'victim' c a n find in a p r a c t i c e o f
220 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
a n o t h e r c u l t u r e t h a t a p p e a r s c r u e l a n d b a r b a r i c t o us ( v i c t i m s o f c l i t o r i -
dectomy often p e r c e i v e i t a s t h e way t o r e g a i n t h e p r o p e r l y feminine
d i g n i t y ) , t h e s e c o n d a t t i t u d e fails t o p e r c e i v e t h e f a c t t h a t t h e O t h e r is
split in itself - that m e m b e r s o f a n o t h e r c u l t u r e , far f r o m simply identify
i n g with their c u s t o m s , c a n a c q u i r e a d i s t a n c e towards t h e m a n d revolt
against them - in such cases, r e f e r e n c e to the 'Western' notion of
universal h u m a n rights c a n well serve as t h e catalyst w h i c h sets i n m o t i o n
an authentic protest against the constraints o f one's own culture. In o t h e r
w o r d s , t h e r e is n o h a p p y m e d i u m b e t w e e n ' t o o m u c h ' a n d ' n o t e n o u g h ' ;
so w h e n a m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t r e p l i e s to o u r c r i t i c i s m with a d e s p e r a t e plea:
' W h a t e v e r I d o is w r o n g - e i t h e r I a m t o o t o l e r a n t t o w a r d s t h e i n j u s t i c e
t h e O t h e r suffers, o r I a m i m p o s i n g m y o w n values o n to t h e O t h e r - so
w h a t d o y o u w a n t m e t o d o ? ' , o u r a n s w e r s h o u l d b e : ' N o t h i n g ! A s l o n g as
you remain stuck in y o u r false p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s , you can do nothing!'
W h a t t h e l i b e r a l m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t fails t o n o t i c e is t h a t e a c h o f t h e two
c u l t u r e s e n g a g e d i n ' c o m m u n i c a t i o n ' is c a u g h t i n its o w n antagonism
which has prevented it f r o m fully 'becoming itself - and the only
a u t h e n t i c c o m m u n i c a t i o n is t h a t o f ' s o l i d a r i t y i n a c o m m o n struggle',
w h e n I d i s c o v e r t h a t t h e d e a d l o c k w h i c h h a m p e r s m e is a l s o t h e d e a d l o c k
which hampers the Other.
D o e s this m e a n that t h e s o l u t i o n lies in a c k n o w l e d g i n g t h e 'hybrid'
character of each identity? I t is e a s y t o praise the hybridity of the
p o s t m o d e r n m i g r a n t s u b j e c t , n o l o n g e r a t t a c h e d to specific e t h n i c r o o t s ,
f l o a t i n g freely b e t w e e n d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l c i r c l e s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , two totally
different s o c i o p o l i t i c a l levels a r e c o n d e n s e d h e r e : o n t h e o n e h a n d the
cosmopolitan upper- and upper-middle-class a c a d e m i c , always w i t h the
p r o p e r visas e n a b l i n g h i m t o c r o s s b o r d e r s w i t h o u t a n y p r o b l e m i n o r d e r
to carry o u t his (financial, a c a d e m i c . . .) business, a n d thus a b l e to ' e n j o y
the difference'; o n the o t h e r h a n d the p o o r ( i m ) m i g r a n t worker driven
f r o m his h o m e by p o v e r t y o r ( e t h n i c , r e l i g i o u s ) v i o l e n c e , f o r w h o m the
c e l e b r a t e d 'hybridity' d e s i g n a t e s a very t a n g i b l e t r a u m a t i c e x p e r i e n c e o f
n e v e r b e i n g able to settle d o w n p r o p e r l y a n d legalize his status, t h e s u b j e c t
f o r w h o m s u c h s i m p l e t a s k s as c r o s s i n g a b o r d e r o r r e u n i t i n g w i t h his
f a m i l y c a n b e a n e x p e r i e n c e full o f a n x i e t y , a n d d e m a n d i n g g r e a t e f f o r t .
F o r t h i s s e c o n d s u b j e c t , b e i n g u p r o o t e d f r o m h i s t r a d i t i o n a l way o f life is
a t r a u m a t i c s h o c k w h i c h destabilizes his e n t i r e e x i s t e n c e - to tell h i m that
h e s h o u l d e n j o y t h e h y b r i d i t y a n d t h e l a c k o f fixed i d e n t i t y o f h i s d a i l y
l i f e , t h e f a c t t h a t h i s e x i s t e n c e is m i g r a n t , n e v e r i d e n t i c a l - t o - i t s e l f , a n d s o
o n , i n v o l v e s t h e s a m e c y n i c i s m as t h a t a t w o r k i n t h e ( p o p u l a r i z e d v e r s i o n
of) Deleuze and Guattari's celebration o f the schizo-subject whose rhizo-
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 221
H o w , t h e n , d o L e f t i s t s w h o a r e a w a r e o f t h i s falsity o f m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t
postmodernism react to it? T h e i r r e a c t i o n assumes the form of the
H e g e l i a n infinite judgement, w h i c h p o s i t s t h e s p e c u l a t i v e i d e n t i t y o f two
t h o r o u g h l y i n c o m p a t i b l e t e r m s : ' A d o r n o ( t h e m o s t s o p h i s t i c a t e d "elitist"
critical theorist) is B u c h a n a n (the lowest p o i n t o f American rightist
4 7
populism).' T h a t is t o say: t h e s e c r i t i c s o f p o s t m o d e r n multiculturalist
e l i t i s m ( f r o m C h r i s t o p h e r L a s c h t o P a u l P i c c o n e ) t a k e t h e risk o f e n d o r s
ing neo-conservative populism, with its n o t i o n s o f the reassertion of
c o m m u n i t y , l o c a l d e m o c r a c y a n d a c t i v e c i t i z e n s h i p , as t h e o n l y p o l i t i c a l l y
r e l e v a n t a n s w e r t o t h e all-pervasive p r e d o m i n a n c e o f ' i n s t r u m e n t a l Rea
48
son', o f the bureaucratization and instrumcntalization o f o u r life-world.
O f c o u r s e , it is e a s y t o d i s m i s s t o d a y ' s p o p u l i s m as a n o s t a l g i c r e a c t i v e
f o r m a t i o n a g a i n s t t h e p r o c e s s o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n , a n d as s u c h inherently
paranoiac, in s e a r c h o f a n e x t e r n a l c a u s e o f m a l i g n a n c y , o f a s e c r e t a g e n t
w h o p u l l s t h e s t r i n g s a n d is t h u s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e w o e s o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n
(Jews, i n t e r n a t i o n a l Capital, n o n - p a t r i o t i c m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t m a n a g e r s , state
b u r e a u c r a c y . . . ) ; t h e p r o b l e m is, r a t h e r , t o c o n c e i v e o f t h i s n e w p o p u l i s m
as a n e w f o r m o f ' f a l s e t r a n s p a r e n c y ' w h i c h , f a r f r o m p r e s e n t i n g a s e r i o u s
o b s t a c l e t o c a p i t a l i s t m o d e r n i z a t i o n , p a v e s t h e way f o r it. W h a t t h e s e l e f t i s t
a d v o c a t e s o f p o p u l i s m fail t o p e r c e i v e is t h u s t h e f a c t t h a t t o d a y ' s p o p u l
i s m , f a r f r o m p r e s e n t i n g a t h r e a t t o g l o b a l c a p i t a l i s m , r e m a i n s its i n h e r e n t
product.
e c o l o g y , e t c . ) . H o w e v e r , t h e p r o b l e m is t h a t t h i s v e r y f o r m o f t h e p o l i t i c a l
s p a c e is i n c r e a s i n g l y t h r e a t e n e d b y t h e o n s l a u g h t o f g l o b a l i z a t i o n ; c o n s e
q u e n t l y , o n e c a n n o t s i m p l y r e t u r n t o it o r r e v i t a l i z e it: t h e post-nation-
state logic o f Capital r e m a i n s t h e R e a l w h i c h lurks in t h e background,
w h i l e all t h r e e m a i n leftist r e a c t i o n s t o t h e p r o c e s s o f g l o b a l i z a t i o n ( l i b e r a l
m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m ; t h e a t t e m p t to e m b r a c e p o p u l i s m by d i s c e r n i n g , b e n e a t h
its f u n d a m e n t a l i s t appearance, resistance to 'instrumental reason'; the
attempt to k e e p o p e n the space o f the political) s e e m inappropriate.
Although t h e last a p p r o a c h is b a s e d on an accurate insight into the
complicity between multiculturalism and fundamentalism, it a v o i d s the
c r u c i a l q u e s t i o n : how are we to reinvent the political space in today's conditions
of globalization? T h e politicization o f the series o f particular struggles which
l e a v e s t h e g l o b a l p r o c e s s o f C a p i t a l i n t a c t is c l e a r l y n o t s u f f i c i e n t . T h i s
m e a n s that o n e should reject the opposition which, within the frame o f
l a t e c a p i t a l i s t l i b e r a l d e m o c r a c y , i m p o s e s i t s e l f as t h e m a i n a x i s o f i d e o
logical struggle: the tension b e t w e e n ' o p e n ' post-ideological universalist
liberal t o l e r a n c e a n d the particularist 'new fundamentalisms'. Against the
l i b e r a l C e n t r e w h i c h p r e s e n t s i t s e l f as n e u t r a l , p o s t - i d e o l o g i c a l , r e l y i n g o n
t h e r u l e o f Law, o n e s h o u l d r e a s s e r t t h e o l d leftist m o t i f o f t h e n e c e s s i t y
to s u s p e n d t h e n e u t r a l s p a c e o f Law.
O f course, b o t h Left a n d R i g h t involve their own m o d e o f suspension
o f the Law on behalf o f some higher or m o r e fundamental interest. T h e
rightist suspension, from anti-Dreyfussards to Oliver N o r t h , acknowledges
its v i o l a t i o n o f t h e l e t t e r o f t h e L a w , b u t j u s t i f i e s it b y r e f e r e n c e t o s o m e
h i g h e r n a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t : it p r e s e n t s its v i o l a t i o n as a p a i n f u l self-sacrifice
4 9
for the g o o d o f the N a t i o n . A s f o r t h e l e f t i s t s u s p e n s i o n , it is e n o u g h to
m e n t i o n two films, Under Fire a n d Watch on the Rhine. T h e first t a k e s p l a c e
during the Nicaraguan revolution, when an A m e r i c a n photo-journalist
faces a t r o u b l e s o m e d i l e m m a : j u s t b e f o r e the victory o f the revolution,
S o m o z i s t a s kill a c h a r i s m a t i c S a n d i n i s t a l e a d e r , s o t h e S a n d i n i s t a s a s k t h e
j o u r n a l i s t t o f a k e a p h o t o o f t h e i r d e a d l e a d e r , p r e s e n t i n g h i m as still alive
a n d t h u s b e l y i n g t h e S o m o z i s t a s ' c l a i m s a b o u t h i s d e a t h - i n t h i s way, h e
would contribute t o a swift v i c t o r y f o r t h e r e v o l u t i o n and shorten the
agony o f prolonged bloodshed. Professional ethics, o f course, strictly
p r o h i b i t s u c h a n a c t , s i n c e it v i o l a t e s t h e u n b i a s e d o b j e c t i v i t y ' o f r e p o r t i n g
a n d m a k e s t h e j o u r n a l i s t a n i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e p o l i t i c a l fight; t h e j o u r n a l i s t
nevertheless c h o o s e s the 'leftist' o p t i o n a n d fakes the p h o t o . . . . I n Watch
on the Rhine, b a s e d o n a p l a y b y L i l l i a n H e l l m a n , t h i s d i l e m m a is e v e n
more a c u t e : in the late 1930s, a fugitive family o f G e r m a n political
emigrants involved in the anti-Nazi struggle comes t o stay w i t h their
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 223
t h i s l i n k is n o t a d e t e r m i n i n g c a u s a l c o n n e c t i o n , a n d t h e two l e v e l s m u s t
b e strictly d i s t i n g u i s h e d : to b e a ' p r o l e t a r i a n ' involves a s s u m i n g a c e r t a i n
subjective stance ( o f class s t r u g g l e d e s t i n e d to achieve the Redemption
t h r o u g h R e v o l u t i o n ) w h i c h , i n p r i n c i p l e , c a n b e a d o p t e d b y any i n d i v i d u a l
- to p u t it in religious terms, irrespective o f his ( g o o d ) works, any
i n d i v i d u a l c a n b e ' t o u c h e d b y G r a c e ' a n d i n t e r p e l l a t e d as a p r o l e t a r i a n
s u b j e c t . T h e l i n e t h a t s e p a r a t e s t h e two o p p o s i n g s i d e s in t h e c l a s s s t r u g g l e
is t h e r e f o r e n o t ' o b j e c t i v e ' , i t is n o t t h e l i n e s e p a r a t i n g two p o s i t i v e s o c i a l
g r o u p s , b u t u l t i m a t e l y radically subjective — it i n v o l v e s t h e p o s i t i o n i n d i v i d
uals a s s u m e towards the Truth-Event. Subjectivity and universalism are
t h u s n o t o n l y n o t e x c l u s i v e , b u t two s i d e s o f t h e s a m e c o i n : it is p r e c i s e l y
b e c a u s e 'class s t r u g g l e ' i n t e r p e l l a t e s individuals to a d o p t t h e s u b j e c t i v e
s t a n c e o f a ' p r o l e t a r i a n ' t h a t its a p p e a l is u n i v e r s a l , a i m i n g at e v e r y o n e
w i t h o u t e x c e p t i o n . T h e d i v i s i o n it m o b i l i z e s is n o t t h e d i v i s i o n b e t w e e n
two w e l l - d e f i n e d s o c i a l g r o u p s , b u t t h e d i v i s i o n , w h i c h r u n s ' d i a g o n a l l y ' t o
the social division in the O r d e r o f B e i n g , b e t w e e n t h o s e w h o r e c o g n i z e
t h e m s e l v e s i n t h e c a l l o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t , b e c o m i n g its f o l l o w e r s , and
those who deny or ignore it. I n H e g e l e s e , the existence o f the true
Universal (as o p p o s e d to the false 'concrete' Universality o f the all-
encompassing global Order o f Being) is t h a t o f a n e n d l e s s a n d i n c e s
santly divisive s t r u g g l e ; it is u l t i m a t e l y the division between the two
notions ( a n d material practices) o f Universality: those who advocate the
p o s i t i v i t y o f t h e O r d e r o f B e i n g as t h e u l t i m a t e h o r i z o n o f k n o w l e d g e a n d
action, and those who a c c e p t the efficiency o f the d i m e n s i o n o f Truth-
E v e n t i r r e d u c i b l e to ( a n d u n a c c o u n t a b l e in the t e r m s o f ) t h e O r d e r o f
Being.
T h a t is t h e u l t i m a t e g a p t h a t s e p a r a t e s N a z i s m f r o m C o m m u n i s m : i n
N a z i s m , a J e w is u l t i m a t e l y g u i l t y s i m p l y b e c a u s e h e is a J e w , b e c a u s e o f
h i s d i r e c t n a t u r a l p r o p e r t i e s , b e c a u s e o f w h a t h e is; w h i l e e v e n in the
d a r k e s t days o f S t a l i n i s m a m e m b e r o f t h e b o u r g e o i s i e o r a r i s t o c r a c y is
n o t g u i l t y per se, t h a t is, d i r e c t l y b e c a u s e o f h i s s o c i a l s t a t u s - t h e r e is
always a m i n i m u m o f s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n i n v o l v e d ; p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e c l a s s
s t r u g g l e r e l i e s o n t h e s u b j e c t i v e a c t o f d e c i s i o n . I n a p e r v e r t e d way, t h e
very function o f confession in the Stalinist show trial attests to this
difference: for the guilt o f the traitor to b e effective, the a c c u s e d must
c o n f e s s , t h a t is, s u b j e c t i v e l y a s s u m e h i s g u i l t , in c l e a r c o n t r a s t t o N a z i s m ,
w h e r e a n a n a l o g o u s c o n f e s s i o n b y a J e w t h a t h e was p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n a p l o t
against Germany would be m e a n i n g l e s s . It is at this point that the
revisionist historians' a r g u m e n t a t i o n a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h t h e Nazi H o l o
caust was already foreshadowed by the Leninist liquidation of the
228 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
T h e Ambiguity o f E x c r e m e n t a l Identification
F o r R a n c i e r e , s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n i n v o l v e s t h e a s s e r t i o n o f a singulier universel,
t h e s i n g u l a r / e x c e s s i v e p a r t o f t h e s o c i a l e d i f i c e t h a t d i r e c t l y gives b o d y t o
t h e d i m e n s i o n o f u n i v e r s a l i t y . P e r h a p s t h i s l o g i c o f singulier universel is,
like fiadiou's thought, profoundly C h r i s t o l o g i c a l : is n o t the ultimate
'universal singular', the singular individual standing for humanity, Christ
himself? D o e s n o t t h e r e v o l u t i o n o f Christianity lie in t h e fact that, in
a c c o r d a n c e with t h e l o g i c o f ' i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e s y m p t o m ' , it o f f e r s as
t h i s s i n g u l a r p o i n t , w h i c h s t a n d s f o r t h e t r u e U n i v e r s a l , n o t w h a t is ' t h e
h i g h e s t o f M a n ' b u t t h e lowest e x c r e m e n t a l r e m a i n d e r - o n l y by identify-
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 229
p a r t i c u l a r p l i g h t as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y o f ' h u m a n i t y ' , o r is it
the s t a t e m e n t o f solidarity m a d e b y others, t h e c o n c e r n e d 'enlightened
p u b l i c ' ? H o w d o t h e s e two m o d e s o f f u n c t i o n i n g r e l a t e to o n e another?
T h e d i f f e r e n c e i n q u e s t i o n is t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e u n i v e r s a l P u b l i c
c l a i m i n g : ' W e a r e all them ( t h e e x c l u d e d n o n - p a r t ) ! ' a n d t h e excluded
non-part claiming: 'We are the true Universal [the People, Society,
Nation...!]' - this reversal, a l t h o u g h apparently purely symmetrical,
n e v e r p r o d u c e s d i r e c t s y m m e t r i c a l e f f e c t s . W h a t w e e n c o u n t e r h e r e is a
key feature o f t h e m e c h a n i s m that g e n e r a t e s ( i d e o l o g i c a l ) s e m b l a n c e : the
s y m m e t r i c a l reversal that p r o d u c e s an a s y m m e t r i c a l result. In M a r x , for
e x a m p l e , t h e s i m p l e i n v e r s i o n o f t h e ' d e v e l o p e d ' to t h e ' g e n e r a l ' f o r m o f
e q u i v a l e n c e ( f r o m t h e s t a t e i n w h i c h c o m m o d i t y A e x p r e s s e s its v a l u e i n
t h e s e r i e s o f c o m m o d i t i e s B , C, D , E , F . . ., t o t h e s t a t e i n w h i c h c o m m o d
ity A itself expresses - gives body to - the value of commodities
B , C, D , E , F . . . ) g i v e s rise t o t h e e f f e c t o f f e t i s h i s m ; t h a t is, it c o n f e r s o n
A the aura o f a c o m m o d i t y that has to possess s o m e mysterious ingredient
e n a b l i n g it t o f u n c t i o n as t h e e q u i v a l e n t o f all t h e o t h e r s .
H e g e l also o f t e n b r i n g s a b o u t t h e d e e p e s t speculative shift, a c h a n g e in
t h e w h o l e terrain o f t h o u g h t , by m e a n s o f a s i m p l e s y m m e t r i c a l inversion.
The s t a t e m e n t ' T h e S e l f is t h e S u b s t a n c e ' is i n n o way e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e
s t a t e m e n t ' T h e S u b s t a n c e is t h e S e l f : t h e first a s s e r t s t h e s i m p l e s u b o r d i
n a t i o n o f t h e S e l f t o t h e S u b s t a n c e ( ' I r e c o g n i z e m y s e l f as b e l o n g i n g t o
my social S u b s t a n c e ' ) , while the s e c o n d involves the subjectivization o f
t h e S u b s t a n c e i t s e l f . L o u i s X I V d i d n o t say: ' I a m t h e S t a t e ' ; w h a t h e s a i d
was: 'L'Etat e'est mot: o n l y in t h e s e c o n d v e r s i o n is t h e f i n i t e S e l f p o s i t e d
as t h e t r u t h o f t h e S u b s t a n c e itself, s o t h a t w h e n L o u i s X I V issues a
d e c r e e , it is n o t o n l y h i m ( t h i s finite i n d i v i d u a l ) w h o is s p e a k i n g , it is t h e
S u b s t a n c e itself which speaks t h r o u g h h i m (in the precise sense o f the
L a c a n i a n 'moi, la verite, parte). T h e r e i n , in t h e n e c e s s i t y o f this reversal,
lies o n e o f H e g e l ' s c r u c i a l i n s i g h t s : t h e a p p a r e n t l y modest gesture of
asserting the subordination (the belonging) o f subject to Substance
s o o n e r o r l a t e r r e v e a l s i t s e l f as s t a n d i n g f o r its e x a c t o p p o s i t e , f o r the
subjectivization o f the Substance itself. T h e r e i n a l s o lies t h e core of
C h r i s t i a n i t y : n o t o n l y is m a n d i v i n e , God Himself has to become man ( w i t h all
the latter's finite a t t r i b u t e s ) . F o r t h a t s a m e r e a s o n , 'life is a n i l l u s i o n ' is
n o t t h e s a m e as ' i l l u s i o n is l i f e ' : 'life is a n i l l u s i o n ' s t a n d s f o r t h e B a r o q u e
attitude o f the m e l a n c h o l i c awareness o f t h e illusory c h a r a c t e r o f terres
t r i a l life (d la C a l d e r o n ) , w h i l e ' i l l u s i o n is l i f e ' i n v o l v e s a p o s i t i v e N i e t z -
s c h e a n a t t i t u d e o f fully e m b r a c i n g a n d a s s e r t i n g t h e g a m e o f a p p e a r a n c e s
against the 'nihilist' search for a t r a n s c e n d e n t 'true' r e a l i t y - o r , if we
232 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
r e t u r n t o o u r e x a m p l e , ' W e [ t h e n a t i o n ] a r e a l l i m m i g r a n t w o r k e r s ' is n o t
t h e s a m e as ' W e [ i m m i g r a n t w o r k e r s ] a r e t h e t r u e n a t i o n . '
T h i s is p e r h a p s t h e m o m e n t t o r e t u r n t o o u r s t a r t i n g p o i n t , h o w w e l l a r e
t h e a u t h o r s we have b e e n d e a l i n g with e q u i p p e d to a c c o m p l i s h this s t e p
o f political universalization? H e r e , the r e f e r e n c e t o A l t h u s s e r as their
starting point again b e c o m e s crucial. As I have already emphasized, their
t h e o r e t i c a l e d i f i c e s a r e t o b e c o n c e i v e d as f o u r d i f f e r e n t ways o f n e g a t i n g
this c o m m o n starting p o i n t , o f m a i n t a i n i n g ( o r , r a t h e r , g a i n i n g ) a dis
t a n c e towards Althusser; p e r h a p s it w o u l d e v e n b e p o s s i b l e to c o n c e p t u a l
i z e t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s b y r e f e r e n c e t o t h e d i f f e r e n t ways o n e c a n n e g a t e /
'repress' a traumatic kernel in psychoanalysis: denegation, disavowal,
repression stricto sensu ( c o i n c i d i n g with the return o f the repressed),
f o r e c l o s u r e . . . why?
A l t h o u g h t h e s e a u t h o r s m a d e i m p o r t a n t p r o g r e s s with r e g a r d to t h e i r
Althusserian starting point (their everlasting merit is t h a t they went
forward f r o m A l t h u s s e r w i t h o u t allowing t h e m s e l v e s to b e i m m e r s e d in
t h e p o s t m o d e r n a n d / o r d e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t m o r a s s ) , t h e y s e e m t o fall i n t o
the trap o f 'marginalist' politics, a c c e p t i n g the logic o f m o m e n t a r y out
bursts o f an 'impossible' radical politicization that contains the seeds o f
its o w n f a i l u r e a n d h a s t o r e c e d e i n t h e f a c e o f t h e e x i s t i n g O r d e r (the
c o u p l e s o f T r u t h - E v e n t versus O r d e r o f B e i n g ; o f politics versus police; o f
egaliberte v e r s u s i m a g i n a r y u n i v e r s a l i t y ) . T h i s c o m m o n f e a t u r e is c l o s e l y
l i n k e d to t h e r e d u c t i o n o f the s u b j e c t to t h e p r o c e s s o f subjectivization.
W h a t R a n c i e r e a i m s at is t h e p r o c e s s b y m e a n s o f w h i c h a ' p a r t o f n o p a r t '
b e c o m e s i n v o l v e d i n l i t i g a t i o n f o r its p l a c e w i t h i n t h e s o c i a l visibility; w h a t
B a d i o u a i m s at is e n g a g e m e n t g r o u n d e d in fidelity to t h e T r u d i - E v e n t ;
what B a l i b a r a i m s at is a p o l i t i c a l a g e n t insisting o n his 'impossible'
d e m a n d f o r egaliberte a g a i n s t a n y p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f its a c t u a l i z a t i o n . I n all
t h e s e c a s e s , s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n , o f c o u r s e , is n o t t o b e c o n f u s e d w i t h what
Althusser had in m i n d w h e n he elaborated the notion o f ideological
( m i s ) r e c o g n i t i o n a n d i n t e r p e l l a t i o n : h e r e s u b j e c t i v i t y is n o t d i s m i s s e d as a
f o r m o f m i s r e c o g n i t i o n ; o n t h e c o n t r a r y , it is a s s e r t e d as t h e m o m e n t i n
which the ontological gap/void b e c o m e s palpable, as a g e s t u r e that
u n d e r m i n e s the positive o r d e r o f B e i n g , o f the differential structure o f
S o c i e t y , o f p o l i t i c s as p o l i c e .
I t is c r u c i a l t o p e r c e i v e t h e l i n k b e t w e e n t h i s r e d u c t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t t o
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 233
s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n a n d t h e way t h e t h e o r e t i c a l e d i f i c e o f t h e s e a u t h o r s r e l i e s
o n t h e b a s i c o p p o s i t i o n o f two l o g i c s : la politique/police a n d le politique in
R a n c i e r e ; B e i n g a n d T r u t h - E v e n t in B a d i o u ; even, p e r h a p s , t h e i m a g i n a r y
u n i v e r s a l o r d e r v e r s u s egaliberte i n B a l i b a r . I n all t h e s e c a s e s , t h e s e c o n d
p o i n t is p r o p e r l y p o l i t i c a l , i n t r o d u c e s t h e g a p in t h e p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f
Being: a situation b e c o m e s 'politicized' when a particular d e m a n d starts
to function as a s t a n d - i n for the impossible Universal. T h u s we have
various forms o f the opposition between Substance a n d Subject, between
a positive ontological order (police, Being, structure) and a gap of
impossibility w h i c h p r e v e n t s a final c l o s u r e o f this o r d e r a n d / o r disturbs
its b a l a n c e . T h e u l t i m a t e r e f e r e n c e o f t h e s e t h r e e f o r m s o f d u a l i t y s e e m s
to b e t h e K a n t i a n o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n t h e c o n s t i t u t e d o r d e r o f o b j e c t i v e
r e a l i t y a n d t h e I d e a o f F r e e d o m t h a t c a n f u n c t i o n o n l y as a r e g u l a t i v e
p o i n t o f r e f e r e n c e , s i n c e it is n e v e r o n t o l o g i c a l l y fully a c t u a l i z e d . ' J u s t i c e ' ,
the rectificadon o f the fundamental a n d constitutive ontological injustice
o f t h e u n i v e r s e , is p r e s e n t e d as a n u n c o n d i t i o n a l impossible demand,
p o s s i b l e o n l y a g a i n s t t h e b a c k g r o u n d o f its o w n i m p o s s i b i l i t y : t h e m o m e n t
a p o l i t i c a l m o v e m e n t p r e t e n d s fully t o r e a l i z e J u s t i c e , t o t r a n s l a t e i t i n t o
a n a c t u a l s t a t e o f t h i n g s , t o p a s s f r o m t h e s p e c t r a l democratie ci venir to
'actual d e m o c r a c y ' , we a r e in totalitarian c a t a s t r o p h e - i n K a n t i a n t e r m s ,
t h e S u b l i m e c h a n g e s i n t o t h e M o n s t r o u s . . . . O f c o u r s e , t h e s e two l e v e l s
a r e n o t s i m p l y e x t e r n a l : t h e s p a c e f o r t h e p o l i t i c a l T r u t h - E v e n t is o p e n e d
up by t h e s y m p t o m a t i c void in the order o f B e i n g , by t h e necessary
i n c o n s i s t e n c y i n its s t r u c t u r a l order, by the constitutive p r e s e n c e o f a
surnumfraire, o f a n e l e m e n t w h i c h is i n c l u d e d i n t h e t o t a l i t y o f O r d e r ,
a l t h o u g h tirere is n o p r o p e r p l a c e f o r it i n t h i s t o t a l i t y , a n d w h i c h , f o r t h i s
v e r y r e a s o n - s i n c e it is a n e l e m e n t w i t h o u t f u r t h e r p a r t i c u l a r s p e c i f i c a
tions - professes to b e t h e i m m e d i a t e e m b o d i m e n t o f t h e W h o l e . O n t h e
o t h e r h a n d , the properly political intervention endeavours to b r i n g a b o u t
c h a n g e i n t h e o r d e r o f p o l i c e , its r e s t r u c t u r i n g ( s o t h a t w h a t was h i t h e r t o
' i n v i s i b l e ' a n d / o r ' n o n e x i s t e n t ' i n its s p a c e b e c o m e s v i s i b l e ) .
Two Hegelian conclusions should be drawn from this: ( 1 ) t h e very
n o t i o n o f politics involves c o n f l i c t b e t w e e n t h e political a n d a p o l i t i c a l /
p o l i c e - t h a t is, p o l i t i c s is t h e a n t a g o n i s m b e t w e e n p o l i t i c s p r o p e r a n d t h e
apolitical attitude ( ' d i s o r d e r ' a n d O r d e r ) ; ( 2 ) for this r e a s o n , p o l i t i c s ' is
a g e n u s w h i c h is iLs o w n s p e c i e s : w h i c h , u l t i m a t e l y , h a s two s p e c i e s , i t s e l f
a n d its ' c o r p o r a t i s t ' / p o l i c e n e g a t i o n . D e s p i t e t h i s H e g e l i a n twist, h o w e v e r ,
we a r e d e a l i n g h e r e w i t h a l o g i c w h i c h i n c l u d e s its o w n f a i l u r e i n a d v a n c e ,
w h i c h c o n s i d e r s its full s u c c e s s as its u l t i m a t e f a i l u r e , w h i c h s t i c k s t o its
marginal c h a r a c t e r as t h e ultimate sign o f its a u t h e n t i c i t y , and thus
234 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
e n t e r t a i n s a n a m b i g u o u s a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s its p o l i l i c o - o n t o l o g i c a l o p p o s i t e ,
t h e p o l i c e O r d e r o f B e i n g : i t h a s t o r e f e r t o it, it needs it as t h e b i g e n e m y
( ' P o w e r ' ) w h i c h m u s t b e t h e r e in o r d e r f o r us t o e n g a g e i n o u r m a r g i n a l /
subversive activity - t h e very i d e a o f a c c o m p l i s h i n g a total s u b v e r s i o n o f
t h i s O r d e r ( ' g l o b a l r e v o l u t i o n ' ) is d i s m i s s e d as p r o t o - t o t a l i t a r i a n .
T h i s criticism should not be misread as r e l y i n g o n the traditional
Hegelian opposition o f abstract and c o n c r e t e universality: against the
a s s e r t i o n o f r a d i c a l n e g a t i v i t y as t h e o b v e r s e o f u n i v e r s a l i t y - o f t h e l o g i c
of the Ought that indefinitely postpones its a c t u a l i z a t i o n - I am not
a d v o c a t i n g t h e n e c e s s i t y o f e m b r a c i n g t h e ' c o n c r e t e ' p o s i t i v e o r d e r as t h e
r e a l i z e d S u p r e m e G o o d . T h e H e g e l i a n m o v e h e r e is n o t a r e s i g n e d - h e r o i c
a c c e p t a n c e o f the positive O r d e r as t h e o n l y p o s s i b l e a c t u a l i z a t i o n o f
R e a s o n , b u t t o f o c u s o n , to reveal, h o w t h e p o l i c e / p o l i t i c a l O r d e r itself
a l r e a d y r e l i e s o n a s e r i e s o f d i s a v o w e d / m i s r e c o g n i z e d political a c t s , h o w its
f o u n d i n g g e s t u r e is p o l i t i c a l (in t h e r a d i c a l s e n s e o f t h e t e r m , as o p p o s e d
t o p o l i c e ) - i n H e g e l e s e , h o w p o s i t i v e O r d e r is n o t h i n g b u t t h e p o s i t i v a -
tion o f the radical negativity.
L e t us t a k e R a n c i e r e ' s c e n t r a l n o t i o n o f rnesentente ('misapprehension'),
w h i c h o c c u r s w h e n t h e e x c l u d e d / i n v i s i b l e ' p a r t o f n o p a r t ' p o l i t i c i z e s its
p r e d i c a m e n t and disturbs the established police/political structure o f the
s o c i a l s p a c e , its s u b d i v i s i o n i n p a r t s , b y a s s e r t i n g i t s e l f as t h e s t a n d - i n f o r
the W h o l e and d e m a n d i n g t h e r e a r t i c u l a t i o n o f its p a r t i c u l a r position,
that is, a new mode o f its visibility (say, a w o m a n 'politicizes' her
p r e d i c a m e n t t h e m o m e n t s h e p r e s e n t s h e r l i m i t a t i o n t o t h e private family
s p a c e as a c a s e o f political injustice). Does not the ambiguous relationship
b e t w e e n t h e e x p l i c i t p o w e r / p o l i c e d i s c o u r s e a n d its o b s c e n e d o u b l e a l s o
i n v o l v e a k i n d o f nwsentente? Is n o t this o b s c e n e d o u b l e (the publicly
disavowed message ' b e t w e e n the l i n e s ' ) the 'invisible', non-public con
d i t i o n o f p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e f u n c t i o n i n g o f t h e p o l i c e a p p a r a t u s ? P o w e r is
t h u s n o t a u n i q u e / f l a t d o m a i n o f visibility, t h e s e l f - t r a n s p a r e n t machine
t o w h i c h t h e ' p e o p l e ' o p p o s e s its d e m a n d to reveal, to a c c e p t into the
public discursive s p a c e , its d e m a n d s - that is, t o reject/subvert the
( n o n - ) i d e n t i c a l s t a t u s it e n j o y s w i t h i n the power/police discourse; the
( a l m o s t ) s y m m e t r i c a l o p p o s i t e to t h i s is the refusal of the public power/police
discourse to 'hear/understand' its own message between the lines, t h e o b s c e n e
s u p p o r t o f its f u n c t i o n i n g - c o n f r o n t e d w i t h it, it r e j e c t s it w i t h c o n t e m p t
as u n w o r t h y o f its d i g n i t y . . . .
What Power 'refuses t o s e c ' is n o t s o m u c h the (non-)part of the
' p e o p l e ' e x c l u d e d f r o m the p o l i c e s p a c e but, r a t h e r , the invisible s u p p o r t
o f its o w n p u b l i c p o l i c e a p p a r a t u s . ( I n t e r m s o f a v u l g a r c l a s s a n a l y s i s :
P O L I T I C A L S U B J E C T I V I Z A T I O N AND I T S V I C I S S I T U D E S 235
t h e r e is n o r u l e o f a r i s t o c r a c y w i t h o u t t h e h i d d e n - p u b l i c l y u n a c k n o w l e d
ged - support o f the Lumpenproletariat.) Our point is t h u s that the
m a r g i n a l i s t r a d i c a l r e f u s a l to a s s u m e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r P o w e r ( i n L a c a n e s e ;
its h i d d e n d e m a n d f o r t h e M a s t e r i n t h e g u i s e o f his p u b l i c p r o v o c a t i o n -
see Lacan's diagnosis o f the hysterical character o f the student rebellion
o f M a y ' 6 8 ) is s t r i c t l y c o r r e l a t i v e t o ( o r t h e o b v e r s e o f ) P o w e r ' s h i d d e n
l i n k with its o w n d i s a v o w e d o b s c e n e s u p p l e m e n t — w h a t a truly ' s u b v e r s i v e '
p o l i t i c a l i n t e r v e n t i o n h a s t o strive t o i n c l u d e i n t h e p u b l i c s p a c e is a b o v e
all this o b s c e n e s u p p l e m e n t o n w h i c h t h e P o w e r / P o l i c e itself relies. T h e
o r d e r o f p o l i c e is n e v e r s i m p l y a p o s i t i v e o r d e r : to f u n c t i o n a t all, it h a s to
c h e a t , t o m i s n a m e , a n d s o o n - in short, to engage in politics, t o d o w h a t its
s u b v e r s i v e o p p o n e n t s a r e s u p p o s e d to d o .
In K a n t ' s political thought, the basic p r i n c i p l e (the equivalent o f the
m o r a l c a t e g o r i c a l i m p e r a t i v e ) is t h e ' t r a n s c e n d e n t a l p r i n c i p l e o f p u b l i c i t y ' :
'All a c t s w h i c h c o n c e r n t h e r i g h t s o f o t h e r p e o p l e a n d w h o s e m a x i m d o e s
not coincide, with their publicly announced aim, are w r o n g . . . . All
guiding principles which n e e d publicity (if they are not to miss their goal)
5 5
a r e in a c c o r d with j u s t i c e a n d with p o l i t i c s . ' In the political domain,
w r o n g o r evil is a n a c t w h o s e a c t u a l a i m c o n t r a d i c t s its p u b l i c l y a n n o u n c e d
g o a l : as K a n t e m p h a s i z e s a g a i n a n d a g a i n , e v e n t h e w o r s t t y r a n t p u b l i c l y
pretends to work for the g o o d o f the p e o p l e , while p u r s u i n g his own
power and wealth. W e may put this s a m e m a x i m i n a n e g a t i v e way: a
p o l i t i c s is ' w r o n g ( u n j u s t ) ' w h e n it h o l d s t h a t t h e p u b l i c d i s c l o s u r e o f its
actual motives (or, rather, m a x i m s ) would be self-defeating: even a tyrant
c a n n o t publicly say: ' I a m i m p o s i n g t h i s l a w i n o r d e r t o c r u s h m y e n e m i e s
a n d i n c r e a s e m y w e a l t h . ' - I t is a g a i n s t t h i s b a c k g r o u n d t h a t o n e s h o u l d
locate the thesis on the superego supplement o f public ideological
d i s c o u r s e : t h e s u p e r e g o o b s c e n e s u p p l e m e n t is p r e c i s e l y t h e s u p p o r t o f
t h e p u b l i c i d e o l o g i c a l t e x t w h i c h , i n o r d e r t o b e o p e r a t i v e , has to remain
publicly disavowed: its p u b l i c a v o w a l is s e l f - d e f e a t i n g . A n d our point is
t h a t s u c h a d i s a v o w a l is c o n s t i t u t i v e o f w h a t R a n c i e r e c a l l s t h e o r d e r o f
'police'.
T h e n o t i o n o f t h e I d e a l o f egaliberte as a r e a l / i m p o s s i b l e u n c o n d i t i o n a l
d e m a n d b e t r a y e d i n its e v e r y p o s i t i v i z a t i o n , a d e m a n d w h i c h c a n a c t u a l i z e
i t s e l f o n l y in t h o s e s h o r t i n t e r m e d i a r y m o m e n t s o f P o w e r / P o l i c e V a c u u m
when the 'people' 'spontaneously' organizes itself outside the official
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e p o l i t i c a l m a c h i n e r y ( s e e t h e f a s c i n a t i o n o f m a n y L e f t i s t s for
' s p o n t a n e o u s c o u n c i l d e m o c r a c y ' in the early, ' a u t h e n t i c ' stages o f t h e
r e v o l u t i o n ) , b r i n g s r a d i c a l r e v o l u t i o n a r y p u r i s t s u n c a n n i l y c l o s e to t h o s e
conservatives who endeavour to p r o v e the necessary and unavoidable
236 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
Notes
From Subjection to
Subjective Destitution
5
O n e o f t h e k e v c o n c l u s i o n s t o b e d r a w n f r o m t h e th e m c o f ' K a n t a v e c
S a d e ' is t h a t t h o s e w h o , l i k e M i c h e l F o u c a u l t , a d v o c a t e t h e subversive
potential o f perversions are s o o n e r o r later l e d to t h e denial of the
F r e u d i a n U n c o n s c i o u s . T h i s d e n i a l is t h e o r e t i c a l l y g r o u n d e d in t h e f a c t ,
e m p h a s i z e d by F r e u d himself, that for psychoanalysis, hysteria a n d psycho
sis - not pemersion - o f f e r a way i n t o t h e U n c o n s c i o u s : t h e U n c o n s c i o u s is
not a c c e s s i b l e v i a p e r v e r s i o n s . F o l l o w i n g F r e u d , L a c a n r e p e a t e d l y i n s i s t e d
t h a t p e r v e r s i o n is always a s o c i a l l y c o n s t r u c t i v e a t t i t u d e , w h i l e h y s t e r i a is
m u c h m o r e subversive a n d t h r e a t e n i n g to the p r e d o m i n a n t h e g e m o n y . It
m a y s e e m t h a t t h e s i t u a t i o n is t h e o p p o s i t e : d o n ' t p e r v e r t s o p e n l y r e a l i z e
a n d p r a c t i s e w h a t h y s t e r i c s o n l y s e c r e t l y d r e a m a b o u t ? O r , w i t h r e g a r d to
the Master: do hysterics n o t m e r e l y p r o v o k e the M a s t e r in an ambiguous
way w h i c h , in e f f e c t , a m o u n t s to a n a p p e a l a d d r e s s e d to t h e M a s t e r to
assert his authority again and more strongly, while perverts actually
undermine t h e M a s t e r ' s p o s i t i o n ? ( T h i s is h o w o n e u s u a l l y u n d e r s t a n d s
F r e u d ' s t h e s i s t h a t p e r v e r s i o n is t h e n e g a t i v e o f n e u r o s i s . ) T h i s v e r y f a c t ,
h o w e v e r , c o n f r o n t s us w i t h t h e p a r a d o x o f t h e F r e u d i a n U n c o n s c i o u s : t h e
U n c o n s c i o u s d o e s not c o n s i s t o f t h e s e c r e t p e r v e r s e s c e n a r i o s w e d a y d r e a m
a b o u t a n d ( i n s o f a r as w e r e m a i n h y s t e r i c s ) s h i r k f r o m r e a l i z i n g , w h i l e
perverts h e r o i c a l l y ' d o it'. W h e n we d o this, w h e n we realize ('act o u t ' )
o u r s e c r e t p e r v e r s e f a n t a s i e s , e v e r y t h i n g is d i s c l o s e d , y e t t h e U n c o n s c i o u s
is s o m e h o w m i s s e d - w h y ?
B e c a u s e t h e F r e u d i a n U n c o n s c i o u s is not t h e s e c r e t p h a n t a s m i c c o n t e n t ,
b u t s o m e t h i n g t h a t i n t e r v e n e s in between, in t h e p r o c e s s o f t h e t r a n s l a t i o n /
transposition o f the secret phantasmic c o n t e n t into the text o f the dream
( o r t h e h y s t e r i c a l s y m p t o m ) . T h e U n c o n s c i o u s is t h a t w h i c h , p r e c i s e l y , is
248 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
obfuscated b y t h e p h a n t a s m i c s c e n a r i o s t h e p e r v e r t is a c t i n g o u t : t h e p e r
vert, with his c e r t a i n t y a b o u t w h a t b r i n g s e n j o y m e n t , o b f u s c a t e s t h e gap,
the 'burning question', the stumbling block, that 'is' the core o f the
U n c o n s c i o u s . T h e p e r v e r t is t h u s t h e ' i n h e r e n t t r a n s g r e s s o r ' par excellence.
h e b r i n g s to l i g h t , s t a g e s , p r a c t i s e s t h e s e c r e t f a n t a s i e s t h a t s u s t a i n the
predominant public discourse, while the hysterical position precisely
d i s p l a y s d o u b t a b o u t w h e t h e r t h o s e s e c r e t p e r v e r s e f a n t a s i e s a r e ' r e a l l y it'.
H y s t e r i a is n o t s i m p l y t h e b a t t l e g r o u n d b e t w e e n s e c r e t d e s i r e s a n d sym
b o l i c p r o h i b i t i o n s ; it a l s o , a n d a b o v e a l l , a r t i c u l a t e s t h e g n a w i n g doubt
w h e t h e r secret desires really c o n t a i n what they p r o m i s e - w h e t h e r our
inability to e n j o y really h i n g e s o n l y o n s y m b o l i c p r o h i b i t i o n s . In other
words, the pervert precludes the Unconscious because he knoxvs the
a n s w e r ( t o w h a t b r i n g s puissance, to the O t h e r ) ; h e has n o doubts about
it; h i s p o s i t i o n is u n s h a k e a b l e ; w h i l e t h e h y s t e r i c d o u b t s - t h a t is, h e r
p o s i t i o n is t h a t o f a n e t e r n a l a n d c o n s t i t u t i v e (self-)questioning: W h a t
does the O t h e r want from m e ? W h a t a m I for the O t h e r ? . . .
T h i s o p p o s i t i o n o f p e r v e r s i o n a n d h y s t e r i a is e s p e c i a l l y p e r t i n e n t t o d a y ,
in o u r e r a o f t h e ' d e c l i n e o f O e d i p u s ' , w h e n t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c m o d e o f
s u b j e c t i v i t y is n o l o n g e r the subject integrated into the paternal Law
through symbolic castration, but the 'polymorphously perverse' subject
following t h e s u p e r e g o i n j u n c t i o n to enjoy. T h e q u e s t i o n o f h o w we a r e
to hystericize t h e s u b j e c t c a u g h t in t h e c l o s e d l o o p o f p e r v e r s i o n ( h o w we
are to i n c u l c a t e t h e d i m e n s i o n o f lack a n d q u e s t i o n i n g in h i m ) b e c o m e s
m o r e u r g e n t in view o f today's p o l i t i c a l s c e n e : t h e s u b j e c t o f late capitalist
m a r k e t r e l a t i o n s is p e r v e r s e , w h i l e t h e ' d e m o c r a t i c s u b j e c t ' ( t h e m o d e o f
subjectivity i m p l i e d by t h e m o d e r n d e m o c r a c y ) is i n h e r e n t l y hysterical
(the abstract citizen correlative to the e m p t y place of P o w e r ) . In other
w o r d s , t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e bourgeois c a u g h t u p i n m a r k e t m e c h a
n i s m s a n d t h e citoyen e n g a g e d i n t h e u n i v e r s a l p o l i t i c a l s p h e r e is, in its
subjective e c o n o m y , the relationship b e t w e e n perversion a n d hysteria. S o
w h e n R a n c i e r e c a l l s o u r a g e ' p o s t - p o l i t i c a l ' , h e is a i m i n g p r e c i s e l y at t h i s
shift in p o l i t i c a l d i s c o u r s e ( t h e s o c i a l l i n k ) f r o m h y s t e r i a to perversion:
'post-politics' is t h e p e r v e r s e m o d e of administering s o c i a l affairs, the
m o d e deprived o f the 'hystericized' universal/out-of-joint dimension.
O n e o f t e n h e a r s t h e c l a i m t h a t t o d a y h y s t e r i a is n o l o n g e r s c x u a l i z e d
b u t is, r a t h e r , t o b e l o c a t e d i n t h e d o m a i n o f n o n - s e x u a l i z e d v i c t i m i z a t i o n ,
o f the w o u n d o f s o m e traumatic v i o l e n c e that cuts i n t o t h e very soul o f
o u r b e i n g . H o w e v e r , w e a r e d e a l i n g w i t h h y s t e r i a o n l y i n s o f a r as t h e
victimized s u b j e c t entertains an a m b i g u o u s attitude o f fascination towards
t h e w o u n d , in so f a r as h e s e c r e t l y t a k e s ' p e r v e r s e ' p l e a s u r e in it, in s o f a r
PASSIONATE (DIS) ATTACHMENTS 249
£1 the very s o u r c e o f p a i n e x e r t s a m a g n e t i s m - h y s t e r i a is p r e c i s e l y t h e
name for this s t a n c e o f a m b i v a l e n t f a s c i n a t i o n i n t h e f a c e o f t h e o b j e c t
(hat terrifies a n d r e p e l s u s . A n d t h i s e x c e s s o f p l e a s u r e in p a i n is a n o t h e r
jttame for sexualization: t h e m o m e n t i t is t h e r e , t h e s i t u a t i o n is s e x u a l i z e d ,
t h e s u b j e c t is c a u g h t i n t h e p e r v e r s e l o o p . I n o t h e r w o r d s , o n e s h o u l d
n o n e the less s t i c k to t h e o l d F r e u d i a n t h e s i s o n t h e f u n d a m e n t a l l y s e x u a l
character o f hysteria: wasn't Freud's Dora, the paradigmatic case o f
hysteria, c o n t i n u a l l y c o m p l a i n i n g a b o u t b e i n g victimized by t h e m a n i p u
lations o f h e r father a n d M r K?
W h a t c o m p l i c a t e s t h e issue further is t h a t o n e s h o u l d definitely not
d i r e c d y qualify h o m o s e x u a l i t y ( o r a n y o t h e r s e x u a l p r a c t i c e t h a t v i o l a t e s
the h e t e r o s e x u a l n o r m ) a s a ' p e r v e r s i o n ' . T h e q u e s t i o n t o b e a s k e d is,
rather: h o w is t h e f a c t o f h o m o s e x u a l i t y inscribed into the subject's
s y m b o l i c u n i v e r s e ? W h a t s u b j e c t i v e a t t i t u d e s u s t a i n s it? T h e r e d e f i n i t e l y is
a perverse h o m o s e x u a l i t y ( t h e m a s o c h i s t o r s a d i s t p r e t e n d i n g to possess
k n o w l e d g e a b o u t w h a t p r o v i d e s puissance t o t h e O t h e r ) ; b u t t h e r e is a l s o
a hysterical h o m o s e x u a l i t y ( o p t i n g for it in o r d e r to c o n f r o n t t h e e n i g m a
of ' W h a t a m I f o r t h e O t h e r ? W h a t d o e s t h e O t h e r w a n t ( f r o m m e ) ? ' , a n d
so o n . S o , f o r L a c a n , t h e r e is n o d i r e c t c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n forms o f
sexual p r a c t i c e (gay, lesbian, straight) a n d t h e ' p a t h o l o g i c a l ' subjective
symbolic economy (perverse, hysterical, p s y c h o t i c ) . L e t us take the
e x t r e m e c a s e o f c o p r o p h a g y ( e a t i n g e x c r e m e n t ) : e v e n s u c h a p r a c t i c e is
n o t n e c e s s a r i l y ' p e r v e r s e ' , s i n c e it c a n w e l l b e i n s c r i b e d i n t o a h y s t e r i c a l
economy - that is t o say, it c a n w e l l f u n c t i o n as a n e l e m e n t o f the
hysterical provocation a n d q u e s t i o n i n g o f t h e O t h e r ' s desire: what i f I e a t
shit i n o r d e r t o t e s t h o w I s t a n d with r e g a r d t o t h e O t h e r ' s d e s i r e - will h e
still l o v e m e w h e n h e s e e s m e d o i n g it? W i l l h e finally a b a n d o n m e as h i s
o b j e c t ? I t c a n a l s o f u n c t i o n as p s y c h o t i c if, say, t h e s u b j e c t i d e n t i f i e s h i s
p a r t n e r ' s s h i t as t h e m i r a c u l o u s D i v i n e s u b s t a n c e , s o t h a t by s w a l l o w i n g it
he g e t s in t o u c h w i t h G o d , r e c e i v e s H i s e n e r g y . O r , o f c o u r s e , it c a n
f u n c t i o n as p e r v e r s i o n i f t h e s u b j e c t , w h i l e d o i n g it, a s s u m e s t h e p o s i t i o n
o f t h e o b j e c t - i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e O t h e r ' s d e s i r e ( i f h e d o e s it i n o r d e r t o
generate enjoyment in his p a r t n e r ) .
On a more general l e v e l , it is i n t e r e s t i n g lo note how, when one
describes new p h e n o m e n a , o n e as a r u l e o v e r l o o k s t h e i r predominant
hysterical functioning a n d prefers the allegedly m o r e 'radical' perverse o r
psychotic functioning. Say, in t h e case o f cyberspace, we are bombarded
with i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s w h i c h e m p h a s i z e h o w c y b e r s p a c e o p e n s u p t h e p o s s i
bility o f p o l y m o r p h o u s p e r v e r s e p l a y i n g w i t h a n d p e r m a n e n t r e s h a p i n g o f
o n e ' s symbolic identity, o r h o w it involves a r e g r e s s i o n to t h e psychotic
250 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
i n c e s t u o u s i m m e r s i o n i n t o t h e S c r e e n as t h e m a t e r n a l T h i n g t h a t swallows
us, d e p r i v i n g us o f t h e c a p a c i t y o f s y m b o l i c d i s t a n c e a n d r e f l e c t i o n . I t c a n ,
h o w e v e r , b e a r g u e d t h a t t h e m o s t c o m m o n r e a c t i o n o f all o f us w h e n w e
a r e c o n f r o n t e d w i t h c y b e r s p a c e is still t h a t o f h y s t e r i c a l p e r p l e x i t y , o f
p e r m a n e n t q u e s t i o n i n g : ' H o w d o I s t a n d w i t h r e s p e c t t o this a n o n y m o u s
O t h e r ? W h a t d o e s I t w a n t f r o m m e ? W h a t g a m e is it p l a y i n g w i t h m e ? ' . . .
W i t h r e g a r d to this c r u c i a l o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n hysteria a n d p e r v e r s i o n ,
i t is i m p o r t a n t to n o t e t h a t A d o r n o ' s Philosophy of the New Music, that
m a s t e r p i e c e o f the dialectical analysis o f the 'class struggle in music',
resorts to t h e clinical c a t e g o r i e s of, precisely, hysteria a n d p e r v e r s i o n in
o r d e r t o e l a b o r a t e t h e o p p o s i t i o n o f t h e two f u n d a m e n t a l tendencies in
modern music, designated by the names Schoenberg and Stravinsky:
S c h o e n b e r g ' s 'progressive' m u s i c displays the c l e a r features o f an e x t r e m e
hysterical tension (anxiety-laden reactions to traumatic e n c o u n t e r s ) ; while
S t r a v i n s k y , in h i s p a s t i c h e - l i k e t r a v e r s i n g o f a l l p o s s i b l e m u s i c a l styles,
d i s p l a y s n o less c l e a r f e a t u r e s o f p e r v e r s i o n , t h a t is, o f r e n o u n c i n g the
d i m e n s i o n o f subjectivity p r o p e r , o f a d o p t i n g t h e stance o f e x p l o i t i n g the
polymorphous m u l t i t u d e , with n o r e a l s u b j e c t i v e e n g a g e m e n t w i t h any
specific c l e m e n t o r m o d e .
A n d - to give this o p p o s i t i o n a p h i l o s o p h i c a l twist - o n e is t e m p t e d t o
c l a i m that this fidelity t o t h e t r u t h o f h y s t e r i a a g a i n s t t h e p e r v e r t ' s false
t r a n s g r e s s i o n is w h a t l e d L a c a n , i n t h e l a s t y e a r s o f h i s t e a c h i n g , t o c l a i m
p a t h e t i c a l l y : ' I r e b e l a g a i n s t p h i l o s o p h y [fe m'insurge contre la philosophie].'
A p r o p o s o f this g e n e r a l c l a i m , t h e L e n i n i s t q u e s t i o n s h o u l d be asked
i m m e d i a t e l y : w h i c h ( s i n g u l a r ) p h i l o s o p h y d i d L a c a n have in m i n d ; w h i c h
p h i l o s o p h y was, f o r h i m , a s t a n d - i n f o r p h i l o s o p h y ' a s s u c h ' ? F o l l o w i n g a
s u g g e s t i o n by F r a n c o i s R e g n a u l t ( w h o draws a t t e n t i o n to the fact that
L a c a n m a d e t h i s s t a t e m e n t i n 1 9 7 5 , i n t h e w a k e o f t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f Anti-
1
Oedipus ), o n e could argue that the p h i l o s o p h y actually u n d e r fire, far
f r o m s t a n d i n g f o r s o m e t r a d i t i o n a l H e g e l i a n m e t a p h y s i c s , is n o n e other
than that o f Gilles D e l e u z e , a p h i l o s o p h e r o f globalized perversion if ever
there was o n e . T h a t is t o say, is n o t Deleuze's critique o f 'Oedipal'
7
psychoanalysis an e x e m p l a r ) case o f t h e perverse rejection o f hysteria?
Against the hysterical subject w h o maintains an ambiguous attitude
towards symbolic authority (like the psychoanalyst who acknowledges the
p a t h o l o g i c a l c o n s e q u e n c e s o f ' r e p r e s s i o n ' , b u t n o n e the less c l a i m s that
' r e p r e s s i o n ' is t h e c o n d i t i o n o f c u l t u r a l p r o g r e s s , s i n c e o u t s i d e s y m b o l i c
a u t h o r i t y t h e r e is o n l y t h e p s y c h o t i c v o i d ) , t h e p e r v e r t b r a v e l y g o e s t o t h e
l i m i t i n u n d e r m i n i n g t h e v e r y f o u n d a t i o n s o f s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y a n d fully
e n d o r s i n g the multiple productivity o f prc-symbolit libidinal flux . . . for
PASSIONATE ( D I S ) ATTACHMENTS 251
L a c a n , o f c o u r s e , t h i s ' a n t i - O e d i p a l ' r a d i c a l i z a t i o n o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s is t h e
very m o d e l o f t h e trap to b e a v o i d e d at a n y cost: t h e m o d e l o f false
s u b v e r s i v e r a d i c a l i z a t i o n t h a t fits t h e e x i s t i n g p o w e r c o n s t e l l a t i o n p e r f e c t l y .
In other words, for L a c a n , the philosopher's i a d i c a l i t y ' , his fearless
q u e s t i o n i n g o f all p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s , is t h e m o d e l o f t h e f a l s e t r a n s g r e s s i v e
radicalily.
F o r F o u c a u l t , a p e r v e r s e p h i l o s o p h e r i f e v e r t h e r e was o n e , t h e r e l a t i o n
ship between prohibition and desire is c i r c u l a r , a n d one o f absolute
i m m a n e n c e : power a n d resistance (counter-power) presuppose and gen
e r a t e e a c h o t h e r - t h a t is, t h e v e r y p r o h i b i t i v e m e a s u r e s t h a t c a t e g o r i z e
and r e g u l a t e illicit desires effectively g e n e r a t e them. Simply recall the
proverbial figure o f the early Christian ascetic who, in his detailed
description o f situations to b e avoided, since they provoke sexual tempta
tions, displays an e x t r a o r d i n a r y k n o w l e d g e o f b o w s e d u c t i o n works ( o f
how a simple smile, a glance, a defensive gesture o f the hands, a d e m a n d
f o r h e l p , c a n c a n y a s e x u a l i n n u e n d o . . . ) . T h e p r o b l e m h e r e is t h a t , a f t e r
insisting that t h e disciplinary p o w e r m e c h a n i s m s p r o d u c e t h e very o b j e c t
o n w h i c h t h e y e x e r t t h e i r f o r c e ( t h e s u b j e c t is n o t o n l y that w h i c h is
oppressed by t h e power but emerges h i m s e l f as t h e product o f this
oppression) -
T h e man described for us, whom we are invited to free, is already in himself t h e
effect of a subjection [assujetlissement] m u c h m o r e profound than himself. A
'soul' inhabits him and brings him to e x i s t e n c e , which is itself a factor in the
mastery that power exercises over the bodv. T h e soul is the effect a n d instru
ment o f a political autonomy; the soul is the prison o f the body.-
o p p o s i t e r e a d i n g . T h a t is t o say: i f w e g r o u n d o u r r e s i s t a n c e t o i m p e r i a l i s t
E u r o c e n t r i s m in t h e r e f e r e n c e to s o m e k e r n e l o f p r e v i o u s e t h n i c identity,
we a u t o m a t i c a l l y a d o p t t h e p o s i d o n o f a victim resisting modernization,
o f a p a s s i v e o b j e c t o n w h i c h i m p e r i a l i s t p r o c e d u r e s w o r k . If, h o w e v e r , w e
conceive our r e s i s t a n c e as a n excess that results from t h e way brutal
imperialist intervention disturbed o u r previous self-enclosed identity, o u r
p o s i t i o n b e c o m e s m u c h s t r o n g e r , s i n c e w e c a n c l a i m t h a t o u r r e s i s t a n c e is
grounded in t h e i n h e r e n t d y n a m i c s o f the i m p e r i a l i s t system - t h a t the
i m p e r i a l i s t s y s t e m itself, t h r o u g h its i n h e r e n t antagonism, activates the
forces t h a t will b r i n g about its d e m i s e . ( T h e situation here is s t r i c t l y
h o m o l o g o u s t o t h a t o f h o w t o g r o u n d f e m i n i n e r e s i s t a n c e : i f w o m a n is ' a
s y m p t o m o f m a n ' , t h e locus at w h i c h t h e i n h e r e n t a n t a g o n i s m s o f the
p a t r i a r c h a l s y m b o l i c o r d e r e m e r g e , t h i s i n n o way c o n s t r a i n s t h e s c o p e o f
f e m i n i s t r e s i s t a n c e b u t p r o v i d e s it with a n e v e n s t r o n g e r d e t o n a t i n g f o r c e . )
Or - to put it i n y e t a n o t h e r way - the premiss according to which
r e s i s t a n c e t o p o w e r is i n h e r e n t a n d i m m a n e n t t o t h e p o w e r e d i f i c e ( i n
the sense that it is g e n e r a t e d by the inherent dynamic o f the power
e d i f i c e ) i n n o way o b l i g e s us t o d r a w t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t e v e r y r e s i s t a n c e
is c o - o p t e d i n a d v a n c e , i n c l u d e d i n t h e e t e r n a l g a m e P o w e r plays w i t h
itself - the key point is t h a t through the effect o f proliferation, of
producing an e x c e s s o f r e s i s t a n c e , t h e very i n h e r e n t antagonism of a
s y s t e m m a y well s e t i n m o t i o n a p r o c e s s w h i c h l e a d s t o its o w n ultimate
7
downfall.
I t s e e m s t h a t s u c h a n o t i o n o f a n t a g o n i s m is w h a t F o u c a u l t l a c k s : f r o m
t h e f a c t t h a t e v e r y r e s i s t a n c e is g e n e r a t e d ( ' p o s i t e d ' ) b y t h e P o w e r e d i f i c e
itself, f r o m t h i s a b s o l u t e i n h e r e n c e o f r e s i s t a n c e to P o w e r , h e s e e m s t o
d r a w t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t r e s i s t a n c e is c o - o p t e d i n a d v a n c e , t h a t it c a n n o t
s e r i o u s l y u n d e r m i n e t h e s y s t e m - t h a t is, h e p r e c l u d e s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t
t h e s y s t e m itself, o n a c c o u n t o f its i n h e r e n t i n c o n s i s t e n c y , m a y g i v e b i r t h
t o a f o r c e w h o s e e x c e s s it is n o l o n g e r a b l e t o m a s t e r a n d w h i c h thus
d e t o n a t e s its u n i t y , its c a p a c i t y t o r e p r o d u c e itself. I n s h o r t , F o u c a u l t d o e s
n o t c o n s i d e r t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a n e f f e c t e s c a p i n g , o u t g r o w i n g its c a u s e , s o
t h a t a l t h o u g h it e m e r g e s as a f o r m o f r e s i s t a n c e t o p o w e r a n d is as s u c h
a b s o l u t e l y i n h e r e n t t o it, it c a n o u t g r o w a n d e x p l o d e it. ( T h e p h i l o s o p h i
c a l p o i n t t o b e m a d e h e r e is t h a t t h i s is t h e f u n d a m e n t a l feature o f the
d i a l e c t i c a l - m a t e r i a l i s t n o t i o n o f ' e f f e c t ' : t h e e f f e c t c a n ' o u t d o ' its c a u s e ; it
can be ontologically 'higher' than its c a u s e . ) O n e is t h u s t e m p t e d to
reverse the Foucauldian notion o f an all-encompassing power edifice
w h i c h a l w a y s - a l r c a d y c o n t a i n s its t r a n s g r e s s i o n , t h a t w h i c h a l l e g e d l y e l u d e s
it: w h a t i f t h e p r i c e t o b e p a i d is t h a t t h e p o w e r m e c h a n i s m c a n n o t e v e n
PASSIONATE (DIS) ATTACHMENTS 257
c o n t r o l itself, b u t h a s t o r e l y o n a n o b s c e n e p r o t u b e r a n c e a t its v e r y h e a r t ?
I n o t h e r w o r d s : w h a t e f f e c t i v e l y e l u d e s t h e c o n t r o l l i n g g r a s p o f P o w e r is
n o t s o m u c h t h e e x t e r n a l I n - i t s e l f it t r i e s t o d o m i n a t e b u t , r a t h e r , the
8
o b s c e n e s u p p l e m e n t w h i c h s u s t a i n s its o w n o p e r a t i o n .
A n d t h i s is w h y F o u c a u l t l a c k s t h e a p p r o p r i a t e n o d o n o f the subject:
the s u b j e c t is b y d e f i n i t i o n i n e x c e s s o v e r its c a u s e , a n d as s u c h it e m e r g e s
with t h e reversal o f t h e r e p r e s s i o n o f sexuality i n t o t h e s e x u a l i z a t i o n o f
the r e p r e s s i v e m e a s u r e s t h e m s e l v e s . T h i s i n s u f f i c i e n c y o f F o u c a u l t ' s t h e o r
e t i c a l e d i f i c e c a n b e d i s c e r n e d i n t h e way, i n h i s e a r l y History of Madness,
h e is a l r e a d y o s c i l l a t i n g b e t w e e n two r a d i c a l l y o p p o s e d views: t h e view t h a t
madness is n o t s i m p l y a p h e n o m e n o n that exists in itself a n d is o n l y
s e c o n d a r i l y t h e o b j e c t o f d i s c o u r s e s , b u t is itself t h e p r o d u c t o f a m u l t i t u d e
o f ( m e d i c a l , l e g a l , b i o l o g i c a l . . . ) d i s c o u r s e s a b o u t itself; a n d t h e o p p o s i t e
view, a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h o n e s h o u l d 'liberate' madness from the hold
e x e r t e d o v e r it b y t h e s e d i s c o u r s e s , a n d ' l e t m a d n e s s i t s e l f s p e a k V
Ideological Interpellation
T h e w o r k o f J u d i t h B u t l e r is o f s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t h e r e : w h i l e s h e t a k e s as
h e r s t a r t i n g p o i n t t h e F o u c a u l d i a n a c c o u n t o f s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n as s u b j e c
tion through performative disciplinatory practices, she none the less
p e r c e i v e s t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d flaws i n F o u c a u l t ' s e d i f i c e , a n d endeavours
t o s u p p l e m e n t it by r e f e r e n c e t o a s e r i e s o f o t h e r t h e o r e t i c a l c o n c e p t s a n d
e d i f i c e s , f r o m H e g e l via p s y c h o a n a l y s i s t o A l t h u s s e r ' s n o t i o n o f i d e o l o g i c a l
i n t e r p e l l a t i o n as c o n s t i t u t i v e o f s u b j e c t i v i t y , c o m b i n i n g all i h e s e r e f e r e n c e s
i n a way w h i c h is far f r o m t h e e c l e c t i c m o n s t r o s i t y u s u a l l y r e f e r r e d t o as
'creative synthesis'.
In h e r reading o f the Hegelian dialectics o f lord and b o n d s m a n , Butler
f o c u s e s o n t h e h i d d e n c o n t r a c t b e t w e e n t h e two: ' t h e i m p e r a t i v e to t h e
b o n d s m a n consists in the f o l l o w i n g f o r m u l a t i o n : y o u b e m y b o d y for m e ,
1
b u t d o n o t l e t m e k n o w t h a t t h e b o d y t h a t y o u a r e is m y b o d y ' . " T h e
d i s a v o w a l o n t h e p a r t o f t h e l o r d is t h u s d o u b l e : first, t h e l o r d d i s a v o w s
h i s o w n b o d y , h e p o s e s as a d i s e m b o d i e d d e s i r e a n d c o m p e l s t h e b o n d s
m a n t o a c t as h i s b o d y ; s e c o n d l y , t h e b o n d s m a n h a s t o d i s a v o w t h e fact
t h a t h e a c t s m e r e l y as t h e l o r d ' s b o d y a n d a c t as a n a u t o n o m o u s a g e n t , as
i f t h e b o n d s m a n ' s b o d i l y l a b o u r i n g f o r t h e l o r d is n o t i m p o s e d o n him
b u t is h i s a u t o n o m o u s activity. . . This structure o f double (and thereby
self-effacing) disavowal also expresses the patriarchal matrix of the
r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n m a n a n d w o m a n : i n a first m o v e , w o m a n is p o s i t e d
258 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
as a m e r e p r o j e c t i o n / r e f l e c t i o n o f m a n , h i s i n s u b s t a n t i a l s h a d o w , h y s t e r i
c a l l y i m i t a t i n g b u t n e v e r a b l e r e a l l y t o a c q u i r e t h e m o r a l s t a t u r e o f a fully
c o n s t i t u t e d self-identical subjectivity; however, this status o f a m e r e reflec
tion has itself to b e disavowed and the w o m a n provided with a false
a u t o n o m y , as i f s h e a c t s as s h e d o e s w i t h i n the logic o f patriarchy on
a c c o u n t o f h e r own a u t o n o m o u s logic ( w o m e n are 'by nature' submissive,
c o m p a s s i o n a t e , s e l f - s a c r i f i c i n g . . . ) . T h e p a r a d o x n o t t o b e m i s s e d h e r e is
that the bondsman ( s e r v a n t ) is all t h e m o r e the servant, the m o r e he
( m i s ) p e r c e i v e s h i s p o s i t i o n as t h a t o f a n a u t o n o m o u s a g e n t ; a n d t h e s a m e
g o e s f o r w o m a n - t h e u l t i m a t e f o r m o f h e r s e r v i t u d e is t o ( m i s ) p e r c e i v e
h e r s e l f , w h e n s h e a c t s i n a ' f e m i n i n e ' s u b m i s s i v e - c o m p a s s i o n a t e way, as a n
a u t o n o m o u s agent. For that reason, the W e i n i n g e r i a n ontological denigra
t i o n o f w o m a n as a m e r e ' s y m p t o m ' o f m a n — as t h e e m b o d i m e n t o f m a l e
f a n t a s y , as t h e h y s t e r i c a l i m i t a t i o n o f t r u e m a l e s u b j e c t i v i t y - is, w h e n it is
o p e n l y a d m i t t e d a n d fully a c c e p t e d , f a r m o r e s u b v e r s i v e t h a n t h e false
direct assertion o f feminine a u t o n o m y - perhaps the ultimate feminist
s t a t e m e n t is to p r o c l a i m o p e n l y : ' I d o n o t e x i s t i n m y s e l f , I a m m e r e l y t h e
O t h e r ' s fantasy e m b o d i e d ' .
T h e s a m e holds for the relationship b e t w e e n t h e subject a n d the Ins
titution: the b u r e a u c r a t i c / s y m b o l i c Institution n o t only r e d u c e s the sub
j e c t t o its m o u t h p i e c e , b u t a l s o w a n t s t h e s u b j e c t t o d i s a v o w t h e f a c t t h a t
h e is m e r e l y its m o u t h p i e c e a n d t o ( p r e t e n d t o ) a c t as a n autonomous
a g e n t - a p e r s o n with a h u m a n t o u c h a n d p e r s o n a l i t y , n o t j u s t a faceless
b u r e a u c r a t . T h e p o i n t , o f c o u r s e , is n o t o n l y t h a t s u c h a n a u t o n o m i z a t i o n
is d o u b l y f a l s e , s i n c e it i n v o l v e s a d o u b l e d i s a v o w a l , b u t a l s o t h a t t h e r e is
n o subject prior to the Institution (prior to language as t h e ultimate
i n s t i t u t i o n ) : s u b j e c t i v i t y is p r o d u c e d as t h e v o i d i n t h e v e r y s u b m i s s i o n o f
t h e l i f e - s u b s t a n c e o f t h e R e a l t o t h e I n s t i t u t i o n . If, t h e n - as A l t h u s s e r
w o u l d h a v e p u t it - t h e p e r c e p t i o n that, p r i o r to i n t e r p e l l a t i o n , the s u b j e c t
is a l w a y s - a l r e a d y there is p r e c i s e l y t h e effect and p r o o f o f successful
interpellation, does not the Lacanian assertion o f a subject prior to
interpellation/subjectivization repeat the very ideological illusion that
A l l h u s s e r e n d e a v o u r s to d e n o u n c e ? O r - to take a n o t h e r a s p e c t o f the
s a m e c r i t i c a l a r g u m e n t - in s o f a r as i d e o l o g i c a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s u c c e e d s
p r e c i s e l y i n a s m u c h as I p e r c e i v e m y s e l f as a 'full h u m a n person' who
' c a n n o t b e r e d u c e d to a p u p p e t , to an i n s t r u m e n t o f s o m e ideological big
O t h e r ' , is n o t t h e t h e s i s o n i n t e r p e l l a t i o n ' s n e c e s s a r y ' f a i l u r e t h e v e r y s i g n
o f its u l t i m a t e s u c c e s s ? A n i n t e r p e l l a t i o n s u c c e e d s p r e c i s e l y w h e n I p e r
c e i v e m y s e l f as ' n o t o n l y that.' but a 'complex person who, among other
PASSIONATE (DIS) ATTACHMENTS 259
A f u n n y t h i n g h a p p e n e d r e c e n t l y in a S l o v e n e t h e a t r e : a h a l f - e d u c a t e d
nouveau riche was l a t e f o r t h e p e r f o r m a n c e a n d tried to r e a c h his seat
h a l f a n h o u r i n t o t h e s h o w ; q u i t e a c c i d e n t a l l y , at t h a t very m o m e n t , the
a c t o r o n t h e s t a g e h a d t o p r o n o u n c e , p a t h e t i c a l l y , t h e p h r a s e : ' W h o is
d i s t u r b i n g m y s i l e n c e ? ' - t h e p o o r nouveau riche, w h o did n o t feel quite
a t h o m e i n t h e t h e a t r e , o u t o f g u i l t f o r b e i n g l a t e , r e c o g n i z e d h i m s e l f as
the addressee o f this p h r a s e - that is, h e interpreted this p h r a s e as
t h e o u t b u r s t o f t h e a c t o r ' s r a g e b e c a u s e o f t h e s u d d e n c o m m o t i o n in t h e
f r o n t r o w - a n d a n s w e r e d l o u d l y , f o r e v e r y o n e t o h e a r : ' M y n a m e is X .
S o r r y I was l a t e , b u t m y c a r b r o k e d o w n o n t h e way t o t h e t h e a t r e ! ' T h e
t h e o r e t i c a l p o i n t o f this r i d i c u l o u s u n f o r t u n a t e e v e n t is t h a t a similar
' m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g ' d e f i n e s i n t e r p e l l a t i o n as such: w h e n e v e r we r e c o g n i z e
ourselves in the call o f the Other, there is a minimum o f such a
m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g at w o r k ; o u r r e c o g n i t i o n in t h e c a l l is always a m i s r e c o g -
nition, an act o f falling into ridicule by boastfully assuming the place o f
t h e a d d r e s s e e w h i c h is n o t r e a l l y o u r s . . . .
D o e s n o t this gap, however, also i n d i c a t e an excess on the side o f the
' b i g O t h e r ' o f t h e s y m b o l i c i n s t i t u t i o n ? T h a t is t o say: is it n o t a f a c t t h a t
t o d a y , m o r e t h a n e v e r , w e , as i n d i v i d u a l s , a r e i n t e r p e l l a t e d w i t h o u t e v e n
b e i n g a w a r e o f it: o u r i d e n t i t y is c o n s t i t u t e d f o r t h e b i g O t h e r b y a s e r i e s
o f d i g i t a l i z e d i n f o r m a t i o n a l ( m e d i c a l , p o l i c e , e d u c a t i o n a l . . . ) files we a r c
m o s t l y n o t e v e n a w a r e of, s o t h a t i n t e r p e l l a t i o n f u n c t i o n s ( d e t e r m i n e s o u r
p l a c e a n d a c t i v i t y in t h e s o c i a l s p a c e ) w i t h o u t a n y g e s t u r e o f r e c o g n i t i o n
o n t h e p a r t o f t h e s u b j e c t c o n c e r n e d . T h i s , h o w e v e r , is n o t t h e p r o b l e m
A l t h u s s e r is a d d r e s s i n g w i t h t h e n o t i o n o f i n t e r p e l l a t i o n ; his problem,
260 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
r a t h e r , is t h a t o f subject ivization: h o w d o i n d i v i d u a l s t h e m s e l v e s s u b j e c t i v i z e
t h e i r c o n d i t i o n , h o w d o t h e y e x p e r i e n c e t h e m s e l v e s as s u b j e c t s ? I f I a m
i n s c r i b e d i n t o a s e c r e t s t a t e file w i t h o u t b e i n g a w a r e o f it, this simply
d o e s n ' t c o n c e r n m y s u b j e c t i v i t y . M u c h m o r e i n t e r e s t i n g is t h e opposite
case, in w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t r e c o g n i z e s h i m s e l f in t h e call o f a n O t h e r w h i c h
'doesn't exist' - say, in t h e Call o f G o d : Althusser's p o i n t is t h a t my
r e c o g n i t i o n i n t h e i n t e r p e l l a t i v e c a l l o f t h e O t h e r is p e r f o r m a t i v e i n the
s e n s e t h a t , i n t h e v e r y g e s t u r e o f r e c o g n i t i o n , it constitutes ( o r ' p o s i t s ' ) this
big O t h e r - G o d ' e x i s t s ' i n s o f a r as b e l i e v e r s r e c o g n i z e t h e m s e l v e s as
h e a r i n g a n d ( d i s ) o b e y i n g H i s C a l l ; t h e S t a l i n i s t p o l i t i c i a n e x e r t s his p o w e r
i n s o f a r as h e r e c o g n i z e s h i m s e l f as i n t e r p e l l a t e d b y t h e b i g O t h e r o f
History, serving its P r o g r e s s ; a democratic politician who 'serves the
p e o p l e ' constitutes the a g e n c y ( P e o p l e ) t h e r e f e r e n c e to w h i c h legitimizes
h i s activity.
If, t h e n , t o d a y , in t h e g u i s e o f d e t a i l e d d a t a b a s e s t h a t c i r c u l a t e i n t h e
c o r p o r a t e c y b e r s p a c e a n d d e t e r m i n e what we effectively are for the big
1 2
O t h e r o f the power structure - t h a t is, h o w o u r s y m b o l i c i d e n t i t y is
c o n s t r u c t e d - a n d w e a r e i n this s e n s e ' i n t e r p e l l a t e d ' b y i n s t i t u t i o n s e v e n
w i t h o u t b e i n g a w a r e o f it, o n e s h o u l d n e v e r t h e l e s s i n s i s t t h a t t h i s ' o b j e c t i v e
i n t e r p e l l a t i o n ' actually affects m y subjectivity o n l y by m e a n s o f t h e fact
t h a t / myself urn well aware of how, outside the grasp of my knowledge, databases
circulate which determine my symbolic identity in the eyes of the social 'big Other'.
M y v e r y a w a r e n e s s o f t h e f a c t t h a t ' t h e t r u t h is o u t t h e r e ' , t h a t files o n m e
circulate which, even if they are factually 'inaccurate', none the less
performatively determine m y s o c i o - s y m b o l i c s t a t u s , is w h a t gives r i s e t o
the specific proto-paranoiac mode o f subjectivization characteristic o f
t o d a y ' s s u b j e c t : it c o n s t i t u t e s m e as a s u b j e c t i n h e r e n t l y r e l a t e d t o and
h a s s l e d by a n e l u s i v e p i e c e o f d a t a b a s e i n w h i c h , b e y o n d m y r e a c h , ' m y
f a t e is writ l a r g e ' .
T h e p o l i t i c a l f o c u s o f B u t l e r ' s t h e o r e t i c a l e n d e a v o u r is t h e o l d leftist o n e :
h o w is it p o s s i b l e n o t o n l y a c t u a l l y t o r e s i s t , b u t a l s o t o u n d e r m i n e and/
or displace the existing socio-symbolic network (the L a c a n i a n 'big O t h e r ' )
1 1
which p r e d e t e r m i n e s the space within which the subject can only exist?
S h e is well a w a r e , o f c o u r s e , t h a t t h e s i t e o f t h i s r e s i s t a n c e c a n n o t be
s i m p l y a n d d i r e c t l y i d e n t i f i e d as t h e U n c o n s c i o u s : t h e e x i s t i n g o r d e r o f
P o w e r is a l s o s u p p o r t e d b y u n c o n s c i o u s ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t s ' - a t t a c h -
PASSIONATE (DIS)ATTACHMENTS 261
m e r i t s t h a t m u s t r e m a i n p u b l i c l y n o n - a c k n o w l e d g e d i f t h e y a r e t o fulfil
their role:
a c c e p t a n c e o f a l i e n a t i o n in t h e s y m b o l i c O r d e r ( t h e goal o f p s y c h o a n a l y t i c
t r e a t m e n t ) as t h e o n l y ' r e a l i s t i c ' o p t i o n .
B u t l e r o p p o s e s to this L a c a n i a n fixity o f the Symbolic the Hegelian
dialectics o f presupposing a n d p o s i t i n g : n o t o n l y is t h e s y m b o l i c O r d e r
always-already p r e s u p p o s e d as the sole milieu o f the subject's social
e x i s t e n c e ; t h i s O r d e r i t s e l f e x i s t s , is r e p r o d u c e d , o n l y i n s o f a r as s u b j e c t s
r e c o g n i z e t h e m s e l v e s in it a n d , via r e p e a t e d p e r f o r m a t i v e g e s t u r e s , a g a i n
and again assume their p l a c e s i n it - this, o f c o u r s e , o p e n s up the
possibility o f c h a n g i n g t h e symbolic c o n t o u r s o f o u r socio-symbolic exist
e n c e b y way o f its p a r o d i c a l l y d i s p l a c e d p e r f o r m a t i v e e n a c t i n g s . T h a t is
the thrust o f Butler's anti-Kantianism: she rejects the L a c a n i a n symbolic a
p r i o r i as a n e w v e r s i o n o f t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l f r a m e w o r k w h i c h fixes the
c o - o r d i n a t e s o f o u r e x i s t e n c e in a d v a n c e , leaving n o s p a c e f o r t h e r e t r o
active d i s p l a c e m e n t o f these p r e s u p p o s e d c o n d i t i o n s . S o w h e n , in a k e y
passage, B u t l e r asks -
W h a t w o u l d it m e a n f o r t h e s u b j e c t t o d e s i r e s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n its c o n t i n u e d
'social e x i s t e n c e ' ? If s u c h a n e x i s t e n c e c a n n o t b e u n d o n e w i t h o u t falling i n t o
some kind of death, can existence nevertheless be risked, death c o u r t e d o r
pursued, in order to e x p o s e and open to t r a n s f o r m a t i o n t h e h o l d o f social
p o w e r o n t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f life's p e r s i s t e n c e ? T h e s u b j e c t is c o m p e l l e d t o r e p e a t
t h e n o r m s by w h i c h it is p r o d u c e d , b u t t h e r e p e t i t i o n e s t a b l i s h e s a d o m a i n of
risk, f o r if o n e fails t o r e i n s l a l e t h e n o r m 'in lite r i g b l way,' o n e b e c o m e s s u b j e c t
to f u r t h e r s a n c t i o n , o n e feels t h e p r e v a i l i n g c o n d i t i o n s o f e x i s t e n c e t h r e a t e n e d .
A n d yet, w i t h o u t a r e p e t i t i o n t h a t risks life - in its c u r r e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n - how
m i g h t we begin to i m a g i n e t h e c o n t i n g e n c y o f thai o r g a n i z a t i o n , a n d p e r i b n n a -
tively r e c o n f i g u r e t h e c o n t o u r s o f t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f life?-"
Is it p o s s i b l e a l s o t o u n d e r m i n e t h e m o s t f u n d a m e n t a l l e v e l o f s u b j e c t i o n ,
what B u t l e r calls 'passionate a t t a c h m e n t s ' ? T h e L a c a n i a n n a m e for the
p r i m o r d i a l ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t s ' o n w h i c h t h e very c o n s i s t e n c y o f t h e
s u b j e c t ' s b e i n g h i n g e s is, o f c o u r s e , fundamental fantasy. The 'attachment
t o s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n ' c o n s t i t u t i v e o f t h e s u b j e c t is t h u s n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e
primordial ' m a s o c h i s t ' s c e n e in w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t ' m a k e s / s e e s h i m s e l f
suffering', that is, a s s u m e s la douleur d'exister, and thus provides the
minimum o f s u p p o r t to his b e i n g (like Freud's primordially repressed
middle term ' F a t h e r is b e a t i n g m e ' in the t r i a d o f ' A c h i l d is b e i n g
beaten'). This fundamental f a n t a s y is t h o r o u g h l y inter-passive." in it, a
s c e n e o f passive suffering ( s u b j e c t i o n ) is s t a g e d w h i c h simultaneously
sustains a n d t h r e a t e n s the s u b j e c t ' s b e i n g - w h i c h sustains this b e i n g only
i n s o far as it r e m a i n s f o r e c l o s e d (primordially repressed). From this
perspective, a new a p p r o a c h o p e n s u p to t h e r e c e n t artistic practices o f
sadomasochistic performance: is it n o t a f a c t t h a t , i n t h e m , this very
foreclosure is u l t i m a t e l y undone? In other words, what if the open
assuming/staging o f the phantasmic scene o f primordial 'passionate
a t t a c h m e n t s ' is far m o r e s u b v e r s i v e t h a n t h e d i a l e c t i c r e a r t i c u l a t i o n and/
o r d i s p l a c e m e n t o f this s c e n e ?
T h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n B u l l e t a n d L a c a n is t h a t f o r B u t l e r , t h e p r i m o r
dial r e p r e s s i o n (foreclosure) equals the foreclosure o f the primordial
'passionate a t t a c h m e n t ' , while for L a c a n the f u n d a m e n t a l fantasy (the
s t u f f " p r i m o r d i a l a t t a c h m e n t s ' a r e m a d e o f ) is a l r e a d y a f i l l e r , a f o r m a t i o n
w h i c h c o v e r s u p a c e r t a i n g a p / v o i d . I t is h e r e , o n this v e r y p o i n t a t w h i c h
t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n B u t l e r a n d L a c a n is a l m o s t i m p e r c e p t i b l e , t h a t w e
e n c o u n t e r the ultimate gap that separates t h e m . B u t l e r again interprets
t h e s e ' p r i m o r d i a l a t t a c h m e n t s ' as t h e s u b j e c t ' s p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s i n a p r o t o -
H e g e l i a n sense o f the term, a n d t h e r e f o r e c o u n t s o n the subject's ability
dialectically to r e a r t i c u l a t e these presuppositions of his/her being, to
r e c o n f i g u r e / d i s p l a c e t h e m : t h e s u b j e c t ' s i d e n t i t y 'will r e m a i n always a n d
f o r e v e r r o o t e d i n its i n j u r y as l o n g as it r e m a i n s a n i d e n t i t y , b u t it d o e s
i m p l y t h a t t h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f r e s i g n i f i c a t i o n will r e w o r k a n d u n s e t t l e the
p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t to s u b j e c t i o n w i t h o u t w h i c h s u b j e c t f o r m a t i o n -
a n d r e - f o r m a t i o n - c a n n o t s u c c e e d ' . ' " W h e n s u b j e c t s a r c c o n f r o n t e d with
a f o r c e d c h o i c e in w h i c h r e j e c t i n g an i n j u r i o u s i n t e r p e l l a t i o n amounts
t o n o t e x i s t i n g a t all - w h e n , u n d e r t h e t h r e a t o f n o n e x i s t e n c e , t h e y a r e ,
as it w e r e , e m o t i o n a l l y b l a c k m a i l e d i n t o i d e n t i f y i n g w i l h the imposed
266 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
t o w a r d s it, w h a t h o l d s a c o m m u n i t y t o g e t h e r is n o t t h e d i r e c t l y s h a r e d
m o d e o f i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e s a m e o b j e c t b u t , r a t h e r , its e x a c t o p p o s i t e :
the s h a r e d m o d e o f disidenlification, o f delegating the m e m b e r s ' hatred o r
love to a n o t h e r agent through whom they love o r h a t e . T h e Christian
c o m m u n i t y , f o r i n s t a n c e , is h e l d t o g e t h e r b y t h e s h a r e d d e l e g a t i o n o f
t h e i r b e l i e f to s o m e s e l e c t e d individuals (saints, priests, m a y b e only Christ
alone) who are 'supposed to really believe'. T h e function of symbolic
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n is t h u s t h e v e r y o p p o s i t e o f d i r e c t i m m e r s i o n in ( o r f u s i o n
with) t h e o b j e c t o f i d e n t i f i c a t i o n : i t is t o m a i n t a i n t h e proper distance
towards the object ( f o r this reason, the Church as I n s t i t u t i o n always
p e r c e i v e d z e a l o t s as its u l t i m a t e e n e m i e s : b e c a u s e o f t h e i r d i r e c t i d e n t i f i
cation a n d belief, they t h r e a t e n t h e distance t h r o u g h which t h e religious
i n s t i t u t i o n m a i n t a i n s i t s e l f ) . A n o t h e r e x a m p l e : if, i n a l o v e melodrama
d e p i c t i n g a c o u p l e m a k i n g l o v e , we w e r e a l l o f a s u d d e n t o p e r c e i v e t h a t
the c o u p l e is a c t u a l l y h a v i n g s e x ( o r if, i n a s n u f f m o v i e , w c b e c o m e a w a r e
that t h e v i c t i m is a c t u a l l y b e i n g t o r t u r e d t o d e a t h ) , t h i s t h o r o u g h l y ruins
the p r o p e r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with the narrative reality. F r o m my youth, 1
r e m e m b e r t h e P o l i s h s p e c t a c l e Pharaoh ( 1 9 6 0 ) , i n w h i c h t h e r e is a s c e n e
w h e r e a h o r s e is s a c r i f i c e d : w h e n I , t h e s p e c t a t o r , n o t i c e d t h a t t h e h o r s e
was a c t u a l l y b e i n g s t a b b e d t o d e a t h b v l a n c e s , this i n s t a n t l y o b s t r u c t e d m y
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e n a r r a t i v e . . . . A n d t h e p o i n t is t h a t t h e s a m e g o e s
f o r ' r e a l l i f e ' : o u r s e n s e o f r e a l i t y is always s u s t a i n e d b y a m i n i m u m o f
disidendficalion ( f o r e x a m p l e , w h e n we e n g a g e i n c o m m u n i c a t i o n with
o t h e r p e o p l e , we ' r e p r e s s ' o u r a w a r e n e s s o f h o w they sweat, d e f e c a t e a n d
urinate).
B u t i e r is r i g h t t o e m p h a s i z e t h a t s u b j e c t i v i t y i n v o l v e s a two-level o p e r
ation: a primordial 'passionate a t t a c h m e n t ' , a s u b m i s s i o n / s u b j e c t i o n to
an O t h e r , and its d e n i a l - t h a i is, t h e g a i n i n g o f a m i n i m a l distance
t o w a r d s it w h i c h o p e n s u p t h e s p a c e o f f r e e d o m and autonomy. T h e
p r i m o r d i a l ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' is t h u s - t o p u t it i n D e r r i d a n t e r m s -
the condition o f (im)possibility o f freedom a n d r e s i s t a n c e : t h e r e is n o
subjectivity outside it, t h a t is, s u b j e c t i v i t y c a n a s s e r t i t s e l f o n l y as t h e
g a i n i n g o f a d i s t a n c e t o w a r d s its g r o u n d w h i c h c a n n e v e r b e fully ' s u h -
l a t e d ' . H o w e v e r , it is n o n e t h e l e s s t h e o r e t i c a l l y a n d p o l i t i c a l l y c r u c i a l t o
distinguish between the primordial phantasmic 'passionate attachment'
t h a t t h e s u b j e c t is c o m p e l l e d t o r e p r e s s / d i s a v o w i n o r d e r t o g a i n s o c i o -
s y m b o l i c e x i s t e n c e , a n d s u b j e c t i o n t o t h i s very s o c i o - s y m b o l i c o r d e r , w h i c h
p r o v i d e s the s u b j e c t w i t h a d e t e r m i n a t e s y m b o l i c ' m a n d a t e ' (a place o f
i n t e r p e l l a t o r y r e c o g n i t i o n / i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ) . W h i l e t h e two c a n n o t s i m p l y b e
o p p o s e d as ' g o o d ' a n d ' b a d ' ( t h e v e r y s o c i o - s y m b o l i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n c a n
268 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
s u s t a i n i t s e l f o n l y i f it m a i n t a i n s a n o n - a c k n o w l e d g e d phantasmic sup
p o r t ) , they nevertheless function a c c o r d i n g to different logics.
This confusion between phantasmic 'passionate attachments' and socio-
symbolic identification also a c c o u n t s for the fact that - surprisingly -
B u d e r uses t h e c o u p l e o f s u p e r e g o a n d e g o i d e a l in a naive p r e - L a c a n i a n
way, d e f i n i n g s u p e r e g o as t h e a g e n c y t h a t m e a s u r e s t h e g a p b e t w e e n t h e
s u b j e c t ' s a c t u a l e g o a n d t h e e g o i d e a l t h e s u b j e c t is s u p p o s e d t o e m u l a t e ,
a n d finds t h e s u b j e c t g u i l t y o f f a i l u r e i n t h i s e n d e a v o u r . W o u l d it n o t b e
much more productive to follow L a c a n a n d insist o n the opposition
b e t w e e n t h e two t e r m s - o n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e g u i l t m a t e r i a l i z e d i n the
p r e s s u r e e x e r t e d o n t h e s u b j e c t b y t h e s u p e r e g o is n o t as s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d
as it m a y s e e m : it is n o t t h e g u i l t c a u s e d b y t h e f a i l e d e m u l a t i o n o f t h e
e g o ideal, but the m o r e fundamental guilt o f accepting the e g o ideal (the
s o c i a l l y d e t e r m i n e d s y m b o l i c r o l e ) as t h e i d e a l t o b e f o l l o w e d i n t h e first
place, a n d thus o f betraying o n e ' s m o r e fundamental desire (the primor
d i a l ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' , as B u t l e r w o u l d h a v e p u t i t ) ? I f o n e f o l l o w s
L a c a n , o n e can thus a c c o u n t for the basic p a r a d o x o f the superego, which
lies i n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e m o r e I f o l l o w t h e o r d e r s o f t h e e g o i d e a l , t h e
m o r e g u i l t y I a m - L a c a n ' s p o i n t is t h a t , i n f o l l o w i n g t h e d e m a n d s o f t h e
e g o ideal, I a m in effect guilty - guilty o f betraying my fundamental
p h a n t a s m i c 'passionate a t t a c h m e n t ' . In o t h e r words, far f r o m feeding o f f
some 'irrational' guilt, the superego manipulates the subject's actual
b e t r a y a l o f his f u n d a m e n t a l ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' as t h e p r i c e h e had
to pay for entering the socio-symbolic space, and assuming a pre
d e t e r m i n e d p l a c e w i t h i n it.
S o w h a t is s u p e r e g o i n its o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e s y m b o l i c L a w ? T h e p a r e n t a l
f i g u r e w h o is s i m p l y ' r e p r e s s i v e ' i n t h e m o d e o f s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y tells a
child: ' Y o u m u s t g o to G r a n d m a ' s b i r t h d a y parry a n d b e h a v e nicely, even
i f y o u ' r e b o r e d t o d e a t h - I d o n ' t c a r e h o w y o u f e e l , j u s t d o it!' T h e
s u p e r e g o f i g u r e , i n c o n t r a s t , tells t h e c h i l d : ' . A l t h o u g h y o u k n o w how
m u c h G r a n d m a w o u l d l i k e t o s e e y o u , y o u s h o u l d visit h e r o n l y i f y o u
r e a l l y w a n t t o - i f n o t , y o u s h o u l d stay a t h o m e ! ' T h e s u p e r e g o t r i c k lies
i n t h i s false a p p e a r a n c e o f a f r e e c h o i c e , w h i c h , as e v e r y c h i l d k n o w s , is
actually a f o r c e d c h o i c e that involves an even s t r o n g e r o r d e r - n o t o n l y
' Y o u m u s t visit G r a n d m a , h o w e v e r y o u f e e l ! ' , b u t ' Y o u m u s t visit G r a n d m a ,
a n d , f u r t h e r m o r e , you must be glad to do U\' — t h e s u p e r e g o o r d e r s y o u t o
enjoy d o i n g w h a t y o u h a v e t o d o . T h e s a m e g o e s f o r t h e s t r a i n e d r e l a t i o n
ship between lovers or a m a r r i e d couple: when a spouse says t o his
p a r t n e r : ' W e s h o u l d visit m y s i s t e r o n l y i f y o u r e a l l y w a n t t o ! ' , t h e order
b e t w e e n t h e l i n e s is, o f c o u r s e : ' N o t o n l y m u s t y o u a g r e e to visit m y s i s t e r ,
PASSIONATE (DIS) ATTACHMENTS 269
b u t y o u m u s t d o i t g l a d l y , o f y o u r o w n f r e e will, f o r y o u r o w n pleasure,
n o t as a f a v o u r t o me!" T h e p r o o f o f t h i s l i e s i n w h a t h a p p e n s i f t h e
u n f o r t u n a t e p a r t n e r t a k e s t h e o f f e r as a n a c t u a l f r e e c h o i c e a n d says: ' N o ! '
- the p r e d i c t a b l e s p o u s e ' s a n s w e r t h e n i s : ' H o w c o u l d y o u say t h a t ! How
c a n y o u b e s o c r u e l ! W h a t h a s m y p o o r s i s t e r d o n e to y o u t h a t y o u d o n ' t
like her?'
T h e Melancholic Double-Bind
t h e h e t e r o s e x u a l n o r m ( t h e r e p r e s s e d i n c e s t u o u s w i s h is f o r t h e p a r e n t o f
the opposite sex), and this n o r m itself c a m e into place t h r o u g h the
foreclosure o f the h o m o s e x u a l a t t a c h m e n t :
T h e p r i m o r d i a l ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' t o t h e s a m e s e x is t h u s p o s i t e d as
n o t o n l y r e p r e s s e d b u t f o r e c l o s e d in t h e r a d i c a l s e n s e o f s o m e t h i n g w h i c h
n e v e r p o s i t i v e l y e x i s t e d , s i n c e it was e x c l u d e d f r o m t h e v e r y start: ' T o t h e
e x t e n t that h o m o s e x u a l a t t a c h m e n t s remain u n a c k n o w l e d g e d within nor
m a t i v e h e t e r o s e x u a l i t y , t h e y a r e n o t m e r e l y c o n s t i t u t e d as d e s i r e s w h i c h
e m e r g e and subsequently b e c o m e prohibited; rather, these desires are
p r o s c r i b e d f r o m t h e s t a r t . ' S o , p a r a d o x i c a l l y , it is t h e v e r y e x c e s s i v e a n d
c o m p u l s i v e 'straight' i d e n t i f i c a t i o n which - i f we take i n t o a c c o u n t the
fact that, for F r e u d , identification relies on the m e l a n c h o l i c i n c o r p o r a t i o n
of the lost object - demonstrates that the primordial attachment was
homosexual:
H e r e B u t l e r s e e m s t o g e t i n v o l v e d i n a k i n d o f J u n g i a n i s m a Verniers: a
m a n is l o n g i n g n o t f o r h i s c o m p l e m e n t a r y f e m i n i n e c o u n t e r p a r t (animus
f o r anima, e t c . ) , b u t f o r s a m e n e s s - it is n o t s a m e n e s s w h i c h ' r e p r e s s e s '
d i f f e r e n c e , it is ( t h e d e s i r e f o r ) d i f f e r e n c e w h i c h f o r e c l o s e s ( t h e d e s i r e
f o r ) s a m e n e s s . . . . H o w e v e r , what a b o u t the fact, q u o t e d by B u t l e r herself,
t h a t t h e m a n , in r e m a i n i n g a t t a c h e d t o t h e c o m p u l s i v e m a l e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ,
fears b e i n g put in t h e ' p a s s i v e ' p o s i t i o n o f f e m i n i n i t y as t h e o n e who
d e s i r e s ( a n o t h e r ) m a n ? W h a t w e h a v e h e r e is t h e o b v e r s e o f t h e m e l a n
c h o l i c i n c o r p o r a t i o n : if, in t h e l a t t e r , o n e becomes w h a t o n e was c o m p e l l e d
t o give u p - desiring as an object ( a m a n ) , t h e n , i n t h e first c a s e , o n e desires
as an object w h a t o n e is a f r a i d t o become (a w o m a n ) : a m a n 'wants the
woman he would never be. He wouldn't be caught dead being her:
t h e r e f o r e h e w a n t s h e r . . . . I n d e e d , h e will n o t i d e n t i f y w i t h h e r , a n d he
will n o t d e s i r e a n o t h e r m a n . T h a t r e f u s a l t o d e s i r e , t h a t s a c r i f i c e o f d e s i r e
under t h e f o r c e o f p r o h i b i t i o n , will i n c o r p o r a t e h o m o s e x u a l i t y as an
PASSIONATE (DIS)ATTACHMENTS 271
2 8
identification with m a s c u l i n i t y . ' H e r e we e n c o u n t e r t h e key a m b i g u i t y o f
B u d e r ' s a r g u m e n t , an a m b i g u i t y w h i c h also affects t h e i n c o n c l u s i v e c h a r
acter o f h e r i m p o r t a n t discussion o f transsexual drag dressing: h e r defini
tion of the foreclosed primordial 'passionate attachment' oscillates
b e t w e e n two s u b j e c t i v e p o s i t i o n s from which o n e d e s i r e s a n o t h e r m a n - is
it that o n e d e s i r e s a n o t h e r m a n as a man, o r t h a t o n e desires to b e a
ttioman d e s i r e d by ( a n d d e s i r i n g ) a n o t h e r m a n ? I n o t h e r w o r d s , is m y
Straight m a s c u l i n e identification the m e l a n c h o l i c incorporation o f my
f o r e c l o s e d a t t a c h m e n t to a n o t h e r m a n , o r a d e f e n c e against a s s u m i n g t h e
subjective position o f a w o m a n (desiring a m a n ) ? Butler herself touches
u p o n this a m b i g u i t y l a t e r i n t h e t e x t , w h e n s h e asks:
T h i s q u e s t i o n , o f c o u r s e , is r h e t o r i c a l - t h a t is, B u t l e r c l e a r l y o p t s f o r t h e
s e c o n d c h o i c e . I n t h a t c a s e , h o w e v e r , why d o e s s h e , in t h e q u o t e d p a s s a g e ,
identify' d e s i r i n g a n o t h e r m a n w i t h a s s u m i n g a f e m i n i n e d i s p o s i t i o n , as i f
a m a n ' w o u l d n ' t b e c a u g h t d e a d b e i n g h e r ' , since this w o u l d m e a n that
h e d e s i r e s a n o t h e r m a n ? D o e s n o t all t h i s i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e p r i m o r d i a l l o s s
c o n s t i t u t i v e o f s u b j e c t i v i t y c a n n o t b e d e f i n e d in t e r m s o f t h e f o r e c l o s u r e
o f a homosexual a t t a c h m e n t ? I n o t h e r w o r d s , why d o e s a m a n f e a r b e c o m i n g
a woman; why 'wouldn't [he] be caught dead b e i n g h e r ' ? Is it o n l y
b e c a u s e , as s u c h , h e w o u l d d e s i r e ( a n d b e d e s i r e d b y ) a n o t h e r m a n ? L e t
us r e c a l l N e i l J o r d a n ' s The Crying Game, a film in w h i c h we have a
p a s s i o n a t e l o v e b e t w e e n two m e n , s t r u c t u r e d as a h e t e r o s e x u a l affair: t h e
b l a c k t r a n s s e x u a l D i l is a m a n w h o d e s i r e s a n o t h e r m a n as a woman. It
t h u s s e e m s m o r e p r o d u c t i v e t o p o s i t as t h e c e n t r a l e n i g m a t h a t o f s e x u a l
d i f f e r e n c e - not as t h e a l r e a d y e s t a b l i s h e d s y m b o l i c d i f f e r e n c e ( h e t e r o s e x
u a l n o r m a t i v i t y ) b u t , p r e c i s e l y , as t h a t w h i c h f o r e v e r e l u d e s t h e g r a s p o f
normative symbolization.
B u t l e r is r i g h t i n o p p o s i n g t h e P l a t o n i c - J u n g i a n n o t i o n t h a t t h e l o s s
i n v o l v e d i n s e x u a l i o n is t h e l o s s o f t h e o t h e r s e x ( t h e n o t i o n w h i c h o p e n s
u p t h e p a t h t o v a r i o u s o b s c u r a n t i s t a n d r o g y n o u s m y t h s o f t h e two h a l v e s ,
f e m i n i n e a n d m a s c u l i n e , j o i n e d i n a c o m p l e t e h u m a n b e i n g ) : it is w r o n g
' t o a s s u m e f r o m t h e o u t s e t t h a t we o n l y a n d always l o s e t h e o t h e r s e x , f o r
it is as o f t e n t h e c a s e t h a t w c a r e o f t e n in t h e m e l a n c h o l i c b i n d o f having
lost our own sex in order, paradoxically, to become if?" In short, what the
P l a t o n i c - J u n g i a n m v t h fails t o t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t is t h a t t h e o b s t a c l e o r
272 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
T h i s is t h e k e y p r o b l e m : w h e n B u t l e r r e j e c t s s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e as ' t h e
p r i m a r y guarantor o f loss i n o u r p s y c h i c l i v e s ' - w h e n s h e disputes the
p r e m i s s t h a t ' a l l s e p a r a t i o n a n d loss [ c a n ] b e t r a c e d b a c k t o t h a t s t r u c t u r
i n g l o s s o f t h e o t h e r s e x b y w h i c h w e e m e r g e as this s e x e d b e i n g i n t h e
1
world', ' s h e silently e q u a t e s sexual difference with the heterosexual
s y m b o l i c n o r m d e t e r m i n i n g w h a t i t is t o b e a ' m a n ' o r a ' w o m a n ' , w h i l e
f o r L a c a n s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e is r e a l p r e c i s e l y i n t h e s e n s e t h a t it c a n n e v e r
be properly symbolized, transposed/translated into a symbolic norm
w h i c h fixes t h e s u b j e c t ' s s e x u a l identity - ' t h e r e is n o s u c h t h i n g as a
s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p ' . W h e n L a c a n c l a i m s t h a t s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e is ' r e a l ' ,
h e is t h e r e f o r e f a r f r o m e l e v a t i n g a h i s t o r i c a l c o n t i n g e n t f o r m o f s e x u a t i o n
into a transhistorical n o r m ('if you do n o t occupy your proper preor
d a i n e d place in t h e h e t e r o s e x u a l o r d e r , as e i t h e r m a n o r w o m a n , y o u a r e
e x c l u d e d , e x i l e d i n t o a p s y c h o t i c abyss o u t s i d e t h e s y m b o l i c d o m a i n ' ) : t h e
c l a i m t h a t s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e is ' r e a l ' e q u a l s t h e c l a i m t h a t i t is ' i m p o s s i b l e '
- impossible to symbolize, to formulate as a s y m b o l i c n o r m . In other
w o r d s , it is n o t t h a t w e h a v e h o m o s e x u a l s , f e t i s h i s t s , a n d o t h e r p e r v e r t s in
spite of t h e n o r m a t i v e f a c t o f s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e - t h a t is, as p r o o f s o f t h e
failure o f sexual difference to impose its n o r m ; it is n o t t h a t sexual
d i f f e r e n c e is t h e u l t i m a t e p o i n t o f r e f e r e n c e w h i c h a n c h o r s t h e c o n t i n g e n t
d r i f t i n g o f s e x u a l i t y ; i t is, o n t h e c o n t r a r y , o n a c c o u n t o f t h e g a p w h i c h
f o r e v e r persists b e t w e e n t h e real o f s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e a n d t h e d e t e r m i n a t e
forms o f heterosexual symbolic norms that we have the multitude of
' p e r v e r s e ' f o r m s o f s e x u a l i t y . T h a t is a l s o t h e p r o b l e m w i t h t h e a c c u s a t i o n
t h a t s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e i n v o l v e s ' b i n a r y l o g i c ' : in s o f a r as s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e
is r e a l / i m p o s s i b l e , it is p r e c i s e l y not ' b i n a r y ' b u t , a g a i n , t h a t b e c a u s e o f
w h i c h e v e r y ' b i n a r y ' a c c o u n t o f it ( e v e n - t r a n s l a t i o n o f s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e
274 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
. . . the expression 'psychical reality' itself is not simply synonymous with 'inter
nal world', 'psychological d o m a i n ' , etc. I f taken in the most basic sense that it
has tor Freud, this expression d e n o t e s a nucleus within that domain which is
h e t e r o g e n e o u s and resistant and which is alone in b e i n g truly 'real' as c o m p a r e d
with the majority o f psychical p h e n o m e n a . "
I n w h a t s e n s e , t h e n , d o e s t h e O e d i p u s c o m p l e x t o u c h o n t h e R e a l ? L e t us
a n s w e r t h i s via a n o t h e r q u e s t i o n : w h a t d o H e g e l a n d p s y c h o a n a l y s i s h a v e
i n c o m m o n w h e n it c o m e s t o t h e n o t i o n o f s u b j e c t ? F o r b o t h o f t h e m , t h e
'free' subject, integrated into the symbolic network o f mutual recognition,
is t h e r e s u l t o f a p r o c e s s i n w h i c h t r a u m a t i c c u t s , ' r e p r e s s i o n s ' , a n d the
p o w e r struggle i n t e r v e n e , n o t s o m e t h i n g primordially given. T h u s both
a i m at a k i n d o f ' m e t a - t r a n s c e n d e n t a l ' g e s t u r e o f a c c o u n t i n g f o r t h e v e r y
genesis o f the a priori t r a n s c e n d e n t a l frame. Every 'historicization', every
symbolization, h a s to ' r e - e n a c t ' the passage from the pre-symbolic X t o
h i s t o r y . A p r o p o s o f O e d i p u s , f o r e x a m p l e , it is e a s y to p l a y t h e g a m e o f
historicization, and to demonstrate bow the Oedipal constellation is
e m b e d d e d i n a s p e c i f i c p a t r i a r c h a l c o n t e x t ; it r e q u i r e s a f a r g r e a t e r e f f o r t
PASSIONATE (DIS) A TTAGHMENTS 275
iiof t h o u g h t t o d i s c e r n , i n t h e v e r y h i s t o r i c a l c o n t i n g e n c y o f t h e Oedipus
c o m p l e x , o n e o f the re-enactments o f the gap which o p e n s up the horizon
!v'©f h i s t o r i c i t y .
r\ I n h e r m o r e r e c e n t writings, B u t l e r h e r s e l f s e e m s to c o n c e d e this p o i n t ,
V h e n she accepts the key distinction b e t w e e n sexual difference a n d the
'social construction of gender': the status o f sexual difference is not
('direcdy that of a contingent socio-symbolic formation; rather, sexual
'difference indicates the enigmatic domain which lies i n b e t w e e n , no
J o n g e r biology a n d n o t yet the space o f socio-symbolic c o n s t r u c t i o n . O u r
p o i n t h e r e w o u l d b e t o e m p h a s i z e h o w t h i s i n - b e t w e e n is t h e v e r y ' c u t '
w h i c h sustains the gap b e t w e e n t h e R e a l a n d t h e c o n t i n g e n t m u l t i t u d e o f
the modes o f its s y m b o l i z a t i o n . I n s h o r t : y e s , o f c o u r s e , t h e wav we
• s y m b o l i z e s e x u a l i t y is n o t d e t e r m i n e d by n a t u r e , it is t h e o u t c o m e o f a
c o m p l e x a n d c o n t i n g e n t s o c i o - s y m b o l i c p o w e r s t r u g g l e ; h o w e v e r , this v e r y
s p a c e o f c o n t i n g e n t s y m b o l i z a t i o n , t h i s v e r y g a p b e t w e e n t h e R e a l a n d its
i S y m b o l i z a t i o n , m u s t b e s u s t a i n e d b y a c u t , a n d ' s y m b o l i c c a s t r a t i o n ' is t h e
L a c a n i a n n a m e f o r t h i s c u t . S o ' s y m b o l i c c a s t r a t i o n ' is n o t t h e ultimate
p o i n t o f s y m b o l i c r e f e r e n c e w h i c h s o m e h o w l i m i t s t h e f r e e flow o f t h e
. m u l t i t u d e o f s y m b o l i z a t i o n s : o n t h e c o n t r a r y , it is t h e very g e s t u r e w h i c h
sustains, k e e p s o p e n , the s p a c e o f c o n t i n g e n t symbolizations.'''
S o , to r e c a p i t u l a t e : t h e a t t r a c t i o n o f B u t l e r ' s a c c o u n t o f sexual differ
e n c e is t h a t it m a k e s i t p o s s i b l e t o s e e t h e a p p a r e n t l y 'natural' state o f
t h i n g s ( p s y c h i c a c c e p t a n c e o f t h e ' n a t u r a l ' s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e ) as t h e r e s u l t
of a redoubled 'pathological' process - o f repressing the 'passionate
a t t a c h m e n t ' t o t h e s a m e s e x . T h e p r o b l e m w i t h it, h o w e v e r , is: i f w e a g r e e
t h a t t h e e n t r y i n t o s y m b o l i c L a w t h a t r e g u l a t e s h u m a n s e x u a l i t y is p a i d
f o r b y a f u n d a m e n t a l r e n u n c i a t i o n , is t h i s r e n u n c i a t i o n in f a c t t h a t o f t h e
same-sex attachment? W h e n B u t l e r asks t h e crucial q u e s t i o n 'Is there
s o m e p a r t o f t h e b o d y w h i c h is n o t p r e s e r v e d i n s u b l i m a t i o n , s o m e p a r t o f
t h e b o d y w h i c h r e m a i n s u n s u b l i m a t e d ? ' (i.e. n o t i n c l u d e d in the s y m b o l i c
t e x t u r e ) , h e r a n s w e r is: ' T h i s b o d i l y r e m a i n d e r , I w o u l d s u g g e s t , s u r v i v e s
f o r s u c h a s u b j e c t in t h e m o d e o f a l r e a d y , i f n o t always, h a v i n g been
d e s t r o y e d , i n a k i n d o f c o n s t i t u t i v e l o s s . T h e b o d y is n o t a site o n w h i c h a
c o n s t r u c t i o n t a k e s p l a c e ; it is a d e s t r u c t i o n o n t h e o c c a s i o n o f w h i c h a
3 1
s u b j e c t is f o r m e d . ' ' D o e s this n o t b r i n g h e r c l o s e to t h e L a c a n i a n n o t i o n
o f lamella, o f the undeacl organ-without-body?
This organ must be called ' u n r e a l , ' in the sense that the unreal is not the
imaginary and p r e c e d e s the subjective it conditions, being in direct contact with
276 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
t h e ' r e a l ' f a t h e r is n o t h i n g b u t a c o n t i n g e n t b e a r e r o f t h e p u r e l y f o r m a l
s t r u c t u r a l f u n c t i o n o f s y m b o l i c p r o h i b i t i o n ) ? W h a t b l u r s this c l e a r distinc
t i o n b e t w e e n t h e e m p t y s y m b o l i c f o r m a n d its c o n t i n g e n t p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t
is p r e c i s e l y t h e Real: a s t a i n w h i c h s u t u r e s t h e e m p t y f r a m e o n t o a p a r t o f
its c o n t e n t , t h e ' i n d i v i s i b l e r e m a i n d e r ' o f s o m e ' p a t h o l o g i c a l ' c o n t i n g e n t
m a t e r i a l i t y w h i c h , as it w e r e , ' c o l o u r s ' t h e a l l e g e d l y n e u t r a l u n i v e r s a l i t y o f
the symbolic frame, and thus functions as a k i n d o f umbilical cord
t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e e m p t y f r a m e w o r k o f t h e s y m b o l i c f o r m is a n c h o r e d i n
its c o n t e n t . T h i s s h o r t c i r c u i t b e t w e e n f o r m and c o n t e n t provides the
m o s t s u c c i n c t r e j e c t i o n o r subversion o f (what o n e usually perceives as)
' K a n t i a n f o r m a l i s m ' : t h e very t r a n s c e n d e n t a l - f o r m a l f r a m e w h i c h forms
the h o r i z o n , the c o n d i t i o n o f possibility, o f the c o n t e n t w h i c h appears
w i t h i n it is e n f r a m e d b y a p a r t o f its c o n t e n t , s i n c e it is a t t a c h e d t o a
p a r t i c u l a r p o i n t w i t h i n its c o n t e n t . W h a t w e a r e d e a l i n g w i t h h e r e is t h e
paradox o f a kind o f ' p a t h o l o g i c a l a priori': a pathological (in the Kantian
sense o f innerworldly c o n t i n g e n c y ) e l e m e n t that sustains t h e c o n s i s t e n c y
o f t h e f o r m a l f r a m e w i t h i n w h i c h it o c c u r s .
T h i s is a l s o o n e o f t h e p o s s i b l e d e f i n i t i o n s o f t h e L a c a n i a n sinthome as
real: the pathological contingent formation that sustains the a priori
u n i v e r s a l f r a m e . I n this p r e c i s e s e n s e , t h e L a c a n i a n sinthome is a ' k n o t ' : a
p a r t i c u l a r i n n e r w o r l d l y p h e n o m e n o n w h o s e e x i s t e n c e is e x p e r i e n c e d as
c o n t i n g e n t - h o w e v e r , t h e m o m e n t o n e t o u c h e s it o r a p p r o a c h e s i t t o o
c l o s e l y , t h i s ' k n o t ' u n r a v e l s a n d , with it, o u r e n t i r e u n i v e r s e - t h a t is, t h e
v e r y p l a c e f r o m w h i c h we s p e a k a n d p e r c e i v e reality d i s i n t e g r a t e s ; we
literally lose the ground from beneath o u r feet. . . . P e r h a p s the best
i l l u s t r a t i o n is t h e p a t r i a r c h a l m e l o d r a m a t i c t h e m e o f ' g o i n g i n through
t h e w r o n g d o o r ' ( t h e wife w h o a c c i d e n t a l l y r e a c h e s i n t o t h e p o c k e t o f h e r
h u s b a n d ' s j a c k e t a n d finds his c o n f i d e n t i a l love letter, thus r u i n i n g her
e n t i r e f a m i l y l i f e ) , w h i c h is r a i s e d t o a m u c h h i g h e r p o w e r i n its s c i e n c e -
fiction version (you accidentally o p e n the w r o n g d o o r a n d witness the
s e c r e t m e e t i n g o f t h e a l i e n s ) . H o w e v e r , t h e r e is n o n e e d t o g e t i n v o l v e d
in such eccentricities; simply think o f the e l e m e n t a r y case o f the fragile
b a l a n c e o f a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h o n e is f o r m a l l y a l l o w e d t o d o something
(ask a certain question, perform a certain a c t ) , b u t is n o n e the less
e x p e c t e d not t o d o it, as i f s o m e u n w r i t t e n r u l e p r o h i b i t e d i t - i f o n e
a c t u a l l y d o e s it, t h e w h o l e s i t u a t i o n e x p l o d e s .
A p r o p o s o f this point, we c a n e l a b o r a t e the line o f s e p a r a t i o n between
M a r x and the standard 'bourgeois' sociologists o f modernity who empha
size t h e u n i v e r s a l f e a t u r e s o f p o s t - t r a d i t i o n a l l i f e ( t h e m o d e r n individual
is n o l o n g e r d i r e c t l y i m m e r s e d i n a p a r t i c u l a r t r a d i t i o n , b u t e x p e r i e n c e s
278 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
h i m s e l f as a u n i v e r s a l a g e n t c a u g h t i n a c o n t i n g e n t p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e x t a n d
f r e e t o c h o o s e h i s way o f life; h e t h u s e n t e r t a i n s a r e f l e c t e d r e l a t i o n s h i p
t o w a r d s his l i f e - w o r l d , r e l y i n g e v e n i n h i s m o s t ' s p o n t a n e o u s * a c t i v i t i e s
( s e x u a l i t y , l e i s u r e ) o n ' h o w - t o - d o - i t ' m a n u a l s . N o w h e r e is t h i s p a r a d o x o f
r e f l e x i v i t y m o r e e v i d e n t t h a n in d e s p e r a t e a t t e m p t s t o b r e a k o u t o f t h e
r e f l e c t e d ways o f m o d e r n i t y a n d r e t u r n t o a m o r e s p o n t a n e o u s ' h o l i s t i c '
life: i n a t r a g i c o m i c way, t h e s e very a t t e m p t s a r e s u p p o r t e d b y a h o s t o f
specialists w h o t e a c h us h o w t o d i s c o v e r o u r true spontaneous Self. . . .
There is a l s o p r o b a b l y nothing more scientific than the growing of
' o r g a n i c f o o d ' : it t a k e s h i g h s c i e n c e t o b e a b l e t o subtract the harmful
e f f e c t s o f i n d u s t r i a l a g r i c u l t u r e . ' O r g a n i c a g r i c u l t u r e ' is t h u s a k i n d o f
H e g e l i a n ' n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' , t h e t h i r d l i n k i n t h e t r i a d w h o s e first t w o
links are pre-industrial ' n a t u r a l ' a g r i c u l t u r e a n d its n e g a t i o n / m e d i a t i o n ,
i n d u s t r i a l i z e d a g r i c u l t u r e : it is a r e t u r n t o n a t u r e , to a n o r g a n i c way o f
d o i n g t h i n g s ; b u t this v e r y r e t u r n is ' m e d i a t e d ' b y s c i e n c e .
Standard sociologists o f modernity c o n c e i v e o f t h i s ' r e f l e x i v i t y ' as a
q u a s i - t r a n s c e n d e n t a l u n i v e r s a l f e a t u r e w h i c h e x p r e s s e s i t s e l f in a s p e c i f i c
way in d i f f e r e n t d o m a i n s o f s o c i a l life: in p o l i t i c s as t h e r e p l a c e m e n t o f
the traditional o r g a n i c authoritarian structure by m o d e r n formal d e m o c
racy (and its i n h e r e n t counterpoint, the formalist insistence on the
p r i n c i p l e o f a u t h o r i t y f o r its o w n s a k e ) ; in e c o n o m y as t h e predominance
of commodification and 'alienated' market relations over the more
o r g a n i c f o r m s o f t h e c o m m u n a l p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s ; in t h e e t h i c a l d o m a i n
as t h e split o f t r a d i t i o n a l mores into formal external legality a n d an
i n d i v i d u a l ' s i n n e r m o r a l i t y ; i n l e a r n i n g as t h e r e p l a c e m e n t o f t r a d i t i o n a l
initiatory wisdom by the reflected forms o f scientific k n o w l e d g e transmit
t e d b y t h e s c h o o l s y s t e m ; i n a r t as t h e a r t i s t ' s f r e e d o m t o c h o o s e f r o m t h e
multitude o f available 'styles'; a n d so on. 'Reflexivity' ( o r its various
i n c a r n a t i o n s , u p t o t h e F r a n k f u r t S c h o o l ' s ' i n s t r u m e n t a l R e a s o n ' ) is t h u s
c o n c e i v e d as a k i n d o f h i s t o r i c a l a p r i o r i , a f o r m w h i c h 'constitutes',
m o u l d s i n t o t h e s a m e u n i v e r s a l s h a p e , d i f f e r e n t l a y e r s o f s o c i a l life. M a r x ,
however, adds to this a crucial s u p p l e m e n t a r y t u r n o f t h e screw: for h i m ,
all p a r t i c u l a r ' e m p i r i c a l ' d o m a i n s o f s o c i a l life d o n o t e n t e r t a i n t h e s a m e
r e l a t i o n s h i p t o w a r d s t h i s u n i v e r s a l f r a m e ; t h e y a r e n o t all c a s e s o f a p a s s i v e
positive stuff formed by it - there is o n e exceptional 'pathological',
innervvorldly particular content in which the very universal form of
r e f l e x i v i t y is g r o u n d e d , t o w h i c h it is a t t a c h e d b y a k i n d o f u m b i l i c a l c o r d ,
b y w h i c h t h e f r a m e o f t h i s f o r m i t s e l f is e n f r a m e d ; f o r M a r x , o f c o u r s e ,
4
this p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t is t h e s o c i a l u n i v e r s e o f c o m m o d i t y e x c h a n g e . "
And a r e we n o t d e a l i n g w i t h the same p a r a d o x in t h e case o f the
PASSIONATE (DIS) ATTACHMENTS 279
Masochistic Deception
T h i s r e v e r s a l is e m b o d i e d i n K a n t , the p h i l o s o p h e r o f m o r a l autonomy,
w h o identifies this a u t o n o m y with a c e r t a i n m o d e o f s u b j e c t i o n , n a m e l y ,
t h e s u b j e c t i o n to ( e v e n t h e h u m i l i a t i o n in t h e face o f ) t h e universal m o r a l
L a w . T h e k e y p o i n t h e r e is t o b e a r i n m i n d t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n t h e t w o
f o r m s o f this Law: far f r o m b e i n g a m e r e e x t e n s i o n o r i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n o f
t h e e x t e r n a l law, t h e i n n e r L a w ( C a l l o f C o n s c i e n c e ) e m e r g e s w h e n the
e x t e r n a l law fails t o a p p e a r , in o r d e r t o c o m p e n s a t e f o r its a b s e n c e . I n
this perspective, liberation f r o m the e x t e r n a l pressure o f n o r m s e m b o d i e d
280 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
i n o n e ' s s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n i n g ( i n t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t v e i n ) is s t r i c t l y i d e n t i
c a l t o s u b m i s s i o n t o t h e u n c o n d i t i o n a l i n n e r C a l l o f C o n s c i e n c e . T h a t is
t o say: t h e o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n e x t e r n a l s o c i a l r e g u l a t i o n s a n d internal
m o r a l L a w is t h a t b e t w e e n r e a l i t y a n d t h e R e a l : s o c i a l r e g u l a t i o n s c a n still
b e j u s t i f i e d ( o r p r e t e n d to b e j u s t i f i e d ) by o b j e c t i v e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f social
c o e x i s t e n c e (they b e l o n g to the d o m a i n o f the 'reality p r i n c i p l e ' ) ; while
t h e d e m a n d o f t h e m o r a l L a w is u n c o n d i t i o n a l , b r o o k i n g n o e x c u s e -
'You can, because you must!', as K a n t p u t it. F o r t h a t r e a s o n , s o c i a l
r e g u l a t i o n s m a k e p e a c e f u l c o e x i s t e n c e p o s s i b l e , w h i l e m o r a l L a w is a
t r a u m a t i c i n j u n c t i o n t h a t d i s r u p t s it. O n e is t h u s t e m p t e d t o g o a s t e p
further a n d to invert o n c e m o r e t h e relationship b e t w e e n ' e x t e r n a l ' social
n o r m s a n d the i n n e r m o r a l Law: what if the subject invents e x t e r n a l social
n o r m s precisely in o r d e r to e s c a p e t h e u n b e a r a b l e p r e s s u r e o f t h e m o r a l
L a w ? I s n ' t it m u c h e a s i e r t o h a v e a n e x t e r n a l M a s t e r w h o c a n b e d u p e d ,
towards w h o m o n e can m a i n t a i n a m i n i m a l distance a n d private space,
t h a n t o h a v e a n e x - t i m a t e M a s t e r , a s t r a n g e r , a f o r e i g n b o d y in t h e v e r y
heart o f one's being? D o e s n ' t the minimal definition o f Power (the agency
e x p e r i e n c e d by t h e s u b j e c t as t h e f o r c e t h a t e x e r t s its p r e s s u r e o n him
from the Outside, opposing his i n c l i n a t i o n s , thwarting his goals) rely
p r e c i s e l y o n t h i s externalization o f the ex-timate inherent compulsion o f
the Law, o f that which is ' i n y o u more than yourself? This tension
b e t w e e n e x t e r n a l n o r m s a n d t h e i n n e r L a w , w h i c h c a n a l s o give r i s e to
s u b v e r s i v e e f f e c t s (say, o f o p p o s i n g p u b l i c a u t h o r i t y o n b e h a l f o f o n e ' s
i n n e r m o r a l s t a n c e ) , is n e g l e c t e d b y F o u c a u l t .
A g a i n , t h e c r u c i a l p o i n t is t h a t t h i s s u b j e c t i o n t o t h e i n n e r L a w d o e s
n o t s i m p l y ' e x t e n d ' o r ' i n t e r n a l i z e ' e x t e r n a l p r e s s u r e ; r a t h e r , it is c o r r e l a t
ive t o t h e s u s p e n s i o n o f external pressure, to the withdrawal-into-self
which creates so-called 'free inner s p a c e ' . T h i s l e a d s us b a c k to the
p r o b l e m a t i c o f fundamental fantasy: w h a t t h e f u n d a m e n t a l f a n t a s y s t a g e s is
precisely the s c e n e o f constitutive s u b m i s s i o n / s u b j e c t i o n that sustains the
subject's 'inner freedom'. This primordial 'passionate attachment' - that
is, t h e s c e n e o f passive s u b m i s s i o n s t a g e d i n t h e f u n d a m e n t a l fantasy -
m u s t b e distinguished from m a s o c h i s m in t h e strict, n a r r o w clinical sense:
4 3
as it was e l a b o r a t e d i n d e t a i l b y D e l e u z e , t h i s m a s o c h i s m strictv sensu
already involves an i n t r i c a t e attitude o f disavowal towards t h e f r a m e o f
O e d i p a l symbolic reality. T h e m a s o c h i s t ' s suffering d o e s n o t attest to s o m e
p e r v e r s e e n j o y m e n t o f p a i n as s u c h , b u t is t h o r o u g h l y i n t h e s e r v i c e o f
p l e a s u r e - its e x q u i s i t e s p e c t a c l e ( m a s q u e r a d e ) o f torture and pain, o f
h u m i l i a t i o n to w h i c h t h e m a s o c h i s t s u b j e c t s u b m i t s itself, serves to d u p e
t h e a t t e n t i v e g u a r d o f t h e s u p e r e g o . I n s h o r t , c l i n i c a l m a s o c h i s m is a way
PASSIONATE (DIS) ATTACHMENTS 281
e x p e r i e n c e s a n d is t h u s r e a d y t o a c c e p t , o u t s i d e a n y d e c e p t i v e s t r a t e g y ,
45
pain itself as the source of libidinal satisfaction.
Along these lines, o n e should reread L a p l a n c h e ' s old classic ideas a b o u t
t h e p r i m a l s e d u c t i o n fantasy in w h i c h t h e reflexive i n w a r d t u r n , 'fantas-
ization', sexualization and masochism all coincide - that is, a r e all
4 6
generated in o n e and the same gesture o f 'turning around'. In his
detailed c o m m e n t a r y on the three phases o f the Freudian ' A c h i l d is
b e i n g b e a t e n ' f a n t a s y ( 1 : ' M y f a t h e r is b e a t i n g t h e c h i l d w h o m I h a t e ' ; 2 :
'I a m b e i n g b e a t e n b y m y f a t h e r ' ; 3 : ' A c h i l d is b e i n g b e a t e n ' ) , L a p l a n c h e
insists o n t h e c r u c i a l d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e first p h a s e a n d t h e s e c o n d :
t h e y a r e b o t h u n c o n s c i o u s , t h a t is, t h e y r e p r e s e n t t h e s e c r e t g e n e s i s o f t h e
f i n a l , c o n s c i o u s p h a s e o f t h e f a n t a s y ( ' A c h i l d is b e i n g b e a t e n ' ) ; h o w e v e r ,
w h i l e t h e first p h a s e is s i m p l y t h e r e p r e s s e d m e m o r y o f s o m e r e a l e v e n t
w i t n e s s e d b y t h e c h i l d ( t h e p a r e n t b e a t i n g h i s b r o t h e r ) , a n d c a n as s u c h
b e r e m e m b e r e d i n t h e c o u r s e o f p s y c h o a n a l y t i c t r e a t m e n t , t h e s e c o n d is
p r o p e r l y p h a n t a s m i c a n d , f o r t h a t very r e a s o n , ' p r i m o r d i a l l y repressed'.
T h i s p h a s e was n e v e r c o n s c i o u s l y i m a g i n e d , b u t was f o r e c l o s e d f r o m the
v e r y b e g i n n i n g ( h e r e we h a v e a p e r f e c t c a s e o f t h e f o r e c l o s e d s a m e - s e x
p r i m o r d i a l ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' B u t l e r f o c u s e s o n ) ; f o r t h i s r e a s o n , it
c a n n e v e r b e r e m e m b e r e d ( i . e . s u b j e c t i v e l y a s s u m e d by t h e s u b j e c t ) , but
s i m p l y r e t r o a c t i v e l y r e c o n s t r u c t e d as t h e R e a l w h i c h h a s t o b e p r e s u p p o s e d
i f o n e is to a c c o u n t f o r t h e final, c o n s c i o u s p h a s e o f t h e f a n t a s y : '. . . what
is repressed is not the memory but the fantasy derived from it or subtending it in
this case, n o t t h e actual s c e n e in w h i c h t h e father w o u l d have beaten
4 7
a n o t h e r child, b u t the fantasy o f b e i n g b e a t e n by the f a t h e r ' .
• as F r e u d h i m s e l f e m p h a s i z e s , o n l y i n t h e s e c o n d p h a s e is t h e s i t u a t i o n
p r o p e r l y sexualized - t h a t is, t h e p a s s a g e f r o m p h a s e 1 t o p h a s e 2 is t h e
PASSIONATE (DIS) ATTACHMENTS 283
• t h i s s e x u a l i z a t i o n is s t r i c t l y c o n s u b s t a n t i a l w i t h t h e r e f l e x i v e g e s t u r e o f
'introjection': instead o f actually attacking a n o t h e r human being I
f a n t a s i z e a b o u t it, I i m a g i n e a s c e n e o f s u b m i s s i o n a n d p a i n ; i n s t e a d o f
b e i n g an a g e n t in real i n t e r a c t i o n , I b e c o m e an impassive o b s e r v e r o f
an ' i n n e r ' s c e n e that fascinates m e ;
T h e c r u c i a l p o i n t is t h a t t h e s e t h r e e f e a t u r e s a r e s t r i c t i y c o n s u b s t a n t i a l : a t
its m o s t r a d i c a l , s e x u a l i z a t i o n equals p h a n t a s m i z a t i o n , w h i c h equals assum
ing t h e passive p o s i t i o n o f i m p o t e n c e , h u m i l i a t i o n a n d pain:
T h e p o i n t o f t h e r e f l e x i v e t u r n is t h u s n o t s i m p l y a s y m m e t r i c a l r e v e r s a l
of aggressivity (destroying/attacking an external object) into being
a t t a c k e d by a n e x t e r n a l o b j e c t ; r a t h e r , it l i e s i n t h e a c t o f ' i n t e r n a l i z i n g '
passivity, a c t i v e l y i m a g i n i n g t h e s c e n e o f o n e ' s i m p a s s i v e s u b m i s s i o n . T h u s
i n f a n t a s i z i n g , t h e c l e a r - c u t o p p o s i t i o n o f a c t i v i t y a n d passivity is s u b v e r t e d :
in ' i n t e r n a l i z i n g ' a s c e n e o f b e i n g b e a t e n by a n o t h e r , I i m m o b i l i z e m y s e l f
in a d o u b l e s e n s e (instead o f b e i n g active in reality, I a s s u m e t h e passive
s t a n c e o f a f a s c i n a t e d o b s e r v e r w h o m e r e l y i m a g i n e s / f a n t a s i z e s a s c e n e in
which h e participates; within t h e very c o n t e n t o f this s c e n e , I i m a g i n e
m y s e l f in a p a s s i v e , i m m o b i l e p o s i t i o n o f s u f f e r i n g h u m i l i a t i o n a n d p a i n )
- h o w e v e r , p r e c i s e l y t h i s d o u b l e passivity p r e s u p p o s e s m y a c t i v e e n g a g e
m e n t - t h a t is t o say, t h e a c c o m p l i s h m e n t o f a r e f l e x i v e t u r n b y m e a n s o f
w h i c h , i n a n a u t o e r o t i c way, I m y s e l f , n o t a n e x t e r n a l a g e n t , t h w a r t m y
external activity, t h e spontaneous outflow o f energy, and 'dominate
m y s e l f , r e p l a c i n g a c t i v i t y in r e a l i t y by t h e o u t b u r s t o f f a n t a s i z i n g . A p r o p o s
o f h i s d e f i n i t i o n o f drive (as o p p o s e d t o i n s t i n c t ) , L a c a n m a d e this p o i n t
n i c e l y by e m p h a s i z i n g how drive always a n d by d e f i n i t i o n involves a
284 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
a n d e n i g m a t i c - w h a t b a f f l e s t h e o b s e r v i n g / v i c t i m i z e d c h i l d is t h e fact
t h a t h e is w i t n e s s i n g a s c e n e w h i c h is o b v i o u s l y i m p e n e t r a b l e a l s o t o t h e
active adult p e r p e t r a t o r s themselves - that they, too, ' d o n ' t k n o w what
they're doing'.
T h i s c o n s t e l l a t i o n also e n a b l e s us to t h r o w n e w light o n L a c a n ' s c l a i m
( m e n t i o n e d a b o v e ) t h a t ' t h e r e is n o s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p ' : i f t h e enigma
and confusion were to be only on the side of the child, in his
( m i s ) p e r c e p t i o n as s o m e t h i n g m y s t e r i o u s o f w h a t , f o r t h e p a r e n t s them
s e l v e s , is a t h o r o u g h l y natural and unproblematic activity, t h e n there
definitely would b e a ' n o r m a l ' sexual relationship. However, the worn-out
p h r a s e ' d e e p i n s i d e e v e r y a d u l t , t h e r e is a c h i l d w h o is still a l i v e ' is n o t
without foundation, i f it is p r o p e r l y u n d e r s t o o d as m e a n i n g t h a t even
w h e n t h e p r o v e r b i a l two c o n s e n t i n g a d u l t s e n g a g e i n ' n o r m a l a n d h e a l t h y '
s e x in the privacy o f t h e i r b e d r o o m , they are n e v e r q u i t e a l o n e in t h e r e :
t h e r e is always a ' f a n t a s m a t i z e d ' child's gaze o b s e r v i n g t h e m , a gaze -
u s u a l l y ' i n t e r n a l i z e d ' - o n a c c o u n t o f w h i c h t h e i r a c t i v i t y is u l t i m a t e l y
i m p e n e t r a b l e t o t h e m s e l v e s . O r - t o p u t it i n y e t a n o t h e r way - t h e p o i n t
o f t h e s c e n e o f p r i m o r d i a l s e d u c t i o n is n o t t h a t a d u l t s a c c i d e n t a l l y i n f r i n g e
upon the child, disturbing his fragile b a l a n c e with a display o f their
jouissance - t h e p o i n t , r a t h e r , is t h a t t h e c h i l d ' s g a z e is i n c l u d e d , c o m p r e
hended, from the very b e g i n n i n g in the situation o f adult parental
s e x u a l i t y , r a t h e r l i k e K a f k a ' s p a r a b l e o f t h e D o o r o f t h e L a w : j u s t as t h e
m a n f r o m t h e c o u n t r y d i s c o v e r s at t h e e n d t h a t t h e s c e n e o f t h e m a j e s t i c
entrance to the palace o f the L a w was s t a g e d o n l y for his gaze, the
p a r e n t a l s e x u a l display, far f r o m unintentionally disturbing the child's
e q u i l i b r i u m , is i n a way ' t h e r e o n l y f o r t h e c h i l d ' s g a z e ' . Is n o t t h e u l t i m a t e
paradisiacal fantasy t h a t o f p a r e n t s c o p u l a t i n g in f r o n t o f t h e i r child, w h o
observes them and makes comments? We are thus dealing with the
s t r u c t u r e o f a t e m p o r a l l o o p : t h e r e is s e x u a l i t y n o t o n l y b e c a u s e o f a g a p
between adult sexuality a n d the child's u n p r e p a r e d gaze t r a u m a t i z e d by
its d i s p l a y , b u t b e c a u s e t h i s c h i l d ' s p e r p l e x i t y c o n t i n u e s t o s u s t a i n adult
4 1
s e x u a l activity i t s e l f . ' T h i s p a r a d o x a l s o e x p l a i n s t h e b l i n d s p o t o f t h e
t o p i c o f s e x u a l h a r a s s m e n t : there is no sex without an element of 'harassment'
( o f the p e r p l e x e d gaze violently s h o c k e d , traumatized, by t h e uncanny
c h a r a c t e r o f w h a t is g o i n g o n ) . T h e p r o t e s t a g a i n s t s e x u a l harassment,
a g a i n s t v i o l e n t l y i m p o s e d s e x , is t h u s u l t i m a t e l y the protest against sex as
such, if o n e subtracts from t h e s e x u a l i n t e r p l a y its p a i n f u l l y traumatic
c h a r a c t e r , t h e r e m a i n d e r is s i m p l y n o l o n g e r s e x u a l . ' M a t u r e ' s e x b e t w e e n
the proverbial c o n s e n t i n g adults, deprived o f the traumatic e l e m e n t o f
286 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
Is n o t t h e s u p r e m e c a s e o f s u c h a p a r t i c u l a r f e a t u r e t h a t s u s t a i n s the
impossible sexual relationship the curling blonde hair in H i t c h c o c k ' s
Vertigo? W h e n , i n t h e l o v e s c e n e i n t h e b a r n t o w a r d s t h e e n d o f t h e f i l m ,
Scottie passionately e m b r a c e s J u d y refashioned into the dead M a d e l e i n e ,
d u r i n g t h e i r f a m o u s 3 6 0 - d e g r e e kiss, h e s t o p s k i s s i n g h e r j u s t l o n g e n o u g h
t o s t e a l a l o o k at h e r n e w l y b l o n d e h a i r , as i f t o r e a s s u r e h i m s e l f t h a t t h e
p a r t i c u l a r f e a t u r e w h i c h m a k e s h e r i n t o t h e o b j e c t o f d e s i r e is still t h e r e .
. . . Here the opposition between the vortex that threatens to swallow
Scottie (the 'vertigo' o f the tide, t h e deadly T h i n g ) a n d the curl o f the
b l o n d e hair that imitates the vertigo o f the T h i n g , but in a miniaturized,
PASSIONATE (DIS)ATTACHMENTS 287
g e n t r i f i e d f o r m . T h i s c u r l is t h e objet petit a w h i c h c o n d e n s e s t h e i m p o s s i b l e -
d e a d l y T h i n g , s e r v i n g as its s t a n d - i n a n d t h u s e n a b l i n g us t o e n t e r t a i n a
l i v a b l e r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h it w i t h o u t b e i n g s w a l l o w e d b y it.
O r s o n W e l l e s ' s film The Immortal Story, b a s e d o n K a r e n B l i x e n ' s n o v e l , is
o f i n t e r e s t n o t o n l y b e c a u s e it f o c u s e s o n the ambiguous relationship
b e t w e e n m y t h a n d reality: the r i c h o l d m e r c h a n t wants to a c t o u t the
sailors' m y t h i c narrative o f a rich o l d h u s b a n d w h o pays a y o u n g sailor t o
spend t h e n i g h t with his y o u n g wife, a n d thus p r o c u r e a n h e i r to his
w e a l t h - h e w a n t s , as it w e r e , t o c l o s e t h e g a p b e t w e e n m y t h a n d r e a l i t y ,
t h a t is, t o p r o d u c e a s a i l o r w h o will finally b e a b l e t o r e l a t e t h i s m y t h i c
n a r r a t i v e as s o m e t h i n g t h a t a c t u a l l y h a p p e n e d to him (the attempt, o f
c o u r s e , fails: t h e s a i l o r a n n o u n c e s t h a t n o a m o u n t o f m o n e y will i n d u c e
him to tell a n y o n e w h a t happened to h i m ) . M o r e interesting is the
phantasmic staging o f the scene o f lovemaking: b e h i n d a half-transparent
c u r t a i n , o n a b r i g h t l y lit b e d , t h e c o u p l e a r e m a k i n g l o v e , w h i l e t h e o l d
m e r c h a n t sits h a l f - c o n c e a l e d i n a d e e p a r m c h a i r i n t h e d a r k n e s s n e a r b y ,
a n d o v e r h e a r s t h e i r a c t o f l o v e - h e r e w e h a v e t h e T h i r d G a z e as t h e
u l t i m a t e g u a r a n t e e o f t h e s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p . T h a t is t o say, it is t h e v e r y
p r e s e n c e o f the silent witness w h o listens to the c o u p l e m a k i n g love that
t r a n s u b s t a n t i a t e s w h a t is u l t i m a t e l y a n e n c o u n t e r b e t w e e n a p a i d s a i l o r
a n d a n a g e d p r o s t i t u t e i n t o a m y t h i c e v e n t t h a t t r a n s c e n d s its m a t e r i a l
c o n d i t i o n s . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e m i r a c l e t h a t o c c u r s is n o t t h a t t h e two
lovers s o m e h o w t r a n s c e n d t h e i r m i s e r a b l e real-life situation, f o r g e t a b o u t
the ridiculous c o n d i t i o n s o f their e n c o u n t e r , get i m m e r s e d in e a c h o t h e r
a n d thus p r o d u c e an a u t h e n t i c l o v e - e n c o u n t e r ; they s u c c e e d in transub
stantiating t h a t m i s e r a b l e situation into the m i r a c l e o f a n a u t h e n t i c love-
e n c o u n t e r p r e c i s e l y because t h e y a r e a w a r e t h a t t h e y a r e d o i n g it f o r a
s i l e n t w i t n e s s , t h a t t h e y a r e ' r e a l i z i n g a m y t h ' - t h e two l o v e r s b e h a v e as i f
they are n o l o n g e r m i s e r a b l e real p e o p l e , but actors/agents in another
person's dream. The silent witness, far f r o m intruding in an intimate
s i t u a t i o n a n d s p o i l i n g it, is its k e y c o n s t i t u e n t . I t is a s t a n d a r d c l i c h e t h a t ,
s i m p l e a n d a u s t e r e as it is, The Immortal Story is W e l l e s ' s u l t i m a t e e x e r c i s e
in self-reflection - that t h e o l d m e r c h a n t who stages t h e s c e n e o f love-
m a k i n g ( p l a y e d , o f c o u r s e , b y W e l l e s h i m s e l f ) is t h e o b v i o u s s t a n d - i n f o r
W e l l e s h i m s e l f as d i r e c t o r - p e r h a p s this c l i c h e s h o u l d b e t u r n e d a r o u n d ,
a n d t h e o l d m e r c h a n t o b s e r v i n g t h e s c e n e is t h e s t a n d - i n f o r t h e s p e c t a t o r .
T h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n L a c a n a n d L a p l a n c h e is n e v e r t h e l e s s c r u c i a l
h e r e : f o r L a p l a n c h e , d r i v e is c o n s u b s t a n t i a l w i t h f a n t a s y - t h a t is t o say, it
is t h e v e r y r e f l e x i v e t u r n i n t o p h a n t a s m i c ' i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n ' w h i c h brings
a b o u t t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f instinct into drive; for L a c a n , o n t h e contrary,
288 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
t h e r e is a d r i v e b e y o n d f a n t a s y . W h a t d o e s t h i s d r i v e b e y o n d f a n t a s y m e a n ?
P e r h a p s a n o t h e r d i f f e r e n c e a l l o w s us t o t h r o w s o m e l i g h t o n this k e y
point: while o n e c o u l d claim that, for L a c a n also, the 'birthplace' o f
p s y c h o a n a l y s i s is t h e c h i l d ' s t r a u m a t i c e x p e r i e n c e w i t h t h e impenetrable
' d a r k s p o t ' o f t h e O t h e r ' s jouissance w h i c h disturbs the c a l m o f his psychic
h o m e o s t a s i s , L a c a n d e t e r m i n e s f a n t a s y as a n answer to t h e e n i g m a o f t h i s
' d a r k s p o t ' ( d e s i g n a t e d , i n h i s ' g r a p h o f d e s i r e ' , b y t h e q u e s t i o n Che vuoi?
- ' W h a t d o e s t h e O t h e r want f r o m m e ? W h a t [as a n o b j e c t ] a m I for t h e
5 2
O t h e r , for his d e s i r e ? ' ) . T h e p r e - p h a n t a s m i c drive w o u l d t h e n d e s i g n a t e
the stance o f exposing oneself to the 'dark spot' o f the O t h e r ' s e n i g m a
w i t h o u t f i l l i n g it w i t h a p h a n t a s m i c a n s w e r . . . . T h u s f o r L a c a n f a n t a s y is a
m i n i m a l ' d e f e n c e - f o r m a t i o n ' , a s t r a t a g e m to e l u d e - what?
c l i c h e o n t h e p a t e r n a l L a w as t h e a g e n c y t h a t i n t r o d u c e s t h e g a p , t h e r e
a r e t h e c l i c h e s o n t h e p i e c e o f w o o d i n t h e Fort-Da g a m e as s i g n i f y i n g
M o t h e r ' s p r e s e n c e / a b s e n c e ; o n ' e m p t y s p e e c h ' as i n a u t h e n d c b a b b l e ; o n
jouissance feminine as t h e m y s t i c a l a b y s s o u t s i d e t h e s y m b o l i c d o m a i n ; on
g a z e as t h e m a l e s u b j e c t ' s l o o k w h i c h c o n f i n e s w o m a n t o t h e r o l e o f its
object; etc.)
O u r c r i t i c a l r e m a r k s o n B u t l e r a r e b a s e d o n a full e n d o r s e m e n t o f h e r
basic insight into the p r o f o u n d link b e t w e e n - even the ultimate identity
of - the two aspects o r modes o f reflexivity: reflexivity in the strict
p h i l o s o p h i c a l s e n s e o f n e g a t i v e s e l f - r e l a t i n g , w h i c h is c o n s t i t u t i v e o f s u b j e c
tivity i n t h e t r a d i t i o n o f G e r m a n I d e a l i s m f r o m K a n t t o H e g e l ( t h e f a c t
e m p h a s i z e d e s p e c i a l l y b y , a m o n g r e c e n t i n t e r p r e t e r s , R o b e r t P i p p i n : i n its
r e l a t i n g t o its O t h e r , d i e s u b j e c t a l w a y s - a l r e a d y r e l a t e s t o itself, t h a t is,
c o n s c i o u s n e s s is a l w a y s - a l r e a d y s e l f - c o n s c i o u s n e s s ) , a n d r e f l e x i v i t y i n t h e
psychoanalytic sense o f the reflexive turn that defines the gesture o f
'primordial repression' (the reversal o f the regulation o f desire into the
4
d e s i r e f o r r e g u l a t i o n , e t c . ) . " ' T h i s r e f l e x i v e t u r n is a l r e a d y c l e a r l y d i s c e r n
i b l e i n w h a t is a r g u a b l y t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c n a r r a t i v e o f t h e d e f e n c e a g a i n s t
e x c e s s i v e jouissance, that o f Ulysses m e e t i n g t h e S i r e n s ; t h e o r d e r h e gives
h i s s a i l o r s p r i o r t o t h e m e e t i n g is: ' Y o u m u s t tie m e h a r d i n h u r t f u l b o n d s ,
t o h o l d m e fast in p o s i t i o n u p r i g h t a g a i n s t t h e m a s t , with t h e r o p e s ' e n d s
f a s t e n e d a r o u n d it; b u t i f I s u p p l i c a t e y o u a n d i m p l o r e y o u t o s e t m e f r e e ,
5 r >
t h e n y o u m u s t tie m e fast w i t h e v e n m o r e l a s h i n g s . ' T h e o r d e r to 'tie m e
hard in hurtful bonds' is c l e a r l y e x c e s s i v e i n the context o f Circe's
i n s t r u c t i o n s : we p a s s f r o m bonding as a d e f e n c e a g a i n s t t h e e x c e s s i v e
jouissance o f the Sirens' song to b o n d i n g i t s e l f as t h e s o u r c e o f e r o t i c
satisfaction.
T h i s reflexiviry n o n e t h e less a s s u m e s d i f f e r e n t m o d a l i t i e s - n o t o n l y
between philosophy and psychoanalysis, b u t also within psychoanalysis
itself: t h e r e f l e x i v i t y o f drive vie h a v e f o c u s e d o n i n t h i s c h a p t e r is n o t t h e
s a m e as t h e h y s t e r i c a l r e f l e x i v i t y o f desire w e d i s c u s s e d i n C h a p t e r 2 ( i . e .
t h e f a c t t h a t h y s t e r i a is d e f i n e d by t h e reversal o f t h e impossibility to
satisfy d e s i r e i n t o t h e d e s i r e t o k e e p d e s i r e i t s e l f u n s a t i s f i e d , e t c . ) . How
a r e t h e s e two r e f l e x i v i t i e s r e l a t e d ? T h e o p p o s i t i o n h e r e is b e t w e e n p e r v e r
s i o n a n d h y s t e r i a : i f d e s i r e ' a s s u c h ' is h y s t e r i c a l , d r i v e ' a s s u c h ' is p e r v e r s e .
T h a t is to say, h y s t e r i a a n d p e r v e r s i o n a r e c a u g h t in a k i n d o f c l o s e d
PASSIONATE (DIS)ATTACHMENTS 291
d e a d l y l o o p w i t h i n w h i c h e a c h o f t h e t w o c a n b e c o n c e i v e d o f as the
r e a c t i o n t o its o p p o s i t e . D r i v e d e f i n e s t h e m a s o c h i s t i c p a r a m e t e r s o f t h e
primordial 'passionate attachment', o f the fundamental fantasy which
g u a r a n t e e s the m i n i m u m o f b e i n g to the subject; subjectivity p r o p e r then
e m e r g e s t h r o u g h the hysterical disavowal o f this p r i m o r d i a l 'passionate
a t t a c h m e n t ' - t h r o u g h t h e s u b j e c t ' s refusal to a s s u m e t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e
o b j e c t - i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e O t h e r ' s jouissance - the hysterical subject inces
s a n t l y q u e s t i o n s h i s / h e r p o s i t i o n ( h i s / h e r b a s i c q u e s t i o n is ' W h a t a m I f o r
the Other? Why am I what the O t h e r says I a m ? ' ) . S o not only can
h y s t e r i c a l d e s i r e b e c o n c e i v e d o f as t h e d i s a v o w a l o f t h e fundamental
fantasy e n d o r s e d by the pervert; perversion itself ( a s s u m i n g the position
o f t h e o b j e c t - i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e O t h e r ' s jouissance) c a n also b e c o n c e i v e d
o f as t h e e s c a p e i n t o s e l f - o b j e c t i v i z a t i o n w h i c h e n a b l e s m e t o a v o i d the
d e a d l o c k o f t h e r a d i c a l u n c e r t a i n t y o f w h a t I a m as a n o b j e c t — t h e p e r v e r t ,
b y d e f i n i t i o n , knows w h a t , as a n o b j e c t , h e is f o r t h e O t h e r .
D e s i r e a n d d r i v e a r e c l e a r l y o p p o s e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e way t h e y r e l a t e
t o jouissance. F o r L a c a n , t h e t r o u b l e w i t h jouissance is n o t o n l y t h a t it is
u n a t t a i n a b l e , a l w a y s - a l r e a d y l o s t , t h a t it f o r e v e r e l u d e s o u r g r a s p , b u t , e v e n
m o r e , t h a t one can never get rid of it, t h a t its s t a i n d r a g s o n f o r e v e r - t h a t is
t h e p o i n t o f L a c a n ' s c o n c e p t o f s u r p l u s - e n j o y m e n t : t h e very r e n u n c i a t i o n
o f jouissance b r i n g s a b o u t a r e m a i n d e r / s u r p l u s o f jouissance. Desire stands
f o r t h e e c o n o m y i n w h i c h w h a t e v e r o b j e c t w e g e t h o l d o f is ' n e v e r it', t h e
' R e a l T h i n g ' , t h a t w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t is f o r e v e r t r y i n g t o a t t a i n b u t w h i c h
e l u d e s h i m again a n d again, while drive stands for the o p p o s i t e e c o n o m y ,
w i t h i n w h i c h t h e s t a i n o f jouissance always a c c o m p a n i e s o u r a c t s . T h i s a l s o
explains the difference in the reflexivity o f drive and desire: desire
r e f l e x i v e l y d e s i r e s its o w n u n s a t i s f a c t i o n , t h e p o s t p o n e m e n t o f t h e e n c o u n
t e r w i t h jouissance - t h a t is, t h e b a s i c f o r m u l a o f t h e r e f l e x i v i t y o f d e s i r e is
to turn the i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f satisfying desire into the desire for non-
satisfaction; drive, o n the contrary, finds satisfaction in (i.e. b e s m i r c h e s
with t h e stain o f satisfaction) the very m o v e m e n t d e s t i n e d to 'repress'
satisfaction.
W h a t , t h e n , is d r i v e , e s p e c i a l l y i n its m o s t r a d i c a l f o r m , t h a t o f t h e d e a t h
drive? A l o o k at W a g n e r i a n h e r o e s c a n be o f s o m e h e l p h e r e : from their
first p a r a d i g m a t i c case, the Flying D u t c h m a n , they a r e possessed by an
u n c o n d i t i o n a l passion for dying, for finding ultimate p e a c e a n d redemp
t i o n i n d e a t h . T h e i r p r e d i c a m e n t is t h a t at s o m e t i m e in t h e p a s t t h e y
h a v e c o m m i t t e d s o m e u n s p e a k a b l e evil d e e d , s o t h a t t h e y a r e c o n d e m n e d
t o p a y f o r it n o t b y d e a t h , b u t b y b e i n g c o n d e m n e d t o a life o f e t e r n a l
s u f f e r i n g , o f h e l p l e s s l y w a n d e r i n g a r o u n d , u n a b l e t o fulfil t h e i r s y m b o l i c
292 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
f u n c t i o n . W h e r e is t h e d e a t h d r i v e h e r e ? I t p r e c i s e l y d o e s not l i e i n t h e i r
l o n g i n g t o d i e , t o find p e a c e i n d e a t h : t h e d e a t h d r i v e , o n t h e c o n t r a r y , is
the very opposite of dying, i t is a n a m e f o r t h e ' u n d e a d ' e t e r n a l life i t s e l f , f o r
the horrible fate of being caught in the endless repetitive cycle of
wandering around in guilt and pain. The final passing-away of the
Wagnerian hero (the death o f the Dutchman, Wotan, Tristan, Amfortas)
is t h e r e f o r e t h e m o m e n t o f t h e i r liberation f r o m t h e c l u t c h e s o f t h e d e a t h
d r i v e . T r i s t a n i n A c t I I I is n o t d e s p e r a t e b e c a u s e o f h i s f e a r o f d y i n g : w h a t
m a k e s h i m s o d e s p e r a t e is t h e f a c t t h a t , w i t h o u t I s o l d e , h e cannot die a n d
is c o n d e m n e d to eternal l o n g i n g - h e a n x i o u s l y awaits h e r a r r i v a l so
t h a t h e c a n d i e . T h e p r o s p e c t h e d r e a d s is n o t t h a t o f d y i n g w i t h o u t I s o l d e
( t h e s t a n d a r d c o m p l a i n t o f a l o v e r ) b u t , r a t h e r , t h a t o f e n d l e s s life w i t h o u t
her. . . .
d e a t h ' , K i e r k e g a a r d i n v e r t e d t h e s t a n d a r d d e s p a i r o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l w h o is
s p l i t b e t w e e n t h e c e r t a i n t y t h a t d e a t h is t h e e n d , t h a t t h e r e is n o B e v o n d
o f e t e r n a l l i f e , a n d t h e u n q u e n c h a b l e d e s i r e t o b e l i e v e t h a t d e a t h is n o t
t h e l a s t t h i n g : t h a t t h e r e is a n o t h e r l i f e , w i t h its p r o m i s e o f r e d e m p t i o n
a n d e t e r n a l bliss: K i e r k e g a a r d ' s ' s i c k n e s s u n t o d e a t h ' i n v o l v e s t h e o p p o s i t e
p a r a d o x o f t h e s u b j e c t w h o k n o w s t h a t d e a t h is n o t t h e e n d , t h a t h e h a s
an i m m o r t a l soul, b u t c a n n o t face the e x o r b i t a n t d e m a n d s o f this fact
(the necessity to a b a n d o n vain aesthetic pleasures and work for his
salvation), a n d d e s p e r a t e l y wants to b e l i e v e that d e a t h is t h e e n d , that
t h e r e is n o d i v i n e u n c o n d i t i o n a l d e m a n d e x e r t i n g its p r e s s u r e u p o n h i m .
... S o we have h e r e the individual who desperately wants to die, to
d i s a p p e a r f o r e v e r , b u t k n o w s t h a t h e c a n n o t d o it, s i n c e h e is c o n d e m n e d
t o e t e r n a l life: i m m o r t a l i t y , n o t d e a t h , b e c o m e s t h e u l t i m a t e h o r r o r . I n a
way this r e v e r s a l is a n a l o g o u s to t h e one we just m e n t i o n e d , to the
L a c a n i a n s h i f t f r o m d e s i r e t o d r i v e : d e s i r e d e s p e r a t e l y strives t o a c h i e v e
puissance, its u l t i m a t e o b j e c t w h i c h f o r e v e r e l u d e s it; w h i l e d r i v e , o n the
contrary, involves the o p p o s i t e impossibility - not the impossibility o f
a t t a i n i n g jouissance, b u t t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f g e t t i n g rid of it.
T h e p r o b l e m M i l l e r is s t r u g g l i n g w i t h is t h e c e n t r a l o n e i n l a t e L a c a n :
after p e n e t r a t i n g b e n e a t h the ( O e d i p u s ) c o m p l e x o f L a w / d e s i r e , o f desire
g r o u n d e d in p r o h i b i t i o n , t o t h e e n i g m a t i c ' d a r k c o n t i n e n t ' o f d r i v e and
its satisfaction in the repeated circuit of puissance, how do we
( r e ) i n t r o d u c e a L i m i t , a n d t h u s return to t h e d o m a i n o f p r o h i b i t i o n / L a w ,
communication of/and m e a n i n g ? T h e o n l y c o n s i s t e n t s o l u t i o n h e r e is
t h a t I'apparole (the L a c a n i a n version o f 'primary narcissism' prior lo the
introduction o f the symbolic Law) is n o t 'primordial'; that there is
s o m e t h i n g w h i c h ( l o g i c a l l y , a t l e a s t ) p r e c e d e s it - t h i s , p r e c i s e l y , is w h a t
we h a v e c a l l e d t h e v i o l e n c e o f p r e - s y n t h e t i c i m a g i n a t i o n , w h i c h is not t o
b e i d e n t i f i e d with t h e blissful c i r c u i t o f self-satisfied drive. T h i s c i r c u i t o f
d r i v e is t h e u l t i m a t e m a t r i x o f self-affection, o f self-affective c i r c u l a t i o n
( L a c a n h i m s e l f e v o k e s lips k i s s i n g t h e m s e l v e s as t h e perfect figure of
drive; his very f o r m u l a o f drive - 'se faire. . .' - already e v o k e s self-
a f f e c t i o n ) ; w h i l e p r e - s y n t h e t i c i m a g i n a t i o n is t h e v e r y o p p o s i t e o f self-
affection: it stands for a k i n d o f o n t o l o g i c a l ' B i g B a n g ' , f o r t h e p r i m o r d i a l
'violence' o f breaking out o f the i m m e r s i o n a n d enclosure, exploding the
closed circuit, tearing apart any unity o f Life into the free-floating
multiplicity o f spectral a n d m o n s t r o u s 'partial objects'.
E v e n L a c a n ' s o w n p o s i t i o n o n t h i s p o i n t is n o t w i t h o u t its a m b i g u i t i e s .
H i s ' o f f i c i a l ' s t a n c e is b e s t e x e m p l i f i e d b y t h e s h o r t b u t c r u c i a l t e x t a t t h e
296 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
2
e n d o f h i s Ecrits, ' F r o m t h e F r e u d i a n Trieb t o t h e D e s i r e o f t h e A n a l y s t ' : ' '
w h a t is t h e a n a l y s a n d to d o w h e n h e r e a c h e s t h e e n d o f t h e a n a l y t i c c u r e ,
t h a t is, w h e n h e ' r e g r e s s e s ' f r o m d e s i r e ( s u s t a i n e d b y f a n t a s y ) t o d r i v e ? I s
h e to a b a n d o n h i m s e l f to t h e s e l f - e n c l o s e d c i r c u i t o f drive? Different
mystical a n d p h i l o s o p h i c a l traditions, from Christian mysticism to Nie
t z s c h e , s e e m t o a d v o c a t e t h i s way: a c c e p t t h e c i r c u i t o f t h e ' e t e r n a l r e t u r n
o f t h e s a m e ' , find satisfaction n o t in r e a c h i n g a G o a l b u t in t h e very p a t h
which leads t o it, t h a t is, i n repeatedly missing the Goal. . . . Lacan,
h o w e v e r , i n s i s t s t h a t ' g o i n g t h r o u g h t h e f a n t a s y ' is n o t s t r i c t l y e q u i v a l e n t
t o t h e shift f r o m d r i v e t o d e s i r e : t h e r e is a d e s i r e t h a t r e m a i n s e v e n a f t e r
we h a v e t r a v e r s e d o u r f u n d a m e n t a l fantasy, a desire n o t sustained by a
f a n t a s y , a n d this d e s i r e , o f c o u r s e , is the desire of the analyst — n o t t h e d e s i r e
t o b e c o m e a n a n a l y s t , b u t t h e d e s i r e w h i c h fits t h e s u b j e c t i v e p o s i t i o n o f
t h e analyst, t h e d e s i r e o f s o m e o n e w h o h a s u n d e r g o n e 'subjective destitu
tion' a n d a c c e p t e d the role o f the e x c r e m e n t a l abject, desire delivered o f
t h e p h a n t a s m i c n o t i o n t h a t ' t h e r e is s o m e t h i n g i n m e m o r e t h a n m y s e l f ,
a secret treasure which makes m e worthy o f the Other's desire. T h i s
u n i q u e d e s i r e is w h a t , e v e n a f t e r I h a v e fully a s s u m e d ' t h e b i g Other's
nonexistence' - that is, t h e fact that the symbolic order is a mere
s e m b l a n c e - p r e v e n t s m e f r o m i m m e r s i n g m y s e l f in t h e s e l f - e n c l o s u r e o f
d r i v e ' s c i r c u i t a n d its d e b i l i t a t i n g s a t i s f a c t i o n . T h e d e s i r e o f t h e a n a l y s t is
thus s u p p o s e d to sustain the analytic c o m m u n i t y in t h e a b s e n c e o f any
p h a n t a s m i c s u p p o r t ; it is s u p p o s e d to m a k e p o s s i b l e a c o m m u n a l 'big
O t h e r ' that avoids t h e transferential effect o f t h e ' s u b j e c t s u p p o s e d to . . .
[ k n o w , b e l i e v e , e n j o y ] ' . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e d e s i r e o f t h e a n a l y s t is L a c a n ' s
tentative answer to t h e q u e s t i o n : after we have traversed t h e fantasy, a n d
a c c e p t e d t h e ' n o n e x i s t e n c e o f t h e big O t h e r ' , h o w d o we n o n e t h e less
r e t u r n to s o m e ( n e w ) f o r m o f t h e b i g O t h e r that again m a k e s c o l l e c t i v e
coexistence possible?
W h a t o n e s h o u l d a l s o n o t l o s e s i g h t o f is t h e f a c t t h a t , f o r L a c a n , d r i v e
is n o t ' p r i m o r d i a l ' , a f o u n d a t i o n o u t o f w h i c h , b y m e a n s o f t h e i n t e r v e n
tion o f the symbolic Law, desire emerges. A close reading o f L a c a n ' s
3
'graph o f desire'" shows h o w drive is a m o n t a g e o f elements which
e m e r g e s as a k i n d o f ' n e c e s s a r y b y - p r o d u c t ' o f t h e i n s t i n c t u a l b o d y g e t t i n g
c a u g h t in t h e w e b o f t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r . T h e fact that an i n s t i n c t u a l n e e d
is c a u g h t i n t h e s i g n i f i e r ' s w e b m e a n s t h a t t h e o b j e c t t h a t s a t i s f i e s t h i s
n e e d starts t o f u n c t i o n as t h e s i g n o f t h e ( M ) O t h e r ' s l o v e ; c o n s e q u e n t l y ,
t h e o n l y way to b r e a k o u t o f t h e d e a d l o c k o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s e n s l a v e m e n t t o
t h e O t h e r ' s d e m a n d is v i a t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f t h e s y m b o l i c P r o h i b i t i o n /
L a w w h i c h m a k e s t h e full s a t i s f a c t i o n o f d e s i r e f o r e v e r i m p o s s i b l e . All t h e
PASSIONATE (DIS) ATTACHMENTS 297
e m p h a s i z e d b y F o u c a u l t ) - t h a t is, t o t a k e d i s r e g a r d f o r t h e b o d y l i t e r a l l y ,
t o p r e a c h a n d p r a c t i s e t r u e c h a s t i t y ( s i n c e , as t h e C a t h a r s p u t it, every
6 7
s e x u a l r e u n i o n is i n c e s t u o u s ) . T h e p a r a d o x , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t t h i s r a d i c a l
renunciation o f sexual pleasure n o t only does n o t deprive the subject o f
jouissance, but even a m p l i f i e s it (the ascetic mystic has an access to
jouissance that is m u c h more intense than the usual standard sexual
p l e a s u r e ) . T h a t is t h e c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e C a t h a r h e r e s y a n d c o u r t l y
love: w h e n , i n s t e a d o f b e i n g allowed s e x u a l p l e a s u r e within t h e c o n f i n e s
o f t h e L a w , b o d i l y s e x u a l i t y is t o t a l l y p r o h i b i t e d , t h i s p r o h i b i t i o n o f t h e
f i n a l s e x u a l u n i f i c a t i o n , t h i s s t r u c t u r e o f amor interruptus prolonged ad
infinitum, gives b i r t h t o c o u r d y l o v e i n w h i c h d e s i r e shifts i n t o d r i v e - in
w h i c h s a t i s f a c t i o n is p r o v i d e d b y t h e v e r y i n d e f i n i t e p o s t p o n e m e n t o f t h e
sexual u n i o n that would bring a b o u t 'actual' satisfaction. Christian crusad
e r s a g a i n s t t h e C a t h a r s w e r e t h e r e f o r e , i n a way, r i g h t i n t h e i r s u s p i c i o n
t h a t t h e a s c e t i c r e n u n c i a t i o n o f e a r t h l y p l e a s u r e s a m o n g t h e C a t h a r s was
d e e p l y a m b i g u o u s , s i n c e it e n g e n d e r e d a m u c h m o r e i n t e n s e jouissance
t h a t u n d e r m i n e d t h e very r e g u l a t i n g p o w e r o f t h e p a t e r n a l s y m b o l i c Law.
• T h a t o f t h e n a r r a t i v e in w h i c h , i n t h e first m o m e n t , w e ( t h e s u b j e c t
f r o m w h o s e v i e w p o i n t t h e s t o r y is t o l d ) c o n f r o n t s o m e h o r r i f y i n g object
( A l i e n T h i n g , M o n s t e r , M u r d e r e r . . . ) , p r e s e n t e d as t h e p o i n t w i t h w h i c h
n o i d e n t i f i c a t i o n is p o s s i b l e - all o f a s u d d e n , h o w e v e r , w e , t h e s p e c t a t o r s ,
a r e violently t h r o w n i n t o t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o f this very A l i e n T h i n g . R e c a l l
e x a m p l e s l i k e Frankenstein ( t h e n o v e l ) , in w h i c h , after the M o n s t e r is
p r e s e n t e d t o us as t h e A l i e n H o r r o r T h i n g , w e a r e t h r o w n all o f a s u d d e n
7 1
i n t o his p e r s p e c t i v e - t h a t is, he is a l l o w e d to t e l l h i s s i d e o f t h e s t o r y . In
Wes Craven's supreme Wlien a Stranger Calls, a l s o , w e a r e t h r o w n all o f a
sudden into the standpoint o f the pathological compulsive killer pre
s e n t e d i n t h e first p a r t o f t h e f i l m as a b s o l u t e O t h e r n e s s - n o t t o m e n t i o n
Hitchcock's Psycho, in w h i c h , after the Mother is c o n s t r u c t e d as the
horrifying T h i n g , we are, in s o m e shots (like t h e killing o f t h e d e t e c t i v e
7 2
A r b o g a s t ) , v i e w i n g t h e a c t i o n f r o m its p e r s p e c t i v e .
I n all t h e s e c a s e s , t h e i n a c c e s s i b l e / t r a u m a t i c T h i n g - b e y o n d - r e p r e s e n t a t i o n
i t s e l f b e c o m e s ' s u b j e c t i v i z e d ' : this s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n d o e s n o t 'humanize'
t h e T h i n g , d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h a t w h a t w e t h o u g h t was a M o n s t e r is in f a c t
a n o r d i n a r y , v u l n e r a b l e p e r s o n - t h e T h i n g r e t a i n s its u n b e a r a b l e O t h e r
n e s s , it is as such t h a t it s u b j e c t i v i z e s i t s e l f . O r , t o p u t it i n t h e t e r m s o f
v i s i o n : t h e T h i n g is first c o n s t r u c t e d as t h e i n a c c e s s i b l e X a r o u n d w h i c h
m y d e s i r e c i r c u l a t e s , as t h e b l i n d s p o t I w a n t t o s e e b u t simultaneously
PASSIONATE (DIS) ATTACHMENTS 301
d r e a d a n d a v o i d s e e i n g , t o o s t r o n g f o r m y e y e s ; t h e n , i n t h e shift towards
d r i v e , I ( t h e s u b j e c t ) ' m a k e m y s e l f s e e n ' as t h e T h i n g - i n a r e f l e x i v e t u r n ,
I s e e myself as It, t h e t r a u m a t i c o b j e c t - T h i n g I d i d n ' t w a n t t o s e e .
A g a i n , d o we n o t find t h e u l t i m a t e e x a m p l e o f this i m p o s s i b l e T h i n g
t h a t 'is' ourselves in t h e s c i e n c e - f i c t i o n t h e m e o f t h e s o - c a l l e d /rf-Machine,
a mechanism that directly materializes our unacknowledged fantasies
( f r o m F r e d W i l c o x ' s The Forbidden Planet to Andrei Tarkovsky's Solaris)?
T h e l a t e s t v a r i a t i o n o n t h i s t h e m e is B a r r y L e v i n s o n ' s Sphere ( 1 9 9 7 ) , in
w h i c h , b e n e a t h t h e o c e a n surface in t h e m i d s t o f t h e Pacific, a g i g a n t i c
s p a c e c r a f t is s u d d e n l y d i s c o v e r e d , h a v i n g s a t t h e r e o n t h e o c e a n f l o o r f o r
three hundred years. T h e three scientists who penetrate it gradually
discover that the mysterious S p h e r e in the middle o f the spacecraft can
r e a c h i n t o y o u r m i n d : it k n o w s y o u r w o r s t f e a r s a n d s t a r t s t o m a k e them
7 S
c o m e true, to m a t e r i a l i z e t h e m . . . ,
U n i n t e r e s t i n g as Sphere is, it n o n e t h e l e s s d e s e r v e s a t t e n t i o n f o r its t i t l e :
as L a c a n s h o w e d in t h e c h a p t e r o f his S e m i n a r o n T r a n s f e r e n c e d e d i c a t e d
4
to this very t h e m e ( ' L a d e r i s i o n de la s p h e r e ' ' ) , t h e fascination e x e r t e d
o n us b y t h e u n t o u c h a b l e , i m p e n e t r a b l e , s e l f - e n c l o s e d a n d s e l f - c o n t a i n e d
form o f a sphere lies in the fact that it e x p r e s s e s perfectly, on the
i m a g i n a r y level, the f o r e c l o s u r e o f castration, o f a c u t that would signal
the presence o f a lack a n d / o r an excess. A n d , paradoxically, since o u r
a c c e s s t o r e a l i t y is c o n d i t i o n e d by t h e c u t o f c a s t r a t i o n , t h e s t a t u s o f t h i s
s p h e r e , far f r o m embodying o n t o l o g i c a l p e r f e c t i o n , is stricto sensu pre-
ontological: the Sphere-Thing appears to us as s o m e t h i n g which, in
c i n e m a t i c t e r m s , o n e c o u l d d e s i g n a t e as a b l u r r e d o b j e c t , a n o b j e c t t h a t is
b y d e f i n i t i o n , a p r i o r i , o u t o f f o c u s . " ' T h i s is n i c e l y c o n v e y e d i n L e v i n s o n ' s
f i l m , i n w h i c h t h e S p h e r e is p e r f e c t l y r o u n d y e t s i m u l t a n e o u s l y s o m e h o w
a l i v e , u n d u l a t i n g a n d v i b r a t i n g , as i f its s u r f a c e c o n s i s t s o f t h e i n f i n i t y o f
m i c r o s c o p i c waves.
T h e S p h e r e is t h u s l i k e t h e s u r f a c e o f T a r k o v s k y ' s S o l a r i s - O c e a n in its
c o i n c i d e n c e o f g l o b a l , o v e r a l l c a l m a n d i n f i n i t e m o b i l i t y - a l t h o u g h i t is
p e r f e c t l y at p e a c e , it is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y e x t r e m e l y a g i t a t e d , s c i n t i l l a t i n g all
the time, s o t h a t it is i m p o s s i b l e t o fix it, t o g e t h o l d o f i t i n its p o s i t i v e
e x i s t e n c e . As s u c h , t h e S p h e r e is n o t h i n g in itself - a p u r e m e d i u m , a
perfect m i r r o r that does not m i r r o r / m a t e r i a l i z e reality b u t only the R e a l
of the subject's fundamental fantasies. W h e n , in the film, the Dustin
Hoffman character angrily rebukes S a m u e l J a c k s o n (playing the African-
A m e r i c a n m a t h e m a t i c i a n ) b e c a u s e h e d o e s n o t w a n t t o d i v u l g e w h a t is i n
the s p h e r e to others, J a c k s o n retorts angrily: ' B u t you also have b e e n in
302 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
i n n e r m o s t i d i o s y n c r a t i c w h i m s ; i f t h e r e is a p u p p e t - m a s t e r w h o p u l l s t h e
s t r i n g s , it is o u r s e l v e s , ' t h e T h i n g t h a t t h i n k s ' i n o u r h e a r t .
A n d is n o t t h e u l t i m a t e e x a m p l e o f t h i s c o i n c i d e n c e o f t h e v e r y k e r n e l
o f m y b e i n g with the u l t i m a t e e x t e r n a l i t y o f t h e A l i e n T h i n g Oedipus
himself, w h o , in s e a r c h o f t h e m u r d e r e r o f his father, discovers t h a t h e
h i m s e l f is t h e perpetrator? In this p r e c i s e s e n s e , o n e can claim that
F r e u d ' s t e r m Triebschicksale, t h e ' d e s t i n i e s / v i c i s s i t u d e s o f d r i v e ' , is d e e p l y
j u s t i f i e d , e v e n t a u t o l o g i c a l ; t h e F r e u d i a n ' d r i v e ' is u l t i m a t e l y a n o t h e r n a m e
for 'Destiny', for the reversal t h r o u g h which t h e circle o f Destiny a c c o m
p l i s h e s / c l o s e s i t s e l f ( w h e n D e s t i n y c a t c h e s u p w i t h O e d i p u s , h e is c o n
f r o n t e d w i t h t h e f a c t t h a t h e is t h e m o n s t e r h e is l o o k i n g f o r ) . A n d in
o r d e r t o b r i n g h o m e h o w this d i m e n s i o n o f D e s t i n y o v e r l a p s w i t h the
temporal loop, recall the standard tragic science-fiction t h e m e of a
s c i e n t i s t w h o t r a v e l s i n t o t h e p a s t i n o r d e r t o i n t e r v e n e i n it a n d thus
retroactively c h a n g e (undo) the catastrophic present; all o f a sudden
( w h e n i t is a l r e a d y t o o l a t e ) , h e b e c o m e s a w a r e n o t o n l y t h a t t h e result
( t h e p r e s e n t c a t a s t r o p h e ) is t h e s a m e , b u t t h a t his very attempt to change the
present through his retroactive intervention in the past produced the very catastrophe
he wanted to undo - h i s i n t e r v e n t i o n was i n c l u d e d i n t h e c o u r s e o f t h i n g s
f r o m t h e very outset. I n this p r o p e r l y d i a l e c t i c a l reversal, t h e a l t e r n a t i v e
reality t h e a g e n t w a n t e d to b r i n g a b o u t turns o u t to b e the very p r e s e n t
c a t a s t r o p h i c reality.
T o t h o s e v e r s e d i n H e g e l i a n p h i l o s o p h y , t h e s e two f e a t u r e s o f d r i v e -
its t e m p o r a l l o o p ; t h e p i t i l e s s a n d i n e x o r a b l e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t
with t h e i n a c c e s s i b l e T h i n g w h o s e l a c k o r withdrawal sustains t h e s p a c e o f
desire - c a n n o t b u t e v o k e two f u n d a m e n t a l features o f the Hegelian
dialectical process: does not Hegel reiterate again and again how the
dialectical p r o c e s s displays t h e c i r c u l a r structure o f a l o o p ( t h e s u b j e c t o f
t h e p r o c e s s , t h e a b s o l u t e I d e a , is n o t g i v e n i n a d v a n c e , b u t is g e n e r a t e d
by t h e p r o c e s s itself - s o , in a p a r a d o x i c a l t e m p o r a l s h o r t circuit, t h e final
R e s u l t r e t r o a c t i v e l y causes itself, g e n e r a t e s its o w n c a u s e s ) ; a n d , further
m o r e , h o w t h e b a s i c m a t r i x o f t h e d i a l e c t i c a l p r o c e s s is t h a t o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s
s e l f - r e c o g n i t i o n i n t h e I n - i t s e l f o f its a b s o l u t e O t h e r n e s s ( r e c a l l t h e s t a n
d a r d figure o f H e g e l a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h I have to r e c o g n i z e m y own
s u b s t a n c e in t h e very f o r c e t h a t s e e m s to resist a n d t h w a r t m y e n d e a v o u r ) .
D o e s t h i s m e a n t h a t ' d r i v e ' is i n h e r e n t l y m e t a p h y s i c a l , t h a t i t p r o v i d e s
the elemental-)' matrix o f the closed circle o f teleology and o f self-
r e c o g n i t i o n i n O t h e r n e s s ? Y e s , b u t w i t h a twist: it is as if, i n d r i v e , t h i s
c l o s e d l o o p o f t e l e o l o g y is m i n i m a l l y d i s p l a c e d o n a c c o u n t o f t h e f a i l u r e
t h a t s e t s i t i n m o t i o n . I t m a y a p p e a r t h a t d r i v e is t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c c a s e o f
304 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
W e can now pinpoint the opposition between the subject o f desire and
the subject o f drive: while the subject o f desire is g r o u n d e d in the
c o n s t i t u t i v e lack ( i t ex-sists i n s o f a r as it is i n s e a r c h o f t h e m i s s i n g O b j e c t -
C a u s e ) , t h e s u b j e c t o f d r i v e is g r o u n d e d i n a c o n s t i t u t i v e surplus - t h a t is
t o say, in t h e e x c e s s i v e p r e s e n c e o f s o m e T h i n g t h a t is i n h e r e n t l y ' i m p o s s
i b l e ' a n d s h o u l d n o t b e h e r e , in o u r p r e s e n t reality - the T h i n g w h i c h , o f
c o u r s e , is u l t i m a t e l y the subject itself. T h e standard heterosexual 'fatal
attraction' s c e n e is t h a t o f m a l e d e s i r e c a p t i v a t e d a n d f a s c i n a t e d b y a
d e a d l y jouissance feminine, a w o m a n is d e s u b j e c t i v i z e d , c a u g h t i n t h e self-
e n c l o s e d cycle o f a c e p h a l o u s drive, i g n o r a n t o f the fascination she exerts
o n m a n , a n d it is p r e c i s e l y t h i s s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t i g n o r a n c e w h i c h m a k e s h e r
i r r e s i s t i b l e ; t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c m y t h i c a l e x a m p l e o f t h i s s c e n e , o f c o u r s e , is
t h a t o f U l y s s e s c a p t i v a t e d by t h e S i r e n s ' s o n g , t h i s p u r e jouis-sense. What
happens, however, when the W o m a n - T h i n g herself b e c o m e s subjectivized?
T h i s , p e r h a p s , is t h e m o s t m y s t e r i o u s l i b i d i n a l i n v e r s i o n o f all: t h e m o m e n t
PASSIONATE (DIS) ATTACHMENTS 305
r e n d e r e d i n d i f f e r e n t . . . . P e r h a p s t h i s p a i n t i n g is t h e c l o s e s t o n e c a n get
to t h e d e p i c t i o n o f the unique m o m e n t o f the e m e r g e n c e o f the subject
o f drive.
Notes
Whither Oedipus?
1
F r o m t h e e a r l y days o f h i s Complexes familiaux, Lacan foc\_ l s e d on the
historicity o f t h e O e d i p u s c o m p l e x itself, as w e l l as o f its discover).- b y F r e u d .
I n t h e m o d e r n b o u r g e o i s n u c l e a r f a m i l y , t h e two f u n c t i o n s o f t h e f a t h e r
w h i c h w e r e p r e v i o u s l y s e p a r a t e d , t h a t is, e m b o d i e d i n d i f f e r e n t people
(the pacifying Ego Ideal, the point o f ideal identification and the
ferocious superego, the agent o f cruel prohibition; the symbolic function
o f t o t e m a n d t h e h o r r o r o f t a b o o ) , a r e united in one and the same person.
( T h e p r e v i o u s s e p a r a t e p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n o f t h e two f u n c t i o n s a c c o u n t s f o r
the apparent stupidity' o f some aborigines who thought that the true
f a t h e r o f a c h i l d is a s t o n e o r a n a n i m a l o r a s p i r i t : t h e a b o r i g i n e s w e r e
w e l l a w a r e t h a t t h e m o t h e r was i n s e m i n a t e d b y t h e 'real' father; they
m e r e l y s e p a r a t e d t h e r e a l f a t h e r f r o m its s y m b o l i c f u n c t i o n . ) T h e a m b i g u
o u s rivalry with t h e f a t h e r figure, w h i c h e m e r g e d with t h e U n i f i c a t i o n o f
t h e two f u n c t i o n s i n t h e b o u r g e o i s n u c l e a r f a m i l y , c r e a t e d t h e p s y c h i c
c o n d i t i o n s for m o d e r n Western dynamic creative individualism; at the
same time, however, it s o w e d the seeds o f the subsequent 'crisis o f
O e d i p u s ' ( o r , m o r e g e n e r a l l y , with r e g a r d t o figures o f a u t h o r i t y as s u c h ,
2
o f t h e 'crisis o f investiture' that e r u p t e d in t h e late n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y ) :
s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y was m o r e a n d m o r e s m e a r e d b y t h e m a r k . Q f obscenity
a n d t h u s , as it w e r e , u n d e r m i n e d f r o m w i t h i n . L a c a n ' s p o i n t , Q f c o u r s e , is
t h a t t h i s i d e n t i t y is t h e ' t r u t h ' o f t h e O e d i p u s c o m p l e x : it c a n 'function
n o r m a l l y ' a n d a c c o m p l i s h its j o b o f t h e c h i l d ' s i n t e g r a t i o n i n t o t h e s o c i o -
s y m b o l i c o r d e r o n l y i n so far as t h i s i d e n t i t y r e m a i n s c o n c e a l e d - the
m o m e n t it is p o s i t e d as s u c h , t h e figure o f paternal authority potentially
t u r n s i n t o a n o b s c e n e jouisseur ( t h e G e r m a n w o r d is Luripr) in whom
i m p o t e n c e a n d e x c e s s i v e r a g e c o i n c i d e , a ' h u m i l i a t e d l a t h e r ' c a u g h t in
i m a g i n a r y rivalry with h i s s o n .
H e r e we h a v e t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c c a s e o f a p r o p e r l y h i s t o r i c a l d i a l e c t i c :
314 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
as s u c h , i n n e e d o f d i e s u p p l e m e n t a r y ' i r r a t i o n a l ' a c t o f p u r e W i l l i n o r d e r
t o actualize itself.
T h i s G o d is t h e G o d w h o speaks to His f o l l o w e r s / s o n s , to His ' p e o p l e ' -
t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f voice is c r u c i a l h e r e . A s L a c a n p u t it i n h i s u n p u b l i s h e d
S e m i n a r o n Anxiety (from 1 9 6 0 - 6 1 ) , the voice (the actual 'speech act')
b r i n g s a b o u t t h e passage a I'acte o f t h e s i g n i f y i n g n e t w o r k , its ' s y m b o l i c
e f f i c i e n c y ' . T h i s v o i c e is i n h e r e n t l y m e a n i n g l e s s - n o n s e n s i c a l , e v e n ; it is
just a negative gesture which gives e x p r e s s i o n t o G o d ' s m a l i c i o u s and
v e n g e f u l a n g e r ( a l l m e a n i n g is a l r e a d y t h e r e i n t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r w h i c h
s t r u c t u r e s o u r u n i v e r s e ) , b u t it is p r e c i s e l y as s u c h t h a t it a c t u a l i z e s t h e
1 0
p u r e l y s t r u c t u r a l m e a n i n g , t r a n s f o r m i n g it i n t o a n e x p e r i e n c e o f S e n s e .
T h i s , o f c o u r s e , is a n o t h e r way o f s a y i n g t h a t t h r o u g h this u t t e r i n g o f t h e
V o i c e w h i c h m a n i f e s t s H i s W i l l , G o d subjectivizes Himself. T h e old Egyptian
M o s e s b e t r a y e d a n d k i l l e d b y h i s p e o p l e was t h e a l l - i n c l u s i v e O n e o f logos,
the rational substantial structure o f the universe, the 'writing' accessible
to those w h o know h o w to r e a d the ' G r e a t B o o k o f N a t u r e ' , n o t yet the
all-exclusive O n e o f subjectivity w h o i m p o s e s His u n c o n d i t i o n a l Will on
H i s c r e a t i o n . A n d , a g a i n , t h e c r u c i a l p o i n t n o t t o b e m i s s e d is t h a t t h i s
G o d , a l t h o u g h a l o g i c a l , ' c a p r i c i o u s ' , v e n g e f u l , ' i r r a t i o n a l ' , is not t h e p r e -
s y m b o l i c ' p r i m o r d i a l ' Father-Jouissance but, o n the contrary, the a g e n t o f
p r o h i b i t i o n c a r r i e d b y a ' f e r o c i o u s i g n o r a n c e ' o f t h e ways o f jouissance.
T h e p a r a d o x o n e h a s t o b e a r i n m i n d h e r e is t h a t t h i s G o d o f g r o u n d l e s s
W i l l i n g a n d f e r o c i o u s ' i r r a t i o n a l ' r a g e is t h e G o d w h o , b y m e a n s o f H i s
Prohibition, accomplishes the destruction o f the old sexualized Wisdom,
and thus o p e n s up the space for the de-sexualized 'abstract' knowledge o f
m o d e r n s c i e n c e : t h e r e is ' o b j e c t i v e ' s c i e n t i f i c k n o w l e d g e ( i n t h e modern,
post-Cartesian sense o f the t e r m ) only i f the universe o f scientific knowl
e d g e i t s e l f is s u p p l e m e n t e d and s u s t a i n e d by t h i s e x c e s s i v e ' i r r a t i o n a l '
figure o f the 'real father'. In short, Descartes's 'voluntarism' (see his
i n f a m o u s s t a t e m e n t that 2 + 2 would b e 5 if such were G o d ' s Will - there
a r e n o e t e r n a l t r u t h s d i r e c t l y c o n s u b s t a n t i a l w i t h D i v i n e N a t u r e ) is t h e
necessary obverse o f m o d e r n scientific knowledge. P r e m o d e r n Aristotelian
a n d m e d i e v a l k n o w l e d g e was n o t y e t ' o b j e c t i v e ' r a t i o n a l s c i e n t i f i c k n o w l
e d g e p r e c i s e l y b e c a u s e it l a c k e d t h i s e x c e s s i v e e l e m e n t o f G o d qua the
subjectivity o f p u r e ' i r r a t i o n a l ' Willing: in Aristotle, ' G o d ' directly e q u a l s
His own eternal rational Nature; H e 'is' n o t h i n g b u t the logical O r d e r o f
T h i n g s . T h e f u r t h e r p a r a d o x is t h a t t h i s ' i r r a t i o n a l ' G o d as t h e p r o h i b i t o r y
paternal figure also o p e n s up the space for the entire d e v e l o p m e n t of
m o d e r n i t y , u p t o t h e d e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t n o t i o n t h a t o u r s e x u a l i d e n t i t y is a
c o n t i n g e n t s o c i o - s y m b o l i c f o r m a t i o n : t h e m o m e n t this p r o h i b i t o r y figure
32U THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
r e c e d e s , we a r e b a c k i n t o t h e J u n g i a n n e o - o b s c u r a n t i s t n o t i o n o f the
m a s c u l i n e a n d f e m i n i n e e t e r n a l a r c h e t y p e s w h i c h thrives today.
T h i s p a r a d o x is c r u c i a l i f w e a r e n o t t o m i s u n d e r s t a n d c o m p l e t e l y t h e
gap that separates the p r o p e r authority o f the symbolic L a w / P r o h i b i d o n
from mere 'regulation by rules': t h e d o m a i n o f s y m b o l i c r u l e s , i f i t is
actually to count as s u c h , has to b e grounded in some tautological
a u t h o r i t y beyond rules, w h i c h says ' I t is s o b e c a u s e I say it is s o ! ' . " I n s h o r t ,
b e y o n d d i v i n e R e a s o n t h e r e is t h e a b y s s o f G o d ' s W i l l , o f H i s c o n t i n g e n t
Decision which sustains even the Eternal Trutiis. Above and beyond
o p e n i n g u p t h e space for m o d e r n reflexive f r e e d o m , this s a m e g a p also
o p e n s up the s p a c e for m o d e r n tragedy. I n political t e r m s , the d i f f e r e n c e
between classical tragedy a n d m o d e r n t r a g e d y is t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n
12
( t r a d i t i o n a l ) tyranny a n d ( m o d e r n ) terror.' T h e t r a d i t i o n a l hero s a c r i f i c e s
h i m s e l f for the C a u s e ; h e resists t h e p r e s s u r e o f t h e T y r a n t a n d a c c o m
p l i s h e s h i s D u t y , c o s t w h a t it m a y ; as s u c h , h e is a p p r e c i a t e d , h i s s a c r i f i c e
confers on h i m a sublime aura, h i s a c t is i n s c r i b e d i n t h e r e g i s t e r o f
T r a d i t i o n as a n e x a m p l e t o b e f o l l o w e d . W e e n t e r t h e d o m a i n o f m o d e r n
tragedy when t h e very l o g i c o f s a c r i f i c e f o r t h e T h i n g c o m p e l s u s to
s a c r i f i c e t h i s T h i n g itself; t h e r e i n lies t h e p r e d i c a m e n t o f P a u l C l a u d e l ' s
S y g n c , w h o is c o m p e l l e d to b e t r a y h e r f a i t h in o r d e r t o p r o v e h e r a b s o l u t e
f i d e l i t y t o G o d . S y g n e d o e s n o t s a c r i f i c e h e r e m p i r i c a l life f o r w h a t m a t t e r s
t o h e r m o r e t h a n h e r l i f e , s h e s a c r i f i c e s p r e c i s e l y t h a t w h i c h is ' i n her
m o r e t h a n h e r s e l f , a n d t h u s survives as a m e r e s h e l l o f h e r f o r m e r s e l f ,
d e p r i v e d o f h e r agalma — w e t h e r e b y e n t e r t h e d o m a i n o f t h e monstrosity of
heroism, when our fidelity t o t h e Cause c o m p e l s us to transgress the
t h r e s h o l d o f o u r ' h u m a n i t y ' . Is it n o t p r o o f o f t h e h i g h e s t , m o s t a b s o l u t e
f a i t h t h a t , f o r t h e l o v e o f G o d , I a m r e a d y t o l o s e , to e x p o s e t o e t e r n a l
d a m n a t i o n , m y e t e r n a l S o u l itself? I t is e a s y t o s a c r i f i c e o n e ' s life w i t h t h e
c e r t a i n t y o f t h e r e b y r e d e e m i n g o n e ' s e t e r n a l S o u l - h o w m u c h w o r s e is i t
to sacrifice o n e ' s very soul for G o d !
P e r h a p s t h e u l t i m a t e h i s t o r i c a l i l l u s t r a t i o n o f this p r e d i c a m e n t - o f t h e
g a p w h i c h s e p a r a t e s t h e h e r o (his r e s i s t a n c e to tyranny) f r o m t h e victim
o f t e r r o r - is p r o v i d e d b y t h e S t a l i n i s t v i c t i m : t h i s v i c t i m is n o t s o m e o n e
who finally learns that Communism was an ideological mirage, and
becomes aware o f the positivity o f a s i m p l e ethical life outside the
ideological Cause - the Stalinist victim c a n n o t retreat into a simple ethical
life, since h e has already forsaken it f o r his C o m m u n i s t Cause. This
p r e d i c a m e n t a c c o u n t s for t h e i m p r e s s i o n that a l t h o u g h the fate o f the
v i c t i m s o f t h e g r e a t S t a l i n i s t s h o w trials ( f r o m B u k h a r i n t o S l a n s k y ) was
h o r r i b l e b e y o n d d e s c r i p t i o n , t h e p r o p e r l y t r a g i c d i m e n s i o n is m i s s i n g -
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 321
O n e c a n n o w s e e w h y L a c a n c a l l s t h i s p r o h i b i t i n g G o d t h e ' r e a l f a t h e r ' as
t h e ' a g e n t o f c a s t r a t i o n ' : s y m b o l i c c a s t r a t i o n is a n o t h e r n a m e f o r t h e g a p
b e t w e e n t h e b i g O t h e r a n d puissance, f o r t h e f a c t t h a t t h e two c a n n e v e r
be 'synchronized'. O n e c a n also see in w h a t p r e c i s e sense perversion
e n a c t s the disavowal o f castration: the f u n d a m e n t a l illusion o f the p e r v e r t
is t h a t h e p o s s e s s e s a ( s y m b o l i c ) k n o w l e d g e t h a t e n a b l e s h i m t o r e g u l a t e
h i s a c c e s s t o puissance - t h a t is, t o p u t i t i n m o r e c o n t e m p o r a r y t e r m s , t h e
p e r v e r t ' s d r e a m is t o t r a n s f o r m s e x u a l activity i n t o a n i n s t r u m e n t a l p u r p o s e -
o r i e n t a t e d activity t h a t c a n b e p r o j e c t e d a n d e x e c u t e d a c c o r d i n g to a well-
defined plan. So when, today, o n e speaks o f the decline o f paternal
a u t h o r i t y , it is this f a t h e r , t h e f a t h e r o f t h e u n c o m p r o m i s i n g ' N o ! ' , w h o is
effectively in retreat; in t h e a b s e n c e o f his p r o h i b i t o r y ' N o ! ' , n e w f o r m s o f
t h e p h a n t a s m i c h a r m o n y b e t w e e n t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r a n d puissance can
thrive again - this r e t u r n to the substantial n o t i o n o f Reason-as-Life at t h e
e x p e n s e o f t h e p r o h i b i t o r y ' r e a l f a t h e r ' is w h a t t h e s o - c a l l e d N e w A g e
' h o l i s t i c ' a t t i t u d e is u l t i m a t e l y a b o u t ( t h e E a r t h o r m a c r o c o s m i t s e l f as a
1 4
living e n t i t y ) . W h a t t h e s e d e a d l o c k s i n d i c a t e is t h a t t o d a y , i n a s e n s e ,
' t h e b i g O t h e r n o l o n g e r e x i s t s ' - b u t i n tuhat s e n s e ? O n e s h o u l d b e v e r y
s p e c i f i c a b o u t w h a t t h i s n o n e x i s t e n c e a c t u a l l y a m o u n t s t o . I n a way, it is
t h e s a m e w i t h t h e b i g O t h e r as it is with G o d a c c o r d i n g t o L a c a n ( i t is n o t
t h a t G o d is d e a d t o d a y ; G o d was d e a d f r o m t h e v e r y b e g i n n i n g , o n l y H e
d i d n ' t k n o w i t . . . ) : it never existed in the first place, t h a t is, t h e n o n e x i s t e n c e
o f t h e b i g O t h e r is u l t i m a t e l y e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e b i g O t h e r is
t h e symbolic o r d e r , t h e o r d e r o f s y m b o l i c fictions w h i c h o p e r a t e o n a l e v e l
different f r o m that o f d i r e c t m a t e r i a l causality. (In this sense, t h e o n l y
s u b j e c t f o r w h o m t h e b i g O t h e r does e x i s t is t h e p s y c h o t i c , t h e o n e w h o
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 323
meta-physical g e s t u r e : i n t h i s r e f u s a l t o a c c e p t t h e R e a l i n its i d i o c y , t o
1 3
d i s a v o w it a n d t o s e a r c h f o r A n o t h e r W o r l d b e h i n d i t .
1 6
I n his r e a d i n g o f F r e u d ' s article o n fetishism, P a u l - L a u r e n t A s s o u n
s u g g e s t s t h a t s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e is r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t w o d i f f e r e n t a p p r o a c h e s
to the g a p b e t w e e n w h a t my eyes tell m e a n d the s y m b o l i c fiction - to the
g a p that s e p a r a t e s the visible f r o m t h e invisible. W h e n a small b o y sees a
n a k e d girl, h e c h o o s e s n o t to believe his eyes ( a n d a c c e p t t h e fact t h a t
girls a r e different); he continues to believe the 'word', the symbolic
fiction, w h i c h l e d h i m t o e x p e c t a p e n i s i n t h e g i r l as w e l l , s o h e d i s a v o w s
h i s i m m e d i a t e p e r c e p t i o n , i n t e r p r e t s i t as a s u p e r f i c i a l l u r e , a n d s t a r t s t o
s e a r c h , to f o r m h y p o t h e s e s that w o u l d a c c o u n t for this g a p (girls have a
smaller, a l m o s t i n v i s i b l e p e n i s ; t h e i r p e n i s will g r o w l a t e r ; it was cut
o f f . . .) - in s h o r t , t h e boy's disavowal p r o p e l s h i m in t h e d i r e c t i o n o f a
' s p o n t a n e o u s metaphysician', a believer in A n o t h e r W o r l d b e n e a t h the
visible facts. T h e girl, o n t h e c o n t r a r y , 'believes h e r eyes', s h e a c c e p t s t h e
f a c t t h a t s h e d o e s n o t p o s s e s s ' i t ' , s o a d i f f e r e n t s e t o f o p t i o n s is o p e n e d
to h e r , f r o m t h e n o t o r i o u s 'penis envy' a n d t h e s e a r c h f o r substitutes (a
child, etc.) to the cynical attitude o f a fundamental distrust towards the
s y m b o l i c o r d e r ( w h a t i f m a l e p h a l l i c p o w e r is a m e r e s e m b l a n c e ? ) .
In the history o f philosophy, there are three great a n e c d o t a l e x a m p l e s
o f 'believe my words, n o t your eyes': D i o g e n e s the Cynic, w h o refuted the
E l e a t i c t h e s i s t h a t t h e r e is n o m o v e m e n t b y s i m p l y t a k i n g a w a l k , and
t h e n , as H e g e l e m p h a s i z e s , b e a t h i s p u p i l w h o a p p l a u d e d t h e M a s t e r -
t h a t is, b e l i e v e d h i s e y e s m o r e t h a n t h e w o r d s o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n (Dio
g e n e s ' p o i n t was t h a t s u c h a d i r e c t r e f e r e n c e t o e x p e r i e n c e , t o ' w h a t y o u r
e y e s t e l l y o u ' , d o e s n o t c o u n t i n p h i l o s o p h y - t h e t a s k o f p h i l o s o p h y is t o
d e m o n s t r a t e , by m e a n s o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n , t h e truth o r u n t r u t h o f w h a t we
s e e ) ; the medieval story o f scholastic m o n k s w h o discussed h o w many
teeth a d o n k e y has, a n d were t h e n s h o c k e d at t h e p r o p o s a l by a y o u n g e r
m e m b e r o f t h e i r g r o u p t h a t t h e y s h o u l d s i m p l y g o t o a stall o u t s i d e t h e i r
house and count; finally, t h e story o f H e g e l insisting that t h e r e are only
eight planets a r o u n d the S u n even after the discovery o f the ninth.
T o d a y , with the n e w digitalized t e c h n o l o g i e s e n a b l i n g perfectly f a k e d
documentary images, not to mention Virtual Reality, the injunction
' B e l i e v e m y w o r d s ( a r g u m e n t a t i o n ) , n o t t h e f a s c i n a t i o n o f y o u r e y e s ! ' is
more pertinent t h a n e v e r . T h a t is t o say, t h e l o g i c o f ' W h o m d o you
b e l i e v e , y o u r e y e s o r m y w o r d s ? ' - t h a t is, o f ' I k n o w v e r y w e l l , b u t none
t h e less . . . [ I b e l i e v e ] ' - c a n f u n c t i o n i n two d i f f e r e n t ways, t h a t o f t h e
s y m b o l i c fiction a n d t h a t o f t h e i m a g i n a r y simulacrum. In the case o f the
efficient symbolic fiction o f the j u d g e w e a r i n g his insignia, T k n o w very
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 325
w e l l t h a t t h i s p e r s o n is a c o r r u p t w e a k l i n g , b u t I n o n e t h e less t r e a t h i m
as i f [ I b e l i e v e t h a t ] t h e s y m b o l i c b i g O t h e r s p e a k s t h r o u g h h i m ' : I d i s a v o w
w h a t m y eyes tell m e , a n d c h o o s e to b e l i e v e t h e s y m b o l i c fiction. In the
c a s e o f t h e s i m u l a c r u m o f virtual reality, o n t h e c o n t r a r y , T k n o w very well
t h a t w h a t I s e e is a n i l l u s i o n g e n e r a t e d b y d i g i t a l m a c h i n e r y , b u t I n o n e
t h e l e s s a g r e e t o i m m e r s e m y s e l f i n it, t o b e h a v e as i f I b e l i e v e i t ' - h e r e , I
disavow w h a t m y ( s y m b o l i c ) k n o w l e d g e tells m e , a n d c h o o s e to b e l i e v e m y
eyes only.
In the history o f m o d e r n philosophy, the logic o f ' W h o m do you
b e l i e v e , y o u r e y e s o r m y w o r d s ? ' f o u n d its s t r o n g e s t e x p r e s s i o n i n M a l e -
b r a n c h e ' s o c c a s i o n a l i s m : n o t o n l y is t h e r e n o s e n s i b l e p r o o f f o r o c c a s i o n
a l i s m ' s c e n t r a l t e n e t ( a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h G o d is t h e o n l y c a u s a l a g e n t ) ,
t h i s t e n e t is e v e n d i r e c t l y c o n t r a r y t o all s e n s i b l e e x p e r i e n c e , w h i c h l e a d s
us t o b e l i e v e t h a t e x t e r n a l o b j e c t s a c t d i r e c d y o n our senses, causing
sensations in o u r m i n d . W h e n M a l e b r a n c h e thus endeavours to c o n v i n c e
his r e a d e r s to b e l i e v e his words, n o t t h e i r eyes, t h e c e n t r a l e n i g m a h e h a s
t o e x p l a i n is: xuhy d i d G o d c r e a t e t h e u n i v e r s e i n s u c h a way t h a t w e ,
m o r t a l h u m a n s , n e c e s s a r i l y fall p r e y t o t h e i l l u s i o n t h a t s e n s i b l e o b j e c t s
a c t d i r e c t l y o n o u r s e n s e s ? H i s e x p l a n a t i o n is m o r a l : i f w e w e r e to b e a b l e
to perceive the true state o f things directly, we w o u l d love G o d invincibly,
t h r o u g h i n s t i n c t , n o t o n a c c o u n t o f o u r f r e e will a n d rational insight
g a i n e d t h r o u g h l i b e r a t i o n f r o m t h e t y r a n n y o f o u r s e n s e s ; t h a t is, t h e r e
w o u l d b e n o p l a c e f o r o u r m o r a l activity, f o r o u r s t r u g g l e t o u n d o the
c o n s e q u e n c e s o f the Fall a n d regain the lost G o o d n e s s . T h u s M a l e b r a n c h e
delineates the contours o f the philosophical position which explains
m a n ' s e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l l i m i t a t i o n ( t h e f a c t t h a t m a n ' s k n o w l e d g e is l i m i t e d
to p h e n o m e n a , that the true state o f things is o u t o f his r e a c h ) by
r e f e r e n c e to m o r a l g r o u n d s : o n l y a b e i n g m a r k e d by s u c h a n e p i s t e m o l o g
i c a l l i m i t a t i o n c a n b e a m o r a l b e i n g , t h a t is, c a n a c q u i r e G o o d n e s s as t h e
result o f free decision and i n n e r struggle against temptation. T h i s attitude
(later adopted by Kant) runs directly against the standard Platonic
equation o f Knowledge and Goodness (evil is t h e c o n s e q u e n c e o f o u r
i g n o r a n c e , t h a t is t o say, o n e c a n n o t k n o w t h e t r u t h a n d c o n t i n u e t o b e
b a d , s i n c e t h e m o r e we k n o w , the c l o s e r we a r e to b e i n g g o o d ) : a c e r t a i n
r a d i c a l i g n o r a n c e is t h e p o s i t i v e c o n d i t i o n o f o u r b e i n g m o r a l .
S o w h a t is s y m b o l i c e f f i c i e n c y ? W e all k n o w t h e o l d , w o r n - o u t j o k e a b o u t
t h e m a d m a n w h o t h o u g h t h e was a g r a i n o f c o r n ; a f t e r finally b e i n g c u r e d
and sent h o m e , he returned i m m e d i a t e l y to t h e m e n t a l institution and
e x p l a i n e d his p a n i c to the d o c t o r : T m e t a h e n o n t h e r o a d , a n d I was
a f r a i d it w o u l d e a t m e ! ' T o t h e d o c t o r ' s s u r p r i s e d e x c l a m a t i o n ' B u t w h a t s
326 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
m a t i v e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f s t a t i n g it a r e t o e n s u e . U l t i m a t e l y t h i s ' i t ' , o f
course, can b e e m b o d i e d in the gaze o f the absolute big O t h e r , God
H i m s e l f . T h a t is t o say: d o w e n o t e n c o u n t e r e x a c t l y t h e s a m e p r o b l e m as
that o f t h e u n f o r t u n a t e o l d lady with t h o s e C a t h o l i c s w h o d o n o t practise
d i r e c t c o n t r a c e p t i o n b u t h a v e i n t e r c o u r s e o n l y o n days w i t h n o o v u l a t i o n ?
W h o m d o t h e y c h e a t i n t h i s way? A s i f G o d c a n n o t r e a d t h e i r thoughts
a n d k n o w t h a t t h e y r e a l l y w a n t t o h a v e s e x f o r t h e m e r e p l e a s u r e o f it,
with no offspring in mind? The Church has always been extremely
s e n s i t i v e a b o u t t h i s g a p b e t w e e n m e r e e x i s t e n c e a n d its p r o p e r inscrip
tion/registration: children who died before being christened were not
allowed to b e buried properly o n c o n s e c r a t e d g r o u n d , since they were not
yet properly inscribed into the c o m m u n i t y o f believers. 'Symbolic effi
c i e n c y ' thus c o n c e r n s the p o i n t at which, w h e n the O t h e r o f the symbolic
institution c o n f r o n t s m e with the c h o i c e o f ' W h o m d o you believe, my
word or your eyes?', I choose the Other's word without hesitation,
1 7
dismissing the factual testimony o f my eyes.
T h e notion o f the blockbuster provides an e x c e l l e n t e x a m p l e o f the
r e d o u b l i n g o f t h e o r d e r o f p o s i t i v e b e i n g in t h e o r d e r o f n a m i n g , t h a t is,
o f t h e s y m b o l i c i n s c r i p t i o n i n t h e b i g O t h e r . F i r s t , t h e t e r m f u n c t i o n e d as
a d i r e c t d e s c r i p t i o n o f a f i l m w h i c h e a r n e d a l o t o f m o n e y ; t h e n it s t a r t e d
t o b e u s e d t o d e s c r i b e a f i l m m a d e as a b i g p r o d u c t i o n , w i t h t h e p r o s p e c t
o f a h u g e publicity c a m p a i g n a n d b i g box-office r e c e i p t s - such a film, o f
c o u r s e , c a n l a t e r a c t u a l l y fail a t t h e b o x o f f i c e . S o , w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e two
Postmans, t h e I t a l i a n / / Postino a n d t h e f a i l u r e w i t h K e v i n C o s t n e r , it is
quite consistent to designate The Postman as a failed blockbuster, while //
Postino is n o t a b l o c k b u s t e r , a l t h o u g h i t e a r n e d a l o t m o r e m o n e y than
The Postman. T h i s gap can, o f c o u r s e , also g e n e r a t e r a t h e r droll conse
q u e n c e s . I n t h e Y u g o s l a v i a o f t h e 1 9 7 0 s t h e s u b t i t l e s , as a r u l e , undertran-
slated t h e v u l g a r e x p r e s s i o n s t h a t a b o u n d i n t h e H o l l y w o o d f i l m s o f t h e
p e r i o d - say, w h e n a c h a r a c t e r o n s c r e e n says ' F u c k y o u u p y o u r a s s ! ' , t h e
subtitle in S l o v e n e read: ' G o to the Devil!' o r s o m e d i i n g similarly m o d e r
a t e . I n t h e l a t e 1 9 8 0 s , h o w e v e r , w h e n all c e n s o r s h i p b a r r i e r s c a m e d o w n
in Yugoslavia, while H o l l y w o o d b e c a m e slightly m o r e restrained (perhaps
u n d e r the i n f l u e n c e o f R e a g a n - e r a M o r a l Majority p r e s s u r e s ) , the transla
t o r s , as i f t o t a k e r e v e n g e f o r t h e l o n g y e a r s o f r e p r e s s i o n , s t a r t e d to
overtranslate the vulgar expressions - say, w h e n a character on screen
uttered a simple ' G o to hell!', the subtitle read: 'Screw your m o t h e r down
h e r throat!', o r s o m e t h i n g similar. . . .
T o p u t it in p h i l o s o p h i c a l t e r m s : s y m b o l i c i n s c r i p t i o n m e a n s t h a t the
very In-itself, t h e way a t h i n g a c t u a l l y is, is a l r e a d y there f o r us, the
328 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
w o m a n ; h i s s t a n c e , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t o f T k n o w v e r y w e l l I a m r e a l l y j u s t a
shy, m o d e s t guy, so why shouldn't I briefly indulge in posing as a
promiscuous woman, doing things I could never do in real life?' —
however, are things really so simple a n d straightforward? W h a t i f this
m a n ' s real-life p e r s o n a ( t h e S e l f h e a d o p t s , t h e way h e b e h a v e s i n h i s
a c t u a l s o c i a l i n t e r a c d o n ) is a k i n d o f s e c o n d a r y ' d e f e n c e - f o r m a d o n ' , an
i d e n t i t y h e a d o p t s as a m a s k i n o r d e r t o ' r e p r e s s ' o r k e e p a t b a y h i s t r u e
' i n n e r S e l f , t h e h a r d c o r e o f his p h a n t a s m i c identity, w h i c h lies in b e i n g
a p r o m i s c u o u s w o m a n , a n d for w h i c h h e c a n find an o u t l e t o n l y in his
private d a y d r e a m i n g o r in a n o n y m o u s virtual c o m m u n i t y s e x u a l g a m e s ?
I n Seminar XI, L a c a n m e n t i o n s t h e o l d C h i n e s e p a r a d o x o f T c h u a n g - T z e ,
w h o a w a k e n s a f t e r d r e a m i n g t h a t h e is a b u t t e r f l y , a n d t h e n a s k s h i m s e l f :
' H o w d o I k n o w I a m n o t a b u t t e r f l y w h o is n o w d r e a m i n g t h a t h e is a
m a n ? ' D o e s n o t t h e s a m e h o l d f o r o u r shy v i r t u a l c o m m u n i t y m e m b e r : is
h e n o t i n f a c t a p r o m i s c u o u s w o m a n d r e a m i n g t h a t s h e is a n inhibited
man?
T h e t e m p t a t i o n t o b e a v o i d e d h e r e is t h e e a s y ' p o s t m o d e r n ' c o n c l u s i o n
that we d o n o t possess a n y u l t i m a t e fixed socio-symbolic identity, but are
drifting, m o r e o r less freely, a m o n g a n i n c o n s i s t e n t m u l t i t u d e o f Selves,
e a c h o f t h e m displaying a partial aspect o f m y personality, without any
unifying a g e n t g u a r a n t e e i n g t h e u l t i m a t e c o n s i s t e n c y o f this 'pandemon
i u m ' . T h e L a c a n i a n h y p o t h e s i s o f t h e b i g O t h e r i n v o l v e s t h e c l a i m t h a t all
t h e s e d i f f e r e n t partial i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s a r e n o t e q u i v a l e n t in t h e i r s y m b o l i c
s t a t u s : t h e r e is o n e l e v e l a t w h i c h s y m b o l i c e f f i c i e n c y s e t s i n , a l e v e l w h i c h
d e t e r m i n e s m y s o c i o - s y m b o l i c p o s i t i o n . T h i s l e v e l is n o t t h a t o f ' r e a l i t y ' as
o p p o s e d t o t h e p l a y o f m y i m a g i n a t i o n - L a c a n ' s p o i n t is n o t t h a t , b e h i n d
t h e m u l t i p l i c i t y o f p h a n t a s m i c i d e n t i t i e s , t h e r e is a h a r d c o r e o f s o m e ' r e a l
S e l f ; we a r e d e a l i n g with a symbolic fiction, but a fiction which, for
c o n t i n g e n t reasons that have nothing to d o with its i n h e r e n t nature,
p o s s e s s e s p e r f o r m a t i v e p o w e r - is s o c i a l l y o p e r a t i v e , s t r u c t u r e s t h e s o c i o -
s y m b o l i c reality i n w h i c h I p a r t i c i p a t e . T h e status o f t h e s a m e person,
inclusive o f h i s / h e r very 'real' features, c a n a p p e a r in a n entirely different
light the m o m e n t the modality o f h i s / h e r relationship to the big O t h e r
changes.
S o t h e p r o b l e m t o d a y is n o t t h a t s u b j e c t s a r e m o r e d i s p e r s e d t h a n t h e y
w e r e b e f o r e , i n t h e a l l e g e d g o o d o l d days o f t h e s e l f - i d e n t i c a l E g o ; t h e
fact that 'the big O t h e r n o l o n g e r exists' implies, rather, that the symbolic
fiction w h i c h c o n f e r s a p e r f o r m a t i v e status o n o n e level o f m y identity,
determining which o f m y a c t s will d i s p l a y 'symbolic efficiency', is no
l o n g e r fully o p e r a t i v e . P e r h a p s t h e s u p r e m e e x a m p l e o f t h i s shift is p r o -
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 331
i n n e r j o u r n e y , n o t f r o m a n a c t o f p a r d o n c o m i n g f r o m o u t s i d e ; t h a t is,
' R e s u r r e c t i o n ' is t o b e u n d e r s t o o d as t h e i n n e r r e n e w a l / r e b i r t h o f t h e
s o u l o n its j o u r n e y o f s e l f - p u r i f i c a t i o n . A l t h o u g h the advocates o f this
' r e t u r n o f / i n t h e R e a l ' p r o m o t e t h e i r d i s c o v e r y as t h e u n e a r t h i n g o f t h e
h e r e t i c a n d s u b v e r s i v e s e c r e t l o n g r e p r e s s e d by t h e C h u r c h as I n s t i t u t i o n ,
o n e c o u l d c o u n t e r this c l a i m with t h e q u e s t i o n : w h a t i f this very u n e a r t h
i n g o f t h e ' S e c r e t ' is i n t h e s e r v i c e o f ' u n d o i n g ' , o f g e t t i n g r i d o f t h e t r u l y
t r a u m a t i c , s u b v e r s i v e c o r e o f C h r i s t i a n t e a c h i n g , t h e skandalon o f Resurrec
t i o n a n d t h e r e t r o a c t i v e f o r g i v e n e s s o f s i n s - t h a t is, t h e u n i q u e c h a r a c t e r
o f the Event o f Resurrection?
These reversals signal that today, the big O t h e r ' s n o n e x i s t e n c e has
a t t a i n e d a m u c h m o r e r a d i c a l d i m e n s i o n : w h a t is i n c r e a s i n g l y u n d e r m i n e d
is p r e c i s e l y t h e s y m b o l i c tmsl w h i c h p e r s i s t s a g a i n s t all s c e p t i c a l data.
P e r h a p s t h e m o s t e y e - c a t c h i n g f a c e t o f this n e w s t a t u s o f t h e n o n e x i s t e n c e
o f t h e b i g O t h e r is t h e s p r o u t i n g o f ' c o m m i t t e e s ' d e s t i n e d t o d e c i d e u p o n
t h e so-called ethical d i l e m m a s which c r o p up w h e n t e c h n o l o g i c a l devel
20
o p m e n t s ever-increasingly affect o u r life-world: not only cyberspace but
a l s o d o m a i n s as d i v e r s e as m e d i c i n e a n d b i o g e n e t i c s o n t h e o n e hand,
a n d the rules o f sexual c o n d u c t a n d the p r o t e c t i o n o f h u m a n rights o n
t h e o t h e r , c o n f r o n t us w i t h t h e n e e d t o i n v e n t t h e b a s i c r u l e s o f p r o p e r
e t h i c a l c o n d u c t , s i n c e we l a c k any f o r m o f big O t h e r , a n y s y m b o l i c p o i n t
o f r e f e r e n c e t h a t w o u l d s e r v e as a s a f e a n d u n p r o b l e m a t i c m o r a l a n c h o r .
I n all t h e s e d o m a i n s , t h e differend s e e m s t o b e i r r e d u c i b l e - t h a t is t o
say, s o o n e r o r l a t e r w e f i n d o u r s e l v e s i n a g r e y z o n e w h o s e m i s t c a n n o t b e
dispelled by t h e application of some single universal rule. Here we
e n c o u n t e r a kind o f c o u n t e r p o i n t to the 'uncertainty principle' o f quan
t u m p h y s i c s ; t h e r e is, f o r e x a m p l e , a s t r u c t u r a l d i f f i c u l t y i n determining
w h e t h e r s o m e c o m m e n t was a c t u a l l y a c a s e o f s e x u a l h a r a s s m e n t o r o n e
of racist h a t e speech. Confronted with such a dubious statement, a
'politically c o r r e c t ' radical a priori tends to believe the c o m p l a i n i n g victim
( i f t h e v i c t i m e x p e r i e n c e d i t as h a r a s s m e n t , t h e n h a r a s s m e n t i t w a s . . . ) ,
while a d i e h a r d orthodox liberal tends to believe the accused (if he
s i n c e r e l y d i d n o t m e a n i t as h a r a s s m e n t , t h e n h e s h o u l d b e a c q u i t t e d . . . ) .
T h e p o i n t , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t t h i s u n d e c i d a b i l i t y is s t r u c t u r a l a n d u n a v o i d
a b l e , s i n c e it is t h e b i g O t h e r ( t h e s y m b o l i c n e t w o r k i n w h i c h v i c t i m a n d
offender are both e m b e d d e d ) which ultimately 'decides' on meaning, a n d
t h e o r d e r o f t h e b i g O t h e r is, by d e f i n i t i o n , o p e n ; n o b o d y c a n d o m i n a t e
a n d r e g u l a t e its e f f e c t s .
T h a t is t h e p r o b l e m w i t h r e p l a c i n g a g g r e s s i v e w i t h ' p o l i t i c a l l y c o r r e c t '
e x p r e s s i o n s : w h e n o n e r e p l a c e s ' s h o r t - s i g h t e d ' with 'visually c h a l l e n g e d ' ,
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 333
o n e c a n n e v e r b e s u r e t h a t t h i s r e p l a c e m e n t i t s e l f will n o t g e n e r a t e n e w
e f f e c t s o f p a t r o n i z i n g a n d / o r i r o n i c o f f e n s i v e n e s s , all t h e m o r e h u m i l i a t
i n g i n a s m u c h as i t is m a s k e d as b e n e v o l e n c e . T h e m i s t a k e o f t h i s ' p o l i t i
c a l l y c o r r e c t ' s t r a t e g y is t h a t it u n d e r e s t i m a t e s the resistance o f the
l a n g u a g e we a c t u a l l y s p e a k to t h e conscious regulation o f its effects,
especially effects that involve p o w e r r e l a t i o n s . S o to resolve t h e d e a d l o c k ,
o n e c o n v e n e s a c o m m i t t e e t o f o r m u l a t e , i n a n u l t i m a t e l y a r b i t r a r y way,
the precise rules o f conduct. . . . I t is t h e same with medicine and
b i o g e n e t i c s (at what p o i n t d o e s an a c c e p t a b l e a n d even desirable g e n e t i c
e x p e r i m e n t o r i n t e r v e n t i o n t u r n i n t o u n a c c e p t a b l e m a n i p u l a t i o n ? ) , in t h e
application o f universal h u m a n rights (at what p o i n t d o e s the p r o t e c t i o n
o f the victim's rights turn i n t o an imposition o f W e s t e r n v a l u e s ? ) , in
sexual mores ( w h a t is t h e p r o p e r , non-patriarchal procedure o f seduc
t i o n ? ) , n o t t o m e n t i o n t h e o b v i o u s c a s e o f c y b e r s p a c e ( w h a t is t h e s t a t u s
o f sexual h a r a s s m e n t in a virtual c o m m u n i t y ? H o w d o e s o n e distinguish
h e r e between 'mere words' and 'deeds'?). T h e work o f these committees
is c a u g h t i n a s y m p t o m a l v i c i o u s c y c l e : o n the one h a n d , t h e y try t o
l e g i t i m a t e t h e i r d e c i s i o n s by r e f e r e n c e t o t h e m o s t a d v a n c e d scientific
k n o w l e d g e ( w h i c h , in t h e case o f a b o r t i o n , tells us t h a t a f o e t u s d o e s n o t
y e t p o s s e s s s e l f - a w a r e n e s s a n d e x p e r i e n c e p a i n ; w h i c h , in t h e c a s e o f a
m o r t a l l y ill p e r s o n , d e f i n e s t h e t h r e s h o l d b e y o n d w h i c h e u t h a n a s i a is t h e
only meaningful s o l u t i o n ) ; o n the o t h e r h a n d , they have to evoke s o m e
non-scientific ethical criterion in o r d e r to direct a n d posit a limitation to
i n h e r e n t scientific drive.
T h e k e y p o i n t h e r e is n o t t o c o n f u s e t h i s n e e d t o i n v e n t s p e c i f i c r u l e s
w i t h t h e s t a n d a r d n e e d o f phronesis - t h a t is, w i t h t h e i n s i g h t , f o r m u l a t e d
by Aristotle, into how direct application o f universal n o r m s to c o n c r e t e
s i t u a t i o n s is n o t p o s s i b l e - t h e r e is always a n e e d to t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t t h e
'twist' given to the universal norm by t h e specific situation. In this
standard case, we d o have at o u r disposal s o m e universally accepted
' s a c r e d ' T e x t w h i c h p r o v i d e s t h e h o r i z o n o f o u r c h o i c e s (say, t h e B i b l e i n
the Christian t r a d i t i o n ) , so t h a t the problem o f 'interpretation' is t o
reactualize the T e x t o f tradition in e a c h new situation, to discover h o w
t h i s T e x t still ' s p e a k s t o u s ' - t o d a y , it is p r e c i s e l y t h i s u n i v e r s a l l y a c c e p t e d
p o i n t o f r e f e r e n c e w h i c h is m i s s i n g , s o t h a t w e a r e t h r o w n i n t o a p r o c e s s
of radically open and unending symbolic (re) negotiation and
(re)invention without even the semblance o f some preceding set o f
p r e s u p p o s e d n o r m s . O r - to p u t it in H e g e l e s e - w h e n I s p e a k a b o u t the
'rules to b e followed', I already p r e s u p p o s e a reflected attitude o f strate
gically a d a p t i n g m y s e l f to a situation by i m p o s i n g c e r t a i n rules o n m y s e l f
334 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
( a n d o t h e r s ) - w h a t g e t s l o s t i n a d o p t i n g s u c h a n a t t i t u d e is w h a t H e g e l
c a l l e d s o c i a l Substance, t h e ' o b j e c t i v e S p i r i t ' as t h e t r u e S u b s t a n c e o f m y
b e i n g w h i c h is a l w a y s - a l r e a d y t h e r e as t h e g r o u n d o n w h i c h individuals
t h r i v e , a l t h o u g h i t is k e p t alive o n l y t h r o u g h t h e i n c e s s a n t a c t i v i t y o f t h o s e
individuals. S o w h e n t h e p r o p o n e n t s o f virtual c o m m u n i t y e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y
describe the c h a l l e n g e that cyberspace poses to o u r capacity for ethical
i n v e n t i o n , f o r t e s t i n g n e w r u l e s o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n all a s p e c t s o f v i r t u a l
c o m m u n i t y l i f e , w e s h o u l d always b e a r i n m i n d t h a t t h e s e (re)invented
r u l e s supplant the lack of a fundamental Law /Prohibition: they e n d e a v o u r to
provide the viable frame o f i n t e r a c t i o n for narcissistic post-Oedipal sub
jects. I t is as i f t h e lack o f the big O t h e r is s u p p l a n t e d by 'ethical
c o m m i t t e e s ' as s o m a n y s u b s t i t u t e 'small big Others' on to which the
subject transposes his responsibility a n d from w h i c h h e e x p e c t s to receive
a f o r m u l a t h a t will r e s o l v e h i s d e a d l o c k .
I t is c r u c i a l t o d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n t h i s d e c l i n e o f t h e s y m b o l i c p a t e r n a l
authority and the standard O e d i p a l gap that forever separates the real
p e r s o n o f t h e f a t h e r f r o m its s y m b o l i c p l a c e / f u n c t i o n - t h e f a c t t h a t t h e
r e a l f a t h e r always t u r n s o u t t o b e a n i m p o s t o r , u n a b l e a c t u a l l y t o live u p
t o h i s s y m b o l i c m a n d a t e . A s is w e l l k n o w n , t h e r e lies t h e p r o b l e m o f t h e
h y s t e r i c : t h e c e n t r a l f i g u r e o f h i s u n i v e r s e is t h e ' h u m i l i a t e d f a t h e r ' , that
is, h e is o b s e s s e d w i t h t h e s i g n s o f t h e r e a l f a t h e r ' s w e a k n e s s a n d failure,
a n d criticizes h i m incessantly for n o t living u p to his s y m b o l i c m a n d a t e -
b e n e a t h the hysteric's rebellion a n d c h a l l e n g e to paternal authority t h e r e
is t h u s a h i d d e n c a l l f o r a r e n e w e d p a t e r n a l a u t h o r i t y , f o r a f a t h e r who
would really b e a 'true father' and adequately embody his symbolic
m a n d a t e . T o d a y , h o w e v e r , i t is t h e v e r y s y m b o l i c f u n c t i o n o f t h e father
w h i c h is i n c r e a s i n g l y u n d e r m i n e d - t h a t is, w h i c h is l o s i n g its p e r f o r m a t i v e
e f f i c i e n c y ; f o r t h a t r e a s o n , a f a t h e r is n o l o n g e r p e r c e i v e d as o n e ' s Ego
Ideal, t h e ( m o r e o r less failed, i n a d e q u a t e ) b e a r e r o f s y m b o l i c authority,
b u t as o n e ' s ideal ego, i m a g i n a r y c o m p e t i t o r - w i t h t h e r e s u l t t h a t s u b j e c t s
n e v e r really ' g r o w u p ' , t h a t we a r e d e a l i n g t o d a y with individuals in t h e i r
thirties and forties who remain, in terms o f their psychic economy,
2 1
' i m m a t u r e ' adolescents c o m p e t i n g with their fathers.
a n d r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ? W h a t will b e t h e u n f o r e s e e n c o n s e q u e n c e s o f m e d d l i n g
with g e n e s ? )
T h i s c o n j u n c t i o n o f low probability a n d high c o n s e q u e n c e m a k e s the
s t a n d a r d Aristotelian strategy o f avoiding b o t h e x t r e m e s virtually imposs
i b l e : it is as i f it is i m p o s s i b l e t o d a y t o a s s u m e a m o d e r a t e r a t i o n a l p o s i t i o n
between scaremongering (ecologists who depict an i m p e n d i n g universal
catastrophe) and covering u p (downplaying the dangers). T h e downplay
i n g s t r a t e g y c a n always e m p h a s i z e t h e f a c t t h a t s c a r e m o n g e r i n g a t b e s t
t a k e s as c e r t a i n c o n c l u s i o n s w h i c h a r e n o t fully g r o u n d e d in scientific
o b s e r v a t i o n s ; w h i l e t h e s c a r e m o n g e r i n g s t r a t e g y , o f c o u r s e , is fully j u s t i f i e d
i n r e t o r t i n g t h a t o n c e i t is p o s s i b l e t o p r e d i c t t h e c a t a s t r o p h e w i t h full
c e r t a i n t y , it will b e , b y d e f i n i t i o n , a l r e a d y t o o l a t e . T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t
t h e r e is n o o b j e c t i v e s c i e n t i f i c o r o t h e r way t o a c q u i r e c e r t a i n t y about
e x i s t e n c e a n d e x t e n t : it is n o t s i m p l y a m a t t e r o f e x p l o i t a t i v e c o r p o r a t i o n s
o r g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s d o w n p l a y i n g t h e d a n g e r s - t h e r e is i n f a c t n o way
to establish t h e e x t e n t o f t h e risk with certainty; scientists a n d s p e c u l a t o r s
t h e m s e l v e s are u n a b l e to provide the final answer; we are bombarded
d a i l y b y n e w d i s c o v e r i e s w h i c h r e v e r s e p r e v i o u s c o m m o n views. W h a t i f it
t u r n s o u t t h a t fat r e a l l y p r e v e n t s c a n c e r ? W h a t i f g l o b a l w a r m i n g is a c t u a l l y
t h e result o f a n a t u r a l cycle, a n d we s h o u l d p u m p e v e n m o r e carbon
dioxide into the atmosphere?
T h e r e is a p r i o r i n o p r o p e r m e a s u r e between the 'excess' o f scare
mongering and the indecisive procrastination o f ' D o n ' t let's p a n i c , we
d o n ' t yet have conclusive results'. F o r e x a m p l e , a p r o p o s o f global warm
i n g , t h e l o g i c o f ' l e t us a v o i d b o t h e x t r e m e s , t h e c a r e l e s s f u r t h e r e m i s s i o n
o f c a r b o n d i o x i d e as w e l l as t h e q u i c k s h u t t i n g - d o w n o f thousands of
2 3
factories, and proceed gradually' is c l e a r l y m e a n i n g l e s s . ' Again, this
i m p e n e t r a b i l i t y is n o t s i m p l y a m a t t e r o f ' c o m p l e x i t y ' , b u t o f r e f l e x i v i t y :
t h e n e w o p a q u e n e s s a n d i m p e n e t r a b i l i t y ( t h e r a d i c a l u n c e r t a i n t y as t o t h e
u l t i m a t e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f o u r a c t i o n s ) is n o t d u e t o t h e f a c t t h a t w e a r e
puppets in the h a n d s o f s o m e t r a n s c e n d e n t global P o w e r (Fate, Historical
N e c e s s i t y , t h e M a r k e t ) ; o n t h e c o n t r a r y , i t is d u e t o t h e f a c t t h a t ' n o b o d y
is i n c h a r g e ' , t h a t there is no such power, n o ' O t h e r o f t h e O t h e r ' pulling
t h e s t r i n g s - o p a q u e n e s s is g r o u n d e d i n t h e v e r y f a c t t h a t t o d a y ' s s o c i e t y
is t h o r o u g h l y ' r e f l e x i v e ' , t h a t t h e r e is n o N a t u r e o r T r a d i t i o n p r o v i d i n g a
firm f o u n d a t i o n o n w h i c h o n e c a n r e l y , t h a t e v e n o u r i n n e r m o s t i m p e t u s e s
( s e x u a l o r i e n t a t i o n , e t c . ) a r e m o r e a n d m o r e e x p e r i e n c e d as s o m e t h i n g
to b e c h o s e n . H o w to f e e d a n d e d u c a t e a c h i l d , h o w to p r o c e e d in s e x u a l
seduction, h o w a n d what to eat, h o w to r e l a x a n d a m u s e o n e s e l f - all
t h e s e s p h e r e s a r e i n c r e a s i n g l y ' c o l o n i z e d ' b y r e f l e x i v i t y , t h a t is, e x p e r i -
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 337
e n c e d as s o m e t h i n g t o b e l e a r n e d a n d d e c i d e d u p o n . Is n o t t h e u l t i m a t e
e x a m p l e o f r e f l e x i v i t y i n t o d a y ' s a r t t h e c r u c i a l r o l e o f t h e curator} His role
is n o t l i m i t e d t o m e r e s e l e c t i o n - t h r o u g h h i s s e l e c t i o n , h e (re)defmes
w h a t a r t is t o d a y . T h a t is t o say: t o d a y ' s a r t e x h i b i t i o n s d i s p l a y o b j e c t s
w h i c h , at least f o r t h e t r a d i t i o n a l a p p r o a c h , h a v e n o t h i n g to d o with art,
u p to h u m a n e x c r e m e n t a n d d e a d a n i m a l s - s o w h y is t h i s t o b e p e r c e i v e d
as art? Because what we see is the curator's choice. W h e n we visit a n e x h i b i t i o n
today, we are thus n o t directly o b s e r v i n g works o f art - w h a t we are
o b s e r v i n g is t h e c u r a t o r ' s n o t i o n o f w h a t a r t is; i n s h o r t , t h e u l t i m a t e a r t i s t
is n o t t h e p r o d u c e r b u t t h e c u r a t o r , his activity o f s e l e c t i o n .
The ultimate deadlock o f the risk s o c i e t y lies in the gap between
knowledge and decision, between the chain o f reasons and the act which
resolves the d i l e m m a (in L a c a n e s e : b e t w e e n S 2 a n d S , ) : t h e r e is n o one
w h o 'really knows' the global o u t c o m e - o n t h e level o f positive knowl
e d g e , t h e s i t u a t i o n is r a d i c a l l y ' i n d e c i d a b l e ' ; b u t w e n o n e t h e l e s s have to
decide. O f c o u r s e , t h i s g a p was t h e r e all t h e t i m e : w h e n a n a c t o f d e c i s i o n
g r o u n d s i t s e l f i n a c h a i n o f r e a s o n s , it always r e t r o a c t i v e l y ' c o l o u r s ' t h e s e
r e a s o n s s o t h a t tiiey s u p p o r t t h i s d e c i s i o n — j u s t t h i n k o f t h e b e l i e v e r w h o
is w e l l a w a r e t h a t t h e r e a s o n s f o r h i s b e l i e f a r e c o m p r e h e n s i b l e o n l y t o
t h o s e w h o have already d e c i d e d to b e l i e v e . . . . W h a t we e n c o u n t e r in t h e
c o n t e m p o r a r y risk s o c i e t y , h o w e v e r , is s o m e t h i n g m u c h m o r e r a d i c a l : t h e
o p p o s i t e o f t h e s t a n d a r d f o r c e d c h o i c e a b o u t w h i c h L a c a n s p e a k s , t h a t is,
o f a s i t u a t i o n in w h i c h I a m f r e e t o c h o o s e o n c o n d i t i o n t h a t I m a k e the
r i g h t c h o i c e , s o t h a t t h e o n l y t h i n g left f o r m e t o d o is to a c c o m p l i s h t h e
empty gesture o f pretending to a c c o m p l i s h freely what is i n a n y c a s e
4
imposed on me.- I n t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y risk society, we a r e d e a l i n g with
s o m e t h i n g e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t : t h e c h o i c e is r e a l l y ' f r e e ' a n d is, f o r t h i s v e r y
r e a s o n , e x p e r i e n c e d as e v e n m o r e f r u s t r a t i n g - we find ourselves c o n
s t a n t l y i n t h e p o s i t i o n o f h a v i n g t o d e c i d e a b o u t m a t t e r s t h a t will f u n d a
m e n t a l l y a f f e c t o u r lives, b u t w i t h o u t a p r o p e r f o u n d a t i o n i n k n o w l e d g e .
W T i a t U l r i c h B e c k c a l l s t h e ' s e c o n d E n l i g h t e n m e n t ' is t h u s , w i t h regard
t o t h i s c r u c i a l p o i n t , t h e e x a c t r e v e r s a l o f t h e a i m o f t h e 'first E n l i g h t e n
m e n t ' : to bring a b o u t a society in which f u n d a m e n t a l decisions would lose
t h e i r ' i r r a t i o n a l ' c h a r a c t e r a n d b e c o m e fully g r o u n d e d in g o o d reasons
(in a c o r r e c t insight i n t o the state o f t h i n g s ) : the ' s e c o n d E n l i g h t e n m e n t '
i m p o s e s o n e a c h o f us the b u r d e n o f m a k i n g crucial decisions which
m a y a f f e c t o u r v e r y survival w i t h o u t a n y p r o p e r f o u n d a t i o n in K n o w l e d g e
— all t h e e x p e r t g o v e r n m e n t p a n e l s a n d e t h i c a l c o m m i t t e e s , a n d s o o n ,
a r e t h e r e t o c o n c e a l this r a d i c a l o p e n n e s s and uncertainty. Again, far
f r o m b e i n g e x p e r i e n c e d as l i b e r a t i n g , t h i s c o m p u l s i o n to d e c i d e f r e e l y is
338 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
e x p e r i e n c e d as a n a n x i e t y - p r o v o k i n g o b s c e n e g a m b l e , a k i n d o f i r o n i c
reversal o f predestination: I a m h e l d a c c o u n t a b l e for decisions which I
was f o r c e d to m a k e without proper knowledge o f the situation. The
f r e e d o m o f d e c i s i o n e n j o y e d b y t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e ' r i s k s o c i e t y ' is n o t t h e
f r e e d o m o f s o m e o n e w h o c a n freely c h o o s e his destiny, b u t the anxiety-
provoking freedom o f s o m e o n e w h o is c o n s t a n t l y c o m p e l l e d t o make
d e c i s i o n s w i t h o u t b e i n g a w a r e o f t h e i r c o n s e q u e n c e s . T h e r e is n o guaran
tee that the democratic politicization o f crucial decisions, the active
involvement of thousands of concerned individuals, will necessarily
i m p r o v e the quality a n d a c c u r a c y o f decisions, a n d thus effectively lessen
t h e risks - h e r e o n e is t e m p t e d t o e v o k e t h e a n s w e r o f a d e v o u t C a t h o l i c
t o t h e a t h e i s t l i b e r a l c r i t i c i s m t h a t t h e y , C a t h o l i c s , a r e s o s t u p i d as t o
believe in t h e infallibility o f the P o p e : ' W e C a t h o l i c s at least b e l i e v e in t h e
i n f a l l i b i l i t y o f one a n d o n l y o n e p e r s o n ; d o e s n o t d e m o c r a c y r e l y o n a
m u c h m o r e risky n o t i o n t h a t t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e p e o p l e , m i l l i o n s o f t h e m ,
are infallible?'
T h e s u b j e c t thus finds h i m s e l f in a K a f k a e s q u e situation o f b e i n g guilty
o f n o t even knowing what (if anything) h e is g u i l t y o f : I a m forever
haunted b y t h e p r o s p e c t t h a t I h a v e a l r e a d y m a d e d e c i s i o n s w h i c h will
e n d a n g e r m e a n d e v e r y o n e I l o v e , b u t I will l e a r n t h e t r u t h o n l y - i f e v e r
- w h e n i t is a l r e a d y t o o l a t e . H e r e l e t u s r e c a l l t h e figure o f F o r r e s t G u m p ,
that perfect 'vanishing mediator', t h e very o p p o s i t e o f t h e M a s t e r (the
o n e w h o s y m b o l i c a l l y r e g i s t e r s a n e v e n t b y n o m i n a t i n g it, b y i n s c r i b i n g i t
i n t o t h e b i g O t h e r ) : G u m p is p r e s e n t e d as t h e i n n o c e n t b y s t a n d e r w h o ,
simply by d o i n g what h e does, u n k n o w i n g l y sets in m o t i o n a shift o f
h i s t o r i c p r o p o r t i o n s . W h e n h e visits B e r l i n t o p l a y f o o t b a l l , a n d inadver
tently throws the ball a c r o s s t h e wall, h e t h e r e b y starts the p r o c e s s w h i c h
b r i n g s d o w n t h e wall; w h e n h e visits W a s h i n g t o n a n d is g i v e n a r o o m i n
the W a t e r g a t e c o m p l e x , h e notices s o m e strange things going o n in the
r o o m s across t h e yard in t h e m i d d l e o f t h e n i g h t , calls t h e g u a r d , a n d sets
i n m o t i o n t h e e v e n t s w h i c h c u l m i n a t e d i n N i x o n ' s d o w n f a l l - is t h i s n o t
t h e ultimate m e t a p h o r for the situation at w h i c h t h e p r o p o n e n t s o f the
n o t i o n o f 'risk society' aim, a situation in w h i c h we are f o r c e d to m a k e
moves whose ultimate effects are b e y o n d o u r grasp?
I n w h a t p r e c i s e way d o e s t h e n o t i o n o f t h e ' r i s k s o c i e t y ' i n v o l v e the
n o n e x i s t e n c e o f the big O t h e r ? T h e m o s t obvious p o i n t would b e the fact
- e m p h a s i z e d a g a i n a n d a g a i n b y B e c k a n d G i d d e n s - t h a t t o d a y w e live
in a society which comes after Nature and Tradition: in our active
e n g a g e m e n t with t h e w o r l d a r o u n d us, we c a n n o l o n g e r rely e i t h e r o n
N a t u r e as t h e p e r m a n e n t f o u n d a t i o n a n d r e s o u r c e o f o u r activity ( t h e r e
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 339
t h e r e i n s a n d t a k i n g c a r e o f e v e r y t h i n g . T h e r e was a c t u a l l y a p e r v e r s e k i n d
o f l i b e r a t i o n in this possibility o f shifting the b u r d e n o f responsibility o n
to the O t h e r . In h e r report o n a voyage through post-Communist P o l a n d ,
the country o f h e r youth, Eva Hoffman relates how the infamous desolate
g r e y n e s s o f t h e s o c i a l i s t e n v i r o n s , with d e p r e s s i n g c o n c r e t e b u i l d i n g s o n
b r o a d streets without posters o r n e o n lights, l o o k e d different, even m o r e
oppressive, in 1 9 9 0 :
I know this grayness; I even used to love it, as part o f the m o o d and w e a t h e r
with which o n e grew up h e r e , and which sank into the b o n e s with a c o m f o r t i n g
m e l a n c h o l y . Why, then, d o e s it s e e m so m u c h m o r e desolate than before? I
guess I ' m looking at it with different a n t e n n a e , without t h e protective filters o f
the system, which was the justification, the explanation for so m u c h : even for
the gray. I n d e e d , the drabness was partly T h e i r doing, a matter not only o f
e c o n o m i c s but o f deliberate puritanism . . . now this n e i g h b o u r h o o d is j u s t what
25
it is, bareness stripped o f s i g n i f i c a n c e .
W h a t we h a v e h e r e is t h e p e r v e r s e l y l i b e r a t i n g a s p e c t o f a l i e n a t i o n in
actually existing Socialism: r e a l i t y was n o t really 'ours' (the ordinary
p e o p l e ' s ) , it b e l o n g e d t o T h e m ( t h e P a r t y nomenklatura); its g r e y n e s s b o r e
w i t n e s s t o T h e i r o p p r e s s i v e r u l e a n d , p a r a d o x i c a l l y , t h i s m a d e it much
e a s i e r t o e n d u r e life; j o k e s c o u l d b e t o l d a b o u t e v e r y d a y t r o u b l e s , a b o u t
t h e lack o f ordinary objects like s o a p a n d toilet p a p e r - a l t h o u g h we
suffered the material c o n s e q u e n c e s o f these troubles, the j o k e s w e r e at
T h e i r e x p e n s e , we t o l d t h e m f r o m an e x e m p t , l i b e r a t e d p o s i t i o n . Now,
with T h e m o u t o f p o w e r , we are s u d d e n l y a n d violently c o m p e l l e d to
7
assume t h i s d r a b g r e y n e s s : it is n o l o n g e r T h e i r s , it is o u r s . . . . W h a t
happens today, with t h e 'postmodern' risk s o c i e t y , is t h a t t h e r e is no
'Invisible H a n d ' w h o s e m e c h a n i s m , b l i n d as it m a y be, somehow re
establishes the balance; no Other Scene in which the accounts are
properly kept, n o fictional O t h e r P l a c e in w h i c h , f r o m t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o f
t h e L a s t J u d g e m e n t , o u r a c t s will b e p r o p e r l y l o c a t e d a n d a c c o u n t e d f o r .
N o t o n l y d o w e n o t k n o w w h a t o u r a c t s will i n f a c t a m o u n t t o , t h e r e is
e v e n n o g l o b a l m e c h a n i s m r e g u l a t i n g o u r i n t e r a c t i o n s - this is w h a t the
properly 'postmodern' n o n e x i s t e n c e o f the big O t h e r means. Foucault
s p o k e o f t h e ' s t r a t e g i e s w i t h o u t s u b j e c t ' t h a t P o w e r u s e s i n its r e p r o d u c
tion - h e r e we have a l m o s t t h e e x a c t o p p o s i t e : s u b j e c t s c a u g h t in the
u n p r e d i c t a b l e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f t h e i r acts, but n o g l o b a l strategy d o m i n a t
i n g a n d r e g u l a t i n g t h e i r i n t e r p l a y . I n d i v i d u a l s w h o a r e still c a u g h t i n t h e
traditional modernist paradigm are desperately looking for another
agency which one c o u l d legitimately elevate into the position of the
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 341
S u b j e c t S u p p o s e d to K n o w , a n d w h i c h w o u l d s o m e h o w g u a r a n t e e our
c h o i c e : e t h i c a l c o m m i t t e e s , t h e s c i e n t i f i c c o m m u n i t y itself, government
authority, up to the p a r a n o i a c big O t h e r , the s e c r e t invisible M a s t e r o f
conspiracy theories.
S o w h a t is w r o n g w i t h t h e t h e o r y o f t h e r i s k s o c i e t y ? D o e s it n o t fullv
e n d o r s e t h e n o n e x i s t e n c e o f t h e b i g O t h e r , a n d d r a w all e t h i c o - p o l i t i c a l
c o n s e q u e n c e s f r o m t h i s ? T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t , p a r a d o x i c a l l y , t h i s t h e o r y is
s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t o o s p e c i f i c a n d t o o g e n e r a l : w i t h a l l its e m p h a s i s o n h o w
t h e ' s e c o n d m o d e r n i z a t i o n ' f o r c e s us to t r a n s f o r m old n o t i o n s o f h u m a n
a g e n c y , s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n , a n d s o o n , u p t o t h e m o s t i n t i m a t e ways o f
r e l a t i n g to o u r s e x u a l identity, the t h e o r y o f the risk society n e v e r t h e l e s s
u n d e r e s t i m a t e s t h e i m p a c t o f t h e e m e r g i n g n e w societal l o g i c o n t h e very
fundamental status o f subjectivity; o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , in c o n c e i v i n g o f
r i s k a n d m a n u f a c t u r e d u n c e r t a i n t y as a u n i v e r s a l f e a t u r e o f c o n t e m p o r a r y
life, this t h e o r y o b f u s c a t e s t h e c o n c r e t e s o c i o e c o n o m i c r o o t s o f t h e s e risks.
And it is m y c o n t e n t i o n that psychoanalysis a n d M a r x i s m , as a rule
d i s m i s s e d b y t h e o r i s t s o f t h e r i s k s o c i e t y as o u t d a t e d e x p r e s s i o n s o f t h e
first-wave m o d e r n i z a t i o n (the fight o f the rational agency to bring the
i m p e n e t r a b l e U n c o n s c i o u s to light; the idea o f a self-transparent society
c o n t r o l l e d by t h e ' c o m m o n i n t e l l e c t ' ) , c a n c o n t r i b u t e to a c r i t i c a l clarifi
c a t i o n o f t h e s e two p o i n t s .
T h e Unbehagen in t h e R i s k S o c i e t y
P s y c h o a n a l y s i s is n e i t h e r a t h e o r y w h i c h b e m o a n s t h e d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f
t h e o l d m o d e s o f traditional stability a n d wisdom, l o c a t i n g in t h e m the
c a u s e o f m o d e r n n e u r o s e s a n d c o m p e l l i n g us to discover o u r r o o t s in o l d
archaic wisdom or profound self-knowledge (the J u n g i a n version), n o r
j u s t a n o t h e r version o f reflexive m o d e r n k n o w l e d g e t e a c h i n g us h o w to
penetrate a n d m a s t e r t h e i n n e r m o s t s e c r e t s o f o u r p s y c h i c life - what
p s y c h o a n a l y s i s f o c u s e s o n , its p r o p e r o b j e c t , c o n s i s t s , r a t h e r , i n t h e u n e x
pected c o n s e q u e n c e s o f the disintegration o f traditional structures that
r e g u l a t e d l i b i d i n a l life. W h y d o e s t h e d e c l i n e o f p a t e r n a l a u t h o r i t y and
fixed social a n d g e n d e r roles g e n e r a t e new anxieties, instead o f o p e n i n g
up a B r a v e N e w W'otid o f individuals e n g a g e d in t h e creative ' c a r e o f t h e
Self a n d enjoying the perpetual process o f shifting a n d reshaping their
f l u i d m u l t i p l e i d e n t i t i e s ? W h a t p s y c h o a n a l y s i s c a n d o is t o f o c u s o n the
Unbehagen i n t h e risk s o c i e t y : o n t h e n e w a n x i e t i e s g e n e r a t e d b y t h e r i s k
s o c i e t y , w h i c h c a n n o t b e s i m p l y d i s m i s s e d as t h e r e s u l t o f t h e t e n s i o n o r
342 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
c o n s e r v a t i v e p a t r i a r c h a l r e i n s c r i p t i o n o f t h e s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e ( w e a k hys
terical w o m e n versus m e n w h o s e W o r d s h o u l d again b e c o m e t h e i r B o n d ) ,
b u t t h a t t h e way i n w h i c h t h i s v e r y e x p l i c i t e m p h a s i s o n p r o m i s e s t o b e
k e p t is a l r e a d y p a r t o f a h y s t e r i c a l e c o n o m y - a t r u s t w h i c h h a s t o b e
r e a s s e r t e d i n t h i s p u b l i c r i t u a l i z e d way, as i t w e r e , u n d e r m i n e s its o w n
credentials.
T h e inability o f risk s o c i e t y t h e o r y t o t a k e all t h e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f g l o b a l
r e f l e x i v i z a t i o n i n t o a c c o u n t is c l e a r l y d i s c e r n i b l e i n its t r e a t m e n t o f t h e
f a m i l y . T h i s t h e o r y is r i g h t t o e m p h a s i z e h o w t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between
p a r e n t s a n d c h i l d r e n i n t h e t r a d i t i o n a l f a m i l y was t h e l a s t b a s t i o n o f l e g a l
s l a v e r y in o u r W e s t e r n s o c i e t i e s : a l a r g e s t r a t u m o f s o c i e t y - m i n o r s - w e r e
d e n i e d full r e s p o n s i b i l i t y a n d a u t o n o m y , a n d r e t a i n e d i n a slave s t a t u s
w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e i r p a r e n t s ( w h o c o n t r o l l e d t h e i r lives a n d w e r e r e s p o n
sible for their acts). W i t h reflexive m o d e r n i z a t i o n , c h i l d r e n themselves
a r e t r e a t e d as r e s p o n s i b l e s u b j e c t s w i t h f r e e d o m o f c h o i c e (in divorce
procedures, they are allowed to influence the decision o n which o f the
two p a r e n t s t h e y will live w i t h ; t h e y c a n s t a r t a c o u r t p r o c e d u r e against
their parents i f they feel that their h u m a n rights have b e e n violated; e t c . )
- in short, parenthood is n o l o n g e r a natural-substantial notion, but
b e c o m e s i n a way p o l i t i c i z e d ; it t u r n s i n t o a n o t h e r d o m a i n o f r e f l e x i v e
choice. However, is n o t the obverse o f this reflexivization o f family
r e l a t i o n s , i n w h i c h t h e f a m i l y l o s e s its c h a r a c t e r o f i m m e d i a t e - s u b s t a n t i a l
entity whose members are not autonomous subjects, the progressive
'familialization' of public professional life itself? I n s t i t u t i o n s w h i c h w e r e sup
p o s e d t o f u n c t i o n as a n a n t i d o t e t o t h e f a m i l y s t a r t t o f u n c t i o n as s u r r o g a t e
families, allowing us s o m e h o w to p r o l o n g o u r family d e p e n d e n c e and
immaturity: schools - even universities - increasingly assume therapeutic
functions; corporations provide a new family h o m e , and so o n . The
standard situation in which, after the p e r i o d o f e d u c a t i o n a n d depend
ency, I a m allowed to e n t e r the adult universe o f maturity a n d responsi
b i l i t y is t h u s d o u b l y t u r n e d a r o u n d : as a c h i l d I a m a l r e a d y r e c o g n i z e d as
a mature r e s p o n s i b l e b e i n g ; a n d , s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , m y c h i l d h o o d is p r o
l o n g e d i n d e f i n i t e l y , t h a t is, I a m n e v e r r e a l l y c o m p e l l e d t o ' g r o w up',
s i n c e a l l t h e i n s t i t u t i o n s w h i c h f o l l o w t h e f a m i l y f u n c t i o n as ersatz f a m i l i e s ,
providing caring s u r r o u n d i n g s for my Narcissistic endeavours. . . .
I n o r d e r t o g r a s p a l l t h e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f t h i s shift, o n e w o u l d h a v e t o
r e t u r n t o H e g e l ' s t r i a d o f f a m i l y , civil s o c i e t y ( f r e e i n t e r a c t i o n o f i n d i v i d
u a l s w h o e n j o y t h e i r r e f l e x i v e f r e e d o m ) a n d S t a t e : H e g e l ' s c o n s t r u c t i o n is
b a s e d o n the distinction b e t w e e n the private s p h e r e o f family a n d the
p u b l i c s p h e r e o f civil s o c i e t y , a d i s t i n c t i o n w h i c h is v a n i s h i n g t o d a y , i n s o
344 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
f a r as f a m i l y life i t s e l f b e c o m e s p o l i t i c i z e d , is t u r n i n g i n t o p a r t o f t h e
public domain; on the other hand, public professional life becomes
'familialized', t h a t is, s u b j e c t s p a r t i c i p a t e in it as m e m b e r s o f a large
f a m i l y , n o t as r e s p o n s i b l e ' m a t u r e ' i n d i v i d u a l s . S o t h e p r o b l e m h e r e is n o t
p a t r i a r c h a l a u t h o r i t y a n d t h e e m a n c i p a t o r y s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t it, as most
f e m i n i s t s c o n t i n u e t o c l a i m ; t h e p r o b l e m , r a t h e r , is t h e n e w f o r m s o f
dependency that arise f r o m the very decline o f patriarchal symbolic
authority. It was M a x H o r k h e i m e r , in his study o n a u t h o r i t y a n d family in
the 1930s, who drew attention to t h e a m b i g u o u s c o n s e q u e n c e s o f the
gradual disintegration o f p a t e r n a l authority in m o d e r n capitalist society:
far from b e i n g simply the e l e m e n t a r y cell a n d g e n e r a t o r o f authoritarian
p e r s o n a l i t i e s , t h e m o d e r n n u c l e a r f a m i l y was s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h e s t r u c t u r e
that generated the 'autonomous' critical subject a b l e to c o n f r o n t the
predominant social o r d e r o n a c c o u n t o f h i s / h e r ethical convictions, so
that the i m m e d i a t e result o f the disintegration o f p a t e r n a l a u t h o r i t y is
also t h e rise o f w h a t s o c i o l o g i s t s call t h e conformist 'other-orientated'
21
p e r s o n a l i t y . ' T o d a y , with t h e shift towards t h e narcissistic p e r s o n a l i t y , this
p r o c e s s is e v e n s t r o n g e r , a n d h a s e n t e r e d a n e w p h a s e .
W i t h r e g a r d t o t h e ' p o s t m o d e r n ' c o n s t e l l a t i o n ( o r to w h a t t h e theorists
o f t h e risk s o c i e t y call reflexive m o d e r n i z a t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h e s e c o n d
modernity a n d / o r the s e c o n d E n l i g h t e n m e n t - perhaps their overinsistent
e m p h a s i s o n h o w t h e y a r e o p p o s e d t o p o s t m o d e r n i s m is t o b e r e a d as a
2 7
disavowal o f t h e i r u n a c k n o w l e d g e d p r o x i m i t y to i t ) , in w h i c h p a t r i a r c h y
is fatally u n d e r m i n e d , s o t h a t t h e s u b j e c t e x p e r i e n c e s h i m s e l f as freed
from any traditional constraints, lacking any internalized symbolic Prohi
bition, bent on e x p e r i m e n t i n g with h i s life a n d on p u r s u i n g his life-
project, a n d so on, we have t h e r e f o r e to raise the m o m e n t o u s question o f
the disavowed 'passionate a t t a c h m e n t s ' which support the n e w reflexive
freedom o f the subject delivered from the constraints o f Nature and/or
Tradition: what if the disintegration o f the public ('patriarchal') symbolic
a u t h o r i t y is p a i d f o r ( o r c o u n t e r b a l a n c e d ) b y a n e v e n s t r o n g e r d i s a v o w e d
' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' t o s u b j e c t i o n , as - a m o n g o t h e r p h e n o m e n a - t h e
growth o f sado-maso lesbian couples where the relationship between the
two w o m e n follows t h e strict a n d severely e n a c t e d M a s t e r / S l a v e m a t r i x
s e e m s t o i n d i c a t e : t h e o n e w h o g i v e s t h e o r d e r s is t h e ' t o p ' , t h e o n e w h o
o b e y s is t h e ' b o t t o m ' , a n d i n o r d e r t o b e c o m e t h e ' t o p ' o n e h a s t o g o
t h r o u g h a n a r d u o u s p r o c e s s o f a p p r e n t i c e s h i p . W h i l e it is w r o n g t o r e a d
t h i s ' t o p / b o t t o m ' d u a l i t y as a s i g n o f d i r e c t ' i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e ( m a l e )
a g g r e s s o r ' , it is n o l e s s w r o n g t o p e r c e i v e i t as a p a r o d i c i m i t a t i o n o f
patriarchal relations of domination; we are dealing, rather, with the
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 345
a n a l y s i s still r e l i e d o n a s u b s t a n t i a l n o t i o n o f t h e U n c o n s c i o u s as t h e n o n -
reflected 'dark continent', the impenetrable 'decentred' Substance o f the
s u b j e c t ' s b e i n g to b e a r d u o u s l y p e n e t r a t e d , r e f l e c t e d , m e d i a t e d , by inter
pretation. Today, however, the formations o f the Unconscious (from
d r e a m s to hysterical s y m p t o m s ) have definitely lost t h e i r i n n o c e n c e : t h e
'free a s s o c i a t i o n s ' o f a typical e d u c a t e d a n a l y s a n d consist for t h e m o s t p a r t
o f attempts to provide a psychoanalytic explanation o f their disturbances,
s o t h a t o n e is q u i t e j u s t i f i e d i n s a y i n g t h a t w e h a v e n o t o n l y J u n g i a n ,
Kleinian, Lacanian . . . interpretations o f the symptoms, but symptoms
w h i c h a r e t h e m s e l v e s J u n g i a n , K l e i n i a n , L a c a n i a n . . . , t h a t is, w h o s e
reality involves implicit r e f e r e n c e to s o m e psychoanalytic theory. The
unfortunate result o f this g l o b a l r e f l e x i v i z a t i o n o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n (every
t h i n g b e c o m e s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e U n c o n s c i o u s i n t e r p r e t s i t s e l f . . . ) is, o f
c o u r s e , that the analyst's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n l o s e s its p e r f o r m a t i v e 'symbolic
e f f i c i e n c y ' a n d l e a v e s t h e s y m p t o m i n t a c t i n its i d i o t i c jouissance. In o t h e r
w o r d s , w h a t h a p p e n s i n p s y c h o a n a l y t i c t r e a t m e n t is s i m i l a r t o t h e p a r a d o x
( a l r e a d y n o t e d ) o f a n e o - N a z i s k i n h e a d w h o , w h e n r e a l l y p r e s s e d t o give
t h e r e a s o n s for his v i o l e n c e , s u d d e n l y starts to talk like s o c i a l w o r k e r s ,
sociologists and social psychologists, q u o t i n g diminished social mobility,
rising insecurity, the disintegration o f paternal authority, lack o f m a t e r n a l
l o v e i n h i s e a r l y c h i l d h o o d - w h e n t h e b i g O t h e r qua t h e s u b s t a n c e o f o u r
s o c i a l b e i n g d i s i n t e g r a t e s , t h e u n i t y o f p r a c t i c e a n d its i n h e r e n t r e f l e c t i o n
d i s i n t e g r a t e s i n t o r a w v i o l e n c e a n d its i m p o t e n t , i n e f f i c i e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .
T h i s i m p o t e n c e o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is a l s o o n e o f t h e n e c e s s a r y o b v e r s e s
o f t h e u n i v e r s a l i z e d r e f l e x i v i t y h a i l e d b y r i s k s o c i e t y t h e o r i s t s : it is as i f o u r
r e f l e x i v e p o w e r c a n f l o u r i s h o n l y i n s o f a r as it d r a w s its s t r e n g t h from
and relies o n some minimal 'pre-reflexive' substantial support which
e l u d e s its g r a s p , s o t h a t its u n i v e r s a l i z a t i o n is p a i d f o r by its i n e f f i c i e n c y ,
t h a t is, by t h e p a r a d o x i c a l r e - e m e r g e n c e o f t h e b r u t e R e a l o f ' i r r a t i o n a l '
violence, i m p e r m e a b l e a n d insensitive to reflexive interpretation. A n d the
tragedy is t h a t , faced with this d e a d l o c k o f the inefficiency o f their
interpretative interventions, even some psychoanalysts who otherwise
resist the obvious false solution o f a b a n d o n i n g the d o m a i n o f p s y c h o a n a l
ysis p r o p e r and taking refuge in biochemistry or body training are
t e m p t e d t o t a k e t h e d i r e c t way o f t h e R e a l : t h e y e m p h a s i z e t h a t s i n c e t h e
U n c o n s c i o u s is a l r e a d y its o w n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , all t h e p s y c h o a n a l y s t c a n d o
is act - s o , i n s t e a d o f t h e p a t i e n t a c t i n g (say, p r o d u c i n g actes mancfues) and
t h e analyst i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e p a t i e n t ' s acts, we g e t a p a t i e n t interpreting
a n d his analyst i n t r o d u c i n g a c u t i n t o this flow o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n with a n
2 8
a c t (say, o f c l o s i n g t h e s e s s i o n ) .
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 347
i t is t h e b i g O t h e r , t h e s y m b o l i c I n s t i t u t i o n , w h i c h a c t s t h r o u g h h i m : r e c a l l
o u r previous example o f a j u d g e , who may be a miserable a n d corrupt
p e r s o n , b u t the m o m e n t h e puts o n his r o b e a n d o t h e r insignia, his words
a r e t h e w o r d s o f t h e L a w itself. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e ' i n v i s i b l e ' M a s t e r
(whose paradigmatic c a s e is t h e and-Semitic figure o f the 'Jew' who,
i n v i s i b l e t o t h e p u b l i c e y e , p u l l s t h e s t r i n g s o f s o c i a l l i f e ) is a k i n d o f
u n c a n n y d o u b l e o f p u b l i c authority: h e h a s to act in s h a d o w , irradiating a
3 2
phantom-like, spectral o m n i p o t e n c e .
T h i s , t h e n , is t h e c o n c l u s i o n t o b e d r a w n f r o m t h e B i l l G a t e s i c o n : h o w
the disintegration o f the patriarchal symbolic authority, o f the Name-of-
t h e - F a t h e r , gives r i s e t o a n e w figure o f t h e M a s t e r w h o is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y
o u r c o m m o n peer, o u r fellow-creature, o u r imaginary d o u b l e , and - for
this very reason - p h a n t a s m i c a l l y e n d o w e d w i t h a n o t h e r d i m e n s i o n o f t h e
Evil G e n i u s . I n L a c a n i a n t e r m s : t h e s u s p e n s i o n o f t h e E g o I d e a l , o f t h e
f e a t u r e o f s y m b o l i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n - t h a t is, t h e r e d u c t i o n o f t h e M a s t e r to
a n i m a g i n a r y i d e a l - n e c e s s a r i l y g i v e s r i s e t o its m o n s t r o u s o b v e r s e , t o t h e
superego figure o f t h e o m n i p o t e n t Evil G e n i u s w h o c o n t r o l s o u r lives. I n
this figure, t h e i m a g i n a r y ( s e m b l a n c e ) a n d t h e real ( o f p a r a n o i a ) overlap,
owing to the suspension o f the p r o p e r symbolic efficiency.
T h e p o i n t o f i n s i s t i n g t h a t w e a r e d e a l i n g w i t h B i l l G a t e s as a n i c o n is
t h a t i t w o u l d b e m y s t i f y i n g t o e l e v a t e t h e ' r e a l ' G a t e s i n t o a k i n d o f Evil
Genius who masterminds a p l o t t o a c h i e v e g l o b a l c o n t r o l o v e r us all.
H e r e , m o r e t h a n e v e r , i t is c r u c i a l t o r e m e m b e r t h e l e s s o n o f t h e M a r x i s t
dialectic o f fetishization: the 'reification' o f relations b e t w e e n people (the
fact that they assume the form o f p h a n t a s m a g o r i c a l 'relations between
t h i n g s ' ) is always r e d o u b l e d b y t h e a p p a r e n d y o p p o s i t e p r o c e s s - b y t h e
false ' p e r s o n a l i z a t i o n ' ( ' p s y c h o l o g i z a t i o n ' ) o f what are in fact objective
s o c i a l p r o c e s s e s . I t was i n t h e 1 9 3 0 s t h a t t h e first g e n e r a t i o n o f F r a n k f u r t
S c h o o l t h e o r e t i c i a n s d r e w a t t e n t i o n to h o w - at t h e very m o m e n t when
g l o b a l m a r k e t r e l a t i o n s s t a r t e d t o e x e r t t h e i r full d o m i n a t i o n , m a k i n g t h e
individual p r o d u c e r ' s success o r failure d e p e n d e n t o n m a r k e t cycles totally
o u t his o f c o n t r o l - t h e n o t i o n o f a c h a r i s m a t i c ' b u s i n e s s g e n i u s ' r e a s s e r t e d
itself in 'spontaneous capitalist ideology', attributing the success o r failure
o f a b u s i n e s s m a n t o s o m e m y s t e r i o u s je ne sais quoi w h i c h h e p o s s e s s e s . "
A n d d o e s n o t t h e s a m e h o l d even m o r e today, w h e n t h e a b s t r a c t i o n ot
m a r k e t r e l a t i o n s t h a t r u n o u r lives is b r o u g h t t o a n e x t r e m e ? T h e b o o k
m a r k e t is o v e r f l o w i n g w i t h p s y c h o l o g i c a l m a n u a l s a d v i s i n g us o n h o w t o
s u c c e e d , h o w t o o u t d o o u r p a r t n e r o r c o m p e t i t o r - in s h o r t , m a k i n g o u r
success d e p e n d e n t o n our proper 'attitude'.
S o , i n a way, o n e is t e m p t e d to reverse M a r x ' s f a m o u s formula: in
350 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
T h i s a l r e a d y b r i n g s us t o t h e s e c o n d a s p e c t o f o u r c r i t i c a l d i s t a n c e
t o w a r d s risk s o c i e t y t h e o r y : t h e way i t a p p r o a c h e s t h e r e a l i t y o f c a p i t a l i s m .
Is it n o t t h a t , o n c l o s e r e x a m i n a t i o n , its n o t i o n o f ' r i s k ' i n d i c a t e s a n a r r o w
a n d p r e c i s e l y d e f i n e d d o m a i n i n w h i c h risks a r e g e n e r a t e d : t h e d o m a i n o f
the u n c o n t r o l l e d use o f science and t e c h n o l o g y in the conditions o f
c a p i t a l i s m ? T h e p a r a d i g m a t i c c a s e o f ' r i s k ' , w h i c h is n o t s i m p l y o n e a m o n g
m a n y b u t r i s k ' a s s u c h ' , is t h a t o f a n e w s c i e n t i f i c - t e c h n o l o g i c a l i n v e n t i o n
p u t to use by a private c o r p o r a t i o n without p r o p e r public democratic
debate and control, then generating the spectre of unforeseen cata
s t r o p h i c l o n g - t e r m c o n s e q u e n c e s . H o w e v e r , is n o t t h i s k i n d o f risk r o o t e d
i n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e l o g i c o f m a r k e t a n d p r o f i t a b i l i t y is d r i v i n g p r i v a t e l y
o w n e d c o r p o r a t i o n s to pursue their c o u r s e a n d use scientific a n d t e c h n o
logical innovations ( o r simply e x p a n d their p r o d u c t i o n ) without actually
t a k i n g a c c o u n t o f t h e l o n g - t e r m e f f e c t s o f s u c h activity o n t h e environ
m e n t , as w e l l as t h e h e a l t h o f h u m a n k i n d itself?
T h u s - d e s p i t e all t h e t a l k a b o u t a ' s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y ' w h i c h c o m p e l s
us to leave t h e o l d i d e o l o g i c a l d i l e m m a s o f Left a n d R i g h t , o f capitalism
v e r s u s s o c i a l i s m , a n d s o o n , b e h i n d - is n o t t h e c o n c l u s i o n t o b e d r a w n
that in the p r e s e n t global situation, in which private c o r p o r a t i o n s outside
p u b l i c p o l i t i c a l c o n t r o l a r e m a k i n g d e c i s i o n s w h i c h c a n a f f e c t us a l l , e v e n
u p t o o u r c h a n c e s o f survival, t h e o n l y s o l u t i o n l i e s i n a k i n d o f d i r e c t
socialization o f t h e p r o d u c t i v e p r o c e s s - in m o v i n g towards a society in
which global decisions about the fundamental orientation o f how to
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 351
S o t h e r e a r e two a t t i t u d e s : e i t h e r t o d a y ' s L e f t n o s t a l g i c a l l y e n g a g e s i n
t h e r i t u a l i s t i c i n c a n t a t i o n o f o l d f o r m u l a s , b e it t h o s e o f r e v o l u t i o n a r y
C o m m u n i s m o r those o f welfare state r e f o r m i s t Social D e m o c r a c y , dismiss
i n g all talk o f n e w p o s t m o d e r n s o c i e t y as e m p t y f a s h i o n a b l e p r a t t l e that
obfuscates the harsh reality o f today's capitalism; o r it accepts global
c a p i t a l i s m as ' t h e o n l y g a m e i n t o w n ' , a n d f o l l o w s t h e d o u b l e t a c t i c s o f
p r o m i s i n g t h e e m p l o y e e s t h a t t h e m a x i m u m p o s s i b l e w e l f a r e s t a t e will b e
maintained, a n d the employers that the rules o f the (global capitalist)
g a m e will b e fully r e s p e c t e d and the employees' 'irrational' demands
f i r m l y c e n s o r e d . S o , i n t o d a y ' s leftist p o l i t i c s , w e s e e m i n e f f e c t to be
r e d u c e d to the c h o i c e between the 'solid' o r t h o d o x attitude o f proudly,
o u t o f p r i n c i p l e , sticking to t h e o l d ( C o m m u n i s t o r S o c i a l D e m o c r a t i c )
t u n e , a l t h o u g h w e k n o w its t i m e h a s p a s s e d , a n d t h e N e w L a b o u r ' r a d i c a l
c e n t r e ' a t t i t u d e o f g o i n g t h e 'full M o n t y ' i n s t r i p p i n g , g e t t i n g r i d of, t h e
last vestiges o f p r o p e r leftist d i s c o u r s e . . . . P a r a d o x i c a l l y , t h e ultimate
victim o f the demise o f R e a l l y E x i s t i n g S o c i a l i s m was thus its great
historical o p p o n e n t throughout most of our century, reformist Social
D e m o c r a c y itself.
T h e b i g n e w s o f t o d a y ' s p o s t - p o l i t i c a l a g e o f t h e ' e n d o f i d e o l o g y ' is
t h u s t h e r a d i c a l d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f t h e s p h e r e o f t h e e c o n o m y : t h e way
t h e economy f u n c t i o n s ( t h e n e e d t o c u t s o c i a l w e l f a r e , e t c . ) is a c c e p t e d as
a s i m p l e i n s i g h t i n t o t h e o b j e c t i v e s t a t e o f t h i n g s . H o w e v e r , as l o n g as t h i s
fundamental d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f t h e e c o n o m i c s p h e r e is a c c e p t e d , all t h e
t a l k a b o u t a c t i v e c i t i z e n s h i p , a b o u t p u b l i c d i s c u s s i o n l e a d i n g to respon
s i b l e c o l l e c t i v e d e c i s i o n s , a n d so o n , will r e m a i n l i m i t e d t o t h e 'cultural'
i s s u e s o f r e l i g i o u s , s e x u a l , e t h n i c a n d o t h e r way-of-life d i f f e r e n c e s , w i t h o u t
actually e n c r o a c h i n g u p o n t h e level at w h i c h l o n g - t e r m decisions that
a f f e c t us all a r e m a d e . I n s h o r t , t h e o n l y way e f f e c t i v e l y t o b r i n g a b o u t a
s o c i e t y i n w h i c h risky l o n g - t e r m d e c i s i o n s w o u l d e n s u e f r o m p u b l i c d e b a t e
i n v o l v i n g all c o n c e r n e d is s o m e k i n d o f r a d i c a l l i m i t a t i o n o f C a p i t a l ' s
f r e e d o m , the subordination o f the process o f p r o d u c t i o n to social c o n t r o l
- t h e r a d i c a l repoliticization of the economy. T h a t is t o say: i f t h e problem
with today's post-politics ('administration o f social affairs') is t h a t it
increasingly undermines the possibility o f a p r o p e r political act, this
undermining is d i r e c d y d u e t o t h e d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f e c o n o m i c s , t o t h e
c o m m o n a c c e p t a n c e o f C a p i t a l a n d m a r k e t m e c h a n i s m s as n e u t r a l t o o l s /
p r o c e d u r e s to b e e x p l o i t e d .
W e c a n n o w see why today's post-politics c a n n o t attain the properly
p o l i t i c a l d i m e n s i o n o f u n i v e r s a l i t y : b e c a u s e it s i l e n t l y p r e c l u d e s t h e s p h e r e
o f e c o n o m y from politicization. T h e domain o f global capitalist market
354 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
r e l a t i o n s is t h e O t h e r S c e n e o f t h e s o - c a l l e d r e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f civil s o c i e t y
advocated by the partisans o f 'identity politics' a n d other postmodern
f o r m s o f p o l i t i c i z a t i o n : all t h e t a l k a b o u t n e w f o r m s o f p o l i t i c s bursting
o u t all o v e r , f o c u s e d on particular issues (gay rights, ecology, ethnic
m i n o r i t i e s . . . ) , all this i n c e s s a n t a c t i v i t y o f f l u i d , s h i f t i n g i d e n t i t i e s , o f
b u i l d i n g m u l t i p l e ad hoc c o a l i t i o n s , a n d s o o n , h a s s o m e t h i n g inauthentic
a b o u t it, a n d u l t i m a t e l y r e s e m b l e s t h e o b s e s s i o n a l n e u r o t i c w h o t a l k s all
t h e t i m e a n d is o t h e r w i s e f r a n t i c a l l y a c t i v e p r e c i s e l y i n o r d e r t o ensure
t h a t s o m e t h i n g - w h a t really matters — will not b e d i s t u r b e d , t h a t it will
3 5
remain immobilized. So, instead o f celebrating the new freedoms and
r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s b r o u g h t a b o u t by t h e ' s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y ' , i t is m u c h more
crucial to focus o n what remains the same in this g l o b a l fluidity and
r e f l e x i v i t y , o n w h a t s e r v e s as t h e v e r y m o t o r o f t h i s f l u i d i t y : t h e i n e x o r a b l e
l o g i c o f C a p i t a l . T h e s p e c t r a l p r e s e n c e o f C a p i t a l is t h e f i g u r e o f t h e b i g
O t h e r w h i c h n o t o n l y r e m a i n s o p e r a t i v e w h e n all t h e t r a d i t i o n a l embodi
m e n t s o f t h e s y m b o l i c b i g O t h e r disintegrate, b u t e v e n directly c a u s e s this
d i s i n t e g r a t i o n : far f r o m b e i n g c o n f r o n t e d with t h e abyss o f t h e i r freedom
- t h a t is, l a d e n w i t h t h e b u r d e n o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t h a t c a n n o t b e a l l e v i a t e d
b y t h e h e l p i n g h a n d o f T r a d i t i o n o r N a t u r e - t o d a y ' s s u b j e c t is p e r h a p s
m o r e t h a n ever c a u g h t in a n i n e x o r a b l e c o m p u l s i o n t h a t effectively r u n s
his life.
T h e i r o n y o f h i s t o r y is t h a t , in t h e E a s t e r n E u r o p e a n ex-Communist
c o u n t r i e s , t h e ' r e f o r m e d ' C o m m u n i s t s w e r e t h e first t o l e a r n t h i s l e s s o n .
W h y did m a n y o f t h e m r e t u r n to p o w e r via f r e e e l e c t i o n s in t h e mid
1 9 9 0 s ? T h i s v e r y r e t u r n o f f e r s t h e u l t i m a t e p r o o f t h a t t h e s e s t a t e s h a v e in
f a c t e n t e r e d c a p i t a l i s m . T h a t is t o say: w h a t d o e x - C o m m u n i s t s s t a n d f o r
today? D u e to t h e i r privileged links with t h e newly e m e r g i n g capitalists
( m o s d y m e m b e r s o f t h e o l d nomenklatura 'privatizing' the c o m p a n i e s they
o n c e r a n ) , t h e y a r e first a n d f o r e m o s t t h e p a r t y o f b i g C a p i t a l ; further
m o r e , t o e r a s e t h e t r a c e s o f t h e i r b r i e f b u t n o n e t h e less r a t h e r traumatic
e x p e r i e n c e w i t h p o l i t i c a l l y a c t i v e civil s o c i e t y , t h e y as a r u l e f e r o c i o u s l y
advocate a quick deideologization, a retreat from a c t i v e civil society
e n g a g e m e n t i n t o p a s s i v e , a p o l i t i c a l c o n s u m e r i s m - t h e v e r y two f e a t u r e s
which characterize c o n t e m p o r a r y capitalism. S o dissidents are astonished
t o d i s c o v e r t h a t t h e y p l a y e d t h e r o l e o f ' v a n i s h i n g m e d i a t o r s ' o n t h e way
f r o m s o c i a l i s m t o c a p i t a l i s m , i n w h i c h t h e s a m e c l a s s as b e f o r e r u l e s u n d e r
a n e w g u i s e . I t is t h e r e f o r e w r o n g t o c l a i m t h a t t h e e x - C o m m u n i s t s ' r e t u r n
to p o w e r shows h o w p e o p l e a r e d i s a p p o i n t e d by capitalism a n d l o n g for
t h e o l d s o c i a l i s t s e c u r i t y - i n a k i n d o f H e g e l i a n ' n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' , it
is o n l y w i t h the ex-Communists' return to power that socialism was
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 355
e f f e c t i v e l y n e g a t e d - t h a t is t o say, w h a t t h e p o l i t i c a l a n a l y s t s ( m i s ) p e r c e i v e
as ' d i s a p p o i n t m e n t w i t h c a p i t a l i s m ' is i n f a c t d i s a p p o i n t m e n t with the
e t h i c o - p o l i t i c a l e n t h u s i a s m f o r w h i c h t h e r e is n o p l a c e i n ' n o r m a l ' c a p i t a l
3
ism. '' W e should thus reassert the old Marxist critique o f 'reifkation':
today, e m p h a s i z i n g the depoliticized 'objective' e c o n o m i c logic against
allegedly 'outdated' forms o f ideological passions is the predominant
i d e o l o g i c a l f o r m , s i n c e i d e o l o g y is always s e l f - r e f e r e n t i a l , t h a t is, it always
defines itself through a distance towards an Other dismissed and
3 7
d e n o u n c e d as ' i d e o l o g i c a l ' . F o r t h a t p r e c i s e r e a s o n - b e c a u s e the depolit
icized economy is the disavoiued 'fundamental fantasy' of postmodern politics — a
p r o p e r l y p o l i t i c a l act w o u l d n e c e s s a r i l y e n t a i l t h e r e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f t h e
e c o n o m y : w i t h i n a g i v e n s i t u a t i o n , a g e s t u r e c o u n t s as a n act o n l y i n s o f a r
as i t d i s t u r b s ( ' t r a v e r s e s ' ) its f u n d a m e n t a l fantasy.
I n s o f a r as t o d a y ' s m o d e r a t e L e f t , f r o m B l a i r t o C l i n t o n , fully a c c e p t s
t h i s d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n , we a r e w i t n e s s i n g a s t r a n g e r e v e r s a l o f r o l e s : t h e o n l y
serious political f o r c e which c o n t i n u e s to question the u n r e s t r a i n e d rule
o f t h e m a r k e t is t h e p o p u l i s t e x t r e m e R i g h t ( B u c h a n a n i n t h e U S A ; L e
P e n in F r a n c e ) . W h e n W a l l S t r e e t r e a c t e d n e g a t i v e l y t o a fall in the
u n e m p l o y m e n t r a t e , t h e o n l y o n e t o m a k e t h e o b v i o u s p o i n t t h a t w h a t is
g o o d f o r C a p i t a l is o b v i o u s l y n o t w h a t is g o o d f o r t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e
population was B u c h a n a n . I n c o n t r a s t t o t h e o l d w i s d o m according to
w h i c h t h e e x t r e m e R i g h t o p e n l y says w h a t t h e m o d e r a t e Right secretly
t h i n k s , b u t d o e s n ' t d a r e say i n p u b l i c ( t h e o p e n a s s e r t i o n o f r a c i s m , o f t h e
n e e d for strong authority and the cultural h e g e m o n y o f 'Western values',
e t c . ) , we a r e t h e r e f o r e approaching a situation in w h i c h the extreme
R i g h t o p e n l y says w h a t t h e m o d e r a t e Left s e c r e t l y t h i n k s , b u t d o e s n ' t d a r e
say i n p u b l i c ( t h e n e c e s s i t y t o c u r b t h e f r e e d o m o f C a p i t a l ) .
O n e s h o u l d a l s o n o t f o r g e t t h a t t o d a y ' s r i g h t i s t survivalist m i l i t i a s o f t e n
l o o k like a c a r i c a t u r i z e d v e r s i o n o f t h e e x t r e m e m i l i t a n t leftist splinter
groups o f the 1960s: in both cases we are d e a l i n g with radical anti-
institutional logic - t h a t is, t h e u l t i m a t e e n e m y is t h e r e p r e s s i v e State
apparatus (the F B I , the Army, the judicial system) which threatens the
g r o u p ' s v e r y survival, a n d t h e g r o u p is o r g a n i z e d as a t i g h t disciplined
b o d y in o r d e r to b e a b l e to w i t h s t a n d this p r e s s u r e . T h e e x a c t c o u n t e r
p o i n t t o this is a L e f t i s t l i k e P i e r r e B o u r d i e u , w h o d e f e n d s t h e i d e a o f a
u n i f i e d E u r o p e as a s t r o n g ' s o c i a l s t a t e ' , g u a r a n t e e i n g the m i n i m u m of
social rights and welfare against the onslaught o f globalization: it is
difficult to abstain f r o m irony when one sees a radical Leftist raising
barriers against the corrosive global power o f Capital, so fervently cel
e b r a t e d b y M a r x . S o , a g a i n , it is as i f t h e r o l e s a r e r e v e r s e d t o d a y : L e f t i s t s
356 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
s u p p o r t a s t r o n g S t a t e as t h e l a s t g u a r a n t e e o f s o c i a l a n d civil l i b e r t i e s
a g a i n s t C a p i t a l ; w h i l e R i g h t i s t s d e m o n i z e t h e S t a t e a n d its a p p a r a t u s e s as
the ultimate terrorist m a c h i n e .
O f course, one should fully a c k n o w l e d g e the tremendous liberating
impact o f the postmodern politicization o f domains which were hitherto
c o n s i d e r e d apolitical (feminism, gay a n d lesbian politics, ecology, e t h n i c
a n d o t h e r so-called m i n o r i t y i s s u e s ) : t h e fact that t h e s e issues n o t o n l y
b e c a m e p e r c e i v e d as i n h e r e n t l y p o l i t i c a l b u t also gave b i r t h to n e w f o r m s
o f political subjectivization thoroughly r e s h a p e d o u r entire political a n d
cultural landscape. S o t h e p o i n t is n o t to play d o w n this tremendous
a d v a n c e in f a v o u r o f t h e r e t u r n t o s o m e n e w v e r s i o n o f s o - c a l l e d e c o n o m i c
e s s e n t i a l i s m ; t h e p o i n t is, r a t h e r , t h a t t h e d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f t h e e c o n o m y
g e n e r a t e s t h e p o p u l i s t N e w R i g h t w i t h its M o r a l M a j o r i t y i d e o l o g y , w h i c h
today is the main obstacle to the realization o f the very (feminist,
e c o l o g i c a l . . .) d e m a n d s o n w h i c h p o s t m o d e r n f o r m s o f p o l i t i c a l subjectiv
ization focus. In short, I a m pleading for a 'return to the primacy o f the
e c o n o m y ' n o t to t h e d e t r i m e n t o f t h e issues raised by p o s t m o d e r n forms
o f politicization, b u t p r e c i s e l y in o r d e r to c r e a t e t h e c o n d i t i o n s f o r the
m o r e effective realization o f feminist, e c o l o g i c a l , a n d so on, d e m a n d s .
A further indicator o f the necessity for some kind o f politicization o f
t h e e c o n o m y is t h e o v e r t l y ' i r r a t i o n a l ' p r o s p e c t o f c o n c e n t r a t i n g quasi-
m o n o p o l i s t i c p o w e r in the h a n d s o f a single individual or corporation,
like R u p e r t M u r d o c h o r Bill Gates. I f the n e x t d e c a d e brings the unifica
tion o f the multitude of communicative media in a single apparatus
reuniting the features o f interactive computer, T V , video- a n d audio-
p h o n e , \ i d e o a n d C D p l a y e r , a n d i f M i c r o s o f t a c t u a l l y s u c c e e d s in b e c o m
ing the quasi-monopolistic owner of this new universal medium,
c o n t r o l l i n g n o t o n l y t h e l a n g u a g e u s e d i n it b u t a l s o t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f its
application, t h e n we obviously a p p r o a c h the absurd situation in which a
s i n g l e a g e n t , e x e m p t f r o m p u b l i c c o n t r o l , will i n e f f e c t d o m i n a t e t h e b a s i c
c o m m u n i c a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e o f o u r lives a n d will t h u s , i n a way, b e s t r o n g e r
than any government. This o p e n s up the prospect o f paranoiac scenarios:
s i n c e t h e d i g i t a l l a n g u a g e w e s h a l l a l l u s e will n o n e t h e l e s s b e m a n - m a d e ,
c o n s t r u c t e d b y p r o g r a m m e r s , is it n o t p o s s i b l e t o i m a g i n e t h e c o r p o r a t i o n
that owns it installing in it s o m e s p e c i a l s e c r e t p r o g r a m i n g r e d i e n t w h i c h
will e n a b l e i t t o c o n t r o l u s , o r a v i r u s w h i c h t h e c o r p o r a t i o n c a n t r i g g e r ,
a n d thus bring o u r c o m m u n i c a t i o n to a halt? W h e n b i o g e n e t i c c o r p o r a
tions assert their ownership o f o u r g e n e s t h r o u g h patenting them, they
a l s o give r i s e t o a s i m i l a r p a r a d o x o f o w n i n g t h e i n n e r m o s t p a r t s o f o u r
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 357
A g a i n s t t h e s e f e a r s , o n e s h o u l d e m p h a s i z e t h a t C h i n a will, s o o n e r o r l a t e r ,
pay t h e p r i c e f o r t h e u n b r i d l e d d e v e l o p m e n t o f capitalism in n e w f o r m s
of social unrest and instability: t h e 'winning formula' of combining
c a p i t a l i s m w i t h t h e A s i a t i c ' c l o s e d ' e t h i c a l c o m m u n i t y l i f e - w o r l d is d o o m e d
to e x p l o d e . Now, m o r e than ever, o n e should reassert M a r x ' s o l d f o r m u l a
that the limit o f capitalism is C a p i t a l itself: the danger to Western
capitalism c o m e s n o t from outside, from the Chinese or some other
m o n s t e r b e a t i n g u s a t o u r o w n g a m e w h i l e d e p r i v i n g us o f W e s t e r n l i b e r a l
i n d i v i d u a l i s m , b u t f r o m t h e i n h e r e n t l i m i t o f its o w n p r o c e s s o f c o l o n i z i n g
ever new (not only g e o g r a p h i c but also cultural, psychic, etc.) domains,
o f e r o d i n g t h e last r e s i s t a n t s p h e r e s o f n o n - r e f l e c t e d substantial being,
w h i c h h a s t o e n d i n s o m e k i n d o f i m p l o s i o n , w h e n C a p i t a l will n o l o n g e r
have any substantial c o n t e n t outside itself to feed on.™ O n e s h o u l d take
M a r x ' s m e t a p h o r o f C a p i t a l as a v a m p i r e - l i k e e n t i t y l i t e r a l l y : it n e e d s s o m e
k i n d o f pre-rcflexive ' n a t u r a l productivity' (talents in d i f f e r e n t d o m a i n s o f
a r t , i n v e n t o r s i n s c i e n c e , e t c . ) i n o r d e r t o f e e d o n its o w n b l o o d , a n d t h u s
t o r e p r o d u c e i t s e l f - w h e n t h e c i r c l e c l o s e s itself, w h e n r e f l e x i v i t y b e c o m e s
t h o r o u g h l y u n i v e r s a l , t h e w h o l e s y s t e m is t h r e a t e n e d .
A n o t h e r s i g n w h i c h p o i n t s i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n is h o w , i n t h e s p h e r e o f
w h a t A d o r n o a n d H o r k h e i m e r c a l l e d Kulturindustrie, the desubstantializa-
tion a n d / o r reflexivity o f the p r o d u c t i o n process has r e a c h e d a level that
t h r e a t e n s d i e w h o l e s y s t e m w i t h g l o b a l i m p l o s i o n . E v e n i n h i g h art, the
r e c e n t f a s h i o n f o r e x h i b i t i o n s i n w h i c h ' e v e r y t h i n g is p e r m i t t e d ' a n d c a n
p a s s as a n a r t o b j e c t , u p t o m u t i l a t e d a n i m a l b o d i e s , b e t r a y s t h i s d e s p e r a t e
n e e d o f c u l t u r a l C a p i t a l t o c o l o n i z e a n d i n c l u d e i n its c i r c u i t e v e n the
m o s t e x t r e m e a n d p a t h o l o g i c a l strata o f h u m a n subjectivity. P a r a d o x i c a l l y
- and not without irony - t h e first m u s i c a l t r e n d w h i c h was i n a way
' f a b r i c a t e d ' , e x p l o i t e d f o r a s h o r t t i m e a n d very s o o n f o r g o t t e n , s i n c e it
l a c k e d t h e m u s i c a l s u b s t a n c e t o survive a n d a t t a i n t h e s t a t u s o f ' c l a s s i c s '
l i k e t h e e a r l y r o c k o f t h e B e a d e s a n d R o l l i n g S t o n e s , was n o n e o t h e r t h a n
punk, which simultaneously marked the strongest intrusion o f violent
working-class p r o t e s t i n t o m a i n s t r e a m p o p c u l t u r e - in a k i n d o f m o c k i n g
version o f the H e g e l i a n infinite j u d g e m e n t , in which opposites directly
c o i n c i d e , the raw e n e r g y o f social p r o t e s t c o i n c i d e d with t h e n e w level o f
c o m m e r c i a l p r e f a b r i c a t i o n w h i c h , as it w e r e , c r e a t e s t h e o b j e c t i t sells o u t
of itself, w i t h no need for some 'natural talent' to emerge and be
s u b s e q u e n t l y e x p l o i t e d , like B a r o n M u n c h h a u s e n saving h i m s e l f f r o m t h e
s w a m p b y p u l l i n g h i m s e l f u p b y his o w n h a i r s . . . .
D o w e n o t e n c o u n t e r t h e s a m e l o g i c i n p o l i t i c s , w h e r e t h e p o i n t is l e s s
a n d less t o f o l l o w a c o h e r e n t g l o b a l p r o g r a m m e but, rather, to try t o
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 359
R e t u r n s in t h e R e a l
( r e f l e x i v i t y , t h e r i g h t t o c h o o s e o n e ' s w a y o f l i f e i n s t e a d o f a c c e p t i n g i t as
i m p o s e d by tradition, e t c . ) h a s a l s o p e n e t r a t e d t h e m o s t i n t i m a t e private
s p h e r e o f s e x u a l i t y - n o w o n d e r t h e p r i c e o f t h i s s t e p is t h e i n c r e a s e i n
' s a d i s t i c ' p r a c t i c e s t h a t s t a g e s e x u a l i t y as t h e d o m a i n of contract and
m u t u a l e x p l o i t a t i o n . A n d it is p r e c i s e l y a t this p o i n t t h a t w e c a n s e e h o w
o u r two c r i t i c i s m s o f risk s o c i e t y t h e o r y - t h a t i t is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y too
general (avoiding l o c a t i n g t h e key risk-generating f a c t o r in t h e specificity
of the capitalist m a r k e t economy) and too particular (not taking into
a c c o u n t t h e way t h e n o n e x i s t e n c e o f t h e b i g O t h e r a f f e c t s t h e s t a t u s o f
s u b j e c t i v i t y ) - c o n v e r g e : i t is t h e v e r y ' s p e c i f i c ' l o g i c o f r e f l e x i v e c o m m o -
d i f i c a l i o n o f i n t i m a t e s p h e r e s w h i c h , i n t h e way it a f f e c t s s u b j e c t i v i t y ,
4 3
u n d e r m i n e s the standard figure o f the m o d e r n free a u t o n o m o u s s u b j e c t .
O n e should therefore reject the narrative o f the process that leads from
the patriarchal Oedipal order to postmodern (or second modernity)
m u l t i p l e c o n t i n g e n t i d e n t i t i e s : w h a t this narrative o b l i t e r a t e s a r e t h e n e w
f o r m s o f d o m i n a t i o n g e n e r a t e d b y t h e ' d e c l i n e o f O e d i p u s ' itself; f o r t h i s
r e a s o n , t h o s e w h o c o n t i n u e to l o c a t e t h e e n e m y in O e d i p u s a r e o b l i g e d
to insist o n h o w p o s t m o d e r n i t y r e m a i n s an u n f i n i s h e d p r o j e c t , o n how
O e d i p a l p a t r i a r c h y c o n t i n u e s t o l e a d its s u b t e r r a n e a n life a n d p r e v e n t s us
from realizing the full potential of postmodern self-fashioning indi
viduality. T h i s p r o p e r l y hysterical e n d e a v o u r to b r e a k with t h e Oedipal
past m i s l o c a t e s the d a n g e r : it lies n o t in t h e r e m a i n d e r s o f t h e past, b u t
in the o b s c e n e n e e d for d o m i n a t i o n a n d s u b j e c t i o n e n g e n d e r e d by t h e
new 'post-Oedipal' forms o f subjectivity themselves. In o t h e r words, today
we a r e witnessing a shift n o less r a d i c a l t h a n t h e shift f r o m the pre-
m o d e r n patriarchal o r d e r direcdy legitimized by the sexualized c o s m o l o g y
( M a s c u l i n e a n d F e m i n i n e as t h e t w o c o s m i c p r i n c i p l e s ) t o t h e modern
patriarchal o r d e r that i n t r o d u c e d the abstract-universal notion o f m a n ;
as is always t h e c a s e w i t h s u c h r u p t u r e s , o n e s h o u l d b e v e r y c a r e f u l t o
avoid t h e trap o f m e a s u r i n g the new standards against the old - such
b l i n d n e s s leads e i t h e r to c a t a s t r o p h i c visions o f total d i s i n t e g r a t i o n (the
vision o f the emerging s o c i e t y as that o f proto-psychotic narcissists
l a c k i n g any n o t i o n o f trust a n d o b l i g a t i o n ) o r t o a n o less false c e l e
bration o f the new post-Oedipal s u b j e c t i v i t y t h a t fails t o a c c o u n t for
the new forms o f domination emerging from postmodern subjectivity
itself.
What psychoanalysis e n a b l e s us to d o is t o f o c u s o n this o b s c e n e ,
disavowed ' s u p p l e m e n t ' o f the reflexive s u b j e c t freed from the constraints
o f N a t u r e a n d T r a d i t i o n : as L a c a n p u t it, t h e s u b j e c t o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s is
n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e s u b j e c t o f m o d e r n s c i e n c e . L e t us b e g i n w i t h t h e s o -
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 361
4 4
called "culture o f c o m p l a i n t ' , w i t h its u n d e r l y i n g l o g i c o f ressentiment far
from cheerfully assuming the n o n e x i s t e n c e o f the big O t h e r , the subject
b l a m e s t h e O t h e r f o r its f a i l u r e a n d / o r i m p o t e n c e , as i f the Other is guilty
of the fact that it doesn't exist, t h a t is, as i f i m p o t e n c e is n o e x c u s e - t h e b i g
O t h e r is r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e v e r y f a c t t h a t i t w a s n ' t a b l e t o d o anything:
t h e m o r e t h e s u b j e c t ' s s t r u c t u r e is ' n a r c i s s i s t i c ' , d i e m o r e h e puts the
b l a m e o n t h e b i g O t h e r , a n d tims a s s e r t s h i s d e p e n d e n c e o n it. T h e b a s i c
f e a t u r e o f t h e ' c u l t u r e o f c o m p l a i n t ' is a c a l l , a d d r e s s e d t o t h e b i g O t h e r ,
to intervene and put things right (to c o m p e n s a t e the d a m a g e d sexual o r
e t h n i c m i n o r i t y , e t c . ) - h o w , e x a c t l y , t h i s is t o b e d o n e is a g a i n a m a t t e r
for various ethico-legal ' c o m m i t t e e s ' .
T h e s p e c i f i c f e a t u r e o f t h e ' c u l t u r e o f c o m p l a i n t ' is its l e g a l i s t i c twist,
the e n d e a v o u r to translate the c o m p l a i n t into the legal obligation o f the
Other (usually t h e State) to indemnify me - for what? F o r the very
unfathomable surplus-enjoyment I a m d e p r i v e d of, w h o s e l a c k m a k e s me
f e e l u n d e r p r i v i l e g e d . Is n o t t h e ' c u l t u r e o f c o m p l a i n t ' t h e r e f o r e today's
version o f hysteria, o f the hysterical impossible d e m a n d addressed to the
O t h e r , a d e m a n d t h a t a c t u a l l y wants to be rejected, s i n c e t h e s u b j e c t g r o u n d s
h i s / h e r e x i s t e n c e i n h i s / h e r c o m p l a i n t : ' I a m in s o f a r as I m a k e the
O t h e r r e s p o n s i b l e for a n d / o r guilty o f m y misery'? I n s t e a d of u n d e r m i n
ing the position o f the O t h e r , the complaining underprivileged address
t h e m s e l v e s t o it: b y t r a n s l a t i n g t h e i r d e m a n d i n t o t h e t e r m s o f l e g a l i s t i c
c o m p l a i n t , t h e y confirm the Other in its position in the very gesture of attaching
it. T h e r e is a n i n s u r m o u n t a b l e g a p b e t w e e n t h i s l o g i c o f c o m p l a i n t a n d
t h e t m e ' r a d i c a l ' ( ' r e v o l u t i o n a r y ' ) a c t w h i c h , i n s t e a d o f c o m p l a i n i n g to
t h e O t h e r a n d e x p e c t i n g it t o a c t - t h a t is, d i s p l a c i n g d i e n e e d t o a c t o n
4
t o it - s u s p e n d s t h e e x i s t i n g l e g a l f r a m e a n d accomplishes the act itself '
Consequently, this 'culture of complaint' is c o r r e l a t i v e t o sado-maso
p r a c t i c e s o f s e l f - m u t i l a t i o n : t h e y f o r m t h e two o p p o s e d b u t complemen
tary a s p e c t s o f t h e d i s t u r b e d relationship towards the Law, relating to
e a c h o t h e r as d o h y s t e r i a a n d p e r v e r s i o n . T h e s a d o - m a s o p r a c t i c e acts out
the phantasmic scenarios ( o f humiliation, rape, v i c t i m i z a t i o n . . .) which
traumatize the hysterical subject. W h a t m a k e s t h i s p a s s a g e f r o m h y s t e r i a t o
p e r v e r s i o n p o s s i b l e is t h e c h a n g e i n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n L a w a n d
jouissance. for the h y s t e r i c a l s u b j e c t , t h e L a w is still t h e agency which
p r o h i b i t s a c c e s s t o jouissance (so h e can only fantasize a b o u t the o b s c e n e
jouissance h i d d e n b e n e a t h the figure o f the L a w ) ; while for the pervert,
t h e L a w e m a n a t e s f r o m t h e v e r y f i g u r e t h a t e m b o d i e s jouissance (so h e c a n
directly assume the r o l e o f this o b s c e n e O t h e r as t h e instrument of
jouissance)
362 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
T h e p a r a d o x i c a l result o f t h e m u t a t i o n in the n o n e x i s t e n c e o f t h e b i g
Other - o f the growing collapse o f symbolic efficiency - is t h u s the
p r o l i f e r a d o n o f d i f f e r e n t v e r s i o n s o f a big Other that actually exists, in the
Real, n o t m e r e l y as a s y m b o l i c f i c t i o n . T h e b e l i e f i n t h e b i g O t h e r w h i c h
e x i s t s i n t h e R e a l is, o f c o u r s e , t h e m o s t s u c c i n c t d e f i n i t i o n o f p a r a n o i a ;
f o r this r e a s o n , two f e a t u r e s w h i c h c h a r a c t e r i z e today's i d e o l o g i c a l s t a n c e
- c y n i c a l d i s t a n c e a n d full r e l i a n c e o n p a r a n o i a c f a n t a s y - a r e s t r i c t l y c o -
d e p e n d e n t : the t y p i c a l s u b j e c t t o d a y is t h e o n e w h o , w h i l e displaying
cynical distrust o f any public ideology, indulges without restraint in
p a r a n o i a c fantasies a b o u t conspiracies, threats, a n d excessive forms o f
e n j o y m e n t o f the O t h e r . T h e distrust o f the big O t h e r (the order o f
s y m b o l i c f i c t i o n s ) , t h e s u b j e c t ' s refusal to 'take it seriously', relies o n t h e
b e l i e f t h a t t h e r e is a n ' O t h e r o f t h e O t h e r ' , t h a t a s e c r e t , i n v i s i b l e a n d all-
powerful a g e n t actually 'pulls the strings' a n d runs the show: b e h i n d the
v i s i b l e , p u b l i c P o w e r t h e r e is a n o t h e r o b s c e n e , i n v i s i b l e p o w e r structure.
T h i s o t h e r , h i d d e n a g e n t acts t h e p a r t o f t h e ' O t h e r o f t h e O t h e r ' in t h e
Lacanian sense, the part o f the meta-guarantee o f the consistency o f the
big O t h e r (the symbolic order that regulates social life).
It is h e r e t h a t w e s h o i d d l o o k f o r t h e r o o t s o f t h e r e c e n t i m p a s s e o f
n a r r a t i v i z a t i o n , t h a t is, o f t h e t h e m e o f t h e ' e n d o f g r e a t n a r r a t i v e s ' : i n
o u r e r a , w h e n - i n p o l i t i c s a n d i d e o l o g y as w e l l as i n l i t e r a t u r e a n d c i n e m a
- global, all-encompassing narratives ('the struggle o f liberal d e m o c r a c y
with t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m ' , e t c . ) n o l o n g e r s e e m p o s s i b l e , t h e o n l y way t o a c h i e v e
a k i n d o f g l o b a l ' c o g n i t i v e m a p p i n g ' is t h r o u g h t h e p a r a n o i a c n a r r a t i v e o f
a ' c o n s p i r a c y t h e o r y ' . I t is all t o o s i m p l i s t i c t o d i s m i s s c o n s p i r a c y n a r r a t i v e s
as t h e p a r a n o i a c p r o t o - F a s c i s t r e a c t i o n o f t h e i n f a m o u s ' m i d d l e classes'
which feel t h r e a t e n e d by the p r o c e s s o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n : they function,
rather, as a k i n d of floating signifier which can be appropriated by
different political options, e n a b l i n g t h e m to obtain a m i n i m a l cognitive
m a p p i n g - n o t only by right-wing p o p u l i s m a n d f u n d a m e n t a l i s m , b u t also
4 7
b y t h e l i b e r a l c e n t r e ( t h e ' m y s t e r y ' o f K e n n e d y ' s a s s a s s i n a t i o n ) a n d left-
wing o r i e n t a t i o n s (recall the old o b s e s s i o n o f t h e A m e r i c a n Left with t h e
n o t i o n t h a t s o m e m y s t e r i o u s g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c y is e x p e r i m e n t i n g with
n e r v e g a s e s w h i c h w o u l d give t h e m t h e p o w e r t o r e g u l a t e t h e b e h a v i o u r
4 8
o f the p o p u l a t i o n ) .
A n o t h e r v e r s i o n o f t h e O t h e r ' s r e t u r n i n t h e R e a l is d i s c e r n i b l e i n t h e
guise o f the New Age J u n g i a n resexualization o f the universe ( ' m e n are
from Mars, w o m e n are from Venus'): according to t h i s , t h e r e is an
underlying, deeply a n c h o r e d archetypal identity which provides a kind o f
safe h a v e n i n t h e f l u r r y o f c o n t e m p o r a r y c o n f u s i o n o f r o l e s a n d i d e n t i t i e s ;
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 363
q u e s t i o n - e n i g m a o f d e s i r e is u l t i m a t e l y n o t ' W h a t d o I r e a l l y w a n t ? ' , b u t
' W h a t does the O t h e r really want from m e ? W h a t , as a n o b j e c t , a m I
m y s e l f f o r t h e O t h e r ? ' - I myself ( t h e s u b j e c t ) , as t h e o b j e c t - c a u s e o f t h e
O t h e r ' s desire, am the object whose overproximity triggers anxiety: that
is, a n x i e t y e m e r g e s w h e n 1 am reduced to the position o f the object
e x c h a n g e d / u s e d by the O t h e r . A l o n g t h e s a m e lines, in t h e case o f F a l s e
Memory Syndrome, the antagonistic relationship with the parental
h a r a s s e r e n a b l e s m e t o a v o i d a n x i e t y g e n e r a t e d b y t h e f a c t t h a t I am t h e
d i r e c t ( i n c e s t u o u s ) o b j e c t o f p a r e n t a l d e s i r e ; t h a t I desire m y s e l f as s u c h .
O n e last e x a m p l e : in his u n p u b l i s h e d paper 'Ideology and its P a r a
d o x e s ' , Glyn Daly draws attention to the topic o f ' c r a c k i n g the c o d e ' in
today's p o p u l a r ideology, from New Age pseudo-scientific attempts to use
c o m p u t e r t e c h n o l o g y to c r a c k s o m e s o r t o f f u n d a m e n t a l c o d e w h i c h g i v e s
access to the future destiny o f humanity (the Bible code, the code
c o n t a i n e d in the Egyptian pyramids . . .) up to the paradigmatic s c e n e o f
cyberspace thrillers in which the h e r o (or, m o r e often, the h e r o i n e , like
S a n d r a B u l l o c k i n The Net), h u n c h e d over a c o m p u t e r , frantically works
a g a i n s t time t o o v e r c o m e t h e o b s t a c l e o f ' A c c e s s D e n i e d ' a n d g a i n a c c e s s
to the ultra-secret information (say, a b o u t the workings of a secret
g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c y involved in a p l o t against f r e e d o m a n d d e m o c r a c y , o r
s o m e e q u a l l y s e v e r e c r i m e ) . D o e s this t o p i c n o t r e p r e s e n t a desperate
a t t e m p t t o r e a s s e r t t h e b i g O t h e r ' s e x i s t e n c e , t h a t is, to p o s i t s o m e s e c r e t
C o d e o r O r d e r that bears witness to the p r e s e n c e o f s o m e A g e n t w h i c h
a c t u a l l y p u l l s t h e s t r i n g s o f o u r c h a o t i c s o c i a l life?
Y e t a n o t h e r , m u c h m o r e u n c a n n y a s s e r t i o n o f t h e b i g O t h e r is d i s c e r n i b l e ,
however, in the allegedly 'liberating' n o t i o n o f the subjects c o m p e l l e d to
( r e ) i n v e n t the rules o f their c o e x i s t e n c e without any g u a r a n t e e in s o m e
m e t a - n o r m ; K a n t ' s e t h i c a l p h i l o s o p h y c a n already serve as its p a r a d i g m a t i c
c a s e . I n Coldness and Cruelty, D e l e u z e p r o v i d e s a n u n s u r p a s s a b l e formula
tion o f Kant's radically new c o n c e p t i o n o f the m o r a l Law:
T h e K a n t i a n L a w is t h u s n o t m e r e l y a n e m p t y f o r m a p p l i e d t o a r a n d o m
e m p i r i c a l c o n t e n t in o r d e r to a s c e r t a i n i f this c o n t e n t m e e t s t h e c r i t e r i a
o f e t h i c a l a d e q u a c y - t h e e m p t y f o r m o f t h e L a w , r a t h e r , f u n c t i o n s as t h e
promise o f an absent content ( n e v e r ) t o c o m e . T h i s f o r m is n o t the
neutral-universal m o u l d o f t h e plurality o f different e m p i r i c a l c o n t e n t s ; it
bears witness to the persisting uncertainty a b o u t the c o n t e n t o f our acts -
we never know i f the d e t e r m i n a t e c o n t e n t that a c c o u n t s for t h e specificity
o f o u r a c t s is t h e r i g h t o n e , t h a t is, i f w e h a v e a c t u a l l y a c t e d i n a c c o r d a n c e
with t h e L a w a n d have n o t b e e n g u i d e d by s o m e h i d d e n pathological
motives. K a n t thus a n n o u n c e s the n o t i o n o f Law which culminates in
Kafka a n d the e x p e r i e n c e o f m o d e r n political 'totalitarianism': since, in
t h e c a s e o f t h e L a w , its Dass-Sein ( t h e f a c t o f t h e L a w ) p r e c e d e s its Was-
Sein ( w h a t t h i s L a w i s ) , t h e s u b j e c t finds h i m s e l f i n a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h ,
a l t h o u g h h e k n o w s t h e r e is a L a w , h e n e v e r k n o w s ( a n d a p r i o r i cannot
k n o w ) what t h i s L a w is — a g a p f o r e v e r s e p a r a t e s the L a w f r o m its p o s i t i v e
i n c a r n a t i o n s . T h e s u b j e c t is t h u s a p r i o r i , in h i s v e r y e x i s t e n c e , g u i l t y :
guilty w i t h o u t knowing what he is g u i l t y o f ( a n d g u i l t y f o r t h a t very
5 1
r e a s o n ) , i n f r i n g i n g t h e law w i t h o u t k n o w i n g its e x a c t r e g u l a t i o n s . . . .
W h a t w e h a v e h e r e , f o r t h e first t i m e i n t h e h i s t o r y o f p h i l o s o p h y , is t h e
assertion o f the L a w as unconscious: the experience o f Form without
c o n t e n t is always t h e i n d e x o f a r e p r e s s e d c o n t e n t - t h e m o r e i n t e n s e l y
t h e s u b j e c t sticks to t h e e m p t y f o r m , t h e m o r e t r a u m a t i c t h e repressed
content becomes.
o f a d e t e r m i n a t e s e t o f p o s i t i v e u n i v e r s a l n o r m s - r e n d e r s all t h e more
s e n s i b l e t h e u n b e a r a b l e p r e s s u r e o f t h e m o r a l L a w qua t h e p u r e empty
i n j u n c t i o n t o d o o n e ' s D u t y . S o , f r o m t h e L a c a n i a n p e r s p e c d v e , it is h e r e
that we e n c o u n t e r t h e crucial distinction b e t w e e n rules to b e invented
and their underlying Law/Prohibidon: only when t h e L a w qua s e t o f
p o s i t i v e u n i v e r s a l s y m b o l i c n o r m s fails t o a p p e a r - d o w e e n c o u n t e r the
L a w a t its m o s t r a d i c a l , t h e L a w i n its a s p e c t o f t h e R e a l o f a n uncondi
tional i n j u n c t i o n . T h e p a r a d o x to b e e m p h a s i z e d h e r e lies in t h e precise
n a t u r e o f t h e P r o h i b i t i o n e n t a i l e d b y t h e m o r a l L a w : at its m o s t f u n d a m e n
tal, t h i s P r o h i b i t i o n is n o t t h e p r o h i b i t i o n t o a c c o m p l i s h s o m e p o s i t i v e a c t
that would violate the Law, b u t the self-referential p r o h i b i t i o n to confuse
the 'impossible' L a w with any positive symbolic prescription and/or
p r o h i b i t i o n , t h a t is, t o c l a i m f o r a n y p o s i t i v e s e t o f n o r m s t h e s t a t u s o f the
l a w - u l t i m a t e l y , t h e P r o h i b i t i o n m e a n s t h a t the place of the Lazu itself must
remain empty.
T o p u t it i n c l a s s i c F r e u d i a n t e r m s : i n F o u c a u l t , w e g e t a s e t o f r u l e s
regulating the 'care o f the S e l f in his 'use o f pleasures' (in short, a
reasonable application o f the 'pleasure p r i n c i p l e ' ) ; while in Kant, the
(re)invention o f rules follows an injunction which comes from the
'beyond o f the pleasure principle'. O f course, the F o u c a u l d i a n / D e l e u z i a n
a n s w e r t o t h i s w o u l d b e t h a t K a n t is u l t i m a t e l y t h e v i c t i m o f a p e r s p e c t i v e
illusion which leads him to (mis)perceive the radical i m m a n e n c e of
ethical n o r m s ( t h e fact that t h e s u b j e c t has to i n v e n t t h e n o r m s r e g u l a t i n g
his c o n d u c t a u t o n o m o u s l y , at his own e x p e n s e a n d o n his own responsi
bility, w i t h n o b i g O t h e r t o t a k e t h e b l a m e f o r i t ) as its e x a c t o p p o s i t e : as
a radical t r a n s c e n d e n c e , presupposing the existence o f an inscrutable
t r a n s c e n d e n t O t h e r w h i c h t e r r o r i z e s u s w i t h its u n c o n d i t i o n a l i n j u n c t i o n ,
s i m u l t a n e o u s l y p r o h i b i t i n g us a c c e s s t o it - we a r e u n d e r a c o m p u l s i o n to
d o o u r Duty, b u t f o r e v e r p r e v e n t e d f r o m clearly k n o w i n g w h a t this D u t y
is. . . . T h e F r e u d i a n a n s w e r is t h a t s u c h a s o l u t i o n ( t h e t r a n s l a t i o n o f t h e
big Other's inscrutable Call o f Duty into immanence) relies o n the
disavowal of the Unconscious: t h e f a c t w h i c h u s u a l l y g o e s u n n o t i c e d is t h a t
F o u c a u l t ' s r e j e c t i o n o f t h e p s y c h o a n a l y t i c a c c o u n t o f sexuality also involves
a thorough rejection o f the F r e u d i a n U n c o n s c i o u s . I f we read Kant in
psychoanalytic terms, the gap b e t w e e n self-invented rules and their under
l y i n g L a w is n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e g a p b e t w e e n ( c o n s c i o u s l y p r e c o n s c i o u s )
r u l e s we f o l l o w a n d t h e L a w qua u n c o n s c i o u s : t h e b a s i c l e s s o n o f p s y c h o
a n a l y s i s is t h a t t h e U n c o n s c i o u s is, at its m o s t r a d i c a l , n o t t h e w e a l t h o f
i l l i c i t ' r e p r e s s e d ' d e s i r e s b u t the fundamental Law itself.
S o even in t h e case o f a narcissistic s u b j e c t d e d i c a t e d to t h e ' c a r e o f t h e
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 367
F r o m Phallus to the A c t
T h e r e t r e a t o f t h e b i g O t h e r t h u s h a s two i n t e r c o n n e c t e d , a l b e i t o p p o s e d ,
consequences: on the one hand, tiiis failure o f the symbolic fiction
i n d u c e s t h e s u b j e c t t o c l i n g i n c r e a s i n g l y t o i m a g i n a r y simulacra, to the
s e n s u a l s p e c t a c l e s w h i c h b o m b a r d u s t o d a y f r o m all s i d e s ; o n t h e o t h e r , it
triggers the n e e d for v i o l e n c e in the Real o f the body itself (piercing the
flesh, i n s e r t i n g p r o s t h e t i c s u p p l e m e n t s into the body). H o w does this
b o d i l y v i o l e n c e r e l a t e t o t h e s t r u c t u r e o f c a s t r a t i o n as t h e c o n d i t i o n o f
symbolic empowerment? In our popular narratives and myths, from
R o b o c o p to S t e p h e n H a w k i n g , a p e r s o n b e c o m e s a s u p e r n a t u r a l l y power
ful h e r o o n l y a f t e r b e i n g t h e v i c t i m o f s o m e t r a u m a t i c a c c i d e n t o r i l l n e s s
w h i c h literally shatters his body: R o b o c o p b e c o m e s t h e p e r f e c t m a c h i n e -
c o p w h e n h i s b o d y is a r t i f i c i a l l y r e c o m p o s e d a n d s u p p l e m e n t e d a f t e r a n
a l m o s t d e a d l y a c c i d e n t ; H a w k i n g ' s i n s i g h t i n t o ' t h e m i n d o f G o d ' is c l e a r l y
c o r r e l a t e d to his crippling illness. . . . T h e standard analyses o f R o b o c o p
e n d e a v o u r to o p p o s e 'progressive' e l e m e n t s - a cyborg which suspends
the disdnction between h u m a n and a m a c h i n e - and 'regressive' elements
— the obvious 'phallic', aggressive-penetrating n a t u r e o f his m e t a l equip
m e n t , w h i c h s e r v e s as a p r o s t h e s i s t o h i s m u d l a t e d b o d y ; t h e s e a n a l y s e s ,
h o w e v e r , miss the point, w h a t is ' p h a l l i c ' in t h e s t r i c t L a c a n i a n s e n s e is t h e
very structure o f t h e a r t i f i c i a l - m e c h a n i c a l prosthesis that s u p p l e m e n t s the
wound to our body, since the phallus itself qua signifier is s u c h a
prosthesis, empowering its bearer at the price of some traumatic
mutilation.
H e r e it is c r u c i a l t o m a i n t a i n t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e p h a l l u s as
signified ( t h e ' m e a n i n g o f t h e p h a l l u s ' ) a n d t h e p h a l l i c signifier. t h e p h a l l i c
s i g n i f i e d is t h e p a r t o f puissance integrated into the paternal symbolic
order ( p h a l l u s as t h e s y m b o l o f virility, p e n e t r a t i n g p o w e r , t h e f o r c e o f
f e r t i l i t y a n d i n s e m i n a t i o n , e t c . ) ; w h i l e t h e p h a l l u s as s i g n i f i e r s t a n d s f o r
t h e p r i c e t h e m a l e s u b j e c t h a s t o p a y i f h e is t o a s s u m e t h e ' m e a n i n g o f
t h e p h a l l u s ' , its s i g n i f i e d . L a c a n s p e c i f i e s t h i s ' m e a n i n g o f t h e p h a l l u s ' as
the 'imaginary' n u m b e r (the square r o o t o f — 1 ) , an ' i m p o s s i b l e ' n u m b e r
w h o s e v a l u e c a n n e v e r b e p o s i t i v i z e d , b u t w h i c h n o n e t h e less ' f u n c t i o n s ' :
370 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
we e n c o u n t e r ' t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e p h a l l u s ' w h e n , a p r o p o s o f s o m e n o t i o n ,
w e e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y f e e l t h a t ' t h i s is it, t h e r e a l t h i n g , t h e t r u e m e a n i n g ' ,
a l t h o u g h w e a r e n e v e r a b l e t o e x p l a i n what, p r e c i s e l y , t h i s m e a n i n g is. S a y ,
i n a p o l i t i c a l d i s c o u r s e , t h e M a s t e r - S i g n i f i e r ( O u r N a t i o n ) is t h i s k i n d o f
e m p t y signifier w h i c h stands for t h e i m p o s s i b l e fullness o f m e a n i n g , that
is, its m e a n i n g is ' i m a g i n a r y ' i n t h e s e n s e t h a t its c o n t e n t is i m p o s s i b l e t o
p o s i t i v i z e - w h e n y o u a s k a m e m b e r o f t h e N a t i o n to d e f i n e i n w h a t t h e
i d e n t i t y o f h i s N a t i o n c o n s i s t s , h i s u l t i m a t e a n s w e r will always b e : ' I c a n ' t
say, y o u m u s t f e e l it, i t ' s it, w h a t o u r lives a r e r e a l l y a b o u t ' . . . .
S o w h y is it n e c e s s a r y , i n o u r postmodern age, for the 'wound of
c a s t r a t i o n ' to i n s c r i b e i t s e l f a g a i n i n t o t h e b o d y , as a w o u n d i n its v e r y
flesh? In the g o o d o l d times o f m o d e r n subjectivity, an individual h a d n o
n e e d to sacrifice p a r t o f his flesh (circumcision, a ritualized initiatory
o r d e a l o f risking o n e ' s life, t a t t o o i n g . . .) in o r d e r to g a i n s y m b o l i c status:
t h e s a c r i f i c e was p u r e l y s y m b o l i c , t h a t is, a s y m b o l i c a c t o f r e n u n c i a t i o n o f
5 4
all p o s i t i v e s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t e n t . T h i s r e n u n c i a t i o n displays t h e p r e c i s e
structure o f t h e 'loss o f a loss' t h a t d e f i n e s t h e m o d e r n tragedy. Yanez,a.
r e c e n t S e r b film, d e a l s w i t h t h e f a t e o f a n o f f i c e r i n t h e Y u g o s l a v A r m y o f
S l o v e n e e t h n i c o r i g i n , m a r r i e d to a M a c e d o n i a n w o m a n , c a u g h t in the
turmoils o f the disintegration o f Yugoslavia: when the conflict erupts
between Slovenia proclaiming i n d e p e n d e n c e and the Yugoslav Army,
which e n d e a v o u r e d to k e e p S l o v e n i a within Yugoslavia, t h e officer sacri
f i c e s h i s p a r t i c u l a r ( S l o v e n e ) e t h n i c r o o t s , t h a t is, t h e v e r y s u b s t a n c e o f
his b e i n g , for fidelity to the universal Cause (Yugoslav u n i t y ) , o n l y to
d i s c o v e r l a t e r t h a t t h e s a d r e a l i t y o f this u n i v e r s a l C a u s e , f o r w h i c h he
sacrificed everything that mattered to him m o s t , is t h e corrupt and
deprived S e r b i a o f the nationalist r e g i m e o f S l o b o d a n Milosevic - so, at
t h e e n d , we see t h e h e r o a l o n e a n d d r u n k , totally at a loss. . . .
A s i m i l a r d o u b l e m o v e m e n t o f r e n u n c i a t i o n - o f first s a c r i f i c i n g e v e r y
t h i n g , t h e very s u b s t a n c e o f o u r b e i n g , f o r s o m e universal C a u s e , a n d t h e n
b e i n g c o m p e l l e d to c o n f r o n t t h e v a c u o u s n e s s o f this C a u s e itself - is
5
c o n s t i t u t i v e o f m o d e r n subjectivity."' T o d a y , h o w e v e r , t h i s d o u b l e m o v e
ment o f renunciation seems n o l o n g e r to b e operative, since subjects
increasingly stick to their particular substantial identity, unwilling to
sacrifice it f o r some universal Cause (this is w h a t so-called 'identity
p o l i t i e s ' , as w e l l as t h e s e a r c h f o r e t h n i c ' r o o t s ' , a r e a b o u t ) - s o is t h i s w h y
the cut o f symbolic castration h a d again to b e inscribed o n to the body,
i n t h e g u i s e o f s o m e h o r r i f y i n g m u t i l a t i o n as t h e p r i c e o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s
symbolic e m p o w e r m e n t ?
C r u c i a l h e r e is t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e t r a d i t i o n a l ( p r e m o d e r n ) cut
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 371
5 6
in the body (circumcision, etc.) a n d the p o s t m o d e r n c u t : although the
two m a y b e s u p e r f i c i a l l y a l i k e - t h a t is, a l t h o u g h t h e p o s t m o d e r n c u t m a y
l o o k like t h e ' r e t u r n to p r e m o d e r n procedures o f marking the body' -
t h e i r i n h e r e n t l i b i d i n a l e c o n o m i e s a r e o p p o s e d - as w i t h p o s t m o d e r n i s m ,
which m a y l o o k like the r e t u r n o f t h e p r e m o d e r n a r c h a i c f o r m s , b u t in
reality t h e s e f o r m s a r e a l r e a d y ' m e d i a t e d ' , c o l o n i z e d by m o d e r n i t y , so t h a t
postmodernism signals the m o m e n t w h e n m o d e r n i t y n o l o n g e r has to
fight traditional forms, b u t c a n use t h e m directly - today's astrologist o r
f u n d a m e n t a l i s t p r e a c h e r , i n h i s v e r y m o d e o f activity, is a l r e a d y marked
b y m o d e r n i t y . O n e o f t h e d e f i n i t i o n s o f m o d e r n i t y is t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f
the 'natural' naked body w i t h i n the symbolic space: nudism and other
f o r m s o f t h e c e l e b r a t i o n o f n a k e d n e s s - n o t as p a r t o f s e c r e t i n i t i a t o r ) '
transgressive rituals (as i n p r e m o d e r n pagan s o c i e t i e s ) , b u t as finding
pleasure in asserting the ' i n n o c e n t ' beauty o f o n e ' s natural body - are
5 7
distinctly m o d e r n phenomena.
H e r e o n e has to r e p e a t t h e g e s t u r e a c c o m p l i s h e d by H e g e l a p r o p o s o f
t h e s u d d e n r i s e o f n a t u r e as t h e t o p o s i n s e v e n t e e n t h - c e n t u r y a r t : p r e c i s e l y
because the Spirit has r e t u r n e d t o i t s e l f , t h a t is, is a b l e t o g r a s p itself
directly a n d no longer needs nature as t h e medium o f its s y m b o l i c
e x p r e s s i o n , n a t u r e b e c o m e s p e r c e p t i b l e i n its i n n o c e n c e , as it is i n i t s e l f ,
as a beautiful object of contemplation, not as a s y m b o l o f spiritual
struggle; along the same lines, w h e n the m o d e r n subject 'internalizes'
s y m b o l i c castration i n t o t h e 'loss o f a loss', t h e b o d y n o l o n g e r h a s to b e a r
t h e b u r d e n o f c a s t r a t i o n a n d is t h u s r e d e e m e d , f r e e t o b e c e l e b r a t e d as
an object o f pleasure and beauty. This appearance o f the unmutilated
n a k e d b o d y is s t r i c t l y c o r r e l a t i v e t o t h e i m p o s i t i o n o f t h e disciplinary
p r o c e d u r e s d e s c r i b e d in detail by M i c h e l F o u c a u l t : with t h e a d v e n t o f
modernity, when the body is n o longer marked, inscribed upon, it
b e c o m e s t h e o b j e c t o f s t r i c t d i s c i p l i n a r y r e g u l a t i o n s d e s t i n e d t o m a k e it
fit.
W e c a n thus distinguish four stages in the logic o f the ' c u t in the body'.
First, in p r e - J u d a e a n p a g a n tribal s o c i e t i e s , 'I a m m a r k e d , t h e r e f o r e I a m ' ,
t h a t is, t h e c u t i n m y b o d y ( t a t t o o , e t c . ) s t a n d s f o r m y i n s c r i p t i o n i n t o t h e
s o c i o - s y m b o l i c s p a c e - o u t s i d e it I a m n o t h i n g , m o r e l i k e a n a n i m a l t h a n
a m e m b e r o f a h u m a n society. T h e n c o m e s the Jewish logic o f circumci
s i o n , ' a c u t t o e n d all c u t s ' , t h a t is, t h e e x c e p t i o n a l / n e g a t i v e c u t s t r i c t l y
correlative to the p r o h i b i t i o n o f the p a g a n multitude o f cuts: 'You shall
n o t m a k e any gashes in your flesh for the d e a d o r tattoo any m a r k s u p o n
5 8
you: I a m the L O R D ' ( L e v i t i c u s 19: 2 8 ) . Finally, with Christianity, this
e x c e p t i o n a l c u t is itself ' i n t e r n a l i z e d ' , t h e r e a r e n o c u t s . W h e r e , t h e n , l i e s
372 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
T h i s b r i n g s u s t o w h a t o n e is t e m p t e d t o c a l l t h e a n t i n o m y o f p o s t m o d
e r n individuality: t h e i n j u n c t i o n to ' b e y o u r s e l f , to d i s r e g a r d t h e p r e s s u r e
o f your surroundings a n d a c h i e v e s e l f - r e a l i z a t i o n b y fully a s s e r t i n g y o u r
u n i q u e creative potential, stumbles s o o n e r or later u p o n the paradox that
i f y o u a r e c o m p l e t e l y i s o l a t e d f r o m y o u r s u r r o u n d i n g s , y o u a r e left w i t h
n o t h i n g whatsoever, with a void o f i d i o c y p u r e a n d s i m p l e . T h e i n h e r e n t
obverse o f ' B e your true S e l f ! ' is t h e r e f o r e t h e i n j u n c t i o n t o c u l t i v a t e
p e r m a n e n t r e f a s h i o n i n g , i n a c c o r d a n c e with t h e p o s t m o d e r n p o s t u l a t e o f
t h e subject's indefinite plasticity . . . in short, e x t r e m e individualization
reverts to its o p p o s i t e , l e a d i n g to t h e u l t i m a t e i d e n t i t y crisis: s u b j e c t s
e x p e r i e n c e t h e m s e l v e s as r a d i c a l l y u n s u r e , w i t h n o ' p r o p e r f a c e ' , c h a n g i n g
f r o m o n e i m p o s e d m a s k t o a n o t h e r , s i n c e w h a t is b e h i n d t h e m a s k is
u l t i m a t e l y nothing, a h o r r i f y i n g v o i d t h e y a r e f r a n t i c a l l y t r y i n g t o fill in
with t h e i r c o m p u l s i v e activity o r b y s h i f t i n g b e t w e e n more and more
idiosyncratic hobbies o r ways o f d r e s s i n g , meant to a c c e n t u a t e their
individual identity. H e r e we c a n see h o w e x t r e m e individualization (the
e n d e a v o u r to b e true to o n e ' s S e l f o u t s i d e i m p o s e d fixed socio-symbolic
roles) tends to overlap with its o p p o s i t e , w i t h the uncanny, anxiety-
p r o v o k i n g f e e l i n g o f t h e l o s s o f o n e ' s i d e n t i t y - is t h i s n o t t h e ultimate
confirmation o f L a c a n ' s insight into how o n e can achieve a m i n i m u m o f
identity a n d ' b e o n e s e l f o n l y by a c c e p t i n g t h e f u n d a m e n t a l a l i e n a t i o n in
the symbolic network?
T h e p a r a d o x i c a l r e s u l t o f o u t - a n d - o u t n a r c i s s i s t i c h e d o n i s m is t h u s t h a t
e n j o y m e n t i t s e l f is i n c r e a s i n g l y e x t e r n a l i z e d : i n t h e t h o r o u g h r e f l e x i v i t y o f
o u r lives, a n y d i r e c t a p p e a l t o o u r e x p e r i e n c e is i n v a l i d a t e d - t h a t is t o
say, I n o l o n g e r t r u s t m y o w n d i r e c t e x p e r i e n c e , b u t e x p e c t t h e O t h e r t o
tell m e h o w 1 r e a l l y f e e l , as i n t h e anecdote about the conversation
b e t w e e n two b e h a v i o u r i s t s : ' T e l l m e h o w I f e e l t o d a y . ' ' G o o d - w h a t a b o u t
m e ? ' M o r e precisely, this d i r e c t e x t e r n a l i z a t i o n o f my i n n e r m o s t e x p e r i
e n c e is m u c h m o r e u n c a n n y t h a n t h e u s u a l b e h a v i o u r i s t r e d u c t i o n : the
p o i n t is n o t s i m p l y t h a t w h a t c o u n t s is t h e w a y I b e h a v e i n o b s e r v a b l e
e x t e r n a l reality, n o t m y i n n e r feelings; in c o n t r a s t to t h e behaviourist
r e d u c t i o n o f i n n e r s e l f - e x p e r i e n c e , I d o r e t a i n m y f e e l i n g s , b u t these feelings
themselves are externalized. T h e ultimate paradox o f individuation, however,
is t h a t t h i s c o m p l e t e d e p e n d e n c e o n o t h e r s - I a m w h a t I a m o n l y t h r o u g h
m y relations with others (see the postmodern o b s e s s i o n with quality
'relationships') - g e n e r a t e s the opposite effect o f drug d e p e n d e n c e , in
which I a m d e p e n d e n t not o n a n o t h e r subject but on a drug that directly
p r o v i d e s e x c e s s i v e jouissance. Is n o t t h e d u s t o f h e r o i n o r c r a c k t h e u l t i m a t e
figure o f surplus-enjoyment: an object o n which I am hooked, which
374 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
a n u n c a n n y ' a c e p h a l o u s ' s u b j e c t t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e a c t t a k e s p l a c e as t h a t
w h i c h is ' i n h i m m o r e t h a n h i m s e l f . T h e a c t t h u s d e s i g n a t e s t h e l e v e l a t
which the fundamental divisions a n d d i s p l a c e m e n t s usually associated
with t h e ' L a c a n i a n s u b j e c t ' ( t h e split b e t w e e n the s u b j e c t o f t h e e n u n c i a
tion a n d the subject o f the e n u n c i a t e d / s t a t e m e n t ; the subject's 'decentre-
ment' with regard to the symbolic big O t h e r ; etc.) are momentarily
s u s p e n d e d - i n t h e a c t , t h e s u b j e c t , as L a c a n p u t s it, posits himself as his
own cause, a n d is n o l o n g e r d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e d e c e n t r e d o b j e c t - c a u s e .
I n t h e c r i t i c i s m o f K a n t i m p l i c i t i n t h i s n o t i o n o f t h e a c t , L a c a n is t h u s
close to H e g e l , w h o also c l a i m e d that t h e unity o f the n o u m e n a l a n d t h e
phenomenal adjourned ad infinitum i n K a n t is p r e c i s e l y w h a t t a k e s p l a c e
every time an authentic act is a c c o m p l i s h e d . Kant's mistake was to
p r e s u p p o s e t h a t t h e r e is a n a c t o n l y in s o f a r as it is a d e q u a t e l y ' s u b j e c t i v -
i z e d ' , t h a t is, a c c o m p l i s h e d w i t h a p u r e W i l l ( a W i l l f r e e o f a n y ' p a t h o l o g i
c a l ' m o t i v a t i o n s ) ; a n d , s i n c e o n e c a n n e v e r b e s u r e t h a t w h a t I d i d was i n
fact p r o m p t e d b y t h e m o r a l L a w as its s o l e m o t i v e (i.e. since t h e r e is
always a l u r k i n g s u s p i c i o n t h a t I a c c o m p l i s h e d a m o r a l a c t i n o r d e r t o f i n d
pleasure in the esteem o f my peers, etc.), the moral act turns into
s o m e t h i n g w h i c h in fact n e v e r h a p p e n s ( t h e r e are n o saints o n this e a r t h ) ,
but can only be posited as t h e final point o f an infinite asymptotic
a p p r o a c h o f d i e p u r i f i c a t i o n o f t h e s o u l - f o r t h a t r e a s o n , t h a t is, i n o r d e r
n o n e t h e less to g u a r a n t e e t h e u l t i m a t e possibility o f t h e act, K a n t h a d to
376 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
p r o p o s e h i s p o s t u l a t e o f t h e i m m o r t a l i t y o f t h e s o u l ( w h i c h , as c a n be
s h o w n , e f f e c t i v e l y a m o u n t s t o its v e r y o p p o s i t e , t o t h e S a d e i a n f a n t a s y o f
6
t h e i m m o r t a l i t y o f t h e body ^) - o n l y i n s u c h a way c a n o n e h o p e t h a t a f t e r
e n d l e s s a p p r o x i m a t i o n , o n e will r e a c h t h e p o i n t o f b e i n g a b l e t o a c c o m
plish a true moral act.
T h e p o i n t o f L a c a n ' s c r i t i c i s m is t h u s t h a t a n a u t h e n t i c a c t d o e s not- as
K a n t a s s u m e s o n m i s l e a d i n g s e l f - e v i d e n c e - p r e s u p p o s e its a g e n t ' o n t h e
l e v e l o f t h e a c t ' ( w i t h h i s will p u r i f i e d o f a l l p a t h o l o g i c a l m o t i v a t i o n s , e t c . )
- i t is n o t o n l y p o s s i b l e , e v e n i n e v i t a b l e , t h a t t h e a g e n t is not ' o n t h e l e v e l
o f its a c t ' , t h a t h e h i m s e l f is u n p l e a s a n t l y s u r p r i s e d b y t h e ' c r a z y t h i n g h e
h a s j u s t d o n e ' , a n d u n a b l e fully t o c o m e t o t e r m s w i t h it. T h i s , i n c i d e n t a l l y ,
is t h e u s u a l s t r u c t u r e o f h e r o i c a c t s : s o m e b o d y w h o , f o r a l o n g t i m e , h a s
led an opportunistic life of manoeuvring and c o m p r o m i s e s , all o f a
s u d d e n , i n e x p l i c a b l y e v e n t o h i m s e l f , r e s o l v e s t o s t a n d f i r m , c o s t w h a t it
may - t h i s , p r e c i s e l y , was h o w G i o r d a n o B r u n o , a f t e r a l o n g h i s t o r y o f
r a t h e r cowardly attacks a n d retreats, u n e x p e c t e d l y d e c i d e d to stick to his
views. T h e p a r a d o x o f t h e a c t t h u s lies i n t h e f a c t t h a t a l t h o u g h it is n o t
' i n t e n t i o n a l ' i n t h e u s u a l s e n s e o f t h e t e r m o f c o n s c i o u s l y w i l l i n g it, i t is
n e v e r t h e l e s s a c c e p t e d as s o m e t h i n g f o r w h i c h its a g e n t is fully r e s p o n s i b l e
- T c a n n o t d o o t h e r w i s e , y e t I a m n o n e t h e l e s s fully f r e e i n d o i n g i t . '
C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h i s L a c a n i a n n o t i o n o f a c t a l s o e n a b l e s us t o b r e a k w i t h
the deconstructionist ethics o f the irreducible finitude, o f h o w o u r situ
a t i o n is always t h a t o f a d i s p l a c e d b e i n g c a u g h t i n a c o n s t i t u t i v e l a c k , s o
t h a t all we c a n d o is h e r o i c a l l y a s s u m e t h i s l a c k , t h e f a c t t h a t o u r s i t u a t i o n
1 2
is t h a t o f b e i n g t h r o w n i n t o a n i m p e n e t r a b l e finite c o n t e x t ; ' t h e c o r o l l a r y
o f t h i s e t h i c s , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t t h e u l t i m a t e s o u r c e o f t o t a l i t a r i a n and
other catastrophes is m a n ' s presumption that he can overcome this
condition o f finitude, lack a n d d i s p l a c e m e n t , a n d 'act like G o d ' , in a total
transparency, o v e r c o m i n g his constitutive division. L a c a n ' s answer to this
is t h a t a b s o l u t e / u n c o n d i t i o n a l a c t s d o o c c u r , b u t n o t in t h e (idealist)
guise o f a self-transparent g e s t u r e p e r f o r m e d by a s u b j e c t with a p u r e Will
who fully intends them - they occur, on the contrary, as a totally
u n p r e d i c t a b l e tuche, a m i r a c u l o u s e v e n t w h i c h s h a t t e r s o u r lives. T o p u t i t
i n s o m e w h a t p a t h e t i c t e r m s , t h i s is h o w t h e ' d i v i n e ' d i m e n s i o n is p r e s e n t
i n o u r lives, a n d t h e d i f f e r e n t m o d a l i t i e s o f e t h i c a l b e t r a y a l r e l a t e p r e c i s e l y
t o t h e d i f f e r e n t ways o f b e t r a y i n g t h e a c t - e v e n t : t h e t r u e s o u r c e o f E v i l is
n o t a finite m o r t a l m a n w h o acts like G o d , b u t a m a n who d e n i e s that
divine miracles o c c u r a n d r e d u c e s h i m s e l f to j u s t a n o t h e r finite mortal
being.
O n e s h o u l d r e r e a d L a c a n ' s m a t r i x o f t h e f o u r d i s c o u r s e s as t h e three
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 377
0 3
m o d e s o f c o m i n g to t e r m s with the t r a u m a o f t h e (analyst's) a c t ; to these
three strategies o f disavowal o f the act, o n e should add the fourth,
p r o p e r l y psychotic o n e : since a n a u t h e n t i c act involves t h e c h o i c e o f t h e
W o r s e , s i n c e i t is b y d e f i n i t i o n catastrophic (for the existing discursive
u n i v e r s e ) , let us t h e n directly provoke a catastrophe and t h e a c t will
s o m e h o w o c c u r . . . ( t h e r e i n lies t h e d e s p e r a t e 'terrorist' a c t o f trying to
'sober' the masses lulled into ideological sleep, from the R A F in the
G e r m a n y o f the early 1 9 7 0 s to t h e U n a b o m b e r ) . W h i l e this temptation
m u s t , o f c o u r s e , b e r e s i s t e d , o n e s h o u l d n o less firmly r e s i s t t h e o p p o s i t e
temptation o f the different modalities o f dissociating the act from its
inherent 'catastrophic' consequences.
I n s o f a r as t h e p o l i t i c a l a c t par excellence is a r e v o l u t i o n , two opposing
strategies arise h e r e : o n e c a n e n d e a v o u r to separate the n o b l e I d e a o f the
R e v o l u t i o n f r o m its a b o m i n a b l e r e a l i t y ( r e c a l l K a n t ' s c e l e b r a t i o n o f t h e
s u b l i m e f e e l i n g t h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n e v o k e d in t h e e n l i g h t e n e d p u b l i c
all o v e r E u r o p e , w h i c h g o e s h a n d i n h a n d w i t h u t t e r d i s d a i n f o r t h e r e a l i t y
o f the revolutionary events t h e m s e l v e s ) , o r o n e can idealize the a u t h e n t i c
r e v o l u t i o n a r y a c t itself, a n d b e m o a n its r e g r e t t a b l e b u t u n a v o i d a b l e later
betrayal (recall t h e nostalgia o f Trotskyite a n d o t h e r radical Leftists for
the e a r l y days o f the R e v o l u t i o n , with workers' councils popping up
'spontaneously' everywhere, against the Thermidor, that is, t h e later
ossification o f the R e v o l u t i o n i n t o a new h i e r a r c h i c a l state structure).
A g a i n s t all t h e s e t e m p t a t i o n s , o n e s h o u l d i n s i s t o n t h e u n c o n d i t i o n a l need
t o e n d o r s e t h e a c t fully i n all its c o n s e q u e n c e s . F i d e l i t y is n o t fidelity to
t h e p r i n c i p l e s b e t r a y e d by t h e c o n t i n g e n t facticity o f t h e i r a c t u a l i z a t i o n ,
but fidelity to the consequences e n t a i l e d b y t h e full a c t u a l i z a t i o n o f t h e
(revolutionary) principles. Within the h o r i z o n o f what p r e c e d e s the act,
t h e a c t always a n d b y d e f i n i t i o n a p p e a r s as a c h a n g e ' f r o m B a d t o W o r s e '
( t h e u s u a l c r i t i c i s m o f c o n s e r v a t i v e s a g a i n s t r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s : y e s , t h e situ
a t i o n is b a d , b u t y o u r s o l u t i o n is e v e n w o r s e . . . ) . T h e p r o p e r h e r o i s m o f
t h e a c t is fully t o a s s u m e t h i s W o r s e .
Beyond the G o o d
T h i s m e a n s t h a t t h e r e is n o n e t h e less s o m e t h i n g i n h e r e n t l y 'terroristic'
i n e v e r y a u t h e n t i c a c t , i n its g e s t u r e o f t h o r o u g h l y r e d e f i n i n g t h e ' r u l e s o f
t h e g a m e ' , i n c l u s i v e o f t h e v e r y b a s i c s e l f - i d e n t i t y o f its p e r p e t r a t o r - a
p r o p e r political act u n l e a s h e s t h e f o r c e o f negativity that shatters t h e very
foundations o f our being. So, when a L e f t i s t is a c c u s e d o f l a y i n g the
378 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
p r e c i p i c e t h e y will t h r o w h i m i n t o - t h a t is, t h e y a r e p r e c i s e l y e f f e c t i n g h i s
total o b l i t e r a t i o n , t h e d i s a p p e a r a n c e o f his d i s a p p e a r a n c e itself. . . .
S o is t h e r e a t h i r d way b e t w e e n h u m a n i s t h y s t e r i c a l s h i r k i n g t h e a c t a n d
t h e p e r v e r s e o v e r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with t h e act, o r a r e we c a u g h t in t h e vicious
cycle o f v i o l e n c e in w h i c h t h e very r e v o l u t i o n a r y a t t e m p t to b r e a k radically
w i t h t h e p a s t r e p r o d u c e s its w o r s t f e a t u r e s ? T h e r e i n l i e s M i d l e r ' s d i s p l a c e
m e n t with regard to B r e c h t : t h e revolutionary act o f self-obliteration
p r e a c h e d by B r e c h t d o e s n ' t w o r k ; t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y n e g a t i o n o f t h e p a s t
gets c a u g h t in t h e l o o p o f r e p e a t i n g what it n e g a t e s , s o t h a t history
a p p e a r s to b e d o m i n a t e d by a d e a d l y c o m p u l s i o n to r e p e a t . T h e t h i r d way
a d v o c a t e d b y t h e P a r t y C h o r u s i n Mauser involves a n i c e p a r a d o x : y o u c a n
maintain a distance towards your act o f revolutionary violence (killing the
e n e m i e s o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n ) i n s o f a r as y o u c o n c e i v e o f y o u r s e l f as t h e
i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e b i g O t h e r , t h a t is, i n s o f a r as y o u i d e n t i f y y o u r s e l f a s
the o n e t h r o u g h w h o m the big O t h e r itself - History - directly acts. T h i s
opposition between direct overidentification (in which the violent act
t u r n s i n t o t h e ( s e l f - ) d e s t r u c t i v e o r g y as a n e n d - i n - i t s e l f ) a n d identifying
o n e s e l f as t h e i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e b i g O t h e r o f H i s t o r y ( i n w h i c h t h e v i o l e n t
a c t l o o k s l i k e t h e m e a n s o f c r e a t i n g c o n d i t i o n s in w h i c h s u c h a c t s will n o
l o n g e r b e n e c e s s a r y ) , far from b e i n g exhaustive, designates precisely the
two ways o f e s c h e w i n g t h e p r o p e r d i m e n s i o n o f t h e e t h i c a l a c t . W h i l e t h e
a c t s h o u l d n o t b e c o n f u s e d w i t h t h e (self-) d e s t r u c t i v e o r g y as a n end-in-
itself, it is a n ' e n d - i n - i t s e l f i n t h e s e n s e t h a t i t is d e p r i v e d o f a n y g u a r a n t e e
i n t h e b i g O t h e r ( a n a c t is, b y d e f i n i t i o n , ' a u t h o r i z e d o n l y b y i t s e l f , i t
precludes any self-instrumentalization, any justification t h r o u g h r e f e r e n c e
t o s o m e f i g u r e o f t h e b i g O t h e r ) . F u r t h e r m o r e , i f t h e r e is a l e s s o n t o be.
l e a r n e d f r o m p s y c h o a n a l y s i s , it is t h a t d i r e c t o v e r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n a n d self-
instrumentalization ultimately coincide: perverse self-instrumentalization
( p o s i t i n g o n e s e l f as t h e i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e b i g O t h e r ) n e c e s s a r i l y b e c o m e s
v i o l e n c e as a n e n d - i n - i t s e l f - t o p u t it i n H e g e l i a n t e r m s , t h e ' t r u t h ' o f t h e
p e r v e r t ' s c l a i m t h a t h e is a c c o m p l i s h i n g his a c t s as t h e i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e
b i g O t h e r is its e x a c t o p p o s i t e : h e is s t a g i n g t h e fiction o f the big O t h e r
in o r d e r t o c o n c e a l t h e jouissance h e derives from the destructive orgy o f
his a c t s .
S o w h e r e is Evil t o d a y ? T h e p r e d o m i n a n t i d e o l o g i c a l s p a c e p r o v i d e s two
o p p o s e d answers, the fundamentalist o n e a n d t h e liberal o n e . A c c o r d i n g
to t h e first a n s w e r , C l i n t o n is S a t a n (as s o m e o n e r e c e n t l y c l a i m e d a t a
CNN round table) - n o t o v e r t l y evil, b u t s u b d y c o r r o d i n g o u r moral
s t a n d a r d s as i r r e l e v a n t : w h a t d o e s it m a t t e r i f o n e l i e s , c o m m i t s p e r j u r y ,
o b s t r u c t s j u s t i c e , as l o n g as t h e e c o n o m y is b o o m i n g . . .? F r o m this
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 381
p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e t r u e m o r a l c a t a s t r o p h e is n o t a d i r e c t o u t b u r s t o f c r u e l
v i o l e n c e b u t t h e subtle loss o f m o r a l a n c h o r s in a n affluent consumerist
s o c i e t y w h e r e t h i n g s j u s t r u n s m o o t h l y - t h e h o r r o r o f Evil is t h a t it d o e s
n o t l o o k h o r r i b l e a t a l l , t h a t it l u l l s us i n t o a m e a n i n g l e s s life o f p l e a s u r e s .
I n s h o r t , f o r a c o n s e r v a t i v e f u n d a m e n t a l i s t , C l i n t o n is i n a way w o r s e t h a n
H i t l e r , b e c a u s e H i t i e r ( N a z i s m ) was a n Evil d i r e c t l y e x p e r i e n c e d as s u c h
a n d p r o v o k i n g m o r a l o u t r a g e , while with C l i n t o n ' s sleaze we are drawn
i n t o m o r a l l a s s i t u d e w i t h o u t e v e n b e i n g a w a r e o f it. . . .
Although this a t t i t u d e may appear utterly foreign to a lefdst liberal
s t a n c e , is it n o t t r u e t h a t , as I h a v e a l r e a d y n o t e d , e v e n t o d a y ' s leftist
l i b e r a l s e x p e r i e n c e a s t r a n g e r e l i e f a t f i g u r e s l i k e B u c h a n a n in t h e U S A o r
L e P e n in F r a n c e : h e r e , a t l e a s t , w e h a v e s o m e o n e w h o o p e n l y b r e a k s t h e
liberal consensus stalemate and, by passionately advocating a repulsive
s t a n c e , e n a b l e s u s t o e n g a g e i n a n a u t h e n t i c p o l i t i c a l s t r u g g l e (it is e a s y t o
d i s c e r n i n t h i s s t a n c e t h e r e p e t i t i o n o f t h e o l d leftist s t a n c e a p r o p o s o f
Hitler's takeover: for the G e r m a n C o m m u n i s t Party, Nazis w e r e better
than the bourgeois parliamentary r e g i m e or even the Social Democrats,
b e c a u s e with t h e m , at l e a s t w e k n e w w h e r e w e s t o o d , t h a t is, t h e y f o r c e d
t h e w o r k i n g c l a s s t o g e t r i d o f t h e last p a r l i a m e n t a r y l i b e r a l i l l u s i o n and
a c c e p t class s t r u g g l e as t h e u l t i m a t e r e a l i t y ) . I n c o n t r a s t t o t h i s p o s i t i o n ,
the liberal version locates the figure o f Evil i n t h e G o o d itself in its
fundamentalist, f a n a t i c a l a s p e c t : Evil is t h e a t d t u d e o f a fundamentalist
w h o e n d e a v o u r s t o e x t i r p a t e , p r o h i b i t , c e n s o r , a n d so o n , all attitudes a n d
p r a c t i c e s t h a t d o n o t fit h i s f r a m e o f G o o d n e s s a n d T r u t h .
T h e s e two o p p o s e d v e r s i o n s c a n s o m e t i m e s also b e u s e d to condemn
t h e s a m e e v e n t as ' e v i l ' - recall the case o f Mary Kay L e t o u r n e a u , the
thirty-six-year-old s c h o o l t e a c h e r i m p r i s o n e d for a passionate love affair
with h e r f o u r t e e n - y e a r - o l d p u p i l , o n e o f t h e g r e a t r e c e n t love stories in
w h i c h s e x is still l i n k e d t o a u t h e n t i c s o c i a l t r a n s g r e s s i o n : t h i s a f f a i r w a s
c o n d e m n e d by Moral Majority fundamentalists (as a n o b s c e n e i l l e g i t i m a t e
affair) as well as b y p o l i t i c a l l y c o r r e c t l i b e r a l s (as a c a s e o f c h i l d s e x u a l
molestation).
T h e o l d a n d o f t e n - q u o t e d H e g e l i a n m o t t o t h a t Evil is i n t h e e y e o f t h e
b e h o l d e r , t h a t it lies in t h e p o i n t o f view w h i c h o b s e r v e s Evil all around,
has thus found a d o u b l e c o n f i r m a t i o n t o d a y : e a c h o f t h e two opposed
stances, liberal a n d c o n s e r v a t i v e , u l t i m a t e l y d e f i n e s Evil as a reflected
c a t e g o r y , as d i e g a z e t h a t w r o n g l y p r o j e c t s / p e r c e i v e s Evil i n its o p p o n e n t .
Is n o t Evil f o r t o d a y ' s m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t t o l e r a n t l i b e r a l s t h e v e r y r i g h t e o u s
c o n s e r v a t i v e g a z e t h a t p e r c e i v e s m o r a l c o r r u p t i o n all a r o u n d ? Is n o t Evil
for M o r a l Majority conservatives this very multiculturalist t o l e r a n c e w h i c h ,
382 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
a p r i o r i , c o n d e m n s e v e r y p a s s i o n a t e t a k i n g s i d e s a n d e n g a g e d s t r u g g l e as
e x c l u s i v e a n d p o t e n t i a l l y t o t a l i t a r i a n ? A g a i n , it is t h e act t h a t e n a b l e s us t o
c u t t h e G o r d i a n k n o t o f this m u t u a l i n t e r w e a v i n g o f G o o d a n d Evil, o f
E v i l r e f l e c t i v e l y r e s i d i n g i n t h e v e r y e y e o f t h e b e h o l d e r w h o p e r c e i v e s it.
A s l o n g as we d e f i n e e t h i c s i n t e r m s o f t h e G o o d , t h i s G o r d i a n k n o t is o u r
fate, and, if we want to b e 'radical', we e n d up s o o n e r o r later in s o m e
d e l u s i v e , f a l s e l y R o m a n t i c f a s c i n a t i o n w i t h r a d i c a l o r d i a b o l i c a l Evil - the
o n l y way o u t is t o e n f o r c e a disjunction between the Good and the domain of
8
the ethical act.'' A s L a c a n p u t it, a n e t h i c a l a c t p r o p e r b y d e f i n i t i o n i n v o l v e s
a move 'beyond the G o o d ' - n o t ' b e y o n d G o o d a n d Evil', but simply
beyond the G o o d .
T h e f a c t t h a t a c t s a r e still p o s s i b l e t o d a y is d e m o n s t r a t e d b y t h e c a s e o f
M a r y Kay L e t o u r n e a u . I n o r d e r to d i s c e r n t h e t r u e c o n t o u r s o f M a r y Kay's
a c t , o n e s h o u l d l o c a t e it w i t h i n t h e g l o b a l c o - o r d i n a t e s t h a t d e t e r m i n e the
fate o f sexual love. T o d a y , t h e o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n reflexivization a n d n e w
i m m e d i a c y is t h a t b e t w e e n s e x u a l i t y u n d e r t h e r e g i m e o f s c i e n c e a n d N e w
A g e spontaneity. B o t h terms ultimately l e a d to the e n d o f sexuality proper,
o f s e x u a l p a s s i o n . T h e first o p t i o n - d i r e c t s c i e n t i f i c - m e d i c a l i n t e r v e n t i o n
i n t o s e x u a l i t y - is b e s t e x e m p l i f i e d b y t h e n o t o r i o u s V i a g r a , t h e p o t e n c y
pill that p r o m i s e s to restore t h e capacity o f m a l e e r e c t i o n in a purely
b i o c h e m i c a l way, b y p a s s i n g all p r o b l e m s w i t h p s y c h o l o g i c a l i n h i b i t i o n s .
W h a t will b e t h e p s y c h i c e f f e c t s o f V i a g r a i f it a c t u a l l y fulfils its p r o m i s e ?
T o t h o s e w h o c l a i m that f e m i n i s m u n l e a s h e d a t h r e a t to m a s c u l i n i t y
( m e n ' s s e l f - c o n f i d e n c e was s e r i o u s l y u n d e r m i n e d by b e i n g u n d e r a t t a c k
all t h e t i m e f r o m e m a n c i p a t e d w o m e n w h o w a n t e d t o b e l i b e r a t e d from
patriarchal d o m i n a t i o n , a n d retain the initiative in sexual c o n t a c t , and
simultaneously d e m a n d e d full s e x u a l s a t i s f a c t i o n f r o m their male part
n e r s ) V i a g r a o p e n s u p a n e a s y way o u t o f t h i s s t r e s s f u l p r e d i c a m e n t : men
n o l o n g e r h a v e t o w o r r y ; t h e y k n o w t h e y will b e a b l e t o p e r f o r m properly.
O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , f e m i n i s t s c a n c l a i m t h a t V i a g r a finally d e p r i v e s m a l e
p o t e n c y o f its m y s t i q u e , a n d t h u s i n e f f e c t m a k e s m e n e q u a l t o w o m e n . . .
h o w e v e r , t h e l e a s t o n e c a n say a g a i n s t t h i s s e c o n d a r g u m e n t is t h a t i t
s i m p l i f i e s t h e way m a l e p o t e n c y a c t u a l l y f u n c t i o n s : w h a t a c t u a l l y c o n f e r s a
m y t h i c a l s t a t u s o n it is t h e t h r e a t o f i m p o t e n c e . I n t h e m a l e s e x u a l p s y c h i c
e c o n o m y , the e v e r - p r e s e n t s h a d o w o f i m p o t e n c e , t h e t h r e a t that, in the
n e x t s e x u a l e n c o u n t e r , m y p e n i s will r e f u s e t o e r e c t is c r u c i a l t o t h e v e r y
d e f i n i t i o n o f w h a t m a l e p o t e n c y is.
Let m e recall h e r e my own description o f the paradox o f erection:
erection depends entirely o n m e , o n my m i n d (as t h e j o k e g o e s : ' W h a t
is t h e l i g h t e s t o b j e c t i n t h e w o r l d ? T h e p e n i s , b e c a u s e ii. is t h e o n l y o n e
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 383
t h a t c a n b e r a i s e d b y a m e r e t h o u g h t ! ' ) , y e t it is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h a t o v e r
w h i c h I ultimately have n o c o n t r o l ( i f I a m n o t in t h e r i g h t m o o d , no
a m o u n t o f w i l l p o w e r will a c h i e v e it - t h a t is why, f o r S t A u g u s t i n e , t h e f a c t
t h a t e r e c t i o n e s c a p e s t h e c o n t r o l o f m y will is t h e D i v i n e p u n i s h m e n t for
m a n ' s a r r o g a n c e a n d p r e s u m p t i o n , f o r his d e s i r e to b e c o m e m a s t e r o f t h e
u n i v e r s e . . . ) . T o p u t it i n t h e t e r m s o f t h e A d o r n i a n c r i t i q u e o f c o m m o d -
ification and r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n : e r e c t i o n is o n e o f t h e l a s t r e m a i n d e r s of
authentic spontaneity, something that c a n n o t b e thoroughly mastered
through rational-instrumental procedures. This minimal gap - the fact
t h a t it is n e v e r d i r e c t l y ' m e ' , m y S e l f , w h o c a n f r e e l y d e c i d e o n e r e c d o n -
is c r u c i a l : a s e x u a l l y p o t e n t m a n e l i c i t s a c e r t a i n a t t r a c t i o n a n d e n v y n o t
b e c a u s e h e c a n d o it a t will, b u t b e c a u s e t h a t u n f a t h o m a b l e X w h i c h -
although beyond conscious control - decides on erection presents no
problem for him.
T h e crucial point h e r e is t o d i s t i n g u i s h between penis (the erectile
o r g a n itself) a n d phallus ( t h e signifier o f p o t e n c y , o f s y m b o l i c authority,
o f the - symbolic, not biological - dimension that confers authority and/
o r p o t e n c y ) o n m e . J u s t a s (as w e h a v e n o t e d ) a judge, who may be a
w o r t h l e s s i n d i v i d u a l in h i m s e l f , e x e r t s a u t h o r i t y t h e m o m e n t h e p u t s o n
t h e insignia that c o n f e r his legal authority o n him, the m o m e n t h e no
l o n g e r s i m p l y s p e a k s o n l y f o r h i m s e l f , s i n c e it is t h e L a w i t s e l f t h a t s p e a k s
through him, the individual male's potency functions as a s i g n that
a n o t h e r s y m b o l i c d i m e n s i o n is a c t i v e t h r o u g h h i m : t h e 'phallus' desig
nates the symbolic support which confers o n my penis the dimension o f
p r o p e r p o t e n c y . B e c a u s e o f this distinction, for L a c a n , ' c a s t r a t i o n a n x i e t y '
has n o t h i n g to d o with t h e fear o f losing o n e ' s p e n i s : what m a k e s us
a n x i o u s , r a t h e r , is t h e t h r e a t t h a t t h e a u t h o r i t y o f t h e p h a l l i c s i g n i f i e r will
b e r e v e a l e d as a f r a u d . F o r t h i s r e a s o n , V i a g r a is t h e u l t i m a t e a g e n t o f
castration: if a m a n swallows the pill, his p e n i s functions, but he is
d e p r i v e d o f t h e p h a l l i c d i m e n s i o n o f s y m b o l i c p o t e n c y - t h e m a n w h o is
a b l e t o c o p u l a t e t h a n k s t o V i a g r a is a m a n w i t h a p e n i s b u t w i t h o u t a
phallus.
S o c a n we really i m a g i n e h o w c h a n g i n g e r e c t i o n i n t o s o m e t h i n g that
can be achieved through a direct medical-mechanical intervention (by
t a k i n g a p i l l ) will a f f e c t s e x u a l e c o n o m y ? T o p u t i t i n s o m e w h a t m a l e -
c h a u v i n i s t t e r m s : w h a t will r e m a i n o f a w o m a n ' s n o t i o n o f b e i n g p r o p e r l y
attractive to a m a n , o f effectively a r o u s i n g him? Furthermore, is not
e r e c t i o n o r its a b s e n c e a k i n d o f s i g n a l w h i c h l e t s u s k n o w w h a t o u r t r u e
p s y c h i c a t t i t u d e is: t u r n i n g e r e c t i o n i n t o a m e c h a n i c a l l y a c h i e v a b l e s t a t e is
s o m e h o w s i m i l a r to b e i n g d e p r i v e d o f t h e c a p a c i t y t o f e e l p a i n - h o w will
384 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
a m a l e s u b j e c t g e t t o k n o w w h a t h i s t r u e a t t i t u d e is? I n w h a t f o r m s will h i s
dissatisfaction or resistance find an o u d e t , when it is d e p r i v e d o f t h e
simple sign o f i m p o t e n c e ? T h e s t a n d a r d designation o f a sexually vora
c i o u s m a n is t h a t w h e n l u s t t a k e s o v e r h e t h i n k s n o t w i t h h i s h e a d but
with his p e n i s - what happens, however, when his h e a d takes over
c o m p l e t e l y ? W i l l n o t a c c e s s t o t h e d i m e n s i o n u s u a l l y r e f e r r e d t o as t h a t o f
' e m o t i o n a l i n t e l l i g e n c e ' b e further, a n d p e r h a p s decisively, h i n d e r e d ? It
is e a s y t o c e l e b r a t e t h e f a c t t h a t w e will n o l o n g e r h a v e t o b a t t i e w i t h o u r
p s y c h o l o g i c a l t r a u m a s , t h a t h i d d e n f e a r s a n d i n h i b i t i o n s will n o l o n g e r b e
able to i m p e d e o u r sexual capacity; however, these h i d d e n fears and
i n h i b i t i o n s will, f o r t h a t v e r y r e a s o n , n o t d i s a p p e a r - t h e y will p e r s i s t o n
what F r e u d called the ' O t h e r S c e n e ' , b e i n g deprived merely o f their main
o u t l e t , w a i t i n g to e x p l o d e i n w h a t will p r o b a b l y b e a m u c h m o r e v i o l e n t
and ( s e l f - ) d e s t r u c t i v e way. U l t i m a t e l y , t h i s t u r n i n g o f erection into a
m e c h a n i c a l p r o c e d u r e will s i m p l y desexualize the act o f copulation.
A t t h e o p p o s i t e e n d o f t h e s p e c t r u m , N e w A g e w i s d o m s e e m s to offer a
way o u t o f this p r e d i c a m e n t - h o w e v e r , w h a t d o e s i t a c t u a l l y o f f e r us? L e t
m e t u r n t o its u l t i m a t e p o p u l a r v e r s i o n , J a m e s R e d f i e l d ' s m e g a - b e s t s e l l e r
The Celestine Prophecy. A c c o r d i n g t o The Celestine Prophecy, t h e first 'new
i n s i g h t ' t h a t will o p e n t h e p a t h t o h u m a n i t y ' s ' s p i r i t u a l a w a k e n i n g ' is t h e
awareness that there are n o c o n t i n g e n t encounters: since our psychic
e n e r g y participates in t h e E n e r g y o f t h e universe, w h i c h secretly d e t e r
m i n e s t h e c o u r s e o f t h i n g s , c o n t i n g e n t e x t e r n a l e n c o u n t e r s always c a r r y a
message addressed t o u s , t o o u r c o n c r e t e s i t u a t i o n ; t h e y o c c u r as an
a n s w e r to o u r n e e d s a n d q u e s t i o n s (for e x a m p l e , i f I a m b o t h e r e d by a
certain problem and then something unexpected happens - a long-
f o r g o t t e n f r i e n d visits m e ; s o m e t h i n g g o e s w r o n g a t w o r k - t h i s a c c i d e n t
certainly contains a message relevant to my p r o b l e m ) . W e thus find
ourselves in a universe in which everything has a m e a n i n g , in a proto-
psychotic universe in which this meaning is d i s c e r n i b l e in the very
c o n t i n g e n c y o f t h e R e a l , a n d w h a t is o f s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t a r e t h e c o n s e
q u e n c e s o f all t h i s f o r i n t e r s u b j e c t i v i t y . A c c o r d i n g t o The Celestine Prophecy,
we a r e c a u g h t t o d a y i n a false c o m p e t i t i o n w i t h o u r f e l l o w h u m a n b e i n g s ,
s e e k i n g in t h e m w h a t w e l a c k , p r o j e c t i n g i n t o t h e m o u r f a n t a s i e s o f t h i s
l a c k , d e p e n d i n g o n t h e m ; a n d s i n c e u l t i m a t e h a r m o n y is i m p o s s i b l e , s i n c e
t h e o t h e r n e v e r p r o v i d e s w h a t w e a r e l o o k i n g f o r , t e n s i o n is i r r e d u c i b l e .
A f t e r s p i r i t u a l r e n e w a l , h o w e v e r , w e s h a l l l e a r n t o find, in ourselves w h a t w e
w e r e s e e k i n g in vain in o t h e r s ( o n e ' s m a l e o r f e m a l e c o m p l e m e n t ) : e a c h
h u m a n b e i n g will b e c o m e a P l a t o n i c c o m p l e t e b e i n g , d e l i v e r e d o f e x c l u
sive d e p e n d e n c e o n a n o t h e r ( l e a d e r o r love p a r t n e r ) , delivered o f the
WHITHER OEDIPUS? 385
n e e d t o d r a w e n e r g y f r o m h i m / h e r . W h e n a truly f r e e s u b j e c t e n t e r s a
p a r t n e r s h i p w i t h a n o t h e r h u m a n b e i n g , h e is t h u s b e y o n d a p a s s i o n a t e
a t t a c h m e n t t o t h e o t h e r : h i s p a r t n e r is f o r h i m o n l y a v e h i c l e f o r s o m e
m e s s a g e ; h e e n d e a v o u r s to d i s c e r n in t h e o t h e r m e s s a g e s t h a t are r e l e v a n t
to his own inner evolution and growth. . . . H e r e we encounter the
necessary obverse o f New Age spiritualist elevation: the end of the
p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t to t h e O t h e r , t h e e m e r g e n c e o f a self-sufficient e g o
t o w h o m h i s O t h e r - p a r t n e r is n o l o n g e r a s u b j e c t , m e r e l y t h e b e a r e r o f a
message c o n c e r n i n g himself.
I n psychoanalysis, we also e n c o u n t e r t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e b e a r e r o f a
m e s s a g e : t h e s u b j e c t is u n a w a r e t h a t h e e m b o d i e s s o m e m e s s a g e , as i n
s o m e d e t e c t i v e n o v e l s w h e r e s o m e o n e ' s life is t h r e a t e n e d all o f a s u d d e n ,
a m y s t e r i o u s a g e n t t r i e s t o kill h i m - o b v i o u s l y t h e s u b j e c t k n o w s s o m e
thing h e s h o u l d n ' t have known, partakes in s o m e p r o h i b i t e d knowledge
(say, t h e s e c r e t w h i c h c o u l d p u t a t o p M a f i a figure in p r i s o n ) ; t h e key
p o i n t h e r e is t h a t , the subject is completely unaware what this knowledge is, h e
knows only that he knows s o m e t h i n g h e shouldn't know. . . . This position,
h o w e v e r , is t h e v e r y o p p o s i t e o f t h e N e w A g e i d e o l o g y p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e
O t h e r as t h e b e a r e r o f s o m e m e s s a g e w h i c h is r e l e v a n t t o m e : i n p s y c h o
a n a l y s i s , t h e s u b j e c t is n o t t h e (potential) reader but the bearer o f a
m e s s a g e a d d r e s s e d to t h e O t h e r a n d t h e r e f o r e , in p r i n c i p l e , i n a c c e s s i b l e
to the subject himself.
Back to R e d f i e l d : m y p o i n t is t h a t the allegedly highest insight o f
spiritual w i s d o m overlaps with o u r m o s t c o m m o n everyday e x p e r i e n c e . I f
we take Redfield's description o f the ideal state o f spiritual maturity
literally, it a l r e a d y h o l d s f o r late capitalist c o m m e r c i a l i z e d everyday inter
p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e , in w h i c h passions p r o p e r d i s a p p e a r , in w h i c h the
O t h e r is n o l o n g e r a n u n f a t h o m a b l e a b y s s c o n c e a l i n g a n d announcing
t h a t w h i c h is ' i n m e m o r e t h a n m y s e l f , b u t t h e b e a r e r o f m e s s a g e s f o r t h e
s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t c o n s u m e r i s t s u b j e c t . N e w A g e r s a r e n o t g i v i n g us e v e n an
i d e a l s p i r i t u a l s u p p l e m e n t t o c o m m e r c i a l i z e d e v e r y d a y life; t h e y a r e g i v i n g
u s t h e s p i r i t u a l i z e d / m y s t i f i e d v e r s i o n o f t h i s c o m m e r c i a l i z e d e v e r y d a y life
itself. . . .
W h a t , t h e n , is t h e way o u t o f t h i s p r e d i c a m e n t ? A r e w e c o n d e m n e d to
the rather depressing oscillation between scientific objectivization and
New Age wisdom, between Viagra and The Celestine Prophecy? That there
still is a way o u t is d e m o n s t r a t e d b y t h e c a s e o f M a r y K a y . T h e r i d i c u l e o f
d e f i n i n g t h i s u n i q u e p a s s i o n a t e l o v e a f f a i r as t h e c a s e o f a w o m a n raping
a n u n d e r a g e b o y c a n n o t fail t o s t r i k e t h e e y e ; n o n e t h e less, p r a c t i c a l l y n o
o n e d a r e d to d e f e n d t h e e t h i c a l d i g n i t y o f h e r a c t i n p u b l i c ; two p a t t e r n s
386 THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
s o u l ) , y e t s h e d i d it. ( D o e s n o t t h e s a m e h o l d a l s o f o r t h e noir h e r o , w h o
is n o t s i m p l y d u p e d b y t h e femme fatak, b u t fully a w a r e t h a t h i s l i a i s o n w i t h
h e r will e n d in t o t a l c a t a s t r o p h e , t h a t s h e will b e t r a y h i m - nevertheless
h e g o e s a h e a d a n d c o m m i t s h i m s e l f to h e r ? ) T h e fact that this f o r m u l a o f
Sygne c o i n c i d e s with the formula o f cynicism should n o t d e c e i v e us:
Sygne's act stands for the radical opposite o f cynicism. W e are thus
d e a l i n g h e r e with t h e s t r u c t u r e o f H e g e l i a n speculative j u d g e m e n t : with
the statement which c a n b e r e a d i n two o p p o s i t e ways, as t h e lowest
c y n i c i s m ( ' I k n o w t h a t w h a t I a m a b o u t t o d o is t h e l o w e s t d e p r a v i t y , but
what t h e hell, w h o c a r e s , I'll j u s t d o i t . . . ' ) a n d t h e h i g h e s t tragic split ('I
a m fully a w a r e o f t h e c a t a s t r o p h i c c o n s e q u e n c e s o f w h a t I a m a b o u t t o
d o , b u t I c a n ' t h e l p it, it's m y u n c o n d i t i o n a l d u t y t o d o it, s o I ' l l g o o n
with i t . . . ' ) .
A r e c e n t G e r m a n p o s t e r f o r D a v i d o f f c i g a r e t t e s deftly m a n i p u l a t e s t h i s
g a p b e t w e e n k n o w l e d g e a n d act - this s u s p e n s i o n o f k n o w l e d g e in the act,
t h i s ' I ' l l d o it, a l t h o u g h I ' m w e l l a w a r e o f t h e c a t a s t r o p h i c c o n s e q u e n c e s
o f m y a c t ' - in o r d e r to c o u n t e r a c t t h e e f f e c t o f t h e o b l i g a t o r y w a r n i n g at
t h e b o t t o m o f every cigarette a d v e r t i s e m e n t (a variation o n the theme
' S m o k i n g may b e dangerous for your h e a l t h ' ) : the image o f an experi
e n c e d m a n s m o k i n g is a c c o m p a n i e d b y t h e w o r d s ' T h e M o r e Y o u K n o w ' ,
s u g g e s t i n g the c o n c l u s i o n : i f you are truly d a r i n g , then the m o r e you
know a b o u t the dangers o f smoking, the m o r e you should demonstrate
y o u r d e f i a n c e b y t a k i n g t h e risk a n d c o n t i n u i n g t o s m o k e - t h a t is, b y
r e f u s i n g t o give u p s m o k i n g f o r r e a s o n s c o n c e r n i n g c a r e f o r y o u r own
survival. . . . T h i s a d v e r t i s e m e n t is t h e l o g i c a l c o u n t e r p a r t t o t h e o b s e s s i o n
with h e a l t h a n d longevity that c h a r a c t e r i z e s today's narcissistic individual.
A n d d o e s n o t this f o r m u l a o f t h e tragic split also p e r f e c t l y e x p r e s s M a r y
Kay's p r e d i c a m e n t ?
T h i s , t h e n , is t h e s a d r e a l i t y o f o u r l a t e c a p i t a l i s t t o l e r a n t l i b e r a l s o c i e t y :
t h e v e r y c a p a c i t y t o act is b r u t a l l y m e d i c a l i z e d , t r e a t e d as a m a n i c o u t b u r s t
w i t h i n t h e p a t t e r n o f ' b i p o l a r d i s o r d e r ' , a n d as s u c h t o b e s u b m i t t e d to
b i o c h e m i c a l t r e a t m e n t - d o we n o t e n c o u n t e r h e r e o u r own, W e s t e r n ,
liberal-democratic counterpart to t h e old Soviet attempts to diagnose
d i s s i d e n c e as a m e n t a l d i s o r d e r (the practice centred on the infamous
Scherbsky Institute in Moscow)? No wonder, then, that part of the
s e n t e n c e was t h a t M a r y K a y h a s t o u n d e r g o therapy ( t h e lawyer even
e x p l a i n e d h e r s e c o n d t r a n s g r e s s i o n - b e i n g f o u n d with h e r l o v e r in a c a r
in t h e m i d d l e of the n i g h t after h e r r e l e a s e , w h i c h l e d to h e r o u t r a g e o u s
s e n t e n c e o f o v e r s i x y e a r s i n p r i s o n - as r e s u l t i n g f r o m t h e f a c t t h a t i n t h e
5S» THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
Notes
believed it was vital at this stage that t h e symbol o f t h e R e p u b l i c [i.e. D e Valera himself.]
should b e kept u n t o u c h e d a n d t h a t it s h o u l d n o t b e c o m p r o m i s e d in a n y sense by a n y
a r r a n g e m e n t s which it m i g h t be necessary for o u r plenipotentiaries to m a k e . . . it was
necessary t o keep t h e H e a d o f State a n d t h e symbol u n t o u c h e d and that was why h e asked
to b e left out. ( q u o t e d from C o o g a n , De Valera, p. 2 4 7 )
19. Ibid., p. 4 2 8 .
2 0 . See Jacques-Alain Miller a n d E r i c L a u r e n t , ' L ' A u t r e qui n'existe pas et ses c o m i t e s
d'ethique', in La Cause freudienne. 3 5 ( 1 9 9 7 ) , Paris, p p . 7 - 2 0 .
2 1 . Paul V e r h a e g h e (see his unpublished p a p e r T h e Collapse o f t h e F a t h e r F u n c t i o n a n d
its Effects on G e n d e r Roles') drew attention t o a n o t h e r interesting feature o f this suspension
o f p a t e r n a l symbolic authority: in so far as p a t e r n a l authority is the 'relay' that enables the
subject's entry into t h e symbolic universe, is not today's r e g r e s s i o n ' from l a n g u a g e to m o d e s
o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n that c o m b i n e l a n g u a g e with o t h e r types o f signs (say, t h e r e p l a c e m e n t o f
writing with iconic signs: when we deal with a c o m p u t e r , instead o f writing o r d e r s , we
increasingly o p e r a t e by m e r e l y clicking t h e m o u s e on to the a p p r o p r i a t e iconic sign) also a n
i n d e x o f t h e suspension o f p a t e r n a l authority?
2 2 . See Ulrich B e c k ' s classic Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, L o n d o n : Sage 1 9 9 2 ; a n d
A n t h o n y Giddens's, The Consequences ojModernity, C a m b r i d g e : Polity Press 1 9 9 0 . F o r a p o p u l a r
o v e m e w o f this theory, see The Politics of the Risk Society, e d . J a n e Franklin, O x f o r d : Polity
Press 1 9 9 8 .
2 3 . F o r this very reason, the anxiety g e n e r a t e d by the risk society is that o f a s u p e r e g o :
what c h a r a c t e r i z e s t h e s u p e r e g o is precisely t h e a b s e n c e o f ' p r o p e r m e a s u r e ' - o n e obeys its
c o m m a n d s n o t e n o u g h a n d / o r t o o m u c h ; w h a t e v e r o n e does, t h e result is w r o n g a n d o n e is
guilty. T h e p r o b l e m with t h e s u p e r e g o is that its c o m m a n d c a n never be translated into a
positive rule to be followed: the O t h e r issuing the injunction d e m a n d s s o m e t h i n g from us,
but we a r e never in a position t o guess what, exactly, this d e m a n d is. . . .
24. W h a t is an e m p t y gesture? T h e r e is tension in Slovenia between the P r i m e Minister
a n d the President o f the republic: the latter, a l t h o u g h t h e constitution r e d u c e s his r o l e to
p r o t o c o l functions, wants to play a l a r g e r r o l e with effective power. So when, recently, it was
c l e a r that the Slovene representative at the m e e t i n g o f E u r o p e a n leaders o r g a n i z e d by
J a c q u e s C h i r a c would be t h e P r i m e Minister, journalists were told t h a t the P r e s i d e n t wrote
C h i r a c a letter e x p l a i n i n g that since, unfortunately, he was unable to be at t h e summit, t h e
P r i m e Minister would take his place. . . . This is t h e e m p t y g e s t u r e at its purest: a l t h o u g h it
was c l e a r that the P r i m e Minister should g o to F r a n c e to r e p r e s e n t Slovenia, t h e President
acted as if the fact that the P r i m e Minister went was not 'natural', but resulted from his - the
President's - decision not to g o a n d , instead, let the P r i m e Minister take his place. This is
t h e way to turn defeat i n t o victory - to t r a n s f o r m into the result o f o n e ' s free decision ( t o
withdraw) the fact that o n e c a n n o t g o in any case.
2 5 . Eva H o f f m a n , Exit Into History, L o n d o n : M i n e r v a 1 9 9 3 .
26. See Max H o r k h e i m e r , 'Authority a n d t h e Family', in Critical Theory, New York:
Continuum 1995.
27. This, o f c o u r s e , in n o way entails that the difference between the t h e o r y o f p o s t m o d
ernism a n d t h e t h e o r y o f t h e s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y is merely n o m i n a l , a n o t h e r n a m e for the
s a m e p h e n o m e n o n ; what we a r e dealing with h e r e , r a t h e r , is t h e i n h e r e n t split between two
fundamentally i n c o m p a t i b l e notions o f p o s t m o d e r n i t y t h a t a r e operative today, on t h e o n e
hand, t h e idea that p o s t m o d e r n i t y brings t o an e n d t h e logic o f m o d e r n i t y , deploying all its
potential ( F r e d r i c J a m e s o n ' s version - n o w o n d e r m a n y o f his d e t e r m i n a t i o n s o f p o s t m o d e r n
ity c o i n c i d e with those o f the s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y ) ; o n the o t h e r , the idea that p o s t m o d e r n i t y
negates the basic feature o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n (rational reflexivity) in favour o f s o m e new form
o f i m m e d i a c y ( t h e New A g e holistic attitude o r s o m e o t h e r version o f t h e 'post-Cartesian
p a r a d i g m ' ) . Within this c o n t e x t , it is interesting how r e c e n t discussions o n globalization
again b r o u g h t into focus t h e t o p i c o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n in its different aspects (globalized
reflexivity, the dissolution o f the last traditional social links . . . ) : we a r e b e c o m i n g increas
ingly aware that 'postmodernism' was just an endeavour to come to terms with accelerated moderniza
tion. D o not the turbulent events in all s p h e r e s o f life, from e c o n o m i c a n d cultural
'globalization' to t h e reflexivization o f t h e most i n t i m a t e d o m a i n s , d e m o n s t r a t e how we still
have to learn to c o p e with the real shock o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n ?
6 5 . B e r t o l t B r e c h t , ' T h e M e a s u r e T a k e n ' , in The Jewish Wife and Other Short Plays, New
York: Grove Press 1 9 6 5 , p. 9 7 .
6 6 . See H e i n e r Miiller, 'Mauser', in Revolutionsstu/ke, Stuttgart: R e c l a m 1 9 9 5 .
67. B r e c h t , ' T h e M e a s u r e T a k e n ' , p. 1 0 6 .
6 8 . This disjunction between G o o d a n d the ethical act also allows us to resolve t h e
following impasse: if we a c c e p t t h e n o t i o n o f 'diabolical Evil' (Evil elevated to t h e status o f
t h e Kantian ethical duly, that is, a c c o m p l i s h e d for t h e sake o f principle, not for anv
pathological p r o f i t ) , to what e x t e n t , then, does this parallel with the G o o d hold? C a n t h e r e
also be a 'voice o f Evil C o n s c i o u s n e s s ' r e n d e r i n g us guilty w h e n we did n o t d o o u r dutv to
radical Evil? C a n we also feel guilty for not a c c o m p l i s h i n g a h o r r i b l e c r i m e ? T h e p r o b l e m
disappears the m o m e n t we c u t t h e link between the ethical d o m a i n p r o p e r a n d t h e
p r o b l e m a t i c o f G o o d ( a n d Evil as its s h a d o w - s u p p l e m e n t ) .
6 9 . F o r a close r e a d i n g o f Claudel's The Hostage, see C h a p t e r 2 o f Zizek, The Indivisible
Remainder.
7 0 . A detailed c o m p a r a t i v e analysis o f the case of Mary Kay with Nabokov's Lolita (if I
may be e x c u s e d for c o m p a r i n g a 'real-life' case with a fictional o n e ) immediately helps us to
pinpoint this difference: in Lolita (a story which is also, even m o r e than it was when t h e
novel was first published, u n a c c e p t a b l e in out politically c o r r e c t times - r e m e m b e r the
p r o b l e m s with the A m e r i c a n distribution o f the latest c i n e m a v e r s i o n ) , H u m b e r t H u m b e r t
discerns in Lolita a 'nymphet', a girl between nine a n d f o u r t e e n who is potentially a w o m a n :
t h e appeal o f a n y m p h e t resides in t h e very indefiniteness o f h e r form - she resembles a
y o u n g boy m u c h m o r e than a m a t u r e w o m a n . So while Mary Kay, t h e w o m a n , t r e a t e d h e r
y o u n g lover as a grown-up p a r t n e r , in the Lolita case she is for H u m b e r t H u m b e r t a
m a s t u r b a t o r y fantasy, the p r o d u c t o f his solipsistic i m a g i n a t i o n - as H u m b e r t puts it in the
novel: ' W h a t I had madly possessed was not she, b u t m y own c r e a t i o n , a n o t h e r , fanciful
Lolita. . . . ' As a result, t h e i r relationship is teasing-exploitalive, cruel on b o t h sides ( s h e is a
cruel child towards him; he r e d u c e s h e r to t h e a b u s e d o b j e c t o f his m a s t u r b a t o r y solipsistic
i m a g i n a t i o n ) , in c o n t r a s t to the s i n c e r e passion between Mary Kay a n d h e r young lover.
7 1 . A n o t h e r n i c e feature o f t h e film is that, in its d e n o u e m e n t , it avoids the s t a n d a r d
cliche a b o u t 'the real p e r s o n b e h i n d t h e mask': a l t h o u g h , a t t h e e n d , the h e r o throws t h e
mask back into t h e sea, he is able to d o so precisely in so far as h e i n c o r p o r a t e s i n t o his
actual b e h a v i o u r e l e m e n t s o f what he was d o i n g when h e was u n d e r its spell. T h e r e i n lies
o u r growing m a t u r e ' : n o t in simply discarding masks, b u t in a c c e p t i n g their symbolic
efficiency 'on trust' - in a c o u r t o f law, when a j u d g e puts o n his m a s k (his official insignia),
we in effect treat him as if he is u n d e r the spell o f t h e symbolic Institution o f Law which now
speaks t h r o u g h him. . . . However, it would be w r o n g to c o n c l u d e from this that t h e mask is
just a m o r e 'primitive' version o f symbolic efficiency, o f t h e hold e x e r t e d u p o n us by symbolic
authority: it is crucial to m a i n t a i n a distinction between t h e p r o p e r symbolic authority which
o p e r a t e s on a strictly ' m e t a p h o r i c ' level a n d t h e o b s c e n e ' t o t e m i c ' literality o f t h e mask. N o
w o n d e r the h e r o , when he is wearing the mask, often assumes an animal's face: in t h e
p h a n t a s m i c s p a c e o f c a r t o o n s , animals ( T o m , J e r r y , e t c . ) a r e p e r c e i v e d precisely as h u m a n s
wearing a n i m a l masks a n d / o r c l o t h i n g (take t h e s t a n d a r d s c e n e in which an animal's skin is
s c r a t c h e d , a n d what a p p e a r s b e n e a t h it is o r d i n a r y human skin).
T o p a r a p h r a s e Levi-Strauss, what The Mask p r e s e n t s us with is thus in effect a case o f
'totemism today', o f t h e p h a n t a s m i c efficiency o f t h e t o t e m i c a n i m a l mask which is i n o p e r a
tive in today's public social space: when the h e r o c o n f r o n t s the psychologist who wrote a
bestseller o n masks, t h e psychologist calmly answers the h e r o ' s questions to t h e effect that
we all wear masks only in the m e t a p h o r i c m e a n i n g o f the t e r m ; in o n e o f the crucial scenes
o f the film, which then follows, t h e h e r o tries to c o n v i n c e him that in his case t h e mask
really is a magical object - when he puts the mask on, however, it r e m a i n s a d e a d p i e c e o f
carved wood; the magrcal effect fails to o c c u r , so that the h e r o is r e d u c e d to imitating, in a
ridiculous way, t h e wild gestures he is able to p e r f o r m gracefully when he is u n d e r t h e mask's
spell. . . .
Index
Husserl, E d m u n d n a t u r e a n d culture 3 6 - 7
criticism o f Being and Time 6 3 - 4 non-traditional metaphysics 1 6 3
notion o f imagination 2 8 - 3 3
I Love Lucy (television) 7 7 - 8 n o u m e n a l and p h e n o m e n a l 1 9 8
'Ideology a n d its P a r a d o x e s ' (Daly) 3 6 4 political Ideals to c o m e 2 3 8 - 9
The Immortal Story (film) 2 8 7 the Real 2 7 6 - 7
An Introduction to Metaphysics schematizes R e a s o n 6 1 - 2
(Heidegger) 13, 49 s e c o n d E n l i g h t e n m e n t praises 3 5 9
self-consciousness 3 0 4
struggle o f ethical acts 3 7 5 - 6
J a m e s o n , F r e d r i c 1 7 1 , 185
subjectivity 4 4 - 6
true Leftists 1 9 - 2 0
J e s u s Christ transcendental principle o f publicity
M a l e b r a n c h e ' s view o f G r a c e 1 1 6 - 1 9 235
modern reinterpretations 3 3 1 - 2 transcendental schematism 175
Truth-Event 1 3 0 , 142, 146 violence o f imagination 4 1 - 3
J o r d a n , Neil Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics
The Crying Game 2 7 1 (Heidegger) 2 2 - 8 , 29,
J u n g , Carl G. 2 7 0 , 2 7 1 31, 46
Kennedy, J o h n F. 2 2 9
Kierkegaard, S 0 r e n 1 1 5 , 1 4 1 - 2
Kafka, Franz
Christianity on side o f modernity
' S i l e n c e o f the S i r e n s ' 3 0 5
211-12 '
The Trial 7 8
sickness unto death 2 9 2 - 3
Kaganovich, L a z a r Moiseyevich 1 9 4
two facets o f duty 321
Kant, I m m a n u e l
K i n g j r , Martin L u t h e r 2 0 3
abstract universality 9 1
Kipling, Rudyard 2 3 6
anti-cosmos 4 6 - 5 0 , 1 5 8
Kris, Ernst 1 0 8 - 9
and B a d i o u 1 6 5 - 7
Critique of Judgement 4 0
Critique of Practical Reason 2 5 Lacan, Jacques
Critique of Pure Reason 31 aims and goals o f drives 8 2
evil 2 alienation a n d identity 3 7 3 - 5
the F r e n c h Revolution 1 3 9 - 4 0 a n a m o r p h i c distortion and reality
fundamental fantasy 5 9 - 6 1 78-9
H e g e l ' s criticism o f a B e y o n d 8 4 - 6 authentic acts 3 7 5 - 6
H e i d e g g e r a n d abyss o f imagination the big O t h e r 87, 2 8 8 , 3 1 4 - 1 5 , 3 3 0
22-8 butterfly dreams 3 3 0
including the form in the c o n t e n t death drive 1 6 0 - 6 1 , 2 9 1 , 2 9 3 - 4 , 3 9 0
113 desire and fantasy 2 9 5 - 9
materialism a n d idealism 3 7 - 8 differences with B a d i o u 3, 1 5 9 - 6 4
metaphysical notion o f the world drives 1 6 0 - 6 1 , 2 8 3 - 4 , 2 8 7 - 8 , 2 9 1 ,
64-6 2 9 3 - 4 , 304, 390
moral Law 4 0 - 4 1 , 4 4 , 4 6 , 2 7 9 - 8 0 , Evil 3 8 2
364-6 fantasy and reality 51
406 INDEX
ISBN 1-85984-291-7
V
VERSO
UK: e Meard Street, London W1V 3HR USA: 180 Varick Street, New York NY 1 0 0 1 4 - 4 6 M